content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The \mbox{LHCb}\xspace experiment, one of the four main detectors situated on the Large Hadron Collider in CERN, Geneva, specialises
in precision measurements of beauty and charm hadrons decays.
Large backgrounds are present at hadron colliders.
At the nominal LHCb luminosity of $4\times10^{32}\, {\rm cm}^{-2}{\rm s}^{-1}$ during 2012 data taking at 8\ifthenelse{\boolean{inbibliography}}{\ensuremath{~T\kern -0.05em eV}\xspace}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Te\kern -0.1em V}}}\xspace,
around 30\,k beauty ($b$) and 600\,k charm ($c$) hadron pairs pass through the detector each second.
Each recorded collision is defined as an event that can possibly contain a decay of interest.
The most interesting $b$-hadron decays typically occur with decay probabilities of less than $10^{-5}$, whereas
a large fraction of $c$-hadron decays are retained for further study.
The efficient selection of beauty and charm decays from the $\mysim30$\,M proton-proton collisions per second is a significant Big Data challenge.
An innovative feature of the
LHCb experiment is its approach to Big Data in the form of the High Level
Trigger (HLT)~\cite{LHCb-DP-2012-004}. This is a software application designed to reduce the event
rate from 1\,M to $\mysim10$\,k events per second and is executed on an Event Filter
Farm (EFF). The EFF is a computing cluster consisting of 1800 server nodes, with a combined storage space of
5.2~PB. This can accommodate up to two weeks of LHCb data taking~\cite{LHCb-DP-2014-002} in nominal conditions.
The HLT application reconstructs the particle trajectories of the event in real time, where real time is defined as the interval
between the collision in the detector and the moment the data are sent to permanent storage. The event reconstruction
in the EFF is denoted as the \emph{online reconstruction}.
In the LHCb data processing model of LHC Run-I (2010-2012), all events accepted by the
HLT were sent to permanent offline storage containing all raw information from the detector.
An additional event reconstruction performed on the LHC Computing Grid~\cite{Stagni:2012nz}, denoted the \emph{offline reconstruction},
recreates particles in the event from the raw data using an improved detector calibration.
The upgrade of the computing infrastructure during the first long shutdown of the LHC (2013-2014),
combined with efficient use of the EFF storage, provides resources for an online reconstruction in LHC Run-II (2015-2018) with a similar
quality to that of the offline reconstruction.
This is achieved through real-time automated calculation of the final calibrations of the sub-detectors.
With offline-quality information available at the HLT level,
it is possible to perform physics analyses with the information calculated by the HLT event reconstruction.
In the {\em Turbo stream}, a compact event record is written directly
from the trigger and is prepared for physics analysis by the Tesla application.
This bypasses the offline reconstruction.
Reaching the ultimate precision of the \mbox{LHCb}\xspace experiment already in real time as the data arrive
has the power to transform the experimental approach to
processing large quantities of data.
The data acquisition framework is described in Section~\ref{sec:trigger}.
An overview of the upgrades to the trigger and calibration
framework in Run-II is provided in Section~\ref{sec:run2}.
The implementation of the Turbo stream including that of the Tesla application is described in Section~\ref{sec:implementation},
followed by the future prospects of the data model in Section~\ref{sec:future}.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The \mbox{LHCb}\xspace experiment, one of the four main detectors situated on the Large Hadron Collider in CERN, Geneva, specialises
in precision measurements of beauty and charm hadrons decays.
Large backgrounds are present at hadron colliders.
At the nominal LHCb luminosity of $4\times10^{32}\, {\rm cm}^{-2}{\rm s}^{-1}$ during 2012 data taking at 8\ifthenelse{\boolean{inbibliography}}{\ensuremath{~T\kern -0.05em eV}\xspace}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Te\kern -0.1em V}}}\xspace,
around 30\,k beauty ($b$) and 600\,k charm ($c$) hadron pairs pass through the detector each second.
Each recorded collision is defined as an event that can possibly contain a decay of interest.
The most interesting $b$-hadron decays typically occur with decay probabilities of less than $10^{-5}$, whereas
a large fraction of $c$-hadron decays are retained for further study.
The efficient selection of beauty and charm decays from the $\mysim30$\,M proton-proton collisions per second is a significant Big Data challenge.
An innovative feature of the
LHCb experiment is its approach to Big Data in the form of the High Level
Trigger (HLT)~\cite{LHCb-DP-2012-004}. This is a software application designed to reduce the event
rate from 1\,M to $\mysim10$\,k events per second and is executed on an Event Filter
Farm (EFF). The EFF is a computing cluster consisting of 1800 server nodes, with a combined storage space of
5.2~PB. This can accommodate up to two weeks of LHCb data taking~\cite{LHCb-DP-2014-002} in nominal conditions.
The HLT application reconstructs the particle trajectories of the event in real time, where real time is defined as the interval
between the collision in the detector and the moment the data are sent to permanent storage. The event reconstruction
in the EFF is denoted as the \emph{online reconstruction}.
In the LHCb data processing model of LHC Run-I (2010-2012), all events accepted by the
HLT were sent to permanent offline storage containing all raw information from the detector.
An additional event reconstruction performed on the LHC Computing Grid~\cite{Stagni:2012nz}, denoted the \emph{offline reconstruction},
recreates particles in the event from the raw data using an improved detector calibration.
The upgrade of the computing infrastructure during the first long shutdown of the LHC (2013-2014),
combined with efficient use of the EFF storage, provides resources for an online reconstruction in LHC Run-II (2015-2018) with a similar
quality to that of the offline reconstruction.
This is achieved through real-time automated calculation of the final calibrations of the sub-detectors.
With offline-quality information available at the HLT level,
it is possible to perform physics analyses with the information calculated by the HLT event reconstruction.
In the {\em Turbo stream}, a compact event record is written directly
from the trigger and is prepared for physics analysis by the Tesla application.
This bypasses the offline reconstruction.
Reaching the ultimate precision of the \mbox{LHCb}\xspace experiment already in real time as the data arrive
has the power to transform the experimental approach to
processing large quantities of data.
The data acquisition framework is described in Section~\ref{sec:trigger}.
An overview of the upgrades to the trigger and calibration
framework in Run-II is provided in Section~\ref{sec:run2}.
The implementation of the Turbo stream including that of the Tesla application is described in Section~\ref{sec:implementation},
followed by the future prospects of the data model in Section~\ref{sec:future}.
\section{The LHCb detector, data acquisition, and trigger strategy}
\label{sec:trigger}
The \mbox{LHCb}\xspace detector is a forward arm spectrometer
designed to measure the properties of the decays of $b$-hadrons with
high precision~\cite{Alves:2008zz}. Such decays are predominantly produced
at small angles with respect to the proton beam axis~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2010-002}.
This precision is obtained with an advanced tracking system consisting
of a silicon vertex detector surrounding the interaction region (VELO), a silicon strip
detector located upstream of the dipole magnet (TT), and three tracking stations downstream of the
magnet, which consist of silicon strip detectors in the high intensity region close to the
beamline (IT) and a straw-tube tracker in the regions further from the beamline (OT).
Neutral particles are identified with a calorimeter system consisting of a scintillating
pad detector (SPD), an electromagnetic calorimeter preceded by a pre-shower detector (ECAL, PS),
and a hadronic calorimeter (HCAL). Particle identification is provided by combining information from the ring-imaging Cherenkov
detectors (RICH1 and RICH2), the wire chambers used to detect muons, and the calorimeter system.
\subsection{Data readout and hardware trigger}
Most interesting physics processes occur at event rates of
less than 10~Hz in Run-I conditions.
This can be compared to the 30~MHz at which bunches of protons are brought to collision.
Reducing the output rate through the use of a trigger system is
essential to reject uninteresting collisions, thereby using computing resources more efficiently.
The detector front-end (FE) electronic boards connect to a set of common readout boards (RB) that limit the event output rate to 1.1\,MHz.
At LHCb a three-level trigger system is used consisting of a hardware level followed by two software levels.
The level-0 hardware trigger (L0) reduces the
input collision rate of $\mysim30$\,MHz to the maximum output rate allowed by the front-end electronics.
The L0 decision is based on algorithms running on field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs),
which achieve the necessary reduction in rate within a fixed latency of $4\,\mu {\rm s}$.
Information from the ECAL, HCAL, and muon stations
is used in FPGA calculations in separate L0 algorithms. Decisions from these different hardware
triggers are combined and passed to the readout supervisor (RS).
The readout boards perform zero-suppression and interface the
custom electronics to the readout network via Gigabit Ethernet links.
The RS decides where in the EFF to send the event based on the state
of the buffers and the available resources in the EFF. The EFF node address information is sent to the RB via optical
links that also keeps them synchronised.
Event raw data are distributed among the individual servers of the EFF using a simple credit-request scheme.
\subsection{High Level Trigger}
\label{sec:HLT}
The LHCb high level trigger (HLT) is a software application, executed on the EFF, that is implemented
in the same Gaudi framework~\cite{Barrand:2001ny} as the software used for the offline reconstruction.
This permits the incorporation of offline reconstruction software in the trigger,
provided that it is sufficiently optimised to be used in real time.
While no sub-detector upgrade took place in the first long shutdown of the LHC (2013-2014), the EFF was improved.
The EFF now consists of approximately 1800 nodes, with 1000 containing 2~TB of hard disk space each
and 800 nodes containing 4TB each, giving a total of $5.2$~PB.
Each server node in the EFF contains 12-16 physical processor cores
and 24-32 logical cores.
The first level of the software trigger (HLT1) reconstructs charged particle trajectories
using information from the VELO and tracking stations.
If at least one track is found that satisfies strict quality and transverse momentum criteria, then
the event is passed to the second level of the software trigger (di-muon combinations may also trigger the first
software level). The output rate of HLT1 is $\mysim150$\ensuremath{{\rm \,kHz}}\xspace.
The second level of the software trigger (HLT2) can use information from
all sub-detectors to decide whether or not to keep an event for analysis and permanent storage.
A full event reconstruction is performed such that HLT2 is then able to identify the most interesting events,
with a final output rate of $\mysim10$\ensuremath{{\rm \,kHz}}\xspace.
\section{Run-II data taking}
\label{sec:run2}
During Run-I data taking, a buffer was created between the hardware trigger and
the first software trigger level, deferring 20\,\% of the events passing the hardware trigger and
thereby utililising the EFF when the LHC was not providing proton collisions.
The replacement of this buffer with the one between the two software levels introduces
a complete split between an initial stage processing events directly from the L0 (HLT1) and an
asynchronous stage (HLT2), ensuring the EFF is used optimally.
From 2015 onwards, the two HLT software levels run independently,
giving rise to the Run-II data flow depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:trigger2015}.
In order to process two independent trigger stages, a substantial modification to
the trigger software was required (a detailed description is provided in Ref.~\cite{Frank:2014ixa}).
This included the creation of an additional buffer between the two software levels.
The flexibility in trigger processing that is provided by this buffer system allows
the execution of high-quality alignment and calibration between HLT1 and HLT2.
The alignment and calibrations are
described in detail Section~\ref{sec:align}.
The different data streams created from the HLT2 selected events are
described in Section~\ref{sec:streaming}. Among these is the Turbo stream in which information from the
online reconstruction is persisted, detailed in Section~\ref{sec:implementation}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.82\textwidth]{Run2Schematic.pdf}
\caption{Schematic diagram showing the overall data processing model in Run-II,
where the blue solid line represents data flow, and the red dashed line
the propagation of calibrations.}
\label{fig:trigger2015}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Real-time alignment and calibration}
\label{sec:align}
As described in Section~\ref{sec:HLT}, increased computing resources in the EFF allow for automated
alignment and calibration tasks to supply high-quality information to the trigger software.
This removes the need for further reprocessing.
In order to align and calibrate the detector, dedicated samples from
HLT1 are taken as input. These calibrations are implemented before HLT2 has processed the data, which is a prerequisite
for the successful functioning of the Turbo stream as it relies on information calculated by HLT2. The calibrations
are also used by HLT1 for subsequent processing. The alignment and calibration tasks are performed at regular intervals. These intervals
can be as frequent as each time a new LHC proton beam is formed or less frequent depending on the calibrations being calculated.
The calibration tasks are performed in a few minutes using the nodes from the EFF. The resulting
alignment or calibration parameters are updated if they differ significantly from the values
used at a given time and are stored in a database as a function of time.
Full details of the real-time alignment procedure are provided in Ref.~\cite{Dujany:2015} and
are summarised in this section.
The major detector alignment and calibration tasks consist of the following.
\textit{Alignment of the VELO and tracking stations.} Misalignment of the VELO and tracking stations
has a direct impact on the momentum resolution of charged particles.
The alignment is achieved through minimisation of the residuals of a Kalman fit~\cite{Fruhwirth:1987fm}
to a set of well reconstructed tracks from HLT1.
The alignment of the VELO is performed first followed by the corresponding
alignment of the tracking stations. This order is chosen due to the nature of the VELO,
which centres itself around the collision point\footnote{Typically beams are recreated at approximately 8 hour intervals.}.
\textit{RICH mirror alignment.} Misalignment of the RICH detectors causes the circular
rings on the detection plane to become distorted. Therefore
the distance from the projected position of the track to the Cherenkov ring varies as a
function of the azimuthal angle. This distortion requires an individual correction for each mirror. The
correction is calculated using a set of well reconstructed tracks from HLT1.
\textit{Global time alignment of the OT.} The outer tracker uses a drift (gas) tube design~\cite{Arink:2013twa}.
The measurement of the drift time in the straw tubes
is susceptible to differences between the true collision time and the LHCb clock. Such a difference causes the
measured drift time to be different from the estimated time arising from the distance of the wire to the track.
The residuals of a sample of well reconstructed tracks are used to provide
a global drift time offset for the tubes.
\textit{RICH radiator refractive index calibration.} Gas radiators in the RICH detectors
are the source of Cherenkov radiation. The refractive index of the gas varies as a function of
temperature and pressure, which change over time. From a set of well reconstructed tracks originating from a particle of known mass
the expected Cherenkov angle can be calculated using accurate momentum measurements provided by the tracking stations.
The distribution of expected versus measured Cherenkov angles provides the basis for the refractive index calibration
of the radiator.
The complete calibration of the full detector is a complex enterprise.
The achievement of automating and providing accurate calibrations
within a few minutes is a substantial achievement without which analysis-quality reconstruction in HLT2 would be impossible.
\subsection{Streaming and data flow}
\label{sec:streaming}
Data streams at LHCb are controlled through the assignment of {\em routing bits} to each event by the trigger
software.
Routing bits are set according to the trigger lines that select the event.
A filter is applied based on the routing bit that allows for
different streams to be sent to different places in permanent storage, as depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:trigger2015}.
These data are processed
with the DIRAC software framework~\cite{Stagni:2012nz}, which is used to manage all LHCb data processing on the Grid.
The physics data streams in Run-II are the Full stream, the Turbo stream,
and the Calibration stream. Events are allowed to be present
in more than one stream.
Events that are sent to the Full stream have luminosity information calculated, which is then stored in the data
file as a file summary record (FSR). They undergo a further offline reconstruction using the sub-detector
raw data banks, which contain the detector information. Subsequent analysis
selections are applied, identifying decay channels of interest. After this processing is completed, files
are merged to improve network utilisation in the LHC grid
computing infrastructure, and the data are then available for physics analyses.
The events directed to the Turbo stream consist
of the flagged physics lines and those triggered for luminosity accounting.
The Turbo stream does not require further event reconstruction, since datasets are ready for user analysis directly
after the generation of luminosity file summary records and the restoration of the trigger objects.
As for the Full stream the resulting files are merged.
This is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:turbo2015}.
\subsubsection*{Calibration}
Calibration candidates provide pure data samples of pions, kaons, protons,
muons and electrons that can be used to determine efficiencies in a data-driven method.
Most LHCb analyses apply selection requirements for variables that show some
disagreement between real data and simulated data, for example Particle Identification.
The determination of efficiencies using data is therefore preferred where possible.
Exclusive selections applied in the trigger allow candidates of highly abundant
unstable particles, such as ${\ensuremath{\D^{*+}}}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace{\ensuremath{\D^0}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\pion^+}}\xspace$ to be directed to a dedicated stream.
Events sent to the Calibration stream contain the stored
trigger candidates in addition to the raw sub-detector data.
Thus both the offline reconstruction of the Full stream and the
trigger restoration of the Turbo stream can be applied to Calibration stream events.
The workflow of the Calibration stream is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:turbo2015}.
In this way the same particle decay candidates can be used to provide data driven corrections for
both the online and offline event reconstructions.
\section{Implementation of the Turbo stream}
\label{sec:implementation}
The concept of the Turbo stream is to provide a framework by which
physics analyses can be performed using the online reconstruction directly.
The schematic data flow of the Turbo stream compared to the traditional
data flow (represented by the Full stream) is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:turbo2015}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{StreamingPlusValues.pdf}
\caption{Turbo data processing versus the traditional approach,
as described in Section~\ref{sec:implementation}. The time taken for each step in hours is
provided for a 3\,GB raw data file. In addition, a calibration stream
separates events for further processing to calculate data-driven efficiencies for both the Full and
Turbo streams.}
\label{fig:turbo2015}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In the traditional data flow, raw event data undergoes a
complete reconstruction taking 24 hours for 3\,GB of input data on a typical batch node.
This additional reconstruction was designed for a data processing model in which
final calibrations performed at the end of a data taking year were a significant
improvement compared to the calibrations initially available. This is no longer needed since
high quality calibrations are produced in real time.
After the offline reconstruction, selection criteria based on typical $b$-hadron and $c$-hadron topologies are applied that
identify the decay candidates for user analysis, taking an additional 6 hours for the
3\,GB of raw data. After a final merging step of less than one hour, the datasets
are ready for user analysis. The approach taken by the Turbo stream is to save the particle
candidates reconstructed in the HLT (equivalent to those produced after the
selection stage in the traditional approach) inside the raw event. The time taken
for the Tesla application to format the data in preparation for user analysis is
approximately 1 hour.
A clear advantage of the Turbo stream is that the event size is an order
of magnitude smaller than that of the Full stream as all sub-detector information may be
discarded.
For standard Run-II conditions $\mysim20\,\%$ of the HLT2 selected events will be sent to the Turbo stream
at a cost of less than 2\,\% of the output bandwidth.
In order to perform physics analyses with the online reconstruction,
decay candidates must appear in the same format as expected by the output of the traditional
processing, such that the existing analysis infrastructure can be used. This is
the purpose of the Tesla application. The high-level functions of the
Tesla application are detailed in Section~\ref{sec:tesla}. The low-level
design is described in Section~\ref{sec:storing}.
\subsection{The Tesla application}
\label{sec:tesla}
For events in the Turbo stream, the reconstructed decay candidates are stored in the raw data in the format
usually reserved for detector level information.
The Tesla application is subsequently used to perform multiple tasks on events sent to the Turbo stream.
The purpose of Tesla is to ensure that the resulting output
is in a format that is ready for analysis.
This means that the Tesla application must do the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item Compute the information that is necessary for the luminosity determination
and store this in the output file, as described in Section~\ref{sec:streaming}.
\item Place the HLT candidate decays in the output file in such a way that existing analysis tools function correctly with minimal modifications.
\item Ensure that additional information calculated in the online reconstruction is accessible to standard analysis tools, for example
event-level sub-detector occupancies and information calculated using the whole reconstructed collision.
\item Discard the raw data corresponding to the sub-detectors, leaving only the information on the requested HLT candidates, trigger decisions and headers required for subsequent analysis. It should be
noted that this requirement is only relevant for 2015 commissioning and will take place
inside the trigger itself from 2016 onwards.
\end{itemize}
The Tesla application must capable of processing simulated data sets.
Thus it must be able to associate reconstructed tracks and calorimeter clusters to the
simulated particles that produced these signatures in the simulated detector.
There should be also an option to protect the detector raw data, such that the offline
reconstruction in the traditional data flow can coexist in simulated events alongside
the physics analysis objects from the online reconstruction.
It should be noted that the objects created by the Tesla application are stored in
different addresses in the output file than those
used by the traditional processing so that there can be no interference.
This is a requirement for the calibration stream as described in Section~\ref{sec:streaming}.
\subsubsection*{Monitoring and validation}
In addition to providing analysts with data for physics measurements, the Tesla application
allows for a new method with which to monitor the stability of the detector and the reconstruction.
Monitoring is traditionally performed at LHCb by studying abundant decays such as ${\ensuremath{\D^0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace{\ensuremath{\kaon^-}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\pion^+}}\xspace$
using a separate implementation of the offline reconstruction. The data used is that of a single run, which is 1 hour in duration at most.
The creation of histograms directly from the Tesla application permits the simultaneous analysis of several runs.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{LucioHist_reduced}
\caption{
Comparison between variables calculated by the online and offline event reconstructions
for the pion in ${\ensuremath{\D^0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace{\ensuremath{\kaon^-}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\pion^+}}\xspace$ decays of a single hour of LHCb data taking, where the colour represents
the number of pion candidates. The variables are defined in the text.
}
\label{fig:comp}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The additional monitoring allows for variables calculated in the online and the offline
event reconstructions to be compared to ensure consistency.
This also serves the purpose of validating the use of the real-time alignment inside the offline processing.
An example comparison is given in Figure~\ref{fig:comp} of the reconstruction variables calculated for the pion in
${\ensuremath{\D^0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace{\ensuremath{\kaon^-}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\pion^+}}\xspace$ decays. The variables shown consist of the following. The difference in log-likelihood between a given particle type and
that of a pion both combining all sub-detector information (Combined DLL) and restricting to the RICH sub-detector information (RICH DLL),
the minimum difference in \ensuremath{\chi^2}\xspace of the primary vertex between the fits with and without
the pion candidate (Min. IP \ensuremath{\chi^2}\xspace), the track fit quality (Track \ensuremath{\chi^2}\xspace/DoF), the reconstructed pseudorapidity ($\eta$) and momentum, together with the minimum impact parameter (Min. IP)
with respect to the primary vertices.
Comparing the online and offline calculated variables of two decay candidates requires that they are associated
to the same detector hits thereby ensuring the same candidate is found.
\subsection{Persistence of trigger objects}
\label{sec:storing}
Measurements of {\ensuremath{C\!P}}\xspace-violating asymmetries along with searches for new states and rare decays
are made using datasets that are produced from physics object classes, written in C++.
These are stored
in the hashed containers of the data summary tape (DST) format.
In the Full stream, the size of the raw event is on average 70\,kB.
When the sub-detector banks are removed from the raw event,
and replaced with the specific trigger candidates firing the Turbo stream triggers, the event size is decreased to around 5\,kB.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{reports1}
\caption{Steps required to save and restore trigger objects.}
\label{fig:reports}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
During Run I data taking (2009-2012), some limited information from physics objects made inside the trigger
was already placed inside the raw event.
This allows the possibility to determine trigger efficiencies directly from the data
using the methods described in Ref.~\cite{LHCb-DP-2012-004}.
The so-called selection reports allow for a C++ class, known as an HLT object summary, to save the
members of any C++ physics object class in a key-value pair and point to other object summary instances.
After the physics objects have been converted into object summaries,
a dedicated algorithm writes them into the dedicated sub-bank
of the raw data bank associated to the HLT.
This is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:reports}.
A complete physics measurement
requires much more information than
was saved in the selection reports in Run I.
This means that many more classes must be placed into
the raw event and more information must be saved about each individual class.
In order to save entire decay chains, a novel pattern is required
to describe the topology.
This, combined with the information inside the summaries,
allows for all the required information of the decay to be saved.
The pattern of the reports used for saving the decay topology is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:pattern}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.82\textwidth]{reports2}
\caption{Structure of stored objects. Each top-level object represents a
parent particle, which then points to child particles along with associated
information. Note that the example shown is for a two-level particle decay.
The infrastructure allows for as many levels as needed.}
\label{fig:pattern}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
One of the main advantages of the method is its flexibility as only relevant information
contained in the object classes is persisted. Additional members added at a later date
can also be stored.
In order to preserve backwards compatibility, the version of the raw bank
is written to its header.
The version indicates to the dedicated converter tool exactly which piece of
information about the class is present for a given location in the raw data stream.
It is important that the restored data match the original data.
In order to achieve this,
the same dedicated converter tool is used both to read and to write the object summary. For a given analysis class,
the position in the raw data stream is dedicated to a specific quantity. Individual
static maps for each analysis class, such as particles and tracks, are used by the
converter tool to keep track of exactly where each piece of information is stored.
The raw bank version is included on an event-by-event basis, which means that multiple versions can be
processed simultaneously, avoiding the issue of backwards compatibility.
\subsection{Additional analysis requirements}
While physics measurements mostly rely on information about the signal candidate,
the complete event is often exploited to calculate quantities that
discriminate against background processes.
A number of such quantities are employed in analyses, and the tools that
calculate these quantities typically have parameters that are tailored to the needs of individual measurements.
Examples of such quantities are isolation variables, which are measures of particle multiplicity within a region of the detector
around triggered candidates. The necessary size of the region is analysis dependent, and some measurements use a set of regions with different sizes.
This is a different use case, in which a static map is no longer
appropriate to save and restore such data. In order to deal with such cases, an automatically
generated utility class key is created to store separately the map key and corresponding value to be saved.
This ensures that the key and data of the original dynamic map
are both written to the raw data stream, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:dynamic}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{dynamic}
\caption{Method used to save and restore dynamic maps.}
\label{fig:dynamic}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Extra objects needed for analysis, such as primary vertices that have been fitted without
the signal tracks, are persisted one level down from the top of the decay chain.
Since these objects represent static analysis level classes, the usual persistence approach is used
rather than the dynamic map.
\subsection{Analysis using the online reconstruction}
The intended purpose of the Tesla application and the Turbo stream infrastructure is to ensure that
more decays can be collected and therefore more precise measurements performed
than would have been possible under the Run-I computing model.
Example data distributions showing clean decay signals directly from the information
of the online reconstruction are provided in Figure~\ref{fig:lineshapes}.
The limits on the output rate using the Full stream mean that only a subset
of the high-rate particle decays would have been collected without the Turbo
stream infrastructure.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{DspToKSKPiPi.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{DspToKKK.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{DstpToD0pi.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{DpToKKK.pdf}
\caption{
Invariant mass distributions for candidates reconstructed in the ${\ensuremath{\kaon^0_{\rm\scriptscriptstyle S}}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\kaon^-}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\pion^+}}\xspace\pip$ (a), ${\ensuremath{\kaon^-}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}}\xspace\Kp$ (b),
${\ensuremath{\D^0}}\xspace(\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace{\ensuremath{\kaon^-}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\pion^+}}\xspace){\ensuremath{\pion^+}}\xspace$ (c), and ${\ensuremath{\kaon^-}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}}\xspace\Kp$ (d) state hypotheses, from 26.5\ensuremath{\mbox{\,pb}^{-1}}\xspace of proton collision data taken in
2015. The peaks corresponding to {\ensuremath{\D^+}}\xspace, {\ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}}\xspace, and {\ensuremath{\D^{*+}}}\xspace mesons can clearly be seen.
}
\label{fig:lineshapes}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Outlook and future prospects}
\label{sec:future}
The use of the Turbo stream in 2015 proved to be successful.
The first two published physics measurements from the LHCb experiment based
on data collected in the 2015 run were based on the Turbo stream~\cite{LHCB-PAPER-2015-037,LHCB-PAPER-2015-041}.
Around half of the HLT2 trigger lines currently persist
the trigger reconstruction using the Turbo stream.
\subsection{Use in the upgraded LHCb experiment}
The upgrade of the LHCb experiment will see the luminosity rise from
$4\times10^{32}{\rm cm^{-2}s^{-1}}$ to $2\times10^{33}{\rm cm^{-2}s^{-1}}$.
In addition, the L0 hardware trigger will be removed. Therefore the software trigger
will need to cope with input rates that are \mysim30 times larger than the current trigger
input rate.
The output rate of $b$-hadrons, $c$-hadrons and light
long-lived hadrons will increase significantly, as shown in Table~\ref{tab:rate}.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|rr}
Particle type & Run I (kHz) & Upgrade (kHz) \\ \hline
$b$-hadrons & 17.3&270 \\
$c$-hadrons & 66.9&800 \\
light long-lived hadrons & 22.8& 264 \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Rates of hadrons in Run I compared to the expected rate
in the upgraded LHCb experiment~\cite{anatomy}.}
\label{tab:rate}
\end{table}
In order to accommodate the increase in rate, the use of specific selection triggers
will become increasingly necessary.
The Turbo model will become increasingly utilised as an increased retention will have a direct
impact on physics reach.
With the rate of interesting events being so high, the output bandwidth becomes a concern.
The average size of a raw event in the LHCb upgrade is anticipated to be $\mysim100$\,kB.
An event rate of 20\,kHz in traditional model will
then be 2\,GB/s. Assuming $1.5\times10^7$\,s of data taking each year, storage space at the level of
30\,PB/year would be required to save the data in raw form. Usually multiple copies of the raw data are stored to
ensure safety against data loss. In addition, the size of the reconstructed event is larger than the raw form, meaning the total
storage needs would be at the level of 300\,PB/year.
The traditional model therefore does not scale to the LHCb upgrade regime.
The Turbo model would only require 100\,MB/s and would provide $20\times$ the output event rate
of the traditional approach with the same resources, assuming all events
in the upgraded LHCb experiment use the Turbo model.
A mixture of Turbo and traditional approaches is expected to be used as many
analyses require the use of full event information.
\subsection{Extended use of the trigger reconstruction}
The methods described in Sections~\ref{sec:run2} and~\ref{sec:implementation}
use the trigger reconstruction to reduce the event size
thus relaxing the upper limit on the event rate.
The single reconstruction and the removal of a layer of selections also
simplify analyses, potentially reducing many sources of systematic uncertainty.
These benefits would also be seen if the complete reconstructed event in the trigger
was available for analysis. The event model is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:patternUp}.
In a similar fashion to the Turbo model, where analysis classes for candidates are saved
inside the raw data banks, the physics objects created by the online reconstruction
may also be saved to the raw data bank. With a formatting level to prepare the data
for user level analysis tools, an additional reconstruction can be avoided therefore
reducing the computing time.
With appropriate filters inside the trigger,
the decision of whether to keep the raw event or not could be made on an event-by-event
basis.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{upgrade.pdf}
\caption{Possible LHCb Upgrade data processing model.}
\label{fig:patternUp}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary}
\label{sec:summary}
The Tesla toolkit allows for analyses to be based
on the event reconstruction that is performed by the LHCb HLT.
By design, the Tesla output files are compatible with existing analysis framework software
with minimal changes required from analysts.
The event reconstruction performed by the HLT is of sufficient quality
for use in physics analyses because the detector is aligned and calibrated
in real time during data taking.
This is in turn made possible through the upgraded computing infrastructure introduced
in the first long shutdown of the LHC and the decision to buffer data from the first software trigger level.
The successful commissioning of this concept in 2015 has allowed multiple analyses to be performed
based on this model. The higher output rates of the LHCb upgrade will make the approach
increasingly necessary.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\noindent
We thank the technical and administrative staff at the LHCb
institutes. We acknowledge support from CERN and from the national
agencies: CAPES, CNPq, FAPERJ and FINEP (Brazil);
CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG and MPG (Germany); INFN (Italy);
FOM and NWO (The Netherlands);
SNSF and SER (Switzerland);
STFC (United Kingdom).
We acknowledge the computing resources that are provided by CERN, IN2P3 (France),
KIT and DESY (Germany), INFN (Italy), SURF (The Netherlands), PIC (Spain), GridPP (United Kingdom),
RRCKI and Yandex LLC (Russia), CSCS (Switzerland), IFIN-HH (Romania),
CBPF (Brazil), PL-GRID (Poland) and OSC (USA). We are indebted to the communities behind the multiple open
source software packages on which we depend.
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{References}
\ifx\mcitethebibliography\mciteundefinedmacro
\PackageError{LHCb.bst}{mciteplus.sty has not been loaded}
{This bibstyle requires the use of the mciteplus package.}\fi
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
\begin{mcitethebibliography}{10}
\mciteSetBstSublistMode{n}
\mciteSetBstMaxWidthForm{subitem}{\alph{mcitesubitemcount})}
\mciteSetBstSublistLabelBeginEnd{\mcitemaxwidthsubitemform\space}
{\relax}{\relax}
\bibitem{LHCb-DP-2012-004}
R.~Aaij {\em et~al.}, \ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{The \mbox{LHCb}\xspace
trigger and its performance in 2011}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/8/04/P04022}{JINST \textbf{8}
(2013) P04022}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.3055}{{\tt
arXiv:1211.3055}}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{LHCb-DP-2014-002}
LHCb collaboration, R.~Aaij {\em et~al.},
\ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{LHCb detector performance}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X15300227}{Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\
\textbf{A30} (2015) 1530022}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6352}{{\tt
arXiv:1412.6352}}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{Stagni:2012nz}
F.~Stagni and P.~Charpentier, \ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{The
LHCb DIRAC-based production and data management operations systems}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/368/1/012010}{J.\ Phys.\ Conf.\
Ser.\ \textbf{368} (2012) 012010}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{Alves:2008zz}
LHCb collaboration, A.~A. Alves~Jr.\ {\em et~al.},
\ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{The \mbox{LHCb}\xspace detector at the LHC}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08005}{JINST \textbf{3}
(2008) S08005}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{LHCb-PAPER-2010-002}
LHCb collaboration, R.~Aaij {\em et~al.},
\ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{Measurement of $\sigma(pp \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
b\overline{b} X)$ at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV in the forward region}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2010.10.010}{Phys.\ Lett.\
\textbf{B694} (2010) 209} CERN-PH-EP-2010-029, LHCb-PAPER-2010-002,
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.2731}{{\tt arXiv:1009.2731}}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{Barrand:2001ny}
G.~Barrand {\em et~al.}, \ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{GAUDI - A
software architecture and framework for building HEP data processing
applications}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4655(01)00254-5}{Comput.\ Phys.\
Commun.\ \textbf{140} (2001) 45}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{Frank:2014ixa}
M.~Frank {\em et~al.}, \ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{Deferred
High Level Trigger in LHCb: A Boost to CPU Resource Utilization}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/513/1/012006}{J.\ Phys.\ Conf.\
Ser.\ \textbf{513} (2014) 012006}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{Dujany:2015}
G.~Dujany and B.~Storaci, \ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{Real-time
alignment and calibration of the LHCb Detector in Run II}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/664/8/082010}{J.\ Phys.\ Conf.\
Ser.\ \textbf{664} (2015), no.~8 082010}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{Fruhwirth:1987fm}
R.~Fruhwirth, \ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{Application of Kalman
filtering to track and vertex fitting}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168-9002(87)90887-4}{Nucl.\ Instrum.\
Meth.\ \textbf{A262} (1987) 444}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{Arink:2013twa}
LHCb Outer Tracker Group, R.~Arink {\em et~al.},
\ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{Performance of the LHCb Outer
Tracker}}, }{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/9/01/P01002}{JINST
\textbf{9} (2014), no.~01 P01002}, \href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.3893}{{\tt
arXiv:1311.3893}}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{LHCB-PAPER-2015-037}
LHCb collaboration, R.~Aaij {\em et~al.},
\ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{Measurement of forward $J/\psi$
production cross-sections in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13\:$TeV}},
}{}\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2015)172}{JHEP \textbf{10} (2015)
172} {LHCb-PAPER-2015-037, CERN-PH-EP-2015-222},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.00771}{{\tt arXiv:1509.00771}}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{LHCB-PAPER-2015-041}
LHCb collaboration, R.~Aaij {\em et~al.},
\ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{Measurements of prompt charm
production cross-sections in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13\,$TeV}},
}{}\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.01707}{{\tt arXiv:1510.01707}}
{LHCb-PAPER-2015-041, CERN-PH-EP-2015-272},
\href{http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.01707}{{\tt arXiv:1510.01707}}, {to appear in
JHEP}\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\bibitem{anatomy}
C.~Fitzpatrick and V.~Gligorov,
\ifthenelse{\boolean{articletitles}}{\emph{{Anatomy of an upgrade event in
the upgrade era, and implications for the LHCb trigger}},
}{}LHCb-PUB-2014-027 (2014)\relax
\mciteBstWouldAddEndPuncttrue
\mciteSetBstMidEndSepPunct{\mcitedefaultmidpunct}
{\mcitedefaultendpunct}{\mcitedefaultseppunct}\relax
\EndOfBibitem
\end{mcitethebibliography}
\newpage
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
For a finite (multi)graph $G=(V,E)$ let $i_G(X)$ denote the number of edges induced by $X\subseteq V$. The graph $G$ is \emph{$(k,\ell)$-tight} if $|E|=k|V|-\ell$ and $i_G(X)\leq k|V|-\ell$ for all $X\subseteq V$. For $\ell <2k$ the (edge sets of) $(k,\ell)$-tight graphs form the bases of a matroid \cite{L&S,Whi3}. These matroids are examples of count matroids (see \cite{Fra}); we refer to them as the $(k,\ell)$-sparse matroid, and when loops and multiple edges are prohibited, as the simple $(k,\ell)$-sparse matroid.
A simple (respectively multi-)graph $G$ is a \emph{$(k,\ell)$-circuit} if $G$ is the graph induced by a circuit in the simple $(k,\ell)$-sparse matroid (respectively the $(k,\ell)$-sparse matroid). Equivalently a simple (respectively multi-)graph $G$ is a $(k,\ell)$-circuit if $|E|=k|V|-\ell+1$ and $i_G(X)\leq k|V|-\ell$ for all $X\subsetneq V$.
A constructive characterisation of a class of graphs is a method of building all graphs in the class from certain base graphs by elementary operations.
Constructive characterisations of classes of graphs (or other objects) from small base cases by elementary local transformations are natural and relevant to a variety of problems. In particular in the field of combinatorial optimization \cite{K&V}. As particular motivation for us we seek a means to understand when a generic realisation of a graph on a surface is globally rigid (unique up to isometries), see \cite{JMN,JNstress} for details on the geometry of this problem. A related construction for circuits in the $(2,3)$-sparse matroid \cite{B&J} was a vital aspect of the characterisation of global rigidity in the plane \cite{J&J} and we expect that the construction here, along with the construction for circuits in the simple $(2,2)$-sparse matroid, will be crucial in establishing analogues for global rigidity on surfaces supporting either two (e.g. the cylinder) or one (e.g. the cone or torus) tangentially acting isometries. See \cite[Conjecture $5.7$]{Nix} and \cite[Conjecture $9.1$]{JMN}.
Constructive characterisations of $(k,\ell)$-tight (multi)graphs are known when $k=\ell$ \cite{Tay} and more generally when $l\leq k$ \cite{F&S}.
In the case of simple graphs each intermediate graph in the recursive construction needs to be simple; this necessitates establishing new constructions.
When $k=2$ constructions are known for several classes \cite{N&O,NOP,NOP2}.
For $(k,\ell)$-circuits less is known, however some general constructions, such as when $k=\ell$ can be extracted from work on tree packings \cite{Fr&S}. In this paper we are interested in simple $(k,\ell)$-circuits. For $k=1$ the problem is easy. When $k=2$, and $\ell=3$, there is an elegant result of Berg and Jord\'{a}n \cite{B&J}. It is easy to check that the minimum degree, $\delta(G)$, in a $(2,3)$-circuit $G$ is equal to three. They proved first that every $(2,3)$-circuit which was 3-connected contains an \emph{admissible} degree three vertex, that is a degree three vertex which can be removed and an edge added between its neighbours in such a way that the resulting graph is a $(2,3)$-circuit. To complete their constructive characterisation they observed that whenever $G$ was not 3-connected there is a 2-separation $\{x,y\}$ and $xy\notin E$. Such a graph can be broken into two smaller $(2,3)$-circuits by separating over this cut and adding the edge $xy$ to both parts. (This is the inverse of the well known 2-sum operation.)
For $(2,2)$-circuits one must distinguish between the multigraph and simple graph cases. For multigraphs a constructive characterisation occurs as a special case of a characterisation of highly $k$-tree connected graphs \cite{Fr&S}. For simple graphs there is a constructive characterisation in \cite{Nix}. It is a nontrivial extension of Berg and Jord\'{a}n's result in the following senses: firstly since $K_4$ can occur as a subgraph of any $(2,2)$-circuit, it is non-trivial to preserve simplicity; secondly the connectivity level required to guarantee admissibility is higher (requiring 3-connectivity and essential 4-edge-connectivity); and thirdly when these connectivity assumptions do not hold there are several separation moves required.
In this paper we consider simple $(2,1)$-circuits and in particular, we prove a constructive characterisation of such circuits where every intermediate graph is also simple.
At a high level the scheme is analogous to the above cases: we establish the connectivity level required to guarantee an admissible vertex and when this fails we define separation moves to pull apart $(2,1)$-circuits into smaller $(2,1)$-circuits.
However, in the $(2,1)$-circuit case there are numerous complications to previous cases.
Firstly observe that $(2,1)$-circuits need not have $\delta(G)=3$, thus we are forced to consider a degree four operation. Secondly since $K_4$ is not a base in the simple $(2,1)$-sparse matroid we separate out two cases in our result guaranteeing an admissible vertex of degree three.
Thirdly, due to the connectivity level required to guarantee an admissible node, there are six different separations that can occur.
\subsection{Terminology}
We now define the set ${\mathcal{G}}$ of base graphs for our constructive characterisation.
Note first that $K_5$ is the unique simple $(2,1)$-circuit on at most five vertices. There are five distinct graphs formed from deleting three edges from $K_6$. Deleting a one factor leaves a 4-regular graph which has an admissible vertex by Theorem \ref{thm:4reg}. Deleting a degree three star does not give a $(2,1)$-circuit. The other three possibilities are the complements of $G57,G59$ and $G60$ as listed in \cite{R&W} (see also Figure \ref{fig:3fromK6}).
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (v1) at (0,0);
\coordinate (v2) at (1,0);
\coordinate (v3) at (2,0.5);
\coordinate (v4) at (0,1);
\coordinate (v5) at (1.25,1.25);
\coordinate (v6) at (0.5,2);
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\draw (v1) -- (v2);
\draw (v1) -- (v5);
\draw (v1) -- (v4);
\draw (v2) -- (v3);
\draw (v2) -- (v4);
\draw (v2) -- (v5);
\draw (v3) -- (v5);
\draw (v4) -- (v5);
\draw (v4) -- (v6);
\draw (v5) -- (v6);
\draw (v2) -- (v6);
\draw (v3) -- (v4);
\node at (1,0) [label=south:$\overline{G57}$]{};
\coordinate (v7) at (3.5,0);
\coordinate (v8) at (4.5,0);
\coordinate (v9) at (3.5,1);
\coordinate (v10) at (4.5,1);
\coordinate (v11) at (3.5,2);
\coordinate (v12) at (4.5,2);
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\node at (v8) [vertex]{};
\node at (v9) [vertex]{};
\node at (v10) [vertex]{};
\node at (v11) [vertex]{};
\node at (v12) [vertex]{};
\draw (v7) -- (v11);
\draw (v8) -- (v12);
\draw (v7) -- (v8);
\draw (v9) -- (v10);
\draw (v11) -- (v12);
\draw (v11) -- (v10);
\draw (v9) -- (v8);
\draw (v7) -- (v10);
\draw (v9) -- (v12);
\draw[bend left=30] (v7) edge (v11);
\node at (4,0) [label=south:$\overline{G59}$]{};
\coordinate (v13) at (6,0);
\coordinate (v14) at (7,0);
\coordinate (v15) at (6,1);
\coordinate (v16) at (7,1);
\coordinate (v17) at (6.5,1.5);
\coordinate (v18) at (6.5,2);
\node at (v13) [vertex]{};
\node at (v14) [vertex]{};
\node at (v15) [vertex]{};
\node at (v16) [vertex]{};
\node at (v17) [vertex]{};
\node at (v18) [vertex]{};
\draw (v13) -- (v14);
\draw (v13) -- (v15);
\draw (v13) -- (v16);
\draw (v14) -- (v15);
\draw (v14) -- (v16);
\draw (v15) -- (v17);
\draw (v15) -- (v18);
\draw (v16) -- (v17);
\draw (v16) -- (v18);
\draw (v18) -- (v17);
\draw[bend left=50] (v13) edge (v18);
\draw[bend right=50] (v14) edge (v18);
\node at (6.5,0) [label=south:$\overline{G60}$]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{$\overline{G57}$ and $\overline{G59}$ are base graphs on six vertices. $\overline{G60}$ can be reduced to $K_5$ by a 1-reduction.}
\label{fig:3fromK6}
\end{figure}
Examining the list of small graphs in \cite{R&W}, there are 65 non-isomorphic graphs formed from deleting seven edges from $K_7$; of these 34 are $(2,1)$-circuits.
Two of these are 4-regular and hence contain an admissible node by Theorem \ref{thm:4reg}.
Of the remainder note that if there is a node not in a copy of $K_4$ then either adding a missing edge creates a $K_5$ subgraph or that node is admissible. This observation allows us to easily spot that 29 of the remaining $(2,1)$-circuits contain an admissible node. The remaining three do not contain admissible nodes; they are the complements of $G293,G308$ and $G312$ as listed in \cite{R&W} (see also Figure \ref{fig:7fromK7}).
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (v1) at (0,0);
\coordinate (v2) at (1,0);
\coordinate (v3) at (2,0);
\coordinate (v4) at (0.5,1);
\coordinate (v5) at (1.5,1);
\coordinate (v6) at (0.5,2);
\coordinate (v7) at (1.5,2);
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\draw (v1) -- (v2);
\draw (v1) -- (v4);
\draw (v1) -- (v5);
\draw (v2) -- (v3);
\draw (v2) -- (v4);
\draw (v2) -- (v5);
\draw (v3) -- (v4);
\draw (v3) -- (v5);
\draw (v4) -- (v5);
\draw (v4) -- (v6);
\draw (v4) -- (v7);
\draw (v5) -- (v7);
\draw (v5) -- (v6);
\draw (v6) -- (v7);
\node at (1,0) [label=south:$\overline{G293}$]{};
\coordinate (v8) at (4.5,0);
\coordinate (v9) at (5.5,0);
\coordinate (v10) at (3.5,1);
\coordinate (v11) at (4.5,1);
\coordinate (v12) at (5.5,1);
\coordinate (v13) at (3.5,2);
\coordinate (v14) at (4.5,2);
\node at (v8) [vertex]{};
\node at (v9) [vertex]{};
\node at (v10) [vertex]{};
\node at (v11) [vertex]{};
\node at (v12) [vertex]{};
\node at (v13) [vertex]{};
\node at (v14) [vertex]{};
\draw (v8) -- (v9);
\draw (v8) -- (v10);
\draw (v8) -- (v11);
\draw (v8) -- (v12);
\draw (v9) -- (v11);
\draw (v9) -- (v12);
\draw (v10) -- (v11);
\draw (v10) -- (v13);
\draw (v10) -- (v14);
\draw (v11) -- (v12);
\draw (v11) -- (v13);
\draw (v11) -- (v14);
\draw (v13) -- (v14);
\draw[bend left=80] (v8) edge (v13);
\node at (4.5,0) [label=south:$\overline{G308}$]{};
\coordinate (v15) at (8,0);
\coordinate (v16) at (9,0);
\coordinate (v17) at (8,1);
\coordinate (v18) at (9,1);
\coordinate (v19) at (7,1);
\coordinate (v20) at (7,2);
\coordinate (v21) at (8,2);
\node at (v15) [vertex]{};
\node at (v16) [vertex]{};
\node at (v17) [vertex]{};
\node at (v18) [vertex]{};
\node at (v19) [vertex]{};
\node at (v20) [vertex]{};
\node at (v21) [vertex]{};
\draw (v20) -- (v16);
\draw (v15) -- (v19);
\draw (v19) -- (v21);
\draw (v19) -- (v18);
\draw (v18) -- (v16);
\draw (v21) -- (v15);
\draw (v21) -- (v20);
\draw (v20) -- (v19);
\draw (v15) -- (v16);
\draw (v18) -- (v21);
\draw (v18) -- (v15);
\node at (8,0) [label=south:$\overline{G312}$]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Base graphs on seven vertices.}
\label{fig:7fromK7}
\end{figure}
A further five base graphs of orders eight and nine arise in the proof of the recursive construction; there are four on eight vertices (graphs $S_1$, $S_2$, $S_3$ and $S_4$ in Figure \ref{fig:S234}) and there is one on nine vertices (graph $S_5$ in Figure \ref{fig:base9}).
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (v1) at (0,0);
\coordinate (v2) at (1,0);
\coordinate (v3) at (2,0);
\coordinate (v4) at (3,0);
\coordinate (v5) at (0,1);
\coordinate (v6) at (1,1);
\coordinate (v7) at (2,1);
\coordinate (v8) at (3,1);
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\node at (v8) [vertex]{};
\draw (v1) -- (v4);
\draw (v5) -- (v8);
\draw (v1) -- (v5);
\draw (v2) -- (v6);
\draw (v3) -- (v7);
\draw (v4) -- (v8);
\draw (v1) -- (v6);
\draw (v2) -- (v5);
\draw (v3) -- (v8);
\draw (v4) -- (v7);
\draw[bend right=60] (v2) edge (v4);
\draw[bend left=60] (v6) edge (v8);
\node at (1.5,-0.25)[label=south:$S_2$]{};
\coordinate (v9) at (5,0);
\coordinate (v10) at (6,0);
\coordinate (v11) at (7,0);
\coordinate (v12) at (8,0);
\coordinate (v13) at (5,1);
\coordinate (v14) at (6,1);
\coordinate (v15) at (7,1);
\coordinate (v16) at (8,1);
\node at (v9) [vertex]{};
\node at (v10) [vertex]{};
\node at (v11) [vertex]{};
\node at (v12) [vertex]{};
\node at (v13) [vertex]{};
\node at (v14) [vertex]{};
\node at (v15) [vertex]{};
\node at (v16) [vertex]{};
\draw (v9) -- (v12);
\draw (v13) -- (v16);
\draw (v9) -- (v13);
\draw (v10) -- (v14);
\draw (v11) -- (v15);
\draw (v12) -- (v16);
\draw (v9) -- (v14);
\draw (v10) -- (v13);
\draw (v11) -- (v16);
\draw (v12) -- (v15);
\draw (v11) -- (v14);
\draw (v10) -- (v15);
\node at (6.5,-0.25)[label=south:$S_3$]{};
\coordinate (v17) at (10,0);
\coordinate (v18) at (11,0);
\coordinate (v19) at (12,0);
\coordinate (v20) at (13,0);
\coordinate (v21) at (10,1);
\coordinate (v22) at (11,1);
\coordinate (v23) at (12,1);
\coordinate (v24) at (13,1);
\node at (v17) [vertex]{};
\node at (v18) [vertex]{};
\node at (v19) [vertex]{};
\node at (v20) [vertex]{};
\node at (v21) [vertex]{};
\node at (v22) [vertex]{};
\node at (v23) [vertex]{};
\node at (v24) [vertex]{};
\draw (v17) -- (v20);
\draw (v21) -- (v24);
\draw (v17) -- (v21);
\draw (v18) -- (v22);
\draw (v19) -- (v23);
\draw (v20) -- (v24);
\draw (v17) -- (v22);
\draw (v18) -- (v21);
\draw (v19) -- (v24);
\draw (v20) -- (v23);
\draw (v18) -- (v23);
\draw[bend left=60] (v22) edge (v24);
\node at (11.5,-0.25)[label=south:$S_4$]{};
\coordinate (v1) at (5,2.5);
\coordinate (v2) at (6,2.5);
\coordinate (v3) at (5,3.5);
\coordinate (v4) at (6,3.5);
\coordinate (v6) at (7,2.5);
\coordinate (v7) at (8,2.5);
\coordinate (v8) at (7,3.5);
\coordinate (v9) at (8,3.5);
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\node at (v8) [vertex]{};
\node at (v9) [vertex]{};
\draw (v1) -- (v7);
\draw (v1) -- (v3);
\draw (v1) -- (v4);
\draw (v2) -- (v3);
\draw (v2) -- (v4);
\draw (v3) -- (v9);
\draw (v6) -- (v8);
\draw (v6) -- (v9);
\draw (v7) -- (v8);
\draw (v7) -- (v9);
\draw[bend right=20] (v1) edge (v7);
\draw[bend left=20] (v3) edge (v9);
\node at (6.5,2.25)[label=south:$S_1$]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Base graphs on eight vertices.}
\label{fig:S234}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (v1) at (0,1);
\coordinate (v2) at (0,0);
\coordinate (v3) at (1,-0.25);
\coordinate (v4) at (1,1.25);
\coordinate (v5) at (1.7,0.5);
\coordinate (v6) at (2.4,-0.25);
\coordinate (v7) at (2.4,1.25);
\coordinate (v8) at (3.4,1);
\coordinate (v9) at (3.4,0);
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\node at (v8) [vertex]{};
\node at (v9) [vertex]{};
\draw (v1) -- (v2);
\draw (v1) -- (v3);
\draw (v1) -- (v4);
\draw (v2) -- (v3);
\draw (v2) -- (v4);
\draw (v2) -- (v5);
\draw (v3) -- (v4);
\draw (v3) -- (v5);
\draw (v4) -- (v5);
\draw (v5) -- (v6);
\draw (v5) -- (v7);
\draw (v5) -- (v8);
\draw (v5) -- (v9);
\draw (v6) -- (v7);
\draw (v6) -- (v8);
\draw (v6) -- (v9);
\draw (v7) -- (v8);
\draw (v7) -- (v9);
\node at (1.7,-0.25)[label=south:$S_5$]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Base graphs on 9 vertices.}
\label{fig:base9}
\end{figure}
Hence we define ${\mathcal{G}}$ to be the set $\{K_5,\overline{G57},\overline{G59},\overline{G293},\overline{G308},\overline{G312}, S_1, S_2,S_3,S_4,S_5\}.$
For a graph $G$ let $\delta(G)$ denote the minimum degree of a vertex in $G$. A $k$-edge-cutset is a set of $k$ edges whose removal disconnects a graph. If one of the components, of the resulting disconnected graph, contains only a single vertex then we say that the $k$-edge-cutset is \emph{trivial}. Otherwise it is \emph{non-trivial}. A graph is \emph{essentially $k$-edge-connected} if it has no non-trivial $(k-1)$-edge-cutsets. Since $(2,1)$-circuits have $\delta(G)\in \{3,4\}$ this will be a useful notion for us.
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph and let $G'$ be formed from $G$ by deleting an edge $xy$ from $E$ and adding a new vertex $v$ and edges $xv,yv,zv$ for $x,y,z\in V$. This operation is known as a 1-extension (elsewhere it is also referred to as the Henneberg 2 move \cite{NR,Tay,Whi3}). The inverse is known as a 1-reduction.
Also let $G''$ be formed from $G$ by deleting two non-adjacent edges $xy,zw$ from $E$ and adding a new vertex $v$ and edges $xv,yv,zv,wv$ for $x,y,z,w\in V$. This operation is known as $X$-replacement \cite{NR,Whi3}.
As outlined above, when a circuit is sufficiently connected we will show that either a 1-reduction or an inverse $X$-replacement can be applied to form a new circuit. In the cases where a circuit is not sufficiently connected we will apply inverse `summation' moves to reduce to a smaller circuit.
There will remain a handful of cases where the circuit, $G$ say, is invariant under these inverse `summation' moves. In order to deal with these cases we will construct a new circuit $G^*$ which is a, sufficiently connected, multigraph. We will then show that there exists a 1-reduction or inverse $X$-replacement that can be applied to $G^*$ to yield a new circuit. Finally we use this to show that an analogous 1-reduction or $X$-replacement could have been applied in $G$ to yield a new circuit.
Let $M^*(2,1)$ denote the set of all multigraphs that are $(2,1)$-circuits and let $M(2,1)$ denote the set of all simple graphs that are $(2,1)$-circuits.
The multigraph circuits that we construct in the manner referred to above are all elements of the subset $\mathcal{M}\subseteq M^*(2,1)$ defined as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item[] Let $\mathcal{M}'$ be the subset of $M^*(2,1)$ where $G\in \mathcal{M}'$ if and only if
\begin{itemize}
\item $G$ is either 3-connected or has fewer than four vertices;
\item the maximum edge multiplicity is three;
\item all the vertices in $G$ incident with a multiple edge have degree greater than three;
\item if $G$ contains a loop, then the vertex incident with the loop has degree greater than three and it is not incident with any multiple edges; and
\item if $G=(V,E)$ contains a vertex, $v$ say, incident to two loops then $V=\{v\}$.
\end{itemize}
\item[] Then $\mathcal{M}=M(2,1)\cup\mathcal{M}'$.
\end{itemize}
Note that $M(2,1)\subset\mathcal{M}\subset M^*(2,1)$. With this in mind, letting $G\in\mathcal{M}$, we call
\begin{itemize}
\item a vertex of degree three in $G$ a \emph{node};
\item a node $v$ of $G$ \emph{admissible} if there is a 1-reduction removing $v$ that results in a $(2,1)$-circuit in which the added edge is between previously non-adjacent vertices;
\item a degree four vertex $v$ in $G$ \emph{admissible} if there is an inverse $X$-replacement removing $v$ that results in a $(2,1)$-circuit in which the added edges are between pairs of previously non-adjacent vertices.
\end{itemize}
As $M(2,1)\subset\mathcal{M}$, in the case where $G\in M(2,1)$, the resulting circuit for an admissible 1-reduction should also be in $M(2,1)$. (The reader may find the motivation behind the results in Section \ref{sec:hen2} clearer if these results are thought of in the restricted case of $M(2,1)$; we will not need the general case until the end of the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:mainresult}.)
We will use ${\mathcal{G}}^*$ to refer to the set of base graphs in $\mathcal{M}$. The elements of ${\mathcal{G}}^* \backslash M(2,1)$ will be derived in Section \ref{sec:hen2}.
\subsection{Results}
Our main result is as follows.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:mainresult}
A simple graph $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit if and only if it can be generated recursively from $G\in {\mathcal{G}}$ by applying 1-extensions and $X$-replacements sequentially within connected components and taking sums of connected components.
\end{thm}
In order to prove the theorem we first establish admissibility when the minimum degree is 4.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:4reg}
Every essentially 5-edge-connected $(2,1)$-circuit $G\in M(2,1)$ not equal to $K_5$ with $\delta(G)=4$ contains an admissible vertex.
\end{thm}
From there, the key technical step to proving Theorem \ref{thm:mainresult} is to establish admissibility, in the $\delta(G)=3$ case, when $G$ is sufficiently connected.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:Hen2admissible}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a $3$-connected $(2,1)$-circuit with $\delta(G)=3$ and $G\not\in {\mathcal{G}}$. Suppose either
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $G$ is essentially 5-edge-connected and there is no proper critical set or
\item $G$ is essentially 4-edge-connected and there is a proper critical set.
\end{enumerate}
Then $G$ contains an admissible node.
\end{thm}
Proper critical sets are defined in Section \ref{sec:hen2} and the reason for splitting the above theorem into these two cases is purely technical.
\subsection{Outline of paper}
In Section \ref{sec:4reg} we prove Theorem \ref{thm:4reg} establishing that when $\delta(G)=3$ then either a $(2,1)$-circuit has an admissible vertex or it has a small separating set of edges.
In Section \ref{sec:hen2} we prove Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible} establishing that whenever a $(2,1)$-circuit has $\delta(G)=4$ then either it has an admissible vertex or it has a small separating set of edges. In Section \ref{sec:sumsec} we deal with graphs that are $(2,1)$-circuits but fail to be sufficiently connected. In Section \ref{sec:construction} we combine our results to prove Theorem \ref{thm:mainresult}.
\section{$X$-replacement}
\label{sec:4reg}
An \emph{X-replacement} is the deletion of two non-adjacent edges $ab,cd$ and the addition of a vertex $v$ adjacent to $a,b,c,d$. The inverse operation is the deletion of a degree four vertex and the addition of two non-adjacent edges between the neighbours.
For $G=(V,E)$, define $f(G)=2|V|-|E|$, so that a graph $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit if and only if $f(G)=0$ and every proper subgraph $H$ satisfies $f(H)\geq 1$.
If $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit and $v \in V$, then we say that $v$ is \emph{admissible} if there is an inverse X-replacement on $v$ resulting in a $(2,1)$-circuit.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:4reg}
A graph $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit with $\delta(G)=4$ if and only if $G$ is connected and 4-regular.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $G=(V,E)$.
If $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit with $\delta(G)=4$, then $G$ is 4-regular and a simple counting argument
implies that $G$ is connected.
Conversely, if $G$ is connected and 4-regular then $|E|=2|V|$. Suppose $H=(V',E')$ is a proper subgraph of $G$ with $|E'| \geq 2|V'|$ then $H$ has average degree at least four. Since $H$ is proper and $G$ is connected we contradict the 4-regularity of $G$.
\end{proof}
With this lemma, Theorem \ref{thm:4reg} can be extracted from \cite{BJF}. For completeness we provide an alternate proof.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:4reg}]
Let $G=(V,E)$.
\begin{claim}\label{claim:simple1}
Let $v \in V$. Then $v$ is non-admissible if and only if every possible inverse X-replacement on $v$ results in a non-simple graph.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Claim]
If every inverse X-replacement on $v$ creates a multigraph, then clearly $v$ is non-admissible.
For the converse let $G'$ be the result of the inverse X-replacement. By Lemma \ref{lem:4reg} we need to check that 4-regularity and connectedness are preserved. The first of these is clear and if $G'$ is not connected then $v$ is a cut-vertex, but since $v$ has degree four this contradicts the assumption that G is essentially 5-edge-connected.
\end{proof}
It follows that
$G'$ is not simple if and only if in $G$, $v$ is (a) contained in a copy of $K_4$ or (b) there is $x \in N(v)$ (the neighbour set of $v$) adjacent to every other vertex in $N(v)$.
We next show that no subgraph of $G$ is isomorphic to $K_4$.
Suppose otherwise, i.e., that $H$ is a subgraph of $G$ isomorphic to $K_4$. As $G$ is 4-regular there is a 4-edge-cutset between $H$ and $G-H$, since $G\neq K_5$ this cutset is non-trivial.
We complete the proof by showing that either $v$ or one of its neighbours are admissible.
(In fact, either $v$ or three of its neighbours are admissible.)
Let $N(v)={w,x,y,z}$ and note that $v$ is not in a copy of $K_4$. Hence if $v$ is not admissible then, say, $xy, xz, xw \in E$. Let $N(y)=\{v,x,r,s\}$ and note that, since $v$ is not in a subgraph isomorphic to $K_4$, $r,s \in V-\{v,x,y,z,w\}$. By 4-regularity $vr, xs$ are not in $E$. Thus Claim \ref{claim:simple1} implies $y$ is admissible.
\end{proof}
\section{The 1-extension Operation}
\label{sec:hen2}
In this section we prove Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible}. We start with some facts (Lemmas \ref{lem:connected} to \ref{lem:V3}) about $(2,1)$-circuits that can be proved by simple counting arguments. See \cite{B&J} or \cite{Nix} for similar results. Crucial to the problem is that we must retain simplicity throughout the recursive construction. We achieve this, in Subsection \ref{subsec:simple}, by establishing conditions for a $(2,1)$-circuit with $\delta(G)=3$ to have nodes not contained in subgraphs isomorphic to $K_4$. Finally in Subsection \ref{subsec:adm} we loosely follow the method established in \cite{B&J} to deduce admissibility for some node.
\subsection{Preliminaries}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a $(2,1)$-circuit. A subset $X\subsetneq V$ is \emph{critical} if $i(X)=2|X|-1$ and is \emph{semi-critical} if $i(X)=2|X|-2$ and for all $X'\subseteq X$ we have $i(X')\leq 2|X'|-2$. We are particularly interested in special kinds of critical sets. We define a critical set $X\subsetneq V$ to be: \emph{$v$-critical} for a node $v\in V$ if $X$ contains exactly two neighbours of $v$ but not $v$ itself; \emph{node-critical} if $X$ is $v$-critical for some node $v$ (where $N(v)=\{x,y,z\}$) in $V$ such that $x,y\in X$ and $d(z)\geq 4$; and \emph{proper} if $|X|<|V|-1$. Note that node-critical sets are proper, but proper critical sets need not be node-critical.
Suppose that $A,B\subseteq V$; then we denote the number of edges $uv\in E$ such that $u\in A-B$ and $v\in B-A$ by $d(A,B)$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:connected}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a $(2,1)$-circuit. Then $G$ is connected and 2-edge-connected.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:union}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a $(2,1)$-circuit. Let $X,Y\subset V$ be critical sets, let $|X\cap Y|\geq 1$ and let $|X\cup Y|\leq |V|-1$. Then $X\cap Y$ and $X\cup Y$ are critical sets and $d(X,Y)=0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:admissibleedge}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a $(2,1)$-circuit. Let $v$ be a node with $N(v)=\{u,w,z\}$. Then removing $v$ and adding $uw$ is not admissible if and only if there exists a critical set $X\subset V$ with $u,w\in X$ and $v,z\notin X$ or $uw\in E$.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:2edges}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a 3-connected $(2,1)$-circuit containing a node $v$ with $N(v)=\{w,u,z\}$, $uz\notin E, wz,wu\in E$. Then $v$ is admissible.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:1edge}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a $(2,1)$-circuit containing a node $v$ with $N(v)=\{w,u,z\}$, $uz,wu\notin E, wz\in E$. Then $v$ is admissible.
\end{lem}
Let $V_3=\{v \in V:d(v)=3\}$. Let $V_3^*\subseteq V_3$ be the subset of degree three vertices not contained in copies of $K_4$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:V3}
Let $G$ be a $(2,1)$-circuit. Then $G[V_3]$ is a (possibly empty) forest.
\end{lem}
\subsection{Finding Nodes}
\label{subsec:simple}
We now establish connectivity conditions that guarantee that, in a 3-connected, essentially 5-edge-connected $(2,1)$-circuit $G$ with $\delta(G)=3$, there exist nodes not contained in copies of $K_4$.
Since (the vertex set of) $K_4$ is semi-critical, this is significantly
harder than the corresponding result in \cite{Nix}. We will first prove two lemmas for $(2,1)$-circuits that contain proper critical sets, before proving their (simpler) analogues for $(2,1)$-circuits that contain no proper critical sets. We make this distinction as we can give a weaker edge-connectivity assumption for $(2,1)$-circuits that contain proper critical sets, than for $(2,1)$-circuits that do not (see Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible}).
\subsubsection{Proper critical sets}
We first consider the case when there exists at least one proper critical set.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:proper_implies_deg_3}
Let $G\in\mathcal{M}$ be essentially 4-edge-connected. Suppose that $G$ contains a proper critical set $X$. Then $|V_3-X|\geq 2$ (and hence $\delta(G)=3$).
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $E'$ be the set of edges between $X$ and $V-X$.
The sum of the degrees of vertices in $X$ is $4|X|-2+|E'|$. The total sum of the degrees of vertices in $G$ is $4|V|$. So the sum of the degrees in $V-X$ is $4(|V|-|X|)+2-|E'|$. Hence, as $|E'|\geq 4$, $\delta(G)\geq 3$ and the average degree of $G$ is four, there are at least two nodes that are not in $X$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:criticalsemi}
Let $G\in\mathcal{M}$ be 3-connected and essentially 4-edge-connected.
Let ${\mathcal{W}}=\{W_i\mid 1\leq i\leq n:W_i\text{ is critical or semi-critical}\,\},$
where $W_1$ is critical and $|W_i|\geq 2$. Let $Y=V-(\cup_{i=1}^n W_i)$. Suppose that either
\begin{enumerate}
\item $|Y|\geq 2$; or
\item ${\mathcal{A}}:=\cup_{i=1}^n G[W_i]$ is disconnected.
\end{enumerate}
Then $Y$ contains two nodes.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since $G\in \mathcal{M}$, with vertices of $V$ labelled as $v_1,v_2,\dots, v_{|V|}$, we have
\begin{eqnarray} \sum_{i=1}^{|V|}(4-d_G(v_i))=0.\label{eqn1} \end{eqnarray}
Let $A_1,\dots,A_m$ be the vertex sets of the connected components of ${\mathcal{A}}$. For any pair of semi-critical sets $W_i,W_j\in \mathcal{W}$ we have
\begin{eqnarray} 2(|W_i|+|W_j|)-3 &=& 2|W_i\cup W_j|-1 + 2|W_i\cap W_j|-2 \nonumber\\ &\geq & i(W_i\cup W_j)+i(W_i\cap W_j)\nonumber\\ &=& i(W_i)+i(W_j)+d(W_i,W_j)\nonumber\\ &=& 2(|W_i|+|W_j|)-4+d(W_i,W_j)\label{eqnnew} \end{eqnarray}
so either $d(W_i,W_j)=0$ or equality holds and $d(W_i,W_j)=1$.
Hence, whenever $W_i$ and $W_j$ have non-empty intersection, the union is semi-critical or critical. Similarly if $W_i$ is critical, $W_j$ is semi-critical and they have a non-empty intersection then the union is critical. (Note two critical sets with a non-empty intersection gives $V$, contradicting (1) and (2).)
Reordering if necessary, let $A_1,\dots, A_r$ be critical sets and let $A_{r+1},\dots, A_m$ be semi-critical sets.
Define
\[ f_j=\sum_{v\in A_j}(4-d_{G[A_j]}(v)). \]
Hence, for $1\leq j\leq r$, $f_j=2$ and for $r+1\leq j\leq m$, $f_j=4$. As either (1) or (2) holds and there are no non-trivial 3-edge-cutsets, there exist four edges $x_\ell y_\ell$, $1\leq \ell \leq 4$, where $x_\ell \in A_j$ and $y_\ell \in V-A_j$, where the $x_\ell \in A_j$ (respectively the $y_\ell \in V-A_j$) are not necessarily all distinct. Define
\[ g_j=\sum_{v\in A_j} (4-d_G(v)). \]
Hence, for $1\leq j \leq r$, $g_j\leq -2$ and, for $r+1\leq j \leq m$, $g_j\leq 0$. Now
\begin{eqnarray} \sum_{i=1}^m g_j = -2r\leq -2 \label{eqn2} \end{eqnarray}
since $r\geq 1$. The result follows by comparing Equations (\ref{eqn1}) and (\ref{eqn2}).
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:properlem}
Let $G=(V,E) \in\mathcal{M}$ be 3-connected and essentially 4-edge-connected. Suppose that $G$ contains a proper critical set $X$. Then $|V_3^*-X|\geq 2$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
If $G$ contains no copies of $K_4$, then $V_3^*=V_3$ and Lemma \ref{lem:proper_implies_deg_3} yields the result.
So suppose that $B_1,\ldots, B_n$ are the vertex sets of all the copies of $K_4$ which are not subsets of $X$. Let $Y=V-(\cup_{i=1}^n B_i)-X$ and ${\mathcal{A}}=G[X]\cup(\cup_{i=1}^n G[B_i])$. If $|Y|\geq 2$ or ${\mathcal{A}}$ is disconnected, then we may apply Lemma \ref{lem:criticalsemi} to yield the result.
Hence, suppose that $|Y|\leq 1$ and ${\mathcal{A}}$ is connected. So,
without loss of generality, there exists a $t\geq 1$, such that $X\cap B_i\neq \emptyset$, for all $1\leq i\leq t$.
For each of these $B_i$, and a subset $B'\subset B_i$, we have $i(B')=2|B'|-\alpha$ where $\alpha=2$ when $|B'|\in \{1,4\}$ and $\alpha=3$ when $|B'|\in \{2,3\}$. Thus, using a similar calculation to Equation (\ref{eqnnew}) we have: if $|X\cap B_i|=3$, then $X\cup B_i=V$, contradicting the fact that $X$ is a proper critical set, and if $|X\cap B_i|=2$, then $X\cup B_i=V$, contradicting 3-connectivity. So we have that $|X\cap B_i|=1$. If $d(X,B_i)>0$ or the multiplicity of any of the edges in $G[B_i]$ is greater than one, then $X\cup B_i=V$, contradicting 3-connectivity. So $d(X,B_i)=0$ and $G[B_i]$ is simple, for $1\leq i\leq t$.
We define an auxiliary graph $G^\dagger$ as follows. The vertex set is $X,B_1,\ldots,B_n$ and there is an edge between two vertices if and only if the corresponding sets in $G$ intersect.
\begin{claim}
The graph $G^\dagger$ is a tree.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
First note that a path in $G^\dagger$ either corresponds to a critical or a semi-critical set in $G$.
Suppose that $G^\dagger$ contains a cycle. Let $C=(c_0,c_1,\ldots, c_\ell)$ be such a cycle. Without loss of generality $c_0$ corresponds to one of the $B_i$, so let $P$ be the path obtained by deleting $c_0$ from $C$.
Suppose $P$ corresponds to a critical set $P'=\cup_{i=1}^\ell c_i$ in $G$, that is $i(P')=2|P'|-1$. Now let $C'=\cup_{i=0}^\ell c_i$, note that $C'$ contains, at most, an additional two vertices from $P'$ and $G[C']$ contains an additional six edges from $G[P']$, a contradiction.
Suppose $P$ corresponds to a semi-critical set $P'=\cup_{i=1}^\ell c_i$ in $G$, that is $i(P')=2|P'|-2$. Then $X$ is not a vertex of $P$. Now let $C'=\cup_{i=0}^\ell c_i$, note that, as $P'$ is not critical, $G[C']$ contains an additional two vertices and an additional six edges from $G[P']$. Hence $C'=V$, but does not contain $X$, a contradiction.
The claim follows from the connectivity of ${\mathcal{A}}$.
\end{proof}
As $B_1$ exists it follows from the claim that ${\mathcal{A}}$ contains a cut-vertex, $v$. As ${\mathcal{A}}$ is connected the vertex set of ${\mathcal{A}}$ either corresponds to a critical set in $G$ or it is $V$. In the first case $v$ is part of a cut-pair in $G$ (as $|Y|\leq 1$) and in the second case $v$ is a cut-vertex in $G$. In either case we have contradicted the 3-connectivity of $G$.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{No proper critical sets}
Now we deal with the case when there are no proper critical sets.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:noproper}
Let $G=(V,E)\in\mathcal{M}$ be essentially 5-edge-connected. Suppose $V$ contains no proper critical sets, let $W_1,\dots, W_k$, with $k\geq 1$, be the vertex sets of all the copies of $K_4$ in $G$ and let $Y=V-\cup_{i=1}^k W_i$. Suppose that either
\begin{enumerate}
\item $|Y|\geq 2$; or
\item $\cup_{i=1}^kG[W_i]$ is disconnected.
\end{enumerate}
Then $G$ contains an admissible node.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
If any of the $W_i$ are critical sets (i.e., $G[W_i]$ contains multi-edges or loops), then, as $V$ contains no proper critical sets, $|V|=5$ and neither (1) nor (2) hold.
So, since $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit, Equation (\ref{eqn1}) holds and $W_i$ is semi-critical, for each $1\leq i \leq k$. Let $A_1,\dots,A_r$ be the vertex sets of the connected components of $\cup_{i=1}^k G[W_i]$.
Observe that each of $A_1,\dots,A_m$ is semi-critical.
Then
\[ 4=\sum_{v\in A_j}(4-d_{G[A_j]}(v)). \]
There are no non-trivial 4-edge-cutsets so, as at least one of (1) or (2) holds, there exists five edges $x_\ell y_\ell$, $1\leq \ell \leq 5$, where $x_\ell \in A_j$ and $y_\ell \in V-A_j$ (where the $x_\ell$ are not necessarily distinct and nor are the $y_\ell$). Then
\begin{eqnarray} \sum_{j=1}^r \sum_{v\in A_j} (4-d_G(v))\leq -1. \label{eqn3} \end{eqnarray}
Comparing Equations (\ref{eqn1}) and (\ref{eqn3}) gives that $|Y|$ contains a node $v$. Now $v$ is not in a copy of $K_4$ and since there are no proper critical sets, we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:admissibleedge} to deduce that $v$ is admissible.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Admissibility}
\label{subsec:adm}
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:silly}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a 3-connected $(2,1)$-circuit. Suppose $v\in V_3^*$ is a non-admissible node with $N(v)=\{x,y,z\}$. Then there exists two $v$-critical sets $X,Y$ such that $X\cup Y=V-v$. Moreover, we may choose $X,Y$ such that $z\in X\cap Y$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By Lemmas \ref{lem:2edges} and \ref{lem:1edge}, since $v$ is not admissible and $v\in V_3^*$, there are no edges between $x$, $y$ and $z$. Now \ref{lem:admissibleedge} implies there exists critical sets $X$ containing $x,z$ but not $y,v$ and $Y$ containing $y,z$ but not $x,v$.
It follows from Lemma \ref{lem:union} and the definition of a $(2,1)$-circuit that $X\cup Y$ is critical, hence $X\cup Y=V-v$.
\end{proof}
The following has essentially the same proof as the corresponding results for $(2,3)$ and $(2,2)$-circuits, \cite[Lemma $3.3$]{B&J} and \cite[Lemma $2.10$]{Nix}; however we obtain a slightly stronger result.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:leaf}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a
$(2,1)$-circuit with $\delta(G)=3$. Let $v \in V$ be a node with $N(v)=\{x,y,z\}$, $d(z)\geq 4$ and suppose there are no edges between neighbours of $v$. Let $X$ be $v$-critical on $x,y$. Suppose either
\begin{enumerate}
\item there is a non-admissible node $u\in V-X-v$ where $d_{G[V_3^*]}(u)=2$ with no edges between its neighbours, precisely one neighbour $w$ in $X$ and $w$ is a node; or
\item there is a non-admissible node $u \in V-X-v$ where $d_{G[V_3^*]}(u)=0\text{ or }1$ with no edges between its neighbours.
\end{enumerate}
Then, in $G$, there is a node-critical set $X'$ for a node with no edges between its neighbours such that $X\subsetneq X'$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose (1) holds and let $N(u)=\{w,p,q\}$.
Since $u$ is non-admissible and $wp\not\in E$, by Lemma \ref{lem:admissibleedge}, there exists a $u$-critical set, $Y$ say, on $w$ and $p$. Now, $w\in X\cup Y$, and $u,q\not\in X\cup Y$, so by Lemma \ref{lem:union}, $X':=X\cup Y$ is node-critical for $u$. As $p\not\in X$, $X\subsetneq X'$.
So, suppose that (2) holds. Let $r$ be a neighbour of $u$ of minimum degree in $G$, using the argument in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:silly}, we see that there exist $u$-critical sets $Y_1$ and $Y_2$ whose intersection contains $r$ and $Y_1\cup Y_2= V-u$. Hence, without loss of generality, $X\cap Y_1\neq \emptyset$. As $|N(u)\cap X|\leq 3$, we consider four cases. If $|N(u)\cap X|=0$, then the set $X'=X\cup Y_1$ is node-critical and, as $|N(u)\cap X|=0$, we have that $X\subsetneq X'$.
Suppose that $|N(u)\cap X|=1$, say $N(u)\cap X=\{s\}$. If $s\in Y_1$, then set $X'=X\cup Y_1$ is node-critical and, as $N(u)-(X\cup Y_1)\neq \emptyset$, we have that $X\subsetneq X'$. So, assume that $s\not\in Y_1$, that is $s\in Y_2-Y_1$; hence $X'=X\cup Y_2$ is node-critical and, as $N(u)-(X\cup Y_2)\neq \emptyset$, we have that $X\subsetneq X'$.
If $|N(u)\cap X|=2$, then the set $X'=X\cup \{u\}$ is node-critical and hence $X\subsetneq X'$. Finally, if $|N(u)\cap X|=3$, then $V=X\cup \{u\}$, but $v\not\in X\cup \{u\}$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
Before we prove Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible} we establish the following lemma to deal with some small circuits. Note that the set of graphs $\mathcal{G}^*$ is comprised of the graphs in the set $\mathcal{G} = \{K_5,\overline{G57},\overline{G59},\break\overline{G293},\overline{G308},\overline{G312}, S_1, S_2,S_3,S_4,S_5\}$ and those shown in Figure \ref{fig:G*stuff}.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (a1) at (1.75,7.5);
\coordinate (c1) at (3.75,7);
\coordinate (c2) at (4.25,8);
\coordinate (c3) at (4.75,7);
\coordinate (d1) at (6.25,7);
\coordinate (d2) at (6.75,8);
\coordinate (d3) at (7.25,7);
\coordinate (e1) at (8.75,7);
\coordinate (e2) at (9.25,8);
\coordinate (e3) at (9.75,7);
\coordinate (u1) at (0,4);
\coordinate (u2) at (1,4);
\coordinate (u3) at (0,5);
\coordinate (u4) at (1,5);
\coordinate (v1) at (2.5,4);
\coordinate (v2) at (3.5,4);
\coordinate (v3) at (2.5,5);
\coordinate (v4) at (3.5,5);
\coordinate (w1) at (5,4);
\coordinate (w2) at (6,4);
\coordinate (w3) at (5,5);
\coordinate (w4) at (6,5);
\coordinate (x1) at (7.5,4);
\coordinate (x2) at (8.5,4);
\coordinate (x3) at (7.5,5);
\coordinate (x4) at (8.5,5);
\coordinate (y1) at (10,4);
\coordinate (y2) at (11,4);
\coordinate (y3) at (10,5);
\coordinate (y4) at (11,5);
\coordinate (m1) at (0.5,0.5);
\coordinate (m2) at (0,1.5);
\coordinate (m3) at (1,2.25);
\coordinate (m4) at (2,1.5);
\coordinate (m5) at (1.5,0.5);
\coordinate (n1) at (3.5,0.5);
\coordinate (n2) at (3,1.5);
\coordinate (n3) at (4,2.25);
\coordinate (n4) at (5,1.5);
\coordinate (n5) at (4.5,0.5);
\coordinate (o1) at (6.5,0.5);
\coordinate (o2) at (6,1.5);
\coordinate (o3) at (7,2.25);
\coordinate (o4) at (8,1.5);
\coordinate (o5) at (7.5,0.5);
\coordinate (p1) at (9.5,0.5);
\coordinate (p2) at (9,1.5);
\coordinate (p3) at (10,2.25);
\coordinate (p4) at (11,1.5);
\coordinate (p5) at (10.5,0.5);
\draw (1.75,7.65) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (1.75,7.35) circle (0.15cm);
\draw[bend left=15] (c1) edge (c2);
\draw[bend left=15] (c2) edge (c1);
\draw[bend left=15] (c3) edge (c2);
\draw[bend left=15] (c2) edge (c3);
\draw[bend left=15] (c1) edge (c3);
\draw[bend left=15] (c3) edge (c1);
\draw (6.75,8.15) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (d1) -- (d2) -- (d3) -- cycle;
\draw[bend left=20] (d1) edge (d3);
\draw[bend left=20] (d3) edge (d1);
\draw (e1) -- (e2) -- (e3) -- cycle;
\draw (9.25,8.15) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (8.64393398283,6.89393398282) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (9.85606601717,6.89393398282) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (u1) -- (u2) -- (u3) -- (u4) -- (u1) -- (u3);
\draw (u4) -- (u2);
\draw (-0.10606601717,5.10606601717) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (1.10606601717,5.10606601717) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (v1) -- (v2) -- (v3) -- (v4) -- (v1);
\draw (v4) -- (v2);
\draw[bend left=20] (v1) edge (v3);
\draw[bend left=20] (v3) edge (v1);
\draw (3.60606601717,5.10606601717) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (w1) -- (w2) -- (w3) -- (w4) -- (w1);
\draw (w4) -- (w2);
\draw[bend left=20] (w1) edge (w3);
\draw[bend left=20] (w3) edge (w1);
\draw (w3) edge (w1);
\draw (x1) -- (x2);
\draw (x4) -- (x1);
\draw (x3) -- (x2);
\draw (x3) -- (x4);
\draw[bend left=20] (x1) edge (x3);
\draw[bend left=20] (x3) edge (x1);
\draw[bend left=20] (x2) edge (x4);
\draw[bend left=20] (x4) edge (x2);
\draw (y1) -- (y2);
\draw (y4) -- (y1);
\draw (y3) -- (y2);
\draw (y2) -- (y4);
\draw[bend left=20] (y1) edge (y3);
\draw[bend left=20] (y3) edge (y1);
\draw[bend left=20] (y3) edge (y4);
\draw[bend left=20] (y4) edge (y3);
\draw (m5) -- (m4) -- (m3) -- (m2) -- (m1) -- (m4) -- (m2) -- (m5) -- (m3) -- (m1);
\draw (1,2.4) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (n5) -- (n4) -- (n3) -- (n2) -- (n1) -- (n4) -- (n2) -- (n5) -- (n3) -- (n1);
\draw (3.39393398282,0.39393398282) circle (0.15cm);
\draw (o5) -- (o4);
\draw (o3) -- (o2) -- (o1) -- (o4) -- (o2) -- (o5) -- (o3) -- (o1);
\draw[bend left=20] (o4) edge (o3);
\draw[bend left=20] (o3) edge (o4);
\draw (p4) -- (p3) -- (p2) -- (p1) -- (p4) -- (p2) -- (p5) -- (p3) -- (p1);
\draw[bend left=20] (p4) edge (p5);
\draw[bend left=20] (p5) edge (p4);
\node at (a1) [vertex]{};
\node at (c1) [vertex]{};
\node at (c2) [vertex]{};
\node at (c3) [vertex]{};
\node at (d1) [vertex]{};
\node at (d2) [vertex]{};
\node at (d3) [vertex]{};
\node at (e1) [vertex]{};
\node at (e2) [vertex]{};
\node at (e3) [vertex]{};
\node at (u1) [vertex]{};
\node at (u2) [vertex]{};
\node at (u3) [vertex]{};
\node at (u4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (w1) [vertex]{};
\node at (w2) [vertex]{};
\node at (w3) [vertex]{};
\node at (w4) [vertex]{};
\node at (x1) [vertex]{};
\node at (x2) [vertex]{};
\node at (x3) [vertex]{};
\node at (x4) [vertex]{};
\node at (y1) [vertex]{};
\node at (y2) [vertex]{};
\node at (y3) [vertex]{};
\node at (y4) [vertex]{};
\node at (m1) [vertex]{};
\node at (m2) [vertex]{};
\node at (m3) [vertex]{};
\node at (m4) [vertex]{};
\node at (m5) [vertex]{};
\node at (n1) [vertex]{};
\node at (n2) [vertex]{};
\node at (n3) [vertex]{};
\node at (n4) [vertex]{};
\node at (n5) [vertex]{};
\node at (o1) [vertex]{};
\node at (o2) [vertex]{};
\node at (o3) [vertex]{};
\node at (o4) [vertex]{};
\node at (o5) [vertex]{};
\node at (p1) [vertex]{};
\node at (p2) [vertex]{};
\node at (p3) [vertex]{};
\node at (p4) [vertex]{};
\node at (p5) [vertex]{};
\node at (1.75,6.5) {$R_0$};
\node at (4.25,6.5) {$R_1$};
\node at (6.75,6.5) {$R_2$};
\node at (9.25,6.5) {$R_3$};
\node at (0.5,3.5) {$R_4$};
\node at (3,3.5) {$R_5$};
\node at (5.5,3.5) {$R_{6}$};
\node at (8,3.5) {$R_{7}$};
\node at (10.5,3.5) {$R_{8}$};
\node at (1,0) {$R_{9}$};
\node at (4,0) {$R_{10}$};
\node at (7,0) {$R_{11}$};
\node at (10,0) {$R_{12}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Circuits in $\mathcal{G}^*\cap(\mathcal{M}\setminus M(2,1))$.
\label{fig:G*stuff}
\end{figure}
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:small_ones}
Let $G=(V,E)\in\mathcal{M}\setminus\mathcal{G}^*$ be 3-connected and essentially 5-edge-connected with $|V|\leq 8$, $\delta(G)=3$ and no proper critical sets.
Suppose that $G$ contains a copy of $K_4$. Let $W_1,\ldots,W_k$, with $k\geq 1$, be the vertex sets of all copies of $K_4$ in $G$ and let $Y=V-\cup_{i=1}^k W_i$. Further suppose that $\mathcal{A}=\cup_{i=1}^k G[W_i]$ is connected and $|Y|\leq 1$. Then $G$ contains an admissible node.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
First note that, as $G$ contains a copy of $K_4$, $|V|\geq 4$.
Suppose that $|V|=4$. In this case $V=W_1$ and as $G$ is a circuit, $G\in\mathcal{M}'$ (so $G$ is a multigraph). There are five possibilities for a circuit on four vertices: $R_4$, $R_5$, $R_6$, $R_7$, $R_8$ (see Figure \ref{fig:G*stuff}) all of which are contained in $\mathcal{G}^*$.
Suppose that $|V|=5$. Either there are two vertex sets underlying copies of $K_4$ or there is one set and an additional vertex of degree three. Note that these cases are equivalent, hence there are five possibilities for a such a circuit on five vertices: $K_5$, $R_9$, $R_{10}$, $R_{11}$, $R_{12}$ (see Figure \ref{fig:G*stuff}) all of which are contained in $\mathcal{G}^*$.
Suppose that $|V|=6$. As $|Y|\leq 1$, $k\geq 2$ and any pair of distinct $W_i$, $W_j$ intersect in either two or three vertices. Consider $W_1$ and $W_2$. If $|W_1\cap W_2|=2$, then $V=W_1\cup W_2$, and as $G$ is 3-connected it must be isomorphic to $\overline{G59}\in\mathcal{G}$. So suppose that $|W_1\cap W_2|=3$. Then there exists a vertex $v\not\in W_1\cup W_2$. As $W_1\cup W_2$ is a critical set $v$ has degree three and hence $G$ is either isomorphic to $\overline{G57}$ or $\overline{G59}$, in either case $G\in\mathcal{G}$.
Suppose that $|V|= 7$. As $|Y|\leq 1$ and $\mathcal{A}$ is connected, $k\geq 2$ and any two $W_i$, $W_j$ intersect in either one, two or three vertices. However, as $G$ does not contain a proper critical set $|W_i\cap W_j|\neq 3$.
If $|W_1\cap W_2|=1$, then as $G$ is 3-connected it must be isomorphic to $\overline{G312}$.
So suppose that $|W_1\cap W_2|=2$. Then there exists a vertex $v\not\in W_1\cup W_2$. As $W_1\cup W_2$ is a critical set $v$ has degree three and as $G$ is 3-connected it is isomorphic to one of the two graphs illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:order7_admiss}. In either case Lemma \ref{lem:1edge} or \ref{lem:2edges} implies the existence of an admissible node.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (v1) at (0,0);
\coordinate (v2) at (1,0);
\coordinate (v3) at (2,0);
\coordinate (v4) at (0,1);
\coordinate (v5) at (1,1);
\coordinate (v6) at (2,1);
\coordinate (v7) at (1,-1);
\draw (v1) -- (v3) -- (v6) -- (v4) -- (v1) -- (v5) -- (v2) -- (v6);
\draw (v4) -- (v2);
\draw (v5) -- (v3);
\draw (v1) -- (v7) -- (v2);
\draw (v7) -- (v3);
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\coordinate (u1) at (4,0);
\coordinate (u2) at (5,0);
\coordinate (u3) at (6,0);
\coordinate (u4) at (4,1);
\coordinate (u5) at (5,1);
\coordinate (u6) at (6,1);
\coordinate (u7) at (5,-1);
\draw (u1) -- (u3) -- (u6) -- (u4) -- (u1) -- (u5) -- (u2) -- (u6);
\draw (u4) -- (u2);
\draw (u5) -- (u3);
\draw (u1) -- (u7) -- (u3);
\draw (u7) -- (u6);
\node at (u1) [vertex]{};
\node at (u2) [vertex]{};
\node at (u3) [vertex]{};
\node at (u4) [vertex]{};
\node at (u5) [vertex]{};
\node at (u6) [vertex]{};
\node at (u7) [vertex]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Potential base graphs on seven vertices.}
\label{fig:order7_admiss}
\end{figure}
Finally, suppose that $|V|=8$. As $\mathcal{A}$ is connected and $|Y|\leq 1$, $k\geq 2$ and for any pair $W_i$, $W_j$, where $1\leq i<j\leq k$, $|W_i\cap W_j|=0\text{ or }1$ and there exists a pair, say $W_1$, $W_2$, where $|W_1\cap W_2|=1$. Then there exists a vertex $v\not\in W_1\cup W_2$ and as $G$ is 3-connected in this case it must be simple and isomorphic to one of the three graphs illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:order8_admiss}; in each case Lemma \ref{lem:1edge} or \ref{lem:2edges} implies the existence of an admissible node.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (v1) at (0,0);
\coordinate (v2) at (1,0);
\coordinate (v3) at (0,1);
\coordinate (v4) at (1,1);
\coordinate (v5) at (2,0);
\coordinate (v6) at (1,-1);
\coordinate (v7) at (2,-1);
\coordinate (v8) at (2.5,1);
\draw (v1) -- (v3) -- (v2) -- (v4) -- (v1) -- (v6) -- (v7) -- (v5) -- (v6) -- (v2) -- (v5) -- (v8) -- (v2) -- (v1);
\draw (v3) -- (v8);
\draw (v2) -- (v7);
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\node at (v8) [vertex]{};
\coordinate (u1) at (4,0);
\coordinate (u2) at (5,0);
\coordinate (u3) at (4,1);
\coordinate (u4) at (5,1);
\coordinate (u5) at (6,0);
\coordinate (u6) at (5,-1);
\coordinate (u7) at (6,-1);
\coordinate (u8) at (6.5,1);
\draw (u1) -- (u3) -- (u2) -- (u4) -- (u1) -- (u6) -- (u7) -- (u5) -- (u6) -- (u2) -- (u5) -- (u8) -- (u7);
\draw (u3) -- (u8);
\draw (u2) -- (u7);
\draw (u2) -- (u1);
\node at (u1) [vertex]{};
\node at (u2) [vertex]{};
\node at (u3) [vertex]{};
\node at (u4) [vertex]{};
\node at (u5) [vertex]{};
\node at (u6) [vertex]{};
\node at (u7) [vertex]{};
\node at (u8) [vertex]{};
\coordinate (w1) at (8,0);
\coordinate (w2) at (9,0);
\coordinate (w3) at (8,1);
\coordinate (w4) at (9,1);
\coordinate (w5) at (10,0);
\coordinate (w6) at (9,-1);
\coordinate (w7) at (10,-1);
\coordinate (w8) at (10.5,1);
\draw (w1) -- (w3) -- (w2) -- (w4) -- (w1);
\draw (w6) -- (w7) -- (w5) -- (w6)-- (w2) -- (w5) -- (w8) -- (w7);
\draw (w3) -- (w4);
\draw (w4) -- (w5);
\draw (w2) -- (w7);
\draw (w2) -- (w1);
\draw[bend left=30] (w3) edge (w8);
\node at (w1) [vertex]{};
\node at (w2) [vertex]{};
\node at (w3) [vertex]{};
\node at (w4) [vertex]{};
\node at (w5) [vertex]{};
\node at (w6) [vertex]{};
\node at (w7) [vertex]{};
\node at (w8) [vertex]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Potential base graphs on eight vertices.}
\label{fig:order8_admiss}
\end{figure}
We can now prove Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible}.
\begin{thm1.3}
Let $G=(V,E)\in \mathcal{M}$ be $3$-connected with $\delta(G)=3$ and $G\not\in {\mathcal{G}}^\ast$. Suppose either
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $G$ is essentially 5-edge-connected and there is no proper critical set or
\item[(ii)] $G$ is essentially 4-edge-connected and there is a proper critical set.
\end{enumerate}
Then $G$ contains an admissible node.
\end{thm1.3}
\begin{proof
Suppose that (i) holds.
There exists a vertex $v$ of degree three. If $v$ is not contained in a copy of $K_4$, then, as there are no proper critical sets, we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:admissibleedge} to show that $v$ is admissible.
So we may assume that $G$ contains a copy of $K_4$.
Let $W_1,\dots, W_k$, with $k\geq 1$, be the vertex sets of all the copies of $K_4$ in $G$ and let $Y=V-\cup_{i=1}^k W_i$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:noproper} we may assume that $\mathcal{A}=\cup_{i=1}^k G[W_i]$ is connected and $|Y|\leq 1$.
If $G$ has less than 9 vertices, then, by Lemma \ref{lem:small_ones}, it is either in ${\mathcal{G}}^*$ or has an admissible node.
So suppose $G$ has at least 9 vertices. Since there are no proper critical sets, the only options for two copies of $K_4$, with vertex sets $W_i$ and $W_j$ say, are that $W_i\cap W_j=\emptyset$ or $|W_i\cap W_j|=1$ and $d(W_i,W_j)=0$.
We define an auxiliary graph $G^\ddagger$ as follows. The vertex set is $W_1,\ldots, W_n$ and there is an edge between two vertices if and only if the corresponding sets in $G$ intersect.
\begin{claim}
The graph $G^\ddagger$ is either a tree or a cycle.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We show that if $G^\ddagger$ contains a cycle this must be the whole graph; then, as ${\mathcal{A}}$ is connected, the claim follows.
As $W_i\cap W_j=\emptyset$ or $|W_i\cap W_j|=1$ and $d(W_i,W_j)=0$ for $1\leq i<j\leq n$ a path in $G^\ddagger$ corresponds to a semi-critical set in $G$.
Suppose that $G^\ddagger$ contains a cycle. Let $C=(c_0,c_1,\ldots, c_\ell)$ and let $P$ be the path obtained by deleting $c_0$ from $C$. Consider the set of vertices $P'=\cup_{i=1}^\ell c_i$ in $G$, then $i(P')=2|P'|-2$. Now let $C'=\cup_{i=1}^\ell c_i$ and note that $G[C']$ contains an additional two vertices and an additional six edges from $G[P']$. Hence $C'=V$.
\end{proof}
If $G^\ddagger$ is a cycle, then $i(\cup_{i=1}^kW_i)=2|\cup_{i=1}^kW_i|$ so we must have $|Y|=0$ and every edge of $G$ is contained in one of the $K_4$'s so $G$ has a cut-pair, a contradiction. Hence, $G^\ddagger$ is a tree.
As $|V|\geq 9$ and $\mathcal{A}=\cup_{i=1}^k G[W_i]$ is connected, $G^\ddagger$ has at least three vertices. Note that $2|\cup_{i=1}^kW_i|-2\leq i(\cup_{i=1}^kW_i)\leq 2|\cup_{i=1}^kW_i|-1$. In either case we necessarily have $|Y|=1$. Denote the vertex in $Y$ as $v$.
If $\cup_{i=1}^k W_i$ is a semi-critical set in $G$ then $d(v)=4$. As $G^\ddagger$ is a tree, $G$ contains a cut-pair (the vertex $v$ and one of the vertices in the intersection of a pair $W_i$, $W_j$ that intersect); a contradiction. Hence we may suppose that $\cup_{i=1}^k W_i$ is a critical set. Then $d(v)=3$.
Since $\cup_{i=1}^k W_i$ is critical we have $d(W_i,W_j)=1$ for some pair $i,j$ and $d(W_k,W_\ell)=0$ for all other pairs. If we regard this edge as an edge $W_iW_j$ in $G^\ddagger$ then we get a cycle. If this cycle does not contain every vertex of $G^\ddagger$ then $G$ has a proper critical set, contrary to our assumption.
Hence, by reordering if necessary, we may assume that $G^\ddagger$ is a path on $W_1,W_2,\dots,W_k$ and that $d(W_1,W_k)=1$. It is now easy to find a cutpair in $G$ if $|V(G^\ddagger)|\geq 4$ (thereby contradicting 3-connectivity). Hence, as $G^\ddagger$ contains at least three vertices, $|V(G^\ddagger)|=3$ and evidently $v$ is admissible.
Now, suppose that (ii) holds.
Let ${\mathcal{X}}=\{X\subseteq V\mid X\text{ is a node-critical set in }G\}$.
Suppose that ${\mathcal{X}}=\emptyset$. By Lemma \ref{lem:properlem}, $|V_3^*|\geq 2$ and, by Lemma \ref{lem:V3}, $G[V_3^*]$ is a forest. Let $v$ be a vertex of $G[V_3^*]$.
As $v$ is not contained in a copy of $K_4$ and ${\mathcal{X}}=\emptyset$, by Lemma \ref{lem:admissibleedge}, $v$ must be admissible.
So we may assume that ${\mathcal{X}}\neq\emptyset$. By Lemma \ref{lem:properlem} we have $|V_3^*|\geq 2$. By Lemmas \ref{lem:1edge} and \ref{lem:2edges}, we may assume that each vertex in $V_3^*$ has no edges between the neighbours.
Choose $X\in{\mathcal{X}}$ to be a maximal node-critical set chosen over all nodes in $V_3^*$. Suppose $X$ is node-critical for $v$ on $x,y$ where $N(v)=\{x,y,z\}$ and $d_G(z)\geq 4$. By Lemma \ref{lem:properlem}, $V-X-v$ contains a node $u\in V_3^*$ and, by Lemma \ref{lem:V3}, we may choose $u$ to be a leaf in $G[V_3^*-X-v]$.
By the maximality of $X$, each vertex $t\in V-X-v-z$ has at most one neighbour in $X$. Hence $d_{G[V_3^*]}(u)\leq 2$, so $d_{G[V_3]}(u)\leq 2$.
If $d_{G[V_3^*]}(u)=2$, then, since $u$ has precisely one neighbour $w$ in $X$ and since $u$ is a leaf in $G[V_3^*-X-v]$, it follows that $w$ is a node. Thus Lemma \ref{lem:leaf} Part (1) and the maximality of $|X|$ imply that $u$ is an admissible node.
If $d_{G[V_3^*]}(u)=0\text{ or }1$, then Lemma \ref{lem:leaf} Part (2) and the maximality of $|X|$ imply that $u$ is admissible.
\end{proof}
\section{Sum Moves}
\label{sec:sumsec}
In this section we reduce the connectivity assumptions from the previous sections by defining operations that `pull apart' $(2,1)$-circuits into two smaller $(2,1)$-circuits.
Consider a graph $G=(V,E)$ that is either not 3-connected or has a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset. We will provide a series of lemmas that consider the cases where $G$ satisfies one of the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item a cut-vertex $x$, $A,B\subsetneq V$ such that $A\cap B=\{x\}$, $A\cup B=V$, $i(A)=2|A|-1$ and $i(B)=2|B|-1$;
\item a cut-pair $x,y$ (where neither are cut-vertices), $xy\notin E$, $A,B\subsetneq V$ such that $A\cap B=\{x,y\}$, $A\cup B=V$ and either
\begin{enumerate}
\item $i(A)=2|A|-2$ and $i(B)=2|B|-2$, or
\item $i(A)=2|A|-1$ and $i(B)=2|B|-3$;
\end{enumerate}
\item a cut-pair $x,y$ (where neither are cut-vertices), $xy\in E$, $A,B\subsetneq V$ such that $A\cap B=\{x,y\}$, $A\cup B=V$, $i(A)=2|A|-1$ and $i(B)=2|B|-2$;
\item a 3-edge-cutset $\{x_iy_i: x_i\in A, y_i \in B, 1\leq i \leq 3\}$, where $|\{x_i,y_i\mid 1\leq i\leq 3\}|=6$, for $A,B\subsetneq V$, such that $A\cap B=\emptyset$, $A\cup B=V$, $i(A)=2|A|-1$ and $i(B)=2|B|-2$; or
\item a 4-edge-cutset $\{x_iy_i: x_i\in A, y_i \in B, 1\leq i \leq 4\}$ for $A,B\subsetneq V$, such that $A\cap B=\emptyset$, $A\cup B=V$, $i(A)=2|A|-2$ and $i(B)=2|B|-2$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:sum1}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph satisfying (1) in the list above. Let $a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i$, for $i=A,B$ be eight distinct vertices not in $V$. Then $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit if and only if the graphs $G_i=G[i]\cup (K_5(a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i,x)-e)$, for $i=A,B$, are $(2,1)$-circuits. (See Figure \ref{fig:sum1}.)
\end{lem}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, fill=gray!30, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}]
\filldraw[thick] (1,1) ellipse (1 and 0.8);
\node at (1,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-1$]{};
\filldraw[thick] (3,1) ellipse (1 and 0.8);
\node at (3,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-1$]{};
\node at (2,1) [vertex]{};
\draw[ultra thick,<->](4.5,1) -- (5,1);
\filldraw[thick] (6.5,1) ellipse (1 and 0.8);
\node at (6.5,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-1$]{};
\draw (7.5,1) -- (8.5,0.75) -- (8,1.5) -- (8,0.5) -- (8.5,1.25) -- cycle;
\draw (8.5,1.25) -- (8,1.5) -- (7.5,1) -- (8,0.5) -- (8.5,0.75);
\node at (7.5,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.5,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.5,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (8,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (8,0.5) [vertex]{};
\filldraw[thick] (11,1) ellipse (1 and 0.8);
\node at (11,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-1$]{};
\draw (10,1) -- (9,0.75) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (9.5,0.5) -- (9,1.25) -- cycle;
\draw (9,1.25) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (10,1) -- (9.5,0.5) -- (9,0.75);
\node at (10,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (9,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (9,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Illustration of the sum move for Case (1).}
\label{fig:sum1}
\end{figure}
Note that the choice of the missing edge in the $K_5-e$ is arbitrary.
\begin{proof}
Suppose $G_A$ and $G_B$ are $(2,1)$-circuits. Assume for a contradiction that $G$ is not. Then there is a proper subset $X\subsetneq V$ with $i(X)=i(A\cap X)+i(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|$. However $i(A\cap X)\leq 2|A\cap X|-1$, $i(B\cap X)\leq 2|B\cap X|-1$ and $|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|\leq |X|+1$ so
\[ 2|X|\geq 2(|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|)-2\geq i(A\cap X)+i(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|. \]
Hence, we have equality throughout and in particular $i(A\cap X)=2|A\cap X|-1$, $i(B\cap X)=2|B\cap X|-1$ and $(A\cap X)\cap(B\cap X)=\{x
\}$. Now $i((A\cap X)\cup\{a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A\})=2|A\cap X|-1+9=2(|A\cap X|+4)$, so, as $G_A$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit, we have that $(A\cap X)=A$. Similarly $(B\cap X)=B$. Hence
$X=V$, a contradiction.
Conversely, suppose $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit. Then for any $X\subseteq A$ we have $i(X)\leq 2|X|-1$. Let $Y\subseteq \{a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i,x\}$, then $i(Y)\leq 2|Y|-1$. As $x$ is a cut-vertex, $i(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X\cup Y|$, since $|X\cup Y|\geq |X|+|Y|-1$. Note equality holds if and only if $X=A$ and $Y=\{a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i,x\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:sum2a}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph satisfying (2) (a) in the list above. Let $a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i$, for $i=A,B$ be eight distinct vertices not in $V$. Then $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit if and only if the graphs $G_i=G[i]\cup (K_4(a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i)\cup \{ xa_i, yb_i, xc_i,yd_i \}$ for $i=A,B$, are $(2,1)$-circuits. (See Figure \ref{fig:sum2a}.)
\end{lem}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, fill=gray!30, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}]
\filldraw [thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,1) (0.3,1.5) (1,1.7) (1.95,1.5) (1.85,1) (1.95,0.5) (1,0.3) (0.3,0.5)};
\node at (1,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-2$]{};
\filldraw [thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(4,1) (3.7,1.5) (3,1.7) (2.05,1.5) (2.15,1) (2.05,0.5) (3,0.3) (3.7,0.5)};
\node at (3,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-2$]{};
\node at (2,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (2,0.5) [vertex]{};
\draw[ultra thick,<->](4.5,1) -- (5,1);
\filldraw [xshift=5.5cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,1) (0.3,1.5) (1,1.7) (1.95,1.5) (1.85,1) (1.95,0.5) (1,0.3) (0.3,0.5)};
\node at (6.5,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-2$]{};
\draw(7.75,0.75) -- (8.25,0.75) -- (8.25,1.25) -- (7.75,1.25)-- cycle;
\draw(7.75,0.75) -- (8.25,1.25);
\draw(8.25,0.75) -- (7.75,1.25);
\draw(7.5,1.5) -- (7.75,1.25);
\draw(7.5,1.5) -- (8.25,1.25);
\draw(8.25,0.75) -- (7.5,0.5);
\draw(7.75,0.75) -- (7.5,0.5);
\node at (7.75,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (7.75,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.25,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.25,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (7.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (7.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\filldraw [xshift=7.5cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(4,1) (3.7,1.5) (3,1.7) (2.05,1.5) (2.15,1) (2.05,0.5) (3,0.3) (3.7,0.5)};
\node at (10.5,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-2$]{};
\draw(8.75,0.75) -- (9.25,0.75) -- (9.25,1.25) -- (8.75,1.25)-- cycle;
\draw(8.75,0.75) -- (9.25,1.25);
\draw(9.25,0.75) -- (8.75,1.25);
\draw(9.5,1.5) -- (8.75,1.25);
\draw(9.5,1.5) -- (9.25,1.25);
\draw(9.25,0.75) -- (9.5,0.5);
\draw(8.75,0.75) -- (9.5,0.5);
\node at (8.75,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.75,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.25,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.25,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Illustration of the sum move for Case (2a).}
\label{fig:sum2a}
\end{figure}
Note that the proof holds for other choices of the 4-edge-cuts in $G_A$ and $G_B$, provided two edges are incident with $x$, two are incident with $y$, simplicity is maintained and we do not choose the edge $xy$.
\begin{proof}
Suppose $G_A$ and $G_B$ are $(2,1)$-circuits. Assume for a contradiction that $G$ is not. Then there is a proper subset $X\subsetneq V$, containing at least one of $x$ or $y$, with $i(X)=i(A\cap X)+i(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|$. First suppose that $A\cap X$ contains both $x$ and $y$. Then $i(A\cap X)\leq 2|A\cap X|-2$ with equality if and only if $X\cap A=A$; similarly $i(B\cap X)\leq 2|B\cap X|-2$; and $|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|\leq |X|+2$ so
\[ 2|X|\geq 2(|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|)-4\geq i(A\cap X)+i(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|. \]
Hence, we have equality throughout and in particular $i(A\cap X)=2|A\cap X|-2$, $i(B\cap X)=2|B\cap X|-2$.
As noted above, this implies that $(A\cap X)=A$ and $(B\cap X)=B$. Hence $X=V$, a contradiction.
Now suppose $A\cap X$ contains $x$ but not $y$.
Then $|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|\leq |X|+1$.
Thus
\[ 2|X|\geq 2(|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|)-2\geq i(A\cap X)+i(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|. \]
Hence, we have equality throughout and in particular $i(A\cap X)=2|A\cap X|-1$ and $i(B\cap X)=2|B\cap X|-1$. This is a contradiction as $(A\cap X)\cup (B\cap X)$ would induce a $(2,1)$-circuit not containing $y$.
Conversely, suppose $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit. First note that for any subset $X\subseteq A$ containing $x$ but not $y$ and any subset $Y\subseteq \{a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A\}$ we have $i(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X\cup Y|-1$.
Now for any $X\subseteq A$ containing $x$ and $y$ we have $i(X)\leq 2|X|-2$ with equality if and only if $X=A$. Let $Y\subseteq \{a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i\}$, then $i(Y)\leq 2|Y|-2$ with equality if and only if $Y= \{a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i\}$. Thus $i(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X|-2+2|Y|-2+4= 2|X\cup Y|$ where equality holds if and only if $X=A$ and $Y=\{a_i,b_i,c_i,d_i\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:invXtoT1}
Let $G$ be a 4-regular $(2,1)$-circuit which contains a cut-pair $\{x,y\}$ such that one component of $G[V\setminus\{x,y\}]$ is isomorphic to $K_4$ on the vertices $a,b,c,d$; and $\{xa,xb,yc,yd\}\in E$ where $z_1,z_2\in V\setminus\{a,b,c,d,y\}$ are neighbours of $x$. Then $x$ is admissible.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The edges $z_1a,z_2b\not\in G$; so performing an inverse X-replacement on $x$ that introduces the edges $z_1a$ and $z_2b$ yields a connected 4-regular graph. Hence, by Lemma \ref{lem:4reg}, the resulting graph is a $(2,1)$-circuit.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:sum2b}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph satisfying (2) (b) in the list above. Let $a_B,b_B,c_B,\break d_B,e_B$ be five distinct vertices not in $V$. Then $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit if and only if the graphs $G_A=G[A] \cup xy$ and $G_B=G[B]\cup (K_5(a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B)-f) \cup \{ xa_B,xb_B,yc_B,yd_B \}$ are $(2,1)$-circuits. (See Figure \ref{fig:sum2b}.)
\end{lem}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, fill=gray!30, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}]
\filldraw [thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,1) (0.3,1.5) (1,1.7) (1.95,1.5) (1.85,1) (1.95,0.5) (1,0.3) (0.3,0.5)};
\node at (1,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-1$]{};
\filldraw [thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(4,1) (3.7,1.5) (3,1.7) (2.05,1.5) (2.15,1) (2.05,0.5) (3,0.3) (3.7,0.5)};
\node at (3,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-3$]{};
\node at (2,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (2,0.5) [vertex]{};
\draw[ultra thick,<->](4.5,1) -- (5,1);
\filldraw [xshift=5.5cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,1) (0.3,1.5) (1,1.7) (1.95,1.5) (1.85,1) (1.95,0.5) (1,0.3) (0.3,0.5)};
\node at (6.5,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-1$]{};
\draw(7.5,0.5) --(7.5,1.5);
\node at (7.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (7.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\filldraw [xshift=7.5cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(4,1) (3.7,1.5) (3,1.7) (2.05,1.5) (2.15,1) (2.05,0.5) (3,0.3) (3.7,0.5)};
\node at (10.5,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-3$]{};
\draw(9,0.75) -- (8.5,1.5) -- (8.5,0.5) -- (9,1.25)-- (8,1) --cycle;
\draw(9,0.75) -- (8.5,0.5) -- (8,1) -- (8.5,1.5) -- (9,1.25);
\draw(9,0.75) -- (9.5,0.5) -- (8.5,0.5);
\draw(9,1.25) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (8.5,1.5);
\node at (9,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (8,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (9,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Illustration of the sum move for Case (2b).}
\label{fig:sum2b}
\end{figure}
Note that the proof holds for other choices of the 4-edge-cuts in $G_A$ and $G_B$, provided two edges are incident with $x$, two are incident with $y$, simplicity is maintained and we do not choose the edge $xy$. Moreover the choice of the missing edge in $K_5-f$ is arbitrary.
\begin{proof}
Suppose $G_A$ and $G_B$ are $(2,1)$-circuits. Assume for a contradiction that $G$ is not. Then there is a proper subset $X\subsetneq V$, containing at least one of $x$ or $y$, with $i(X)=i(A\cap X)+i(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|$. First suppose that $A\cap X$ contains both $x$ and $y$. Then $i(A\cap X)\leq 2|A\cap X|-1$ with equality if and only if $X\cap A=A$. Similarly $i(B\cap X)\leq 2|B\cap X|-3$ and $|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|\leq |X|+2$ so
\[ 2|X|\geq 2(|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|)-4\geq i(A\cap X)+i(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|. \]
Hence, we have equality throughout. Hence, $(A\cap X)=A$.
Moreover, $i(B\cap X)=2|B\cap X|-3$. Now $i((B\cap X)\cup\{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\})=2|B\cap X|-3+13=2(|B\cap X|+5)$, so, as $G_B$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit, we have that $(B\cap X)=B$. Hence $X=V$, a contradiction.
Now suppose $A\cap X$ contains $x$ but not $y$.
Then $|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|\leq |X|+1$.
Thus
\[ 2|X|\geq 2(|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|)-2\geq i(A\cap X)+i(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|. \]
Hence, we have equality throughout and in particular $i(A\cap X)=2|A\cap X|-1$ and $i(B\cap X)=2|B\cap X|-1$. This is a contradiction as $(A\cap X)\cup (B\cap X)$ would induce a $(2,1)$-circuit not containing $y$.
Conversely, suppose $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit. Clearly $G_A$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit.
Note that for any subset $X\subseteq B$ containing $x$ but not $y$ we have $i(X)\leq 2|X|-2$ and so for any subset $Y\subseteq \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$ we have $i(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X\cup Y|-1$.
Now for any $X\subseteq B$ containing $x$ and $y$ we have $i(X)\leq 2|X|-3$ with equality if and only if $X=B$. Let $Y\subseteq \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$, then $i(Y)\leq 2|Y|-1$ with equality if and only if $Y=\{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$. Thus $i(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X|-3+2|Y|-1+4= 2|X\cup Y|$ where equality holds if and only if $X=B$ and $Y= \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$.
\end{proof}
We emphasise that in the following lemma that the edge $xy$ is included in the count for $i_G(A)$ and $i_G(B)$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:sum3}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph satisfying (3) in the list above. Let $a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A,\break a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B$ be nine distinct vertices not in $V$. Then $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit if and only if the graphs $G_A=(G[A]-xy)\cup K_4(a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A)\cup \{xa_A,xb_A,yc_A,yd_A\}$ and $G_B=(G[B]-xy)\cup (K_5(a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B)-f)\cup \{xa_B,xb_B,yc_B,yd_B\}$ are $(2,1)$-circuits. (See Figure \ref{fig:sum3}.)
\end{lem}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, fill=gray!30, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}]
\filldraw [thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,1) (0.3,1.5) (1,1.7) (1.95,1.5) (1.85,1) (1.95,0.5) (1,0.3) (0.3,0.5)};
\node at (1,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-1$]{};
\filldraw [thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(4,1) (3.7,1.5) (3,1.7) (2.05,1.5) (2.15,1) (2.05,0.5) (3,0.3) (3.7,0.5)};
\node at (3,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-2$]{};
\draw (2,1.5) -- (2,0.5);
\node at (2,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (2,0.5) [vertex]{};
\draw[ultra thick,<->](4.5,1) -- (5,1);
\filldraw [xshift=5.5cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,1) (0.3,1.5) (1,1.7) (1.95,1.5) (1.85,1) (1.95,0.5) (1,0.3) (0.3,0.5)};
\node at (6.5,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-2$]{};
\node at (7.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (7.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\draw(7.75,0.75) -- (8.25,0.75) -- (8.25,1.25) -- (7.75,1.25)-- cycle;
\draw(7.75,0.75) -- (8.25,1.25);
\draw(8.25,0.75) -- (7.75,1.25);
\draw(7.5,1.5) -- (7.75,1.25);
\draw(7.5,1.5) -- (8.25,1.25);
\draw(8.25,0.75) -- (7.5,0.5);
\draw(7.75,0.75) -- (7.5,0.5);
\node at (7.75,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (7.75,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.25,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.25,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (7.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (7.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\filldraw [xshift=8.25cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(4,1) (3.7,1.5) (3,1.7) (2.05,1.5) (2.15,1) (2.05,0.5) (3,0.3) (3.7,0.5)};
\node at (11.25,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-3$]{};
\draw[xshift=0.75cm] (9,0.75) -- (8.5,1.5) -- (8.5,0.5) -- (9,1.25)-- (8,1) --cycle;
\draw[xshift=0.75cm] (9,0.75) -- (8.5,0.5) -- (8,1) -- (8.5,1.5) -- (9,1.25);
\draw[xshift=0.75cm] (9,0.75) -- (9.5,0.5) -- (8.5,0.5);
\draw[xshift=0.75cm] (9,1.25) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (8.5,1.5);
\node at (9.75,0.75) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.25,0.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.75,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.25,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.75,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (10.25,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (10.25,0.5) [vertex]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Illustration of the sum move for Case (3).}
\label{fig:sum3}
\end{figure}
Note again that the proof holds for other choices of the 4-edge-cuts in $G_A$ and $G_B$, provided two edges are incident with $x$, two are incident with $y$, simplicity is maintained and we do not choose the edge $xy$. Moreover the choice of the missing edge in $K_5-f$ is arbitrary.
\begin{proof}
Suppose $G_A$ and $G_B$ are $(2,1)$-circuits. Assume, for a contradiction, that $G$ is not. Then there is a proper subset $X\subsetneq V$, containing at least one of $x$ or $y$, with either:
\begin{itemize}
\item $i_G(X)=i_{G_A}(A\cap X)+i_{G_B}(B\cap X)-1\geq 2|X|$, if $x,y\in X$; or
\item $i_G(X)=i_{G_A}(A\cap X)+i_{G_B}(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|$, if $x\in X$ and $y\not\in X$.
\end{itemize}
First suppose that $x,y\in X$. Then $i_G(A\cap X)\leq 2|A\cap X|-1$ with equality if and only if $X\cap A=A$. Similarly, $i_G(B\cap X)\leq 2|B\cap X|-2$ and $|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|= |X|+2$ so
\[ 2|X|= 2(|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|)-4\geq i_G(A\cap X)+i_G(B\cap X)-1\geq 2|X|. \]
Hence, we have equality throughout. So, $(A\cap X)=A$.
Also $i_G(B\cap X)=2|B\cap X|-2$. Now $i_{G_B}((B\cap X)\cup\{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\})=2|B\cap X|-3+13=2(|B\cap X|+5)$, so, as $G_B$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit, we have that $(B\cap X)=B$. Hence $X=V$, a contradiction.
Now, suppose that $x\in X$ but $y\not\in X$.
Then $|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|\leq |X|+1$.
Thus
\[ 2|X|\geq 2(|A\cap X|+|B\cap X|)-2\geq i_{G_A}(A\cap X)+i_{G_B}(B\cap X)\geq 2|X|. \]
Hence, we have equality throughout and in particular $i_G(B\cap X)=i_{G_B}(B\cap X)=2|B\cap X|-1$. Then $(B\cap X)\cup\{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$ would induce a $(2,1)$-circuit in $G_B$ not containing $y$, a contradiction.
Conversely, suppose $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit.
For any subset $X\subseteq A$ containing $x$ but not $y$ and any subset $Y\subseteq \{a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A\}$ we have $i_{G_A}(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X\cup Y|-1$.
Now, for any $X\subseteq A$ containing $x$ and $y$ we have $i_G(X)\leq 2|X|-1$ with equality if and only if $X=A$. Let $Y\subseteq \{a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A\}$, then $i_{G_A}(Y)\leq 2|Y|-2$ with equality if and only if $Y=\{a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A\}$. Thus $i_{G_A}(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X|-2+2|Y|-2+4= 2|X\cup Y|$ where equality holds if and only if $X=A$ and $Y= K_4(a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A)$.
For any subset $X\subseteq B$ containing $x$ but not $y$ we have that $i_G(X)\leq 2|X|-2$ and for any subset $Y\subseteq \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$ we have $i_{G_A}(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X\cup Y|-1$, otherwise we contradict $G$ being a $(2,1)$-circuit.
Now for any $X\subseteq B$ containing $x$ and $y$ we have $i_G(X)\leq 2|X|-2$ with equality if and only if $X=B$. Let $Y\subseteq \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$, then $i_{G_A}(Y)\leq 2|Y|-1$ with equality if and only if $Y= \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$. Thus $i_{G_A}(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X|-2-1+2|Y|-1+4= 2|X\cup Y|$ where equality holds if and only if $X=B$ and $Y= \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:sum4}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph satisfying (4) in the list above. Let $a_A,a_B,b_B,c_B,\break d_B,e_B$ be six distinct vertices not in $V$. Then $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit if and only if the graphs $G_A=G[A]\cup a_A \cup \{x_1a_A,x_2a_A,x_3a_A \}$ and $G_B=G[B]\cup K_5(a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B)-f \cup \{y_1r_1,y_2r_2,y_3r_3\}$, for $r_i\in \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$, are $(2,1)$-circuits. (See Figure \ref{fig:sum4}.)
\end{lem}
Note that we may choose all the $r_i$'s to be equal giving a stronger final characterisation as then we only have one move for this case.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, fill=gray!30, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}]
\filldraw [thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,0.5) (0,1.5) (0.5,1.75) (1.5,1.75) (2,1.5) (2,0.5) (1.5,0.25) (0.5,0.25)};
\node at (1,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-1$]{};
\filldraw [xshift=2.5cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,0.5) (0,1.5) (0.5,1.75) (1.5,1.75) (2,1.5) (2,0.5) (1.5,0.25) (0.5,0.25)};
\node at (3.5,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-2$]{};
\draw (2,1.5) -- (2.5,1.5);
\draw (2.05,1) -- (2.45,1);
\draw (2,0.5) -- (2.5,0.5);
\node at (2,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (2.05,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (2,0.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (2.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (2.45,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (2.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\draw[ultra thick,<->](5,1) -- (5.5,1);
\filldraw [xshift=6cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,0.5) (0,1.5) (0.5,1.75) (1.5,1.75) (2,1.5) (2,0.5) (1.5,0.25) (0.5,0.25)};
\node at (7,0.5) [label=north:$2|A|-1$]{};
\draw (8,1.5) -- (8.5,1);
\draw (8.05,1) -- (8.5,1);
\draw (8,0.5) -- (8.5,1);
\node at (8,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.05,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (8,0.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.5,1) [vertex]{};
\filldraw [xshift=10.5cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,0.5) (0,1.5) (0.5,1.75) (1.5,1.75) (2,1.5) (2,0.5) (1.5,0.25) (0.5,0.25)};
\node at (11.5,0.5) [label=north:$2|B|-2$]{};
\draw (10.5,1.5) -- (10,1);
\draw (10.45,1) -- (10,1);
\draw (10.5,0.5) -- (10,1);
\node at (10.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (10.45,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (10.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (10,1) [vertex]{};
\draw (10,1) -- (9,1.25) -- (9.5,0.5) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (9,0.75) -- cycle;
\draw (9,1.25) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (10,1) -- (9.5,0.5) -- (9,0.75);
\node at (10,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (9,1.25) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,0.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (9,0.75) [vertex]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Illustration of the sum move for Case (4).}
\label{fig:sum4}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $G_A$ and $G_B$ are $(2,1)$-circuits. Let $X\subseteq A$ and $Y\subseteq B$. First suppose $X$ contains $x_1,x_2,x_3$ and $Y$ contains $y_1,y_2,y_3$, then $i(Y)\leq 2|Y|-2$. As $i(X)\leq 2|X|-1$, $i(X\cup Y) \leq 2|X\cup Y|-3+3=2|V|$, with equality if and only if $X\cup Y=V$.
Next suppose $X$ contains $x_1$ and $x_2$ but not $x_3$ and $Y$ contains $y_1$ and $y_2$ but not $y_3$. Then $i(X)\leq 2|X|-1$ and, as $i_{G_B}=\{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}=9$, $i(Y)\leq 2|Y|-2$. Thus $i(X\cup Y) \leq 2|X\cup Y|-3+2$.
Now suppose $X$ contains $x_1,x_2,x_3$ and $Y$ contains $y_1$ but not $y_2,y_3$. Then $i(X)\leq 2|X|-1$ and $i(Y)\leq 2|Y|-1$. Thus $i(X\cup Y) \leq 2|X\cup Y|-2+1$. The remaining cases can be proved similarly.
Conversely, suppose $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit. Then for any $X\subseteq A$ we have $i(X)\leq 2|X|-1$ and when $x_1,x_2,x_3\in X$ we have equality if and only if $X=A$. It follows that $G_A$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit.
Let $Y\subseteq \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$, then $i(Y)\leq 2|Y|-1$ with equality if and only if $Y= \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$. Let $X\subseteq B$. If $|X\cap\{x_1,x_2,x_3\}|=0\text{ or }1$, then $i(X)\leq 2|X|-1$, thus $i(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X|-1+2|Y|-1+1= 2|X\cup Y|-1$. If $|X\cap\{x_1,x_2,x_3\}|=2$, then $i(X)\leq 2|X|-2$, otherwise $X\cup A$ would be a $(2,1)$-circuit that does not contain all of $B$, thus $i(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X|-2+2|Y|-1+2= 2|X\cup Y|-1$. If $|X\cap\{x_1,x_2,x_3\}|=3$, then $i(X)\leq 2|X|-2$, with equality if and only if $X=B$, thus $i(X\cup Y)\leq 2|X|-2+2|Y|-1+3= 2|X\cup Y|$, with equality if and only if $X=B$ and $Y= \{a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B,e_B\}$.
\end{proof}
Recall that, e.g. in Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible}, we only want to deal with non-trivial 4-edge cutsets when there are no proper critical sets. We utilise this fact in the next lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:sum5a}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph satisfying (5) in the list above. Let $a_A, b_A,c_A,d_A,\break a_B,b_B,c_B,d_B$ be eight distinct vertices not in $V$ and let ${\mathcal{E}}$ denote a set of four edges of the form $xy$ where $x \in A, y\in B$.
For $I\in\{A,B\}$, if there are exactly:
\begin{itemize}
\item
3 distinct $x$'s in $I$, then let $G_I=G[I]\cup K_4(a_I,b_I,c_I,d_I) \cup {\mathcal{F}}_1$, where ${\mathcal{F}}_1$ is a set of four edges such that each has exactly one end vertex in $I$, the degree of each vertex in $G_I$ is equal to their degree in $G$ and between them they have
two, three or four distinct end vertices in $\{a_I,b_I,c_I,d_I\}$, call the graphs in these cases type-2, type-3 and type-4 respectively and denote this set of end vertices by $F_I$;
\item four distinct $x$'s in $I$, then let $G_I=G[I]\cup \{a_I\}\cup\{x_1a_I,x_2a_I,x_3a_I,x_4a_I\}$;
\end{itemize}
Then we have the following.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $G_I$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit for each $I\in\{A,B\}$, has either four distinct $x$'s in $I$, or is either type-3 or type-4 with no proper critical sets, or type-2 with the unique proper critical set $I\cup F_I$, then $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit.
\item Suppose $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit with no proper critical sets. Then if $G_I$, for $I\in\{A,B\}$, either has four distinct $x$'s in $I$, or is type-3 or type-4, then $G_I$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit with no proper critical sets; and if $G_I$, for $I\in\{A,B\}$, is type-2, then it is a $(2,1)$-circuit with the proper critical set $I\cup F_I$.
\end{enumerate}
(See Figure \ref{fig:sum5} for an example.)
\end{lem}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, fill=gray!30, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}]
\filldraw [thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,0.5) (0,2) (0.5,2.25) (1.5,2.25) (2,2) (2,0.5) (1.5,0.25) (0.5,0.25)};
\node at (1,0.75) [label=north:$2|A|-2$]{};
\filldraw [xshift=2.5cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,0.5) (0,2) (0.5,2.25) (1.5,2.25) (2,2) (2,0.5) (1.5,0.25) (0.5,0.25)};
\node at (3.5,0.75) [label=north:$2|B|-2$]{};
\draw (2,2) -- (2.5,2);
\draw (2.05,1.5) -- (2.45,1.5);
\draw (2.05,1) -- (2.47,0.75);
\draw (2,0.5) -- (2.47,0.75);
\node at (2,2) [vertex]{};
\node at (2.05,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (2.05,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (2,0.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (2.5,2) [vertex]{};
\node at (2.45,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (2.47,0.75) [vertex]{};
\draw[ultra thick,<->](5,1.25) -- (5.5,1.25);
\filldraw [xshift=6cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,0.5) (0,2) (0.5,2.25) (1.5,2.25) (2,2) (2,0.5) (1.5,0.25) (0.5,0.25)};
\node at (7,0.75) [label=north:$2|A|-2$]{};
\draw (8,2) -- (8.5,1.25);
\draw (8.05,1.5) -- (8.5,1.25);
\draw (8.05,1) -- (8.5,1.25);
\draw (8,0.5) -- (8.5,1.25);
\node at (8,2) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.05,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.05,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (8,0.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (8.5,1.25) [vertex]{};
\filldraw [xshift=10cm, thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(0,0.5) (0,2) (0.5,2.25) (1.5,2.25) (2,2) (2,0.5) (1.5,0.25) (0.5,0.25)};
\node at (11,0.75) [label=north:$2|B|-2$]{};
\node at (10,2) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.95,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.97,0.75) [vertex]{};
\draw (9,1) -- (9.5,1) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (9,1.5) -- cycle;
\draw (10,2) -- (9.5,1.5);
\draw (9,1.5) -- (9.5,1) -- (9.97,0.75);
\draw[bend left=20] (9.97,0.75) edge (9,1);
\draw (9,1) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (9.95,1.5);
\node at (9,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,1) [vertex]{};
\node at (9,1.5) [vertex]{};
\node at (9.5,1.5) [vertex]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Illustration of a sum move for Case (5).}
\label{fig:sum5}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
(1) Let $X\subseteq A$ and $Y\subseteq B$.
Then $i(X)\leq 2|X|-2$ and $i(Y)\leq 2|Y|-2$ with equality if and only if $X=A$ and $Y=B$. Thus $i(X\cup Y) \leq 2|X\cup Y|-4+d(X,Y)$. We have that $i(X\cup Y)=2|X\cup Y|$ if and only if $i(X)=2|X|-2$, $i(Y)=2|Y|-2$ and $d(X,Y)=4$. This holds if and only if $X=A$ and $Y=B$ and hence $X\cup Y=V$. (Note that, if $d(X,Y)< 4$ then $i(X\cup Y)<2|X\cup Y|$.)
(2) Suppose $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit with no proper critical sets.
First we consider the case where there are exactly three distinct $x$'s in $A$. Then for any $X\subseteq A$ we have $i(X)\leq 2|X|-2$. This implies that $i(X\cup \{a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A\})\leq 2|X\cup \{a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A\}|$ with equality if and only if $X$ contains all the $x$'s in ${\mathcal{E}}$ and hence $X=A$. Hence, $G_A$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit. Suppose that $G_A$ contains a proper critical set. Then this critical set must either be of the form $X\cup \{a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A\}$ where $X \subsetneq A$ or of the form $X\cup F_A$ where $|F_A|=2$ and $X \subseteq A$.
If the critical set is of the form $X\cup \{a_A,b_A,c_A,d_A\}$ where $X \subsetneq A$,
then $i(X\cup B)=2|X\cup B|-1$ and $|X\cup B|<|V|-1$ (since $|X|<|A|-1$), contradicting the fact that $G$ does not contain any proper critical sets.
If $|F_A|=2$, then $A\cup F_A$ is a proper critical set.
The case where there are exactly three distinct $y$'s in $B$ is identical.
Next we consider the case where there are four distinct $x$'s in $A$. Then for any $X\subseteq A$ we have $i(X)\leq 2|X|-2$. This implies that $i(X\cup \{a_A\})\leq 2|X\cup \{a_A\}|$ with equality if and only if $X$ contains all the $x$'s in ${\mathcal{E}}$ and hence $X=A$. Suppose that $G_A$ contains a proper critical set. Then this critical set must be of the form $X\cup \{a_A\}$ where $X \subsetneq A$ and either: $X$ contains exactly three of the $x's$, in which case $i(X)=2|X|-2$; or $X$ contains all four of the $x's$, in which case $i(X)=2|X|-3$. In either case $i(X\cup B)=2|X\cup B|-1$, contradicting the fact that $G$ does not contain any proper critical sets. The case where there are four distinct $y$'s in $B$ is identical.
\end{proof}
\section{A recursive construction}
\label{sec:construction}
We need one final elementary lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:forwardh2x}
Let $G$ be a $(2,1)$-circuit and let $G'$ be formed from $G$ by a 1-extension or an $X$-replacement. Then $G'$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit.
\end{lem}
Now we can prove our main result. In a similar manner to that adopted in \cite{B&J} and \cite{Nix} we refer to applications of Lemmas \ref{lem:sum1} to \ref{lem:sum5a} to combine two $(2,1)$ circuits as taking sums of connected components.
\begin{thm1.1}
A simple graph $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit if and only if it can be generated recursively from $H\in {\mathcal{G}}$ by applying 1-extensions and $X$-replacements sequentially within connected components and taking sums of connected components.
\end{thm1.1}
\begin{proof
($\Leftarrow$) Suppose $G$ is recursively generated by applying 1-extensions and $X$-replacements sequentially within connected components and taking sums of connected components. Then Lemmas \ref{lem:forwardh2x}, \ref{lem:sum1}, \ref{lem:sum2a}, \ref{lem:sum2b}, \ref{lem:sum3}, \ref{lem:sum4} and \ref{lem:sum5a} together imply that $G$ is a $(2,1)$-circuit.
($\Rightarrow$) Suppose that $G \in M(2,1).$
\begin{itemize}
\item If $G$ is essentially 5-edge-connected and $\delta(G)=4$, then Theorem \ref{thm:4reg} implies that there exists an admissible vertex (an inverse X-replacement can be performed at this vertex).
\item If $G$ is 3-connected, essentially 5-edge-connected, contains no proper critical sets and $\delta(G)=3$, then Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible} (i) (restricted to $M(2,1)$) implies that there exists an admissible node (a 1-reduction can be performed at this node).
\item If $G$ is $3$-connected, essentially 4-edge-connected, contains a proper critical set and $\delta(G)=3$, then Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible} (ii) (restricted to $M(2,1)$) implies that there exists an admissible node (a 1-reduction can be performed at this node).
\end{itemize}
The cases left to consider are:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\delta(G)=4$ and $G$ is not essentially 5-edge-connected; or
\item $\delta(G)=3$ and either:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $G$ is 3-connected and contains non-trivial 3-edge-cutsets;
\item $G$ is 3-connected, contains no proper critical sets and is not essentially 5-edge-connected.
\item $G$ is not 3-connected.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
We illustrate how these cases interact during the following argument in Figure \ref{fig:flow-chart}.
\medskip
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.5] (6.25,13) to (5.25,4.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.5] (1,13) to (9.5,9);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.5] (9.5,9) to (5.25,4.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.5] (9.5,9) to (11.5,6.5);
\draw[ultra thick] (4.75,14.5) -- (7.75,14.5) -- (7.75,15.5) -- (4.75,15.5) -- cycle;
\node at (6.25,15) {a (2,1)-circuit};
\draw[ultra thick,fill=white] (4.5,12.5) -- (8,12.5) -- (8,13.5) -- (4.5,13.5) -- cycle;
\node at (6.25,13) {Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible} or \ref{thm:4reg}};
\draw[ultra thick, fill=white] (0,12.5) -- (2,12.5) -- (2,13.5) -- (0,13.5) -- cycle;
\node at (1,13) {Case 1};
\draw[ultra thick] (0,10.5) -- (2.5,10.5) -- (2.5,11.5) -- (0,11.5) -- cycle;
\node at (1.25,11.2) {cut pair or};
\node at (1.25,10.8) {cut-vertex};
\draw[ultra thick] (1,8.5) -- (3.5,8.5) -- (3.5,9.5) -- (1,9.5) -- cycle;
\node at (2.25,9) {\textsection 4 Case (3)};
\draw[ultra thick] (0.5,7) -- (4,7) -- (4,8) -- (0.5,8) -- cycle;
\node at (2.25,7.5) {\textsection 4 Case (1) or (2) };
\draw[ultra thick, fill=white] (4,4) -- (6.5,4) -- (6.5,5) -- (4,5) -- cycle;
\node at (5.25,4.5) {Reducible};
\draw[ultra thick, fill=white] (8,8.5) -- (11,8.5) -- (11,9.5) -- (8,9.5) -- cycle;
\node at (9.5,9.2) {non-trivial};
\node at (9.5,8.8) {4-edge-cutset};
\draw[ultra thick, fill=white] (10.5,6) -- (12.5,6) -- (12.5,7) -- (10.5,7) -- cycle;
\node at (11.5,6.5) {Case 2};
\draw[ultra thick] (9,4) -- (11.5,4) -- (11.5,5) -- (9,5) -- cycle;
\node at (10.25,4.5) {Case 2 (a)};
\draw[ultra thick] (8.5,2) -- (11,2) -- (11,3) -- (8.5,3) -- cycle;
\node at (9.75,2.5) {Case 2 (b)};
\draw[ultra thick] (9,0) -- (11.5,0) -- (11.5,1) -- (9,1) -- cycle;
\node at (10.25,0.5) {Case 2 (c)};
\draw[ultra thick] (1.5,1.5) -- (5.5,1.5) -- (5.5,2.5) -- (1.5,2.5) -- cycle;
\node at (3.5,2.2) {Potential counter};
\node at (3.5,1.8) {example};
\draw[ultra thick] (0,0) -- (1,0) -- (1,1) -- (0,1) -- cycle;
\node at (0.5,0.5) {in $\mathcal{G}$};
\draw[ultra thick] (1,4) -- (3.5,4) -- (3.5,5) -- (1,5) -- cycle;
\node at (2.25,4.5) {Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible}};
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (6.25,14.5) to (6.25,13.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (4.75,14.75) to (1.75,13.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (7.75,14.75) to (12,10) to (12,7);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (0.5,12.5) to (0.5,11.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (0.25,10.5) to (0.25,1);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (1.75,10.5) to (1.75,9.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (1.75,8.5) to (1.75,8);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (3.5,7) to (4.5,5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.5] (4,7.5) to (10.5,6.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (0.75,7) to (0.75,1);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (0.75,10.5) to (0.75,8);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (11.25,6) to (11.25,5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (11.75,6) to (11.75,2.5) to (11,2.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (12.25,6) to (12.25,0.5) to (11.5,0.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (11.25,4) to (11.25,1);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (9.75,2) to (9.75,1);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (9,4.5) to (6.5,4.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (8.5,2.5) to (6,4);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (9,0.75) to (5.5,4);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (9,0.5) to (5.5,2);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (9,0.25) to (1,0.25);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (2,2.5) to (2,4);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (4.5,2.5) to (4.5,4);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (3.5,4.5) to (4,4.5);
\draw [ultra thick, ->-=.6] (2,1.5) to (1,0.75);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{The interaction between cases in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:mainresult} .}
\label{fig:flow-chart}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\noindent\textbf{Case 1: $\mathbf{\delta(G)=4}$ and $\mathbf{G}$ is not essentially 5-edge-connected.}
First, suppose that $G$ contains a cut-vertex or a cut-pair. Then $G$ satisfies either (1), (2a), (2b) or (3) in the list at the start of Section \ref{sec:sumsec}. If $G$ satisfies (1), then we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum1} and reduce to two new (2,1)-circuits both with minimum degree three. If $G$ satisfies (2a), then we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum2a} to reduce to two new (2,1)-circuits unless one (or both) of $A$ and $B$ are isomorphic to the graph $T_1$ (the cut pair in $G$ correspond to the degree two vertices in $T_1$) shown in Figure \ref{fig:K4withwings}. (If both of $A$ and $B$ are isomorphic to $T_1$ we can apply two inverse X-replacements to achieve the graph $S_1\in{\mathcal{G}}$, see Figure \ref{fig:S234}.
Hence, any potential counterexample arising from this case has no cut-vertices and any cut pairs, $\{x,y\}$ say, satisfy: $xy$ is not an edge and at least one of the `sides' of the cut-pair is isomorphic to $T_1$. Then, by Lemma \ref{lem:invXtoT1}, we can perform an inverse X-replacement at $x$.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (v1) at (0,0);
\coordinate (v2) at (1,0);
\coordinate (v3) at (2,0);
\coordinate (v4) at (0,1);
\coordinate (v5) at (1,1);
\coordinate (v6) at (2,1);
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\draw (v1) -- (v3);
\draw (v4) -- (v6);
\draw (v2) -- (v5);
\draw (v2) -- (v6);
\draw (v3) -- (v5);
\draw (v3) -- (v6);
\draw[bend right=60] (v1) edge (v3);
\draw[bend left=60] (v4) edge (v6);
\node at (1,-0.75)[label=south:$T_1$]{};
\coordinate (v7) at (4,0);
\coordinate (v8) at (5,0);
\coordinate (v9) at (6,-0.25);
\coordinate (v10) at (6.7,0.5);
\coordinate (v11) at (4,1);
\coordinate (v12) at (5,1);
\coordinate (v13) at (6,1.25);
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\node at (v8) [vertex]{};
\node at (v9) [vertex]{};
\node at (v10) [vertex]{};
\node at (v11) [vertex]{};
\node at (v12) [vertex]{};
\node at (v13) [vertex]{};
\draw (v7) -- (v8);
\draw (v8) -- (v9);
\draw (v9) -- (v10);
\draw (v11) -- (v12);
\draw (v12) -- (v13);
\draw (v13) -- (v10);
\draw (v12) -- (v10);
\draw (v8) -- (v10);
\draw (v13) -- (v8);
\draw (v13) -- (v9);
\draw (v12) -- (v9);
\draw[bend right=40] (v7) edge (v9);
\draw[bend left=40] (v11) edge (v13);
\node at (5.35,-0.75)[label=south:$T_2$]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{The graphs $T_1$ and $T_2$.}
\label{fig:K4withwings}
\end{figure}
If $G$ satisfies (2b), then we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum2b} to reduce to two new (2,1)-circuits (one has strictly fewer vertices than $G$ and the other has minimum degree 3). If $G$ satisfies (3), then we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum3} to obtain two new $(2,1)$-circuits (these two circuits do not contain the edge $xy$, so we have moved to $(2,1)$-circuits satisfying (2a) or (2b)).
Finally, suppose that $G$ is 3-connected and contains a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset, but no non-trivial 3-edge-cutset.
\begin{claim}
\label{claim:noproper}
$G$ contains no proper critical sets.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Claim]
As $\delta(G)=4$, we have that $G$ is 4-regular. Suppose that $G$ did contain a proper critical set $S$, then
$$\sum_{v\in S}d_{G[S]}(v)=4|S|-2.$$
However, as $G$ is 4-regular this means there must be either a cut-vertex or a cut-pair in $G$, contradicting the fact that $G$ is 3-connected.
\end{proof}
Thus we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum5a} to achieve two new (2,1)-circuits one with strictly fewer vertices than $G$ and we can apply the lemma in such a way that the other has minimum degree three.
\noindent\textbf{Case 2a: $\mathbf{\delta(G)=3}$, $\mathbf{G}$ is 3-connected and contains non-trivial 3-edge-cutsets.}
Suppose that $G$ contains a non-trivial 3-edge-cutset. Hence $G$ contains a proper critical set. Thus we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum4} to form two new (2,1)-circuits. When we apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum4} we choose to do so such that the resulting circuits are strictly smaller and (by setting $r_1=r_2$) not 3-connected respectively.
\medskip
\noindent\textbf{Case 2b: $\mathbf{\delta(G)=3}$, $\mathbf{G}$ is 3-connected, contains no proper critical sets and is not essentially 5-edge-connected.}
As $G$ does not contain a proper critical set it does not contain a non-trivial 3-edge cutset.
Hence $G$ contains a non-trivial 4-edge cutset and we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum5a} to form two new (2,1)-circuits. We can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum5a} so that either the resulting circuits have strictly fewer vertices than $G$ or, by the freedom in the choice of edges when applying Lemma \ref{lem:sum5a}, we may assume that they are not 3-connected.
\medskip
\noindent\textbf{Case 2c: $\mathbf{\delta(G)=3}$ and $\mathbf{G}$ is not 3-connected.}
Suppose that there exists a cut-vertex in $G$, then we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum1} and reduce to two smaller (2,1)-circuits unless one (or both) of the sides of the cut are isomorphic to $K_5-e$. If both sides are isomorphic to $K_5-e$, we can, if necessary, reapply Lemma \ref{lem:sum1} until we obtain one graph, $S_5\in{\mathcal{G}}$ (see Figure \ref{fig:base9}).
Now, suppose that there exists a cut-pair in $G$. Then $G$ satisfies (2a), (2b) or (3). If $G$ contains a cut-pair that satisfies:
\begin{itemize}
\item (2a), then we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum2a} to obtain two new smaller $(2,1)$-circuits, unless one side of the cut-pair is isomorphic to $T_1$ (if both sides were isomorphic to $T_1$, we would have $\delta(G)=4$);
\item (2b), then we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum2b} to obtain two new $(2,1)$-circuits, either these circuits are both smaller, or one of the sides of the cut-pair is isomorphic to $T_2$, or a resulting circuit is larger than the original circuit (in the last two cases we will show that either an alternative reduction is possible or the circuit is in ${\mathcal{G}}$); or
\item (3), then we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum3} to obtain two new $(2,1)$-circuits, the edge $xy$ occurs in $G$ but in neither of the resulting circuits. Either the new $(2,1)$-circuits are both smaller or the resulting circuits each satisfy one of case (2a) or (2b).
\end{itemize}
Assume $G$ is a counter-example to the theorem (we will show that no such $G$ exists), then $G$ has:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(I)] every cut-vertex has one side isomorphic to $K_5-e$; and
\item[(II)] every cut-pair $\{x,y\}$ satisfies $xy\not\in E$ and has one side isomorphic to $T_1$ or $T_2$.
\end{itemize}
Associate the following multigraph $G^*$ with $G$: if (I) occurs in $G$, replace the $K_5-e$ with a loop at the cut-vertex; if (II) occurs in $G$, replace any occurrences of $T_1$ with a double edge between the vertices of the cut-pair, and any occurrences of $T_2$ with a triple edge between the vertices of the cut-pair. Note that:
\begin{itemize}
\item all the vertices in $G^\ast$ incident with a multiple edge have degree greater than three and that $G^\ast$ is 3-connected (otherwise we could have reduced $G$ using one of Lemmas \ref{lem:sum1}, \ref{lem:sum2a}, \ref{lem:sum2b} or \ref{lem:sum3});
\item if $G^\ast$ contains a loop, then the vertex incident with the loop has degree greater than three and it is not incident with any multiple edges (else both sides of the 2-cut are not isomorphic to $T_1$ or $T_2$);
\item if $G^\ast=(V,E)$ contains a vertex, $v$ say, incident to two loops then $V=\{v\}$.
\item if there are any triple edges in $G^\ast$, then they are incident to vertices of degree greater than or equal to five, and hence, $G^\ast$ must contain vertices of degree three.
\end{itemize}
Hence $G^*\in\mathcal{M}$. See Figure \ref{fig:G_to_G*} for an illustration of the construction of $G^*$.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8, fill=gray!30, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=0.75,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (v1) at (3,1);
\coordinate (v2) at (2,2);
\coordinate (v3) at (1.5,2.5);
\coordinate (v4) at (0.5,3.5);
\coordinate (v5) at (0.5,4);
\coordinate (v6) at (1.5,5);
\coordinate (v7) at (2,5.25);
\coordinate (v8) at (3.5,5.25);
\coordinate (v10) at (5.5,5.25);
\coordinate (v11) at (6,5);
\coordinate (v12) at (7,4);
\coordinate (v13) at (7,3.5);
\coordinate (v14) at (6,2.5);
\coordinate (v15) at (5.5,2);
\coordinate (v16) at (4.5,1);
\coordinate (a1) at (2.5,1);
\coordinate (a2) at (2,0.5);
\coordinate (a3) at (1.5,0.5);
\coordinate (a4) at (1.5,1);
\coordinate (a5) at (2,1.5);
\coordinate (b1) at (1,2.5);
\coordinate (b2) at (0.5,2);
\coordinate (b3) at (0,2);
\coordinate (b4) at (0,2.5);
\coordinate (b5) at (0.5,3);
\coordinate (c1) at (0.5,4.5);
\coordinate (c2) at (0,5);
\coordinate (c3) at (0,5.5);
\coordinate (c4) at (0.5,5.5);
\coordinate (c5) at (1,5);
\coordinate (d1) at (1.5,6);
\coordinate (d2) at (1.75,6.5);
\coordinate (d3) at (2.25,6.5);
\coordinate (d4) at (2.5,6);
\coordinate (e1) at (3,6);
\coordinate (e2) at (3.25,6.5);
\coordinate (e3) at (3.75,6.5);
\coordinate (e4) at (4,6);
\coordinate (f1) at (5,6);
\coordinate (f2) at (5.25,6.5);
\coordinate (f3) at (5.75,6.5);
\coordinate (f4) at (6,6);
\coordinate (g1) at (6.75,5);
\coordinate (g2) at (7,5.25);
\coordinate (g3) at (7.25,5);
\coordinate (g4) at (7,4.75);
\coordinate (h1) at (7,2.75);
\coordinate (h2) at (7.25,2.5);
\coordinate (h3) at (7,2.25);
\coordinate (h4) at (6.75,2.5);
\coordinate (i1) at (5.5,1.25);
\coordinate (i2) at (5.75,1);
\coordinate (i3) at (5.5,0.75);
\coordinate (i4) at (5.25,1);
\filldraw [ultra thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(v1) (2.7,1.7) (v2) (v3) (1.2,3.2) (v4) (v5) (1.2,4.2) (v6) (v7) (v8) (v10) (v11) (6.3,4.3) (v12) (v13) (6.3,3.2) (v14) (v15) (4.8,1.7) (v16)};
\draw (a1) -- (a4) -- (a2) -- (a5) -- (a3) -- cycle;
\draw (b1) -- (b4) -- (b2) -- (b5) -- (b3) -- cycle;
\draw (c1) -- (c4) -- (c2) -- (c5) -- (c3) -- cycle;
\draw (d1) -- (d4) -- (d2) -- (v7) -- (d3) -- cycle;
\draw (e1) -- (e4) -- (e2) -- (v8) -- (e3) -- cycle;
\draw (f1) -- (f4) -- (f2) -- (v10) -- (f3) -- cycle;
\draw (a2) -- (v1) -- (a1) -- (a2) -- (a3) -- (a4) -- (a5) -- (v2) -- (a4);
\draw (b2) -- (v3) -- (b1) -- (b2) -- (b3) -- (b4) -- (b5) -- (v4) -- (b4);
\draw (c2) -- (v5) -- (c1) -- (c2) -- (c3) -- (c4) -- (c5) -- (v6) -- (c4);
\draw (v7) -- (d1) -- (d2);
\draw (d3) -- (d4) -- (v7);
\draw (v8) -- (e1) -- (e2);
\draw (e3) -- (e4) -- (v8);
\draw (v10) -- (f1) -- (f2);
\draw (f3) -- (f4) -- (v10);
\draw (g1) -- (g2) -- (g3) -- (g4) -- cycle;
\draw (h1) -- (h2) -- (h3) -- (h4) -- cycle;
\draw (i1) -- (i2) -- (i3) -- (i4) -- cycle;
\draw (v11) -- (g1) -- (g3) -- (v12) -- (g4) -- (g2) -- cycle;
\draw (v13) -- (h1) -- (h3) -- (v14) -- (h4) -- (h2) -- cycle;
\draw (v15) -- (i1) -- (i3) -- (v16) -- (i4) -- (i2) -- cycle;
\node at (7.7,4) [vertex2]{};
\node at (7.75,3.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (7.7,3.5) [vertex2]{};
\node at (7.7,4) [vertex2]{};
\node at (7.75,3.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (7.7,3.5) [vertex2]{};
\node at (6.4,1.9) [vertex2]{};
\node at (6.25,1.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (6.1,1.6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (6.4,1.9) [vertex2]{};
\node at (6.25,1.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (6.1,1.6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (1.1,1.9) [vertex2]{};
\node at (1.25,1.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (1.4,1.6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (4.3,6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (4.5,6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (4.7,6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (-0.2,4) [vertex2]{};
\node at (-0.25,3.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (-0.2,3.5) [vertex2]{};
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\node at (v8) [vertex]{};
\node at (v10) [vertex]{};
\node at (v11) [vertex]{};
\node at (v12) [vertex]{};
\node at (v13) [vertex]{};
\node at (v14) [vertex]{};
\node at (v15) [vertex]{};
\node at (v16) [vertex]{};
\node at (a1) [vertex]{};
\node at (a2) [vertex]{};
\node at (a3) [vertex]{};
\node at (a4) [vertex]{};
\node at (a5) [vertex]{};
\node at (b1) [vertex]{};
\node at (b2) [vertex]{};
\node at (b3) [vertex]{};
\node at (b4) [vertex]{};
\node at (b5) [vertex]{};
\node at (c1) [vertex]{};
\node at (c2) [vertex]{};
\node at (c3) [vertex]{};
\node at (c4) [vertex]{};
\node at (c5) [vertex]{};
\node at (d1) [vertex]{};
\node at (d2) [vertex]{};
\node at (d3) [vertex]{};
\node at (d4) [vertex]{};
\node at (e1) [vertex]{};
\node at (e2) [vertex]{};
\node at (e3) [vertex]{};
\node at (e4) [vertex]{};
\node at (f1) [vertex]{};
\node at (f2) [vertex]{};
\node at (f3) [vertex]{};
\node at (f4) [vertex]{};
\node at (g1) [vertex]{};
\node at (g2) [vertex]{};
\node at (g3) [vertex]{};
\node at (g4) [vertex]{};
\node at (h1) [vertex]{};
\node at (h2) [vertex]{};
\node at (h3) [vertex]{};
\node at (h4) [vertex]{};
\node at (i1) [vertex]{};
\node at (i2) [vertex]{};
\node at (i3) [vertex]{};
\node at (i4) [vertex]{};
\draw [ultra thick, ->] (8.5,3.75) -- (9,3.75);
\coordinate (u1) at (13,1);
\coordinate (u2) at (12,2);
\coordinate (u3) at (11.5,2.5);
\coordinate (u4) at (10.5,3.5);
\coordinate (u5) at (10.5,4);
\coordinate (u6) at (11.5,5);
\coordinate (u7) at (12,5.25);
\coordinate (u8) at (13.5,5.25);
\coordinate (u10) at (15.5,5.25);
\coordinate (u11) at (16,5);
\coordinate (u12) at (17,4);
\coordinate (u13) at (17,3.5);
\coordinate (u14) at (16,2.5);
\coordinate (u15) at (15.5,2);
\coordinate (u16) at (14.5,1);
\filldraw [ultra thick] plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(u1) (12.7,1.7) (u2) (u3) (11.2,3.2) (u4) (u5) (11.2,4.2) (u6) (u7) (u8) (u10) (u11) (16.3,4.3) (u12) (u13) (16.3,3.2) (u14) (u15) (14.8,1.7) (u16)};
\draw (u1) -- (u2);
\draw (u3) -- (u4);
\draw (u5) -- (u6);
\draw[bend left=20] (u1) edge (u2);
\draw[bend left=40] (u1) edge (u2);
\draw[bend left=20] (u3) edge (u4);
\draw[bend left=40] (u3) edge (u4);
\draw[bend left=20] (u5) edge (u6);
\draw[bend left=40] (u5) edge (u6);
\draw (u11) -- (u12);
\draw (u13) -- (u14);
\draw (u15) -- (u16);
\draw[bend left=20] (u11) edge (u12);
\draw[bend left=20] (u13) edge (u14);
\draw[bend left=20] (u15) edge (u16);
\draw plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(u7) (11.75,6) (12,6.25) (12.25,6)};
\draw plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(u8) (13.25,6) (13.5,6.25) (13.75,6)};
\draw plot [smooth cycle] coordinates {(u10) (15.25,6) (15.5,6.25) (15.75,6)};
\node at (17.7,4) [vertex2]{};
\node at (17.75,3.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (17.7,3.5) [vertex2]{};
\node at (17.7,4) [vertex2]{};
\node at (17.75,3.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (17.7,3.5) [vertex2]{};
\node at (16.4,1.9) [vertex2]{};
\node at (16.25,1.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (16.1,1.6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (16.4,1.9) [vertex2]{};
\node at (16.25,1.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (16.1,1.6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (11.1,1.9) [vertex2]{};
\node at (11.25,1.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (11.4,1.6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (14.3,6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (14.5,6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (14.7,6) [vertex2]{};
\node at (9.8,4) [vertex2]{};
\node at (9.75,3.75) [vertex2]{};
\node at (9.8,3.5) [vertex2]{};
\node at (u1) [vertex]{};
\node at (u2) [vertex]{};
\node at (u3) [vertex]{};
\node at (u4) [vertex]{};
\node at (u5) [vertex]{};
\node at (u6) [vertex]{};
\node at (u7) [vertex]{};
\node at (u8) [vertex]{};
\node at (u10) [vertex]{};
\node at (u11) [vertex]{};
\node at (u12) [vertex]{};
\node at (u13) [vertex]{};
\node at (u14) [vertex]{};
\node at (u15) [vertex]{};
\node at (u16) [vertex]{};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Illustration of the construction of the multigraph $G^*$.}
\label{fig:G_to_G*}
\end{figure}
We will consider two cases, when $\delta(G^\ast)=4$ (and hence $G^\ast$ is 4-regular) and when $\delta(G^\ast)=3$.
First, suppose that $\delta(G^\ast)=4$ and $G^\ast\neq R_1$, hence $G^\ast$ is 4-regular and, as it is 3-connected, contains no proper critical sets (see Claim \ref{claim:noproper}). As $G^\ast$ is 4-regular and 3-connected it cannot contain a loop or a triple edge. If $G^\ast$ contains a double edge, then it results from a copy of $T_1$ in $G$; so, applying the same argument as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:invXtoT1}, we can perform an inverse X-replacement in $G$, contradicting $G$ being a counterexample.
So, suppose that $\delta(G^\ast)=3$.
We will show that there is an admissible node $v$ in $G^*$.
Recall that $G^*$ is 3-connected and that any vertex of degree three is not incident with a loop or a multiple edge.
\begin{claim}
We may assume that the multigraph $G^*\in\mathcal{M}\setminus M(2,1)$ constructed from a counterexample $G$ does not contain any non-trivial 3-edge-cutsets.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Claim]
If $G^\ast$ contains a non-trivial 3-edge-cutset, then, as $G^\ast$ is 3-connected, $G$ also contains a non-trivial 3-edge-cutset. In which case we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:sum4} to form two (2,1)-circuits. These circuits are both nonisomorphic to $G$ (contradicting our assumption that $G$ is a counterexample) unless one side of the edge-cutset is isomorphic to $K_5-e$. Moreover, we can choose the cut-edges so that they are all incident with the same vertex in the copy of $K_5-e$. At this stage we have a cut-vertex $v$ with one side isomorphic to $K_5-e$ and in our construction of $G^\ast$ this is replaced by a loop on $v$.
\end{proof}
Suppose that $G^\ast$ contains a proper critical set. As $G^\ast$ is essentially 4-edge-connected, as long as $G^\ast\not\in{\mathcal{G}}^\ast$, by Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible} (ii), $G^*$ has an admissible node, and, by construction, this node is also admissible in $G$.
Finally, suppose that $G^\ast$ does not contain a proper critical set. If $G^\ast$ is essentially 5-edge-connected then we may apply Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible} (i).
\begin{claim}
If the $(2,1)$-multi-circuit $G^\ast$ (containing no proper critical sets) constructed from the counter-example $G$ contains a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset, then either one of the sides of the cut is a double edge or, from $G$, we can construct a new counter-example which contains a proper critical set.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Claim]
We know that $G^\ast$ is essentially 4-edge-connected.
If $G^\ast$ contains a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset, then:
\begin{itemize}
\item if a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset is formed from four single edges, then these edges form a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset in $G$;
\item if a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset is formed from two double edges, let the endvertices of one double edge be $x_A$ and $y_A$ and the other be $x_B$ and $y_B$, these double edges resulted from two copies of $T_1$, $T_A$ and $T_B$ say, in $G$ where the degree two vertices of $T_A$ (respectively $T_B$) are $x_A$ and $y_A$ (respectively $x_B$ and $y_B$). Therefore there is a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset in $G$ consisting of the edges incident with $x_A$ and $x_B$ that are contained in $T_A$ and $T_B$.
\item if a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset is formed from two single edges and a double edge between vertices $x$ and $y$ say, then the two single edges combined with the two edges incident with $x$ in the copy of $T_1$ that results in the double edge form a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset.
\end{itemize}
So, suppose that $G^\ast$ contains a non-trivial 4-edge-cutset. As $G^\ast$ contains no proper critical sets, $G$ contains no proper critical sets. Hence we could have applied Lemma \ref{lem:sum5a} to $G$ and reduced to two $(2,1)$-circuits. These circuits are non-isomorphic to $G$ unless one or both sides of the cutset is isomorphic to $K_4$. If both sides are isomorphic to $K_4$ we either have $G=S_1\in{\mathcal{G}}$ or a graph that we can construct by summing $S_1$ with itself using Lemma \ref{lem:sum5a}.
If only one side is isomorphic to $K_4$ a further application of Lemma \ref{lem:sum5a} guarantees that the $K_4$ contains a proper two vertex cut, $\{x,y\}$ say, this yields a proper critical set.
\end{proof}
We may assume that, in $G^\ast$, if it contains a non-trivial 4-edge cutset then one of the sides of the cut is a double edge.
For any such 4-edge-cut in $G^\ast$ replace the two vertices forming one component with a single vertex $z$, call the resulting graph $G^{\ast\ast}$. This either results in two vertices with four edges between them (which is in ${\mathcal{G}}^\ast$) or $z$ is a degree four vertex with either three or four neighbours (as $G^{\ast\ast}$ is 3-connected). If $z$ has four neighbours, then we have reduced to a case with one less non-trivial 4-edge-cutset.
So assume that $z$ has three neighbours, say $u$ is the neighbour with the double edge, then the degree of $u$ is greater than three (otherwise we contradict the fact $G^\ast$ was essentially 4-edge connected). If $u$ has degree four then repeat the above over the double edge between $u$ and $z$, which is one side of a non-trivial 4-edge cutset. Hence we may assume that the degree of $u$ is at least $5$.
In this manner we can eliminate all non-trivial 4-edge cutsets, thus we may assume that $G^{\ast\ast}$ is essentially 5-edge-connected.
If $G^{\ast\ast}\not\in{\mathcal{G}}^\ast$, then Theorem \ref{thm:Hen2admissible} (i) implies that $G^{\ast\ast}$ contains an admissible node, and, by construction, this node is also admissible in $G$.
All that remains is to consider the (2,1)-circuits $R_i$, where $0\leq i\leq 12$. First note that, as they would reduce to $R_0$, neither $R_9$ or $R_{10}$ will arise as the multigraph generated from a minimal counter example. The graphs that would yield $R_2$, $R_8$ and $R_{11}$ all contain admissible nodes. The graphs that would yield $R_1$, $R_6$, $R_7$ and $R_{12}$ all contain admissible vertices (at which an $X$-replacement can be performed). The graphs that yield $R_0$ are either isomorphic to $S_5$ or can be reduced to copies of $S_5$ through an application of Lemma \ref{lem:sum1}.
Any graph that generates $R_3$ contains a cut pair to which Lemma \ref{lem:sum3} can be applied to yield two (2,1)-circuits, each on fewer vertices.
Any graph that generates $R_4$ contains a cut pair to which Lemma \ref{lem:sum3} can be applied to yield two new circuits, $G_1$ and $G_2$ say, where, without loss of generality, $G_1$ has an admissible vertex and Lemma \ref{lem:sum3} can be applied to $G_2$ to yield two (2,1)-circuits that both have admissible nodes. Finally, any graph that generates $R_5$ contains an admissible vertex.
\end{proof}
\section{Concluding remarks}
\noindent 1. We expect that our characterisation will be useful for the problem of characterising the global rigidity of realisations of graphs\footnote{A graph is realised using a map $p:V\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3$, such a realisation is globally rigid if any other map $q$ inducing the same edge lengths is congruent to $p$. A realisation on a surface is a realisation in $\mathbb{R}^3$ in which each vertex is restricted to move only on the surface it lies on.} on surfaces of revolution (such as the cone).
In \cite{NOP2}, rigidity of such frameworks was, generically, shown to be equivalent to the graph being $(2,1)$-tight. In \cite[Conjecture 1]{JMN} it was conjectured that the graphs which are generically globally rigid on the cone are those which are 2-connected and contain a spanning subgraph which is $(2,1)$-tight. It is not hard to prove that the graphs with $|E|=2|V|$ that are 2-connected with a spanning $(2,1)$-tight subgraph are exactly the $(2,1)$-circuits. Thus the constructive characterisation of $(2,1)$-circuits in this paper is likely to be useful in developing a combinatorial characterisation of global rigidity. See also \cite{JNstress,Nix} for analogous results for the cylinder, additional results in this direction and warnings of the additional complication for the cone.
\noindent 2. In \cite{B&J} it was proved that all 3-connected $(2,3)$-circuits can be generated from $K_4$ by 1-extensions. (This is non-trivial since admissible nodes need not result in smaller circuits which are 3-connected even when the original circuit is 3-connected.) For $(2,1)$-circuits we now briefly comment on such extensions. It is easy to see that if $G$ is 2-connected and $v$ is an admissible node in $G$ then the resulting $(2,1)$-circuit $G'$ is 2-connected. Moreover it is easy to check that the same holds for inverse $X$-replacement and for our sum moves (clearly we do not consider the sum move for a graph with a cut-vertex). Thus we instantly have the following result. Let ${\mathcal{G}}^2$ denote all the graphs in ${\mathcal{G}}$ which are 2-connected.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:2concircuits}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a simple graph. Then $G$ is a 2-connected $(2,1)$-circuit if and only if $G$ can be generated from some graphs in ${\mathcal{G}}^2$ by 1-extensions, $X$-replacements and sum moves.
\end{cor}
However we do not know a corresponding statement for 3-connected $(2,1)$-circuits. Indeed Figure \ref{fig:3concounterex} illustrates a $(2,1)$-circuit which is 3-connected and essentially 4-edge-connected for which each admissible 1-reduction results in a $(2,1)$-circuit which is not 3-connected.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1, vertex/.style={circle,inner sep=2,fill=black,draw}, vertex2/.style={circle,inner sep=4,fill=black,draw}]
\coordinate (v1) at (0,0);
\coordinate (v2) at (1,1);
\coordinate (v3) at (2,0);
\coordinate (v4) at (1,-1);
\coordinate (v5) at (-2,0);
\coordinate (v6) at (-1,1);
\coordinate (v7) at (-1,-1);
\coordinate (v8) at (0,2);
\coordinate (v9) at (-2,-1);
\coordinate (v10) at (0,3);
\node at (v1) [vertex]{};
\node at (v2) [vertex]{};
\node at (v3) [vertex]{};
\node at (v4) [vertex]{};
\node at (v5) [vertex]{};
\node at (v6) [vertex]{};
\node at (v7) [vertex]{};
\node at (v8) [vertex]{};
\node at (v9) [vertex]{};
\node at (v10) [vertex]{};
\draw (v1) -- (v2);
\draw (v1) -- (v3);
\draw (v1) -- (v4);
\draw (v1) -- (v5);
\draw (v1) -- (v6);
\draw (v1) -- (v7);
\draw (v2) -- (v3);
\draw (v2) -- (v4);
\draw (v2) -- (v8);
\draw (v3) -- (v4);
\draw (v5) -- (v6);
\draw (v5) -- (v7);
\draw (v5) -- (v8);
\draw (v5) -- (v9);
\draw (v6) -- (v7);
\draw (v6) -- (v8);
\draw (v6) -- (v9);
\draw (v7) -- (v9);
\draw (v8) -- (v10);
\draw (v5) -- (v10);
\draw (v3) -- (v10);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{A 3-connected $(2,1)$-circuit where no degree 4 is admissible, and every admissible node results in a $(2,1)$-circuit which is not 3-connected.}
\label{fig:3concounterex}
\end{figure}
|
\section{Introduction}
Ammonia belongs to the most useful probes of the dense cores of
molecular clouds owing to its energy spectrum and chemical properties
(\citealt{1983ARA&A..21..239H}; \citealt{1989ApJS...71...89B};
\citealt{2002ApJ...569..815T}; \citealt{2009ApJ...697.1457F}). The
molecule can survive in the gas phase also in the cold, dense interior
parts of starless and prestellar cores, and in these regions reactions
with deuterated ions convert part of $\rm NH_3$ to $\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$,
and $\rm ND_3$ (\citealt{2001ApJ...553..613R}). Ammonia and its
deuterated isotopologues are also formed on grain surfaces through
H/D-atom addition reactions to N atoms (\citealt{1989MNRAS.240P..25B};
\citealt{2015MNRAS.446..449F}). Substantial deuteration in both
phases occurs after the disappearance of CO from the gas phase, and
needs some time to take effect, so the relative abundances of the
mentioned molecules can give an idea of the evolutionary stage of a
dense core (\citealt{2005A&A...438..585R};
\citealt{2006A&A...456..215F}; \citealt{2015A&A...576A..99R}).
Previously the $\rm N_2D^+/\rm N_2H^+$ abundance ratio has been used
extensively for this purpose (\citealt{2005ApJ...619..379C};
\citealt{2009A&A...494..623P}).
Besides enabling nuanced investigation into deuteration, spectral line
observations of $\rm NH_3$, $\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$, and $\rm ND_3$ test our
understanding of spin-state chemistry, i.e., selection rules in
chemical reactions which determine the relative abundances of
different nuclear spin symmetry species or ``modifications''. Each
spectral line observed from these molecules belongs to one of the two
spin modifications of $\rm NH_3$, $\rm NH_2D$, or $\rm NHD_2$, or one of the
three spin modifications of $\rm ND_3$. The abundance ratios of these
modifications which must be treated as separate chemical species, can
deviate from their nuclear spin statistical ratios, and are predicted to
change with time (\citealt{2013ApJ...770L...2F};
\citealt{2015A&A...578A..55S}; \citealt{2015A&A...581A.122S}).
The spin symmetry species of a molecule is defined based on how the
nuclear spin wave function transforms under symmetry operations like
the interchange or the permutation of identical nuclei. For molecules
containing only H nuclei there is a one to one correspondence between
the symmetry and the nuclear spin angular momentum, but this is no
more true for molecules with multiple D nuclei
\citep{2009JChPh.130p4302H}. \footnote{\citet{2016JChPh.145g4301S}
have recently shown that the spin angular momentum and the
permutation symmetry are, after all, inherently coupled, and that it
is possible to construct an unequivocal and practical representation
for each spin angular momentum - symmetry species using the Young
diagrams. In the present study, chemical species are distinguished
solely by their nuclear spin symmetries.} The statistical weight of
a symmetry species is the number of possible nuclear spin functions
having that symmetry. When there are no more than three spin
modifications, it is customary to call the species with the largest
nuclear spin statistical weight ``ortho'', and the one with the lowest
weight ``para''. If there is a third one, this is called ``meta''.
For example, the three elementary spin functions of the deuteron,
$|1,1\rangle$, $|1,0\rangle$, and $|1,-1\rangle$, can combine in
$\rm ND_3$ in 27 different ways, and these combinations can be
arranged to a set of 27 orthogonal functions, which form an
irreducible representations of the appropriate permutation group
$S_3$. Of these functions, 10 have symmetry $A_1$ (``meta''), 1 has
symmetry $A_2$ (``para''), and 16 have symmetry $E$ (``ortho'') in
$S_3$ (\citealt{BunkerJensen06}; \citealt{2015A&A...581A.122S};
\citealt{2016MNRAS.457.1535D}, see their Appendix A).
The abundances of all three deuterated forms of ammonia have been
previously estimated in the protostellar core ``B1-b'' of Barnard 1 in
Perseus (\citealt{2002ApJ...571L..55L}; \citealt{2005A&A...438..585R};
\citealt{2006ApJ...636..916L}), and in the starless core (``I16293E'')
of the dark cloud L1689N in Ophiuchus (\citealt{2005A&A...438..585R};
\citealt{2006A&A...454L..63G}). The fractionation ratios are similar
in these two objects. The recent analysis of these observations by
\cite{2016MNRAS.457.1535D} gives $[\rm NH_2D]/[\rm NH_3] \ga [\rm NHD_2]/[\rm NH_2D]
\approx 0.2$, $[\rm ND_3]/[\rm NHD_2] \approx 0.05-0.10$. In both cores,
the {\sl ortho/para} ratios of $\rm NH_2D$ and $\rm NHD_2$ were found to be
close to their statistical values, 3:1 and 2:1, respectively. The
interpretation of chemical data from these two, bright sources of
deuterated ammonia is complicated by the possibility of enhanced
evaporation from grains because of shocks. The Barnard 1 core contains
two, albeit very young and low-mass protostars driving outflows (B1-bS
and B1-bN; \citealt{2007A&A...468.1009H};
\citealt{2014ApJ...789...50H}; \citealt{2015A&A...577L...2G}). The
core in L1689N may be compressed by an outlow from the adjacent
protostellar source IRAS 16293-2422 (\citealt{2002ApJ...569..322L};
\citealt{2004ApJ...608..341S}; \citealt{2006A&A...454L..63G}).
In the present work, we use the 100-m Robert C. Byrd Green Bank
telescope, the 12-m APEX, and the IRAM 30-m telescope to determine the
abundances of {\sl para}-$\rm NH_3$, {\sl meta}-$\rm ND_3$, and both {\sl
ortho} and {\sl para} modifications of $\rm NH_2D$ and $\rm NHD_2$, in
the starless core H-MM1 in Ophiuchus (\citealt{2004ApJ...611L..45J};
\citealt{2011A&A...528C...2P}). Through these observations we obtain
a homogenous data set pertaining to a quiescent region, presumably
characterised by a simple physical structure, where comparison with
chemistry models is more straightforward than in a star-forming
core. The observations are interpreted by modelling the chemical
evolution of a hydrostatic core resembling H-MM1, and simulating
observations towards this model core. Besides the previously
published collisional coefficients of $\rm NH_2D$ with {\sl para}-$\rm H_2$
\citep{2014MNRAS.444.2544D}, we use newly calculated coefficients for
$\rm NHD_2$ and $\rm ND_3$ \citep{2016MNRAS.457.1535D}, in conjunction
with the radiative transfer program of \cite{1997A&A...322..943J}.
The paper is organised as follows. In Sect.~2, we describe the target
core and give details of the observations. The direct observational
results are presented in Sect.~3. In Sect.~4, we construct a physical
model of the core and describe the modelling tools, the collisional
coefficients and the chemistry model, used in this work. In Sect.~5 we
make predictions for the $\rm NH_3$, $\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$, and $\rm ND_3$
abundances, and the observable line emission from the model core. In
Sect.~6 we compare the outcome of the modelling with the observations,
and discuss the implications of this comparison. Finally, in Sect.~7
we draw our conclusions.
\section{Observations}
\subsection{The target: H-MM1}
The dense core H-MM1 in Ophiuchus was discovered by
\cite{2004ApJ...611L..45J} using the Submillimeter Common-User
Bolometric Array (SCUBA) on the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope
(JCMT). The core was also covered by the JCMT Gould Belt Survey with
SCUBA-2 at 450 and 850 $\mu$m \citep{2015MNRAS.450.1094P}. H-MM1 lies
in relative isolation in the eastern part of Lynds 1688, far from
sites of active star formation. \cite{2011A&A...528C...2P} detected
extended {\sl para-}$\rm D_2H^+$ emission towards this core. Based on the
analysis of the {\sl para}-$\rm D_2H^+$ and {\sl ortho-}$\rm H_2D^+$ lines
towards its centre, Parise et al. suggested that the average density
of the core is high compared to typical starless cores, a few
times $10^5$ cm$^{-3}$. In accordance with the high abundances of
the deuterated ions, the deuterium fraction in $\rm N_2H^+$ is also
extremely high: $\rm N_2D^+/\rm N_2H^+=0.43\pm0.11$ \citep{2016A&A...587A.118P}.
In Fig.~\ref{figure:hmm1_td_nh2_maps} we show the dust colour
temperature ($T_{\rm C}$) and the $\rm H_2$ column density ($N(\rm H_2)$)
maps of the core derived from far-infrared images observed by {\sl
Herschel} \citep{2010A&A...518L...1P}. Contours of the 850 $\mu$m emission
map from the SCUBA-2 survey of \cite{2015MNRAS.450.1094P} are superposed
on the $N(\rm H_2)$ map.
The Herschel/SPIRE images were extracted from the pipeline-reduced
images of the Ophiuchus complex made in the course of the Herschel
Gould Belt Survey \citep{2010A&A...518L.102A}. The data are downloaded
from the Herschel Science Archive
(HSA)\footnote{\url{www.cosmos.esa.int/web/herschel/science-archive}}. We
calculated the $T_{\rm C}$ and $N(\rm H_2)$ distributions using only the
three SPIRE \citep{2010A&A...518L...3G} bands at $250\,\mu$m,
$350\,\mu$m, and $500\,\mu$m, for which the pipeline reduction
includes zero-level corrections based on comparison with the Planck
satellite data. A modified blackbody function with the dust emissivity
spectra index $\beta=2$ was fitted to each pixel, after smoothing the
$250\,\mu$m and $350\,\mu$m images to the resolution of the
$500\,\mu$m image ($\sim 40\arcsec$), and resampling all images to the
same grid. For the dust emissivity coefficient per unit mass of gas we
adopted the value from \cite{1983QJRAS..24..267H}, $\kappa_{250\mu
\rm m}=0.1$ cm$^{2}$g$^{-1}$ ($1/C_{250}$ in Table I in their
paper). \cite{2013A&A...555A.140S} derived a similar value for
$\kappa_{250\mu \rm m}$ in the starless core CrA C. According to the
derived maps, the dust colour temperature minimum and the column
density maximum of the core is found at R.A. $16^{\rm h}27^{\rm
m}59\fs0$, Dec. $-24\degr33\arcmin33\arcsec$ (J2000). The line observations
presented here were done towards this position. The obtained minimum
colour temperature is 12.4 K and the maximum column density is
$N(\rm H_2)=5.7\,10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$. These values are averages over the
$40\arcsec$ beam. The fitted $T_{\rm C}$ overestimates the
mass-averaged dust temperature because of line-of-sight temperature
variations. This effect is more marked towards the centre of a starless core
than on the outskirts of the core (\citealt{2012A&A...547A..11N};
\citealt{2013A&A...555A.140S}).
Our position lies about $13\arcsec$ northeast from the centre position
used by \cite{2011A&A...528C...2P}, and about $7\arcsec$ east of
the 450 and 850 $\mu$m peaks observed with SCUBA-2. In a later section we
will use the SCUBA-2 maps to derive a simple spherically symmetric
model of the core for the purpose of radiative transfer modelling.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{harju_fig1a.png}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{harju_fig1b.png}
\caption{Dust colour temperature ($T_{\rm C}$, top) and the $\rm H_2$
column density ($N(\rm H_2)$, bottom) maps of H-MM1 as derived from
Herschel/SPIRE maps at 250, 350, and 500 $\mu$m. The distribution of
the 850 $\mu$m emission observed with SCUBA-2 is indicated with
black contours on the $N(\rm H_2)$ map. The contour levels are 10 to
50 by 10 MJy\,sr$^{-1}$. The column density maximum is marked with a
plus sign. The present observations were pointed towards this
position, with coordinates R.A. $16^{\rm h}27^{\rm m}59\fs0$,
Dec. $-24\degr33\arcmin33\arcsec$ (J2000). The larger circle in the bottom
right represents the resolution of the $N(\rm H_2)$ and $T_{\rm C}$
maps ($\sim 40\arcsec$). The $14^{\prime\prime}$ resolution of the
SCUBA-2 $850\,\mu$m map is indicated with the smaller circle. The
lowest $850\,\mu$m contour (10 MJy\,sr$^{-1}$) coincides roughly
with the $N(\rm H_2)= 2\,10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$ contour.}
\label{figure:hmm1_td_nh2_maps}
\end{figure}
\subsection{GBT observations}
The observations were carried out using the 7-beam K-Band Focal Plane
Array (KFPA) at the GBT, with the Versatile GBT Astronomical
Spectrometer (VEGAS) backend, as part of the Gould Belt Ammonia Survey
(GBT15A-430, PIs: Friesen \& Pineda). VEGAS was configured in Mode 20
which uses 8 separate spectral windows per KFPA beam, each with a
bandwidth of 23.44 MHz and 4096 spectral channels. The spectral
resolution is 5.7 kHz, corresponding to $\sim0.07$~km\,s$^{-1}$.
Observations were performed using in-band frequency switching with a
frequency throw of 4.11 MHz. Here we use the $\rm NH_3(1,1)$ and $(2,2)$
line maps of a $6\arcmin\times6\arcmin$ region centered on the column
density peak of H-MM1. The integrated $\rm NH_3(1,1)$ intensity map of
this region is shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:nh311_map}.
These observations were part of a much larger area map of the entire
L1688 region during the 15A semester, which will be presented by
Friesen \& Pineda et al. (in prep), and carried out on
$10\arcmin\times10\arcmin$ boxes scanned in right ascension with rows
separated by $13\arcsec$ in declination. The scanning rate was
$6.2\arcsec$\,s$^{-1}$, with a data dump every 1.044 s. A fast
frequency switching rate of 0.348 s was used, which results in an rms
of 0.1 K (on the $T_{\rm MB}$ scale).
The data is calibrated using the GBT KFPA data reduction pipeline
\citep{2011ASPC..442..127M}. The data were
calibrated to the $T_{\rm MB}$ scale using the gain factors for each beam
calibration derived from the Moon observations. The final cubes are
created by a custom made gridder using a tapered Bessel function for
the convolution following \cite{2007A&A...474..679M}.
The full calibration and imaging pipeline is available to the
community at \url{https://github.com/GBTAmmoniaSurvey/GAS}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{harju_fig2.png}
\caption{Integrated $\rm NH_3(1,1)$ intensity ($T_{\rm MB}$) map of H-MM1
observed with the GBT. The intensity unit is K\,km\,s$^{-1}$, and the
colour scale is given on the right. The $32\arcsec$ beam size of the
GBT at 23.7 GHz is indicated in the bottom right. The APEX and IRAM spectra
were taken towards the position indicated with a plus sign.}
\label{figure:nh311_map}
\end{figure}
The observed ammonia transitions are indicated in the energy level diagram
shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:energy_levels}.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\unitlength=1mm
\begin{picture}(180,177)(0,0)
\put(-5,86){
\begin{picture}(0,0)
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig3a.png}
\end{picture}}
\put(94,85){
\begin{picture}(0,0)
\includegraphics[width=8.8cm]{harju_fig3b.png}
\end{picture}}
\put(-2,-4){
\begin{picture}(0,0)
\includegraphics[width=8.9cm]{harju_fig3c.png}
\end{picture}}
\put(94,-4){
\begin{picture}(0,0)
\includegraphics[width=8.8cm]{harju_fig3d.png}
\end{picture}}
\put(17,176){\makebox(0,0){\Large{\bf (a)} $\rm NH_3$}}
\put(112,176){\makebox(0,0){\Large{\bf (b)} $\rm ND_3$}}
\put(19,80){\makebox(0,0){\Large{\bf (c)} $\rm NH_2D$}}
\put(115,80){\makebox(0,0){\Large{\bf (d)} $\rm NHD_2$}}
\put(28,171){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl ortho}}}
\put(44,170.5){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl para}}}
\put(62,170.5){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl para}}}
\put(78,171){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl ortho}}}
\put(119,171){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl meta}}}
\put(132,170.5){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl para}}}
\put(154,171){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl ortho}}}
\put(172,171){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl ortho}}}
\put(36,77){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl ortho}}}
\put(73,76.5){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl para}}}
\put(132,77){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl ortho}}}
\put(169,76.5){\makebox(0,0){\tiny {\sl para}}}
\end{picture}
\caption{Energies of the lowest rotational levels of $\rm NH_3$ ({\bf
a}), $\rm ND_3$ ({\bf b}), $\rm NH_2D$ ({\bf c}), and $\rm NHD_2$ ({\bf
d}). The nuclear spin symmetries and their ``para'', ``meta'', and
``ortho'' appellations are indicated. The ground-state
rotation-inversion transition $1_0^{\rm s}-0_0^{\rm a}$ of {\sl
ortho}-$\rm NH_3$ at 572.5 GHz is only observable from space. The
splitting between the inversion doublets of $\rm NH_3$ has been
exaggerated for clarity.}
\label{figure:energy_levels}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{APEX observations}
The centre position of H-MM1 was observed using the upgraded version
of the First Light APEX Submillimeter Heterodyne instrument
\citep[FLASH;][]{2006A&A...454L..21H} on APEX
\citep{2006A&A...454L..13G}. This instrument, FLASH$^+$
\citep{2014ITTST...4..588K}, operates simultaneously in the 345 GHz
and the 460 GHz atmospheric windows, and it can record two 4 GHz wide
sidebands separated by 12 GHz in both windows, i.e., altogether
$4\times4$ GHz frequency bands. The receivers were connected to MPIfR
Fast Fourier Transform Spectrometers (XFTTS,
\citealt{2012A&A...542L...3K}) with spectral resolutions of $\sim
0.03$ and $\sim 0.05$ km\,s$^{-1}$ at 345 and 460 GHz, respectively.
The sky subtraction was done by position switching, using an absolute
reference position (R.A. 16$^{\rm h}$28$^{\rm m}$32$^{s}$,
Dec. $-24\degr31\arcmin00\arcsec$, J2000) which, judging from Herschel
far-infrared maps is void of dense gas. In the lower frequency window
we used two frequency settings which covered 1) the ground-state lines
of {\sl para}- and {\sl meta}-$\rm ND_3$ (hereafter p$\rm ND_3$ and
m$\rm ND_3$) at 306.7 and 309.9 GHz, and 2) the ground-state lines of
{\sl ortho}- and {\sl para}-$\rm NH_2D$ (o$\rm NH_2D$ and p$\rm NH_2D$) at
332.8 GHz, and the ground-state lines of {\sl ortho}- and {\sl
para}-$\rm NHD_2$ (o$\rm NHD_2$ and p$\rm NHD_2$) at 335.5 GHz. The first
tuning covered also the $\rm N_2D^+(4-3)$ line at 308.4 GHz. The
observations in the 460 GHz window were aimed at the $\rm N_2D^+(6-5)$ and
$\rm N_2H^+(5-4)$ lines. Because these two lines could be measured
simultaneously the tuning of the 460 GHz receiver was kept constant
during the whole observing run.
A list of transitions covered is given in Table~\ref{table:obstrans},
mentioning only the most significant to the present study. Here we
give the centre frequencies of transitions, upper state energies, and Einstein
coefficients for spontaneous emission. These parameters are obtained
from the Cologne Database for Molecular Spectroscopy,
CDMS\footnote{\url{www.astro.uni-koeln.de/cdms/catalog}}. The
observed transitions of $\rm NH_3$, $\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$, and $\rm ND_3$
are indicated in the energy level diagrams in
Figs.~\ref{figure:energy_levels}.
The APEX beamsize (FWHM) is $\sim 20\arcsec$ at $310-330$ GHz, and
$\sim 14\arcsec$ at 465 GHz. The main beam efficiency, $\eta_{\rm
MB}$, is 0.73 at $310-330$ GHz, and 0.6 at 465 GHz
\citep{2006A&A...454L..13G}. The observations were carried out
between 29 and 31 May, 2015. The total observing time was 11.4
hours. The weather conditions were stable and fairly good (PWV 0.7-1.2
mm). The absolute calibration, pointing, and focus were checked by
observing Saturn. The system temperatures were in the following
ranges: $180-190$ K (310 GHz), $230-250$ K (335 GHz), and $570-600$ K
(465 GHz). The resulting RMS noise levels at the mentioned frequencies
at a velocity resolution of 0.1 km\,s$^{-1}$, were 18, 27, and 33 mK,
respectively, on the $T_{\rm MB}^*$ scale.
\begin{table}
\caption{Observed transitions.}
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
\hline \hline
\multicolumn{2}{c}{transition} & frequency & $E_{\rm upper}$ & $A_{\rm ul} $ \\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{} & (MHz) & (K) & (s$^{-1}$) \\ \hline
\multicolumn{5}{c}{ } \\
\multicolumn{5}{c}{GBT 100-m} \\
\multicolumn{5}{c}{ } \\
p$\rm NH_3$&$(1_1^{\rm a}-1_1^{\rm s})$ & 23694.4955 & 24.4 & $1.68\,10^{-7}$ \\
p$\rm NH_3$&$(2_2^{\rm a}-2_2^{\rm s})$ & 23722.6336 & 65.6 & $2.24\,10^{-7}$ \\
o$\rm NH_3$&$(3_3^{\rm a}-3_3^{\rm s})$ & 23870.1296 & 124.7 &$2.57\,10^{-7}$ \\
\multicolumn{5}{c}{ } \\
\multicolumn{5}{c}{APEX 12-m} \\
\multicolumn{5}{c}{ } \\
o$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{01}^{\rm a}-0_{00}^{\rm a})$ & 332781.890 & 16.6 & $8.14\,10^{-6}$ \\
p$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{01}^{\rm s}-0_{00}^{\rm s})$ & 332822.510 & 16.0 & $7.60\,10^{-6}$ \\
o$\rm NHD_2$&$(1_{11}^{\rm s}-0_{00}^{\rm s})$& 335513.793 & 16.1 & $1.29\,10^{-5}$ \\
p$\rm NHD_2$&$(1_{11}^{\rm a}-0_{00}^{\rm a})$& 335446.321 & 16.3 & $1.47\,10^{-5}$ \\
m$\rm ND_3$&$(1_0^{\rm a}-0_0^{\rm s})$ & 309909.490 & 14.9 & $2.59\,10^{-4}$ \\
p$\rm ND_3$&$(1_0^{\rm s}-0_0^{\rm a})$ & 306736.710 & 14.8 & $2.51\,10^{-4}$ \\
$\rm N_2D^+$&$(4-3)$ & 308422.267 & 37.0 & $1.75\,10^{-3}$ \\
$\rm N_2D^+$&$(6-5)$ & 462603.852 & 77.7 & $6.15\,10^{-3}$ \\
$\rm N_2H^+$&$(5-4)$ & 465824.777 & 67.1 & $6.18\,10^{-3}$ \\
\multicolumn{5}{c}{ } \\
\multicolumn{5}{c}{IRAM 30-m} \\
\multicolumn{5}{c}{ } \\
o$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{11}^{\rm s}-1_{01}^{\rm a})$ & 85926.278 & 20.7 & $7.84\,10^{-6}$ \\
p$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{11}^{\rm a}-1_{01}^{\rm s})$ & 110153.594 & 21.3 & $1.65\,10^{-5}$ \\
$\rm N_2D^+$&$(2-1)$ & 154217.011 & 11.1 & $1.97\,10^{-4}$ \\
\end{tabular}
\label{table:obstrans}
\end{table}
\subsection{IRAM observations}
The column density peak of H-MM1 was observed with the IRAM 30~meter
telescope on July 5, 2015 in acceptable weather conditions (PWV
8--10~mm). Pointing and focus were checked towards QSO 1253-055. The
following transitions were observed: o$\rm NH_2D(1_{11}-1_{01})$ at
85.9~GHz, p$\rm NH_2D(1_{11}-1_{01})$ at 110.2~GHz, and $\rm N_2D^+(2-1)$ at
154.2~GHz. The measurements were obtained with the EMIR 090 and 150
receivers\footnote{\url{www.iram.es/IRAMES/mainWiki/EmirforAstronomers}} and
the VESPA autocorrelator with spectral resolution of 20~kHz; the
corresponding velocity resolutions were 0.04--0.07~km~s$^{-1}$. The beam
sizes were $29\arcsec$, $23\arcsec$, and $16\arcsec$ for
o$\rm NH_2D(1_{11}-1_{01})$, p$\rm NH_2D(1_{11}-1_{01})$, and $\rm N_2H^+(2-1)$,
respectively. The system temperatures ranged from 166 to 310~K
depending on the frequency (see Table~\ref{observations} for the
details). The spectra were taken in the position switching mode,
using an off position 400$^{\prime\prime}$ East of the target. The
integration time for each line was between 15 and 22~minutes which
resulted in RMS noise levels of 0.08--0.14~K on the $T_{\rm MB}$
scale. The intensity scale was converted to the main-beam temperature
scale using the beam efficiency values given in the IRAM 30~m report
on a beam pattern~\citep{Kramer2013}; see Table~\ref{observations} for
details.
\begin{table*}
\caption{Observational parameters.}\label{observations}
\begin{tabular}{llcccccccc}
\hline \hline
Molecule&Transition&Frequency&HPBW&$\eta_{\rm fss}$& $\eta_{\rm MB}$&
$\Delta \upsilon^a$&$T_{\rm sys}$&time&RMS$^b$\\
& &(GHz)&($\arcsec$)& & &(km~s$^{-1}$)&(K)&(min)&(K)\\
\hline
\multicolumn{10}{c}{} \\
\multicolumn{10}{c}{GBT} \\
\multicolumn{10}{c}{} \\
p$\rm NH_3$&$(1_{1}^{\rm a}-1_{1}^{\rm s})$&23.7&32& 0.95 &0.91 &0.072& 45 & 94 &0.103\\
p$\rm NH_3$&$(2_{2}^{\rm a}-2_{2}^{\rm s})$&23.7&32& 0.95 &0.91 &0.072& 45 & 94 &0.083\\
o$\rm NH_3$&$(3_{3}^{\rm a}-3_{3}^{\rm s})$&23.9&32& 0.95 &0.91 &0.072& 45 & 94 &0.096\\
\multicolumn{10}{c}{} \\
\multicolumn{10}{c}{APEX} \\
\multicolumn{10}{c}{} \\
o$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{01}^{\rm a}-0_{00}^{\rm a})$&332.8&19&0.97&0.73&0.040&263&86&0.027\\
p$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{01}^{\rm s}-0_{00}^{\rm s})$&332.8&19&0.97&0.73&0.040&263&86&0.027 \\
o$\rm NHD_2$&$(1_{11}^{\rm s}-0_{00}^{\rm s})$&335.5&19&0.97&0.73&0.040&227&86&0.021\\
p$\rm NHD_2$&$(1_{11}^{\rm a}-0_{00}^{\rm a})$&335.4&19&0.97&0.73&0.040&227&86&0.021 \\
m$\rm ND_3$&$(1_0^{\rm a}-0_0^{\rm s})$&309.9&20&0.97&0.73&0.043&195&75&0.019\\
p$\rm ND_3$&$(1_0^{\rm s}-0_0^{\rm a})$&306.7&20&0.97&0.73&0.043&178&75&0.019\\
$\rm N_2D^+$&$(4-3)$&308.4&20&0.97&0.73&0.043&178&75&0.019\\
$\rm N_2D^+$&$(6-5)$&462.6&14&0.95&0.60&0.057&594&97&0.043\\
$\rm N_2H^+$&$(5-4)$&465.8&14&0.97&0.60&0.057&557&108&0.038\\
\multicolumn{10}{c}{} \\
\multicolumn{10}{c}{IRAM} \\
\multicolumn{10}{c}{} \\
o$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{11}^{\rm s}-1_{01}^{\rm a})$&85.9&29&0.95&0.81&0.068&166&15&0.080\\
p$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{11}^{\rm a}-1_{01}^{\rm s})$&110.2&23&0.94&0.79&0.053&249&22&0.098\\
$\rm N_2D^+$&$(2-1)$&154.2&16&0.93&0.72&0.038&310&22&0.137\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
$^a$ Spectral resolution ($=$ equivalent noise bandwidth, ENBW). $^b$ On the $T_{\rm MB}$ scale at the original spectral resolution.
\end{table*}
\section{LTE Analysis of the observed spectra}
\label{sec:LTE_analysis}
In this section we present the observed spectra and the results of the
standard hyperfine stucture fitting to the detected lines. The method
assumes line-of-sight homogeneity and that the populations of
hyperfine states in a certain rotational manifold are proportional to
their statistical weights, according to the assumption of local
thermodynamic equilibrium, LTE. The total column density estimates
rely furthermore on the assumption that the excitation temperature,
$T_{\rm ex}$, is constant for all rotational transitions of a
molecule.
The observed spectra are shown in Figs.~\ref{figure:ammo} ($\rm NH_3$),
\ref{figure:dammo} ($\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$, and $\rm ND_3$), and
\ref{figure:diaz} ($\rm N_2D^+$ and $\rm N_2H^+$). The spectra were reduced
using the GILDAS software package\footnote{Grenoble Image and Line
Data Analysis Software package has been developed by IRAM-Grenoble,
see \url{www.iram.fr/IRAMFR/GILDAS}}. All the observed transitions have
hyperfine structure. The detected lines were analysed using the HFS
method implemented in the CLASS software (part of GILDAS), or fitting
routines written in the IDL language.
The o$\rm NH_3(3,3)$ and $\rm N_2D^+(6-5)$ lines were not detected, while
$\rm N_2H^+(5-4)$ shows perhaps a weak line with an integrated intensity of
$\sim 30$ mK\,km\,s$^{-1}$. The upper limits for the intensities of
these lines are 0.1 K, 0.05 K and 0.1 K, respectively, on the $T_{\rm
MB}$ scale. For the $\rm N_2D^+(6-5)$ and $\rm N_2H^+(5-4)$ spectra we have
only used scans (20 s integrations) with smooth baselines, showing no
visible disturbances, which means about half of the measurements.
The hyperfine patterns of the detected lines are dominated by the
splitting caused by the electric quadrupole moment of the $^{14}$N
nucleus. In the $\rm NH_3$ inversion lines, the structure owing to the
magnetic moments of the N and H nuclei can be partially resolved
(\citealt{1967PhRv..156...83K}; \citealt{1983ARA&A..21..239H}).
Furthermore, for the $\rm NH_2D$ lines we use the hyperfine patterns
calculated by \cite{2016A&A...586L...4D}, including the effects of
both N and D nuclei. As shown recently by \cite{2016A&A...586L...4D},
quadrupole coupling of the D nucleus broadens substantially the
observed $1_{11}-1_{01}$ lines of $\rm NH_2D$ at 86 and 110 GHz, and
disregard of this effect results in overestimates of the line widths
by $\sim 50\%$ for a cold cloud. For the ground-state lines at 333
GHz, and for any lines at higher frequencies, the effect of the
hyperfine structure owing to D is, however, negligible compared with
the Doppler broadening.
For other molecules observed here we use line lists which only take
the splitting due to N into account. The data are from
\cite{2006A&A...449..855C} ($\rm NHD_2$ and $\rm ND_3$), and from
\cite{1995ApJ...455L..77C}, \cite{2004A&A...413.1177D}, and
\cite{2009A&A...494..719P} ($\rm N_2H^+$ and $\rm N_2D^+$). The effect of other
interactions is likely to be small compared with the thermal
broadening (\citealt{1969JChPh..49.5523K};
\citealt{2004A&A...413.1177D}). In the hyperfine fitting, we have
assumed that the frequencies listed in Table~\ref{table:obstrans},
which are adopted from the CDMS, represent weighted averages of the
hyperfine components.
The results of Gaussian fits to the hyperfine structure are presented
in Table~\ref{table:hffits}. This table contains the peak main-beam
brightness temperatures, $T_{\rm MB}$, the radial velocities, $V_{\rm
LSR}$, the line widths, $\Delta \upsilon$, and the sums of the peak
optical thicknesses, $\tau_{\rm sum}$, of the hyperfine
components. The hyperfine fit also gives an estimate for the
$T_{\rm ex}$ of the transition, provided that
the spectrum is on the brightness temperature scale. We have
approximated this by the $T_{\rm MB}$ scale, which is equivalent to
assuming that the source fills the telescope beam uniformly. Finally,
the two last columns of Table~\ref{table:hffits} give the total column
densities, $N_{\rm total}$, of the molecules, and the fractional
abundances, $X$, using the $\rm H_2$ column density derived from
Herschel observations. The derived total optical thicknesses of the
detected lines range from $\sim 1$ to $\sim 5$. This means that the
satellites are mainly optically thin, and we are in the regime where
the integrated intensity is proportional to the column density of the
molecule.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{harju_fig4.png}
\caption{$\rm NH_3(1,1)$, $(2,2)$, and $(3,3)$ inversion line spectra
observed with the GBT towards the centre of H-MM1. The spectra are
on the $T_{\rm MB}$ scale. Fits to the $(1,1)$ and $(2,2)$ hyperfine
structures are indicated with orange curves. The origin of the
absorption feature seen in the $(3,3)$ spectrum (at 23869.6 MHz) is
unkown to us.}
\label{figure:ammo}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\unitlength=1mm
\begin{picture}(90,80)(0,0)
\put(-3,0){
\begin{picture}(0,0)
\includegraphics[width=9.5cm]{harju_fig5.png}
\end{picture}}
\end{picture}
\caption{Deuterated ammonia spectra observed at IRAM and APEX. The
spectra are presented on the $T_{\rm MB}^*$ scale. The APEX spectra
are Hanning smoothed to a resolution of about 0.07 km\,s$^{-1}$
which corresponds to the spectral resolution of the spectra from
GBT and IRAM. The orange curves are Gaussian fits to the hyperfine structure.}
\label{figure:dammo}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\unitlength=1mm
\begin{picture}(90,100)(0,0)
\put(-5,0){
\begin{picture}(0,0)
\includegraphics[width=9.0cm]{harju_fig6.png}
\end{picture}}
\end{picture}
\caption{$\rm N_2D^+$ and $\rm N_2H^+$ spectra observed at IRAM and APEX. The
APEX spectra are Hanning smoothed. The velocity resolution is about
0.07 km\,s$^{-1}$ for the $\rm N_2D^+(2-1)$ and $\rm N_2D^+(4-3)$ spectra
and about 0.1 km\,s$^{-1}$ for the higher frequency
spectra. Gaussian fits to the hyperfine components of the
$\rm N_2D^+(2-1)$ and $\rm N_2D^+(4-3)$ lines are shown as orange curves.}
\label{figure:diaz}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Hyperfine fit results, column densities, and
the fractional abundances relative to $\rm H_2$.}
\begin{tabular}{ll|c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline \hline
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{transition} & $T_{\rm MB}$ (K) & $V_{\rm LSR}$ (km\,s$^{-1}$) &
$\Delta \upsilon$ (km\,s$^{-1}$) & $\tau_{\rm sum}$ &
$T_{\rm ex}$ (K) &
$N_{\rm total}$ (cm$^{-2}$) & X \\ \hline
p$\rm NH_3$&$(1_{1}^{\rm a}-1_{1}^{\rm s})$&$4.18\pm0.10$&$4.222\pm0.002$&$0.297\pm0.005$&
$4.8\pm0.3$&$8.2\pm0.2$&$(1.7\pm0.2)\,10^{14}$&$3\,10^{-9}$\\
p$\rm NH_3$&$(2_{2}^{\rm a}-2_{2}^{\rm s})$&$0.91\pm0.08$&$4.220\pm0.008$&$0.256\pm0.020$&
$0.22\pm0.09$&$9.2\pm0.2$& & \\
o$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{11} - 1_{01})$&$3.04\pm0.08$&$4.283\pm0.002$&$0.235\pm0.006$&$5.1\pm0.3$&
$7.0\pm0.2$&$(1.1\pm0.1)\,10^{14}$&$2\,10^{-9}$\\
o$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{01} - 0_{00})$&
$0.84\pm0.03$ & $4.327\pm0.003$ & $0.223\pm0.006$ & $2.4\pm0.4$ &
$6.1\pm0.2$ & $(1.2\pm 0.3)\,10^{14}$ & \\
p$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{11} - 1_{01})$& $1.42\pm0.11$ & $4.285\pm0.005$ & $0.222\pm0.016$ & $2.3\pm0.8$ &
$5.9\pm0.7$ & $(4.6\pm1.2)\,10^{13}$ &$8\,10^{-10}$ \\
p$\rm NH_2D$&$(1_{01} - 0_{00})$&
$0.36\pm0.02$& $4.247\pm0.005$& $0.193\pm0.014$& $1.5\pm0.8$&
$5.1\pm0.6$& $(5.7\pm 4.2)\,10^{13}$ & \\
o$\rm NHD_2$&$(1_{11} - 0_{00})$&
$0.28\pm0.02$& $4.239\pm0.005$& $0.197\pm0.012$& $1.5\pm0.8$&
$4.7\pm0.4$& $(4.0\pm 3.2)\,10^{13}$ & $\sim7\,10^{-10}$ \\
p$\rm NHD_2$&$(1_{11} - 0_{00})$&
$0.13\pm0.02$& $4.261\pm0.010$& $0.202\pm0.026$& $\sim 1.3$ &
$\sim 4.0$ & $\sim 2.7\,10^{13}$ & $\sim5\,10^{-10}$ \\
m$\rm ND_3$&$(1_0 - 0_0)$&
$0.22\pm0.02$ & $4.336\pm0.006$ & $0.202\pm0.015$ & $1.1\pm0.5$ &
$4.4\pm0.3$ & $(1.0\pm 0.5)\,10^{12}$ & $2\,10^{-11}$ \\
$\rm N_2D^+$ & $(2-1)$ & $2.81\pm0.09$ & $4.197\pm0.003$ & $0.232\pm0.008$ & $3.5\pm0.3$ &
$7.4\pm0.2$ & $(3.4\pm0.5)\,10^{12}$ & $6\,10^{-11}$ \\
$\rm N_2D^+$ & $(4-3)$ & $0.66\pm0.02$ & $4.273\pm0.003$ & $0.167\pm0.013$ & $2.4\pm0.7$ &
$5.2\pm0.2$ & $(1.7\pm0.7)\,10^{13}$ & \\
\end{tabular}
\label{table:hffits}
\end{table*}
While the accuracy of the LSR velocities and line widths from the
hyperfine fits is high, the optical thicknesses, and consequently the
column densities derived using this method have relatively large
uncertainties, except for p$\rm NH_3$ and o$\rm NH_2D$, which are the brightest
lines. The o$\rm NH_2D$ and p$\rm NH_2D$ column densities derived from the
lines observed with APEX and IRAM are consistent when the different
beam sizes (see Table 2) and the uncertainties owing to noise are
taken into account. In contrast, the $\rm N_2D^+$ column densities
derived from the $\rm N_2D^+(2-1)$ (IRAM) and $\rm N_2D^+(4-3)$ (APEX) spectra
differ by a factor of five. We consider the value obtained from the
$\rm N_2D^+(2-1)$ spectrum more reliable because this line has several
resolved hyperfine components, and because this transition connects
rotational levels which are much more densely populated than $J=3$ and
$J=4$. Furthermore, the $\rm N_2D^+$ column density obtained from
$\rm N_2D^+(2-1)$ is consistent with that of derived from $\rm N_2D^+(1-0)$ by
\cite{2016A&A...587A.118P} ($3.8\pm 0.9\,10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, beamsize
$32\arcsec$) towards a position lying $13\arcsec$ off from our centre
position.
Assuming that {\sl ortho} and {\sl para} $\rm NH_3$ have equal abundances
(which would correspond to their nuclear spin statistical weights), we
obtain a total ammonia column density of $N(\rm NH_3) =
(3.3\pm0.4)\,10^{14}$ cm$^{-2}$. The total column densities for
$\rm NH_2D$ and $\rm NHD_2$ are $N(\rm NH_2D) = (1.5\pm0.1)\,10^{14}$
cm$^{-2}$, $N(\rm NHD_2) \sim 6.7\,10^{13}$ cm$^{-2}$. Like in the case
of $\rm NH_3$, we only have detected one spin modification of $\rm ND_3$. Assuming
that the relative abundances of {\sl ortho}, {\sl meta}, and {\sl
para} $\rm ND_3$ correspond to their nuclear spin statistical
weights, $16:10:1$, we get an estimate for total $\rm ND_3$ column
density with large error margins: $N(\rm ND_3)=(2.7\pm1.4)\,10^{12}$
cm$^{-2}$. These column density estimates imply the following
fractionation ratios: $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3 = 0.45\pm 0.09$, $\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D
\sim 0.45$, and $\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2 \sim 0.04$. The spin ratios can only
be estimated for $\rm NH_2D$ and $\rm NHD_2$ for which we get o/p$\rm NH_2D =
3.0\pm1.1$ and o/p$\rm NHD_2\sim1.5$. We see that both {\sl ortho}/{\sl
para} ratios are close to their statistical values, 3 and 2,
respectively.
We used the $\rm NH_3(1,1)$ and $(2,2)$ maps from GBT to derive the
kinetic temperature, $T_{\rm kin}$, and the p$\rm NH_3$ column density,
$N({\rm p}\rm NH_3)$, distributions in the vicinity of the H-MM1. The
standard analysis described in \cite{1983ARA&A..21..239H},
\cite{1983A&A...122..164W}, and \cite{1986A&A...157..207U} was
used. According to the modelling results of
\cite{2012A&A...538A.133J}, the ammonia spectra trace faithfully the
real mass averaged gas temperature. In Fig.~\ref{figure:tkin} we show
the average $N({\rm p}\rm NH_3)$ and $T_{\rm kin}$ as functions of
distance from the core centre. The diagrams are derived by averaging
spectra over concentric, $10\arcsec$ wide annuli, and calculating the
parameters and their errors from these averaged spectra. Also shown in
this figure are the corresponding distributions of $N(\rm H_2)$ and
$T_{\rm C}$ derived from the Herschel/SPIRE maps. Two things are
perhaps worthy of notice in the diagrams: the $\rm NH_3$ abundance seems
to decrease and the $T_{\rm kin}$ seems to increase towards the edge
of the core, although both quantities have large errors away
from the centre of the core.
The line widths of the spectra observed towards the core centre range
from 170 to 260 m\,s$^{-1}$. Assuming that the average kinetic
temperature in the core is $\sim 11$ K, the non-thermal velocity
dispersions obtained from various transitions are between $\sim 50$
and $\sim 100$ m\,s$^{-1}$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{harju_fig7.png}
\caption{Distributions of the $N(\rm NH_3)$ and $N(\rm H_2)$ (top)
and $T_{\rm kin}$ and $T_{\rm C}$ (bottom), as functions of the
angular distance from the core centre. The $N(\rm NH_3)$ and $T_{\rm
kin}$ estimates are derived from the $\rm NH_3(1,1)$ and $(2,2)$
maps, whereas $N(\rm H_2)$ and $T_{\rm C}$ distributions are based on
Hershel/SPIRE far-infrared continuum maps.}
\label{figure:tkin}
\end{figure}
\section{Abundances from radiative transfer modelling}
\label{sec:model}
\subsection{Physical model of H-MM1}
\label{ss:coremodel}
In order to account for inhomogeneities in the density and temperature
distributions along the line of sight, we constructed a spherically
symmetric physical model of the core. Besides providing a realistic
description of molecular line excitation conditions for the radiative
transfer modelling, the core model is also needed for making a
connection between the observations and the theory of interstellar
chemistry. In this model the core structure is described by a
modified Bonnor-Ebert sphere (MBES) (\citealt{2001ApJ...557..193E};
\citealt{2001A&A...376..650Z}; \citealt{2011A&A...535A..49S};
\citealt{2015A&A...582A..48S}) which is a pressure bound, hydrostatic
sphere of gas and dust with the temperature decreasing towards the
centre.
We fixed the outer radius of the core to be $R_{\rm out} = 9600$ AU
($80\arcsec$). At this distance the core was assumed to be merged with
the ambient cloud. We assumed a constant non-thermal velocity
dispersion of $\sigma_{\rm NT}=100$ m\,s$^{-1}$ inside the core, which
increases the internal pressure slightly. The dust temperature profile
was calculated using a Monte Carlo program for continuum radiative
transfer,
CRT\footnote{\url{wiki.helsinki.fi/display/$\[email protected]/CRT}},
developed by M. Juvela \citep{2005A&A...440..531J}. The spectrum of
the unattenuated interstellar radiation field (ISRF) was taken from
\cite{1994ASPC...58..355B}. We used the dust opacity data from
\cite{1994A&A...291..943O} for unprocessed dust grains with thin ice
coatings\footnote{\url{hera.ph1.uni-koeln.de/$\sim$ossk/Jena/tables.html}},
which agree with the opacities at 250, 350, and 500 $\mu$m used in the
derivation of the $T_{\rm C}$ and $N(\rm H_2)$ maps in Sect. 2.
The MBES model was constructed using the following constraints: 1) The
dust temperature at the boundary should agree with the $T_{\rm C}$
outside the core derived from Herschel; 2) the model should
approximately reproduce the 450 and 850 $\mu$m emission profiles
derived from SCUBA-2 maps of \cite{2015MNRAS.450.1094P}; 3) the
mass-averaged gas kinetic temperature profile, smoothed to the angular
resolution of the GBT, should agree with the observed $T_{\rm kin}$
profile shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:tkin}. In order to achieve the large
temperature difference between the edge ($\sim 15$ K) and the centre
($<11$ K) with the model where the external heating is dominated by
the ISRF, we set the visual extinction to $A_{\rm V} = 2^{\rm mag}$ at
the outer boundary of the core. With this choice we assume that
the core lies near the edge or in a protrusion of the ambient cloud. The total
hydrogen column density in the neighbourhood of the core is of the
order of $10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$ (Fig.~\ref{figure:hmm1_td_nh2_maps})
which corresponds to $A_{\rm V} \sim 10^{\rm mag}$. The strongly
peaked sub-millimetre emission observed with SCUBA-2 could only be
reproduced with central $\rm H_2$ densities of the order of $10^6$
cm$^{-3}$.
The iteration was started from the density distribution of an
isothermal Bonnor-Ebert sphere at 11 K with a central density of
$n(\rm H_2)=10^6$ cm$^{-3}$. The intensity of the ISRF and the central density
were adjusted to reach agreement with the constraints 1) and 2) above.
The sub-millimetre intensity profiles of the model core were
calculated by evaluating the integrals $\int_0^L B_\nu(T_{\rm dust},z)
\rho(z) \kappa_\nu dz$, where the integration is along the line of
sight, at different distances from the core centre. The resulting
intensity profiles at $450\,\mu$m and $850\,\mu$m, smoothed to
appropriate resolutions, were compared with corresponding circularly
averaged profiles from the SCUBA-2 maps.
The gas and dust temperatures are assumed to be equal at densities
above $\sim 10^5$ cm$^{-3}$ \citep{2001ApJ...557..736G}. The observed
$T_{\rm kin}$ profile shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:tkin} suggests,
however, that the (3-dimensional) gas temperature distribution inside
the core does not show the steep gradient characteristic of $T_{\rm
dust}$ caused by the attenuation of the ISRF. In fact, the ammonia
observations can be explained with a model where the core is mostly
isothermal, but the temperature rises steeply near the edge. We note
that this conclusion is probably influenced by the limited angular
resolution (cf. temperature determination in L1544 by
\citealt{2007A&A...470..221C}). To conform with the prediction that
$T_{\rm gas} \sim T_{\rm dust}$ at the highest densities, we assumed
that this is true above a certain, adjustable density threshold, but
that below this threshold, $T_{\rm gas}$ is constant up to the
transition layer, where it rises abruptly. The adopted gas
temperature distribution required a slight adjustment of the density
profile to keep the core in hydrostatic equilibrium. The iteration
converged after three-four rounds. A reasonable agreement with the
dust continuum observations was found with a model where the central
density of core is $n(\rm H_2)=1.2\,10^6$ cm$^{-3}$, and the standard
IRSF is scaled up by the factor 1.7. The observed $T_{\rm kin}$
distribution could be reproduced assuming that $T_{\rm gas}$ separates
from $T_{\rm dust}$ at the density $n(\rm H_2) \sim 4\,10^5$ cm$^{-3}$.
At this point, $\sim 15\arcsec$ from the centre, the temperature is
$\sim 11$ K.
The distributions of $T_{\rm gas}$ and $T_{\rm dust}$ as functions of
the radial distance from the core centre for the best fit model are
shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:be_tdust}, together with the observable
mass-averaged temperature profiles smoothed to the angular resolutions
of GBT and Herschel. Fig.~\ref{figure:iprofs} shows the circularly
averaged $450\,\mu$m and $850\,\mu$m intensity profiles of H-MM1
derived from the SCUBA-2 maps of \cite{2015MNRAS.450.1094P}, together
with predictions from the MBES model.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{harju_fig8.png}
\caption{Radial $T_{\rm dust}$ (red solid curve) and
$T_{\rm gas}$ (green solid curve) distributions of the hydrostatic
core model of H-MM1 used in the chemistry modelling and radiative
transfer calculations. The corresponding mass-averaged dust and gas
temperature profiles are shown as
dashed red and green curves. The $T_{\rm C}$ distribution derived
from Herschel data is indicated with black plus signs, and the
$T_{\rm kin}$ distribution from the GBT ammonia data is indicated
with green diamonds.}
\label{figure:be_tdust}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{harju_fig9.png}
\caption{Sub-millimetre intensities as functions of radial distance
from the centre of H-MM1. The plus signs with error bars indicate
averages over concentric annuli and their standard deviations. These
are obtained from SCUBA-2 maps at $450\,\mu$m and $850\,\mu$m
published by \cite{2015MNRAS.450.1094P}. The solid curves are
predictions from the MBES model described in the text and in
Fig.~\ref{figure:be_tdust}.}
\label{figure:iprofs}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Average abundances from line modelling}
\label{ss:ave_abus}
We derived the fractional abundances of the observed molecules in
H-MM1 by applying the Monte Carlo radiative transfer program of
\cite{1997A&A...322..943J} to the physical model described in
Sect.~\ref{ss:coremodel}. The collisional rate coefficients for
$\rm NH_2D$ were adopted from \cite{2014MNRAS.444.2544D}, and for
$\rm NHD_2$ and $\rm ND_3$ we used the newly calculated coefficients
from \cite{2016MNRAS.457.1535D}. For $\rm N_2D^+$ we have used the
collisional rate coefficients for $\rm N_2H^+$ from the recent work of
\cite{2015MNRAS.446.1245L}.
In this calculation, we assumed constant fractional abundances
throughout the core, i.e., that there is no dependence on the distance
from the core centre. The obtained values can thus be taken as
averages over the core. Starting from the estimates presented in
Table~\ref{table:hffits} of Sect.~\ref{sec:LTE_analysis}, we varied
fractional abundances until the modelled spectra produced the same
integrated intensities as the observed ones. The best-fit
fractional abundances are presented in Table~\ref{table:const_abus}.
The uncertainties correspond to the 1-$\sigma$ errors of the
integrated intensities. The {\sl para}-$\rm NH_3$ lines are broader
than those of its deuterated isotopologues, and for this molecule we
had to increase the assumed non-thermal velocity dispersion to
$\sigma_{\rm NT}=150$ m\,s$^{-1}$ in order to reproduce the
integrated intensities. This suggests that $\rm NH_3$ emission has
contribution from the ambient cloud having a larger velocity
dispersion than the core, and that the derived fractional
{\sl para}-$\rm NH_3$ abundance is an upper limit for the core.
For the different isotopologues of ammonia, the agreement reached
between the predicted spectra and observations is equally good as for
the hyperfine fits shown in Figs.~\ref{figure:ammo} and
\ref{figure:dammo}. The two $\rm N_2D^+$ lines detected cannot be
reproduced by a single abundance. The value listed in
Table~\ref{table:const_abus} is a compromise which overpredicts the
$\rm N_2D^+(4-3)$ intensity but gives too a weak $\rm N_2D^+(2-1)$ line. The
situation is thus opposite to what is expected from the results of the
hyperfine fits. This indicates that either the assumption of a
constant abundance is unrealistic for $\rm N_2D^+$ or that the physical
model is inaccurate.
\begin{table}
\caption{Fractional abundances, deuterium fractionation ratios, and
spin ratios in H-MM1 derived from the detected lines using radiative
transfer modelling. The abundances are assumed to be constant through the core.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ll} \hline\hline
p$\rm NH_3$ & $(3.8 \pm 0.1)\,10^{-9}$ \\
o$\rm NH_2D$ & $(2.2 \pm 0.1)\,10^{-9}$ \\
p$\rm NH_2D$ & $(7.3 \pm 0.3)\,10^{-10}$ \\
o$\rm NHD_2$ & $(4.5\pm 0.3)\,10^{-10}$ \\
p$\rm NHD_2$ & $(1.9\pm 0.2)\,10^{-10}$ \\
m$\rm ND_3$ & $(1.4\pm 0.1)\,10^{-11}$ \\
$\rm N_2D^+$ & $(6.6\pm2.3)\,10^{-11}$ \\ \hline
$\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3$ & $0.39 \pm 0.02$ (o:p$\rm NH_3$ = 1:1) \\
$\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D$ & $0.22\pm0.02$ \\
$\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2$ & $0.06 \pm 0.01$ (o:m:p$\rm ND_3$ = 18:10:1) \\ \hline
o/p-$\rm NH_2D$ & $3.0\pm 0.2$ \\
o/p-$\rm NHD_2$ & $2.4\pm 0.4$
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{table:const_abus}
\end{table}
The abundances listed in Table~\ref{table:const_abus} imply the
following total fractional abundances: $X(\rm NH_3)= (7.6\pm
0.1)\,10^{-9}$ (assuming o:p=1:1), $X(\rm NH_2D) = (2.9 \pm 0.1)
\,10^{-9}$, $X(\rm NHD_2) = (6.4 \pm 0.5)\,10^{-10}$, and $X(\rm ND_3)=
(3.7\pm 0.4)\,10^{-11}$ (assuming o:m:p = 18:10:1). Here we have
assumed statistical spin ratios for species without a line
detection. The corresponding deuterium fractionation ratios for
ammonia, and the ortho/para ratios for $\rm NH_2D$ and $\rm NHD_2$ are
listed in the bottom part of Table~\ref{table:const_abus}.
For the molecules with the brightest lines, the abundances from
the radiative transfer modelling agree relatively well with those
from the LTE analysis (Table~\ref{table:hffits}). The most glaring
discrepancy (by a factor of 2.5) is found for {\sl para}-$\rm NHD_2$
with the weakest detection and a very large uncertainty of the
optical thickness from the LTE method. The statistical errors of the
fractional abundances listed in Table~\ref{table:const_abus} are
small in most cases, but the values are subject to systematic
errors depending on accuracy of the physical model, and on the
validity of the assumption of constant abundances. The present
physical model is, however, consistent with dust continuum
observations, and provides a more realistic decription of the
excitation conditions in the core than the assumption of
line-of-sight homogeneity. Therefore, we consider the abundance
ratios listed in Table~\ref{table:const_abus} to be more accurate
than those implied by the values presented in
Table~\ref{table:hffits}, and use the former ratios to assess the
validity of the chemistry model described below.
\section{Chemical modelling}
\subsection{Model description}
\label{ss:chemistry_model}
We model the chemistry of H-MM1 using the pseudo-time-dependent
gas-grain chemical code presented in earlier papers \citep{Sipila12,
2013A&A...554A..92S, 2015A&A...578A..55S, 2015A&A...581A.122S} where
the details of the code (e.g., the expressions of the various reaction
rate coefficients) can be found. The model includes gas-phase
chemistry, adsorption onto and (non-thermal) desorption from grain
surfaces, and grain-surface chemistry. Tunnelling diffusion of H and D
atoms on grains is not considered in the present calculations, whereas
tunnelling though activation energy barriers in surface reactions has
been included.
The program can be instructed to include various desorption
mechanisms: thermal desorption (negligible in the physical conditions
explored here), cosmic ray desorption, reactive desorption, and
photodesorption. Cosmic ray desorption is treated following
\cite{HH93}. Exothermic association reactions on the surface can
result, when this option is turned on, in desorption of the reaction
product with an efficiency of 1\% \citep{Garrod07}. Finally, it is
possible to include photodesorption of water, CO, and ammonia caused
by secondary UV photons created by $\rm H_2$ excitation
\citep{Prasad83}. In the simulations presented here, however, the
photodesorption and reactive desorption options have been turned
off. According to extensive testing, the inclusion of these processes
increases the ammonia production, which is turn makes it necessary to
lower the elemental N abundance to ensure compliance with the observed
line intensities, but fractionation and spin ratios remain largely
unchanged.
The spin-state chemical model presented in \citet{2015A&A...578A..55S}
describes the spin states of species involving multiple
protons. Recently, we upgraded this model to include a self-consistent
description of the spin states of multiply-deuterated species
\citep{2015A&A...581A.122S}. This is achieved by considering nuclear
spin selection rules arising from molecular symmetries, assuming full
scrambling of nuclei in reactive collisions. The model gives the
necessary information for the present application, i.e., the
calculation of simulated line emission from deuterated ammonia. In
the beginning of the simulation, all elements are in the atomic form,
with the exceptions of hydrogen and deuterium which are initially
locked in $\rm H_2$ and HD, respectively.
The descriptions of deuterium and spin-state chemistry adopted here
apply to both gas-phase chemistry and grain-surface
chemistry. However, the formation mechanism of ammonia (as a
particular example) is different in the gas and on the grains. In the
gas phase, (deuterated) ammonia forms through a network of
ion-molecule reactions, while on the surface the formation mechanism
is hydrogen/deuterium addition. Therefore we expect non-statistical
deuterium and spin-state ratios in the gas phase, and statistical
ratios on the grain surface, although complete scrambling is assumed
in both cases. The assumed binding energies on grain surfaces are the
same as listed in Table~2 of \cite{2015A&A...578A..55S}.
For the elemental abundances we have adopted the set of low-metal
elemental abundances labelled EA1 in \cite{2008ApJ...680..371W},
except for the nitrogen abundance for which we needed to increase
the EA1 abundance by a factor of 2.5 to N/H=$5.3\,10^{-5}$ to reproduce
the observed line intensities of $\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$, $\rm ND_3$, and
$\rm N_2D^+$. According to the recent compilation of \cite{2009ApJ...700.1299J},
the appropriate value for the diffuse ISM is N/H$=6.2\,10^{-5}$.
The adopted carbon and oxygen abundances are O/H$=1.8\,10^{-4}$,
C/H$=7.3\,10^{-5}$.
We derive abundance profiles for the various molecules by separating
the core model (see Sect.\,\ref{ss:coremodel}) into a series of
concentric spherical shells, each associated with unique values of
density, gas/dust temperatures, and visual extinction $A_{\rm V}$.
Chemical evolution is then calculated separately in each shell,
which leads to simulated abundances for each chemical species as
functions of time and radial distance from the core centre. The
integration of the modelled abundance gradients into the radiative
transfer model is discussed in Sect.\,\ref{ss:RT}.
\subsection{Chemical evolution of the core}
\label{ss:chem_evolution}
We calculate the evolution of chemical abundances in the core model
with the goal to examine if the model can reproduce, at a certain
stage of the simulation, the intensities of the lines of deuterated
ammonia and $\rm N_2D^+$ observed towards H-MM1 in the present
study, as well as the intensities of the o$\rm H_2D^+$ and p$\rm D_2H^+$ lines
observed previously by \cite{2011A&A...528C...2P}.
We assume that the spin temperature of $\rm H_2$ has been thermalized
during the intial contraction phase of the cloud down to $\sim 20$ K
(\citealt{2006A&A...449..621F}; \citealt{2013A&A...554A..92S}), and
accordingly, set the initial o/p$\rm H_2$ to $1\,10^{-3}$. For the
cosmic ray ionisation rate of $\rm H_2$ we assume
$\zeta_{\rm H_2}=1.3\,10^{-17}$ s$^{-1}$, and the average grain radius
is set to $a=0.1\,\mu$m. These are kept unchanged in the present
simulations. We note, however, that deuteration can be delayed by
increasing the initial o/p$\rm H_2$ ratio, and that the fractionation
ratios can be lowered by decreasing the average grain size or by
increasing the cosmic ionization rate \citep{2010A&A...509A..98S}. On
the other other hand, an increase of the cosmic ray ionisation rate
would generally increase the abundances and the line intensities of
$\rm H_3^+$, $\rm NH_3$, and their deuterated isotopologues, and decrease
the abundances and line intensities of $\rm N_2H^+$ and $\rm N_2D^+$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{harju_fig10.png}
\caption{Fractional abundances of selected species relative to $\rm H_2$
as functions of time in the core model described
in Sect.~\ref{ss:coremodel}.
The abundances are density weighted averages.}
\label{figure:co_etc}
\end{figure}
We first discuss the predictions for some of the most common
species. The gas-phase abundances of the H, D, and N atoms, and the
HD, CO, and ${\rm N_2}$ molecules, relative to the total hydrogen
abundance, are plotted in Fig.~\ref{figure:co_etc}, as functions of
time for our fiducial core model discussed in
Sect.~\ref{ss:coremodel}. The abundances are averages over the line of
sight through the centre of the core, weighted by the density. The
freeze-out of CO is followed by an increase of $\rm H_3^+$, which in
turn results in an enhanced {\sl ortho}-{\sl para} conversion of
$\rm H_2$. At the same time, deuterium is efficiently transferred from
HD to deuterated ions in the gas phase (to $\rm H_2D^+$, $\rm D_2H^+$, and
$\rm D_3^+$ in the first place). The H and D atoms released in the
dissociative recombination of deuterated ions mainly accrete onto
grains, where they can combine to give back $\rm H_2$ or HD, but also
react with heavier atoms or radicals. At late stages of chemical
evolution, deuterium becomes increasingly incorporated in icy
compounds. In the gas phase this is reflected by the reduction of the
HD abundance.
The rapid decrease of atomic nitrogen in the beginning of the
simulation is mainly caused by accretion onto grains. A fraction of
the nitrogen atoms in the gas phase is converted to N$_2$ through
${\rm N} + {\rm OH} \rightarrow {\rm NO} + {\rm H}$, ${\rm N} + {\rm
NO} \rightarrow {\rm N_2} + {\rm O}$ (\citealt{2006A&A...456..215F};
\citealt{2014A&A...562A..83L}). This reaction is important at early
times, when the N and OH abundances are high. Also the ${\rm N_2}$
molecules accrete onto grains, but their desorption from grains is
more significant than for N atoms, which quickly react with other
atoms or radicals, e.g., ${\rm N^*} + {\rm H^*} \rightarrow {\rm
NH^*}$, ${\rm N^*} + {\rm O^*} \rightarrow {\rm NO^*}$, or ${\rm
N^*} + {\rm N^*} \rightarrow {\rm N_2^*}$. Species attached to grain
are indicated here with asterisks. The surface species ${\rm N_2^*}$
is destroyed by two processes only, either by desorption or by
photodissociation, ${\rm N_2^*} + \, \mbox{photon} \, \rightarrow {\rm
N^*} + {\rm N^*}$, by cosmic-ray induced UV photons. This is the
main difference from ${\rm CO^*}$ for which hydrogenation, ${\rm CO^*}
+ {\rm H^*} \rightarrow {\rm HCO^*}$, competes hard against desorption
(see also Sect.~\ref{ss:ubiquity}).
Owing to desorption, the ${\rm N_2}$ abundance remains high in the gas
phase until late stages of the simulation. Molecular nitrogen is
prerequisite to $\rm N_2H^+$ which forms through ${\rm N_2} + \rm H_3^+
\rightarrow \rm N_2H^+ + \rm H_2$. In case reactive desorption is included,
the most important source of ammonia at very early stages of
simulation is formation on grains, ${\rm NH_2^*} + {\rm H^*}
\rightarrow \rm NH_3$, where ammonia is supposed to be released into the
gas phase at the probability of $1\%$. After a few thousand years,
gas-phase formation takes over. In the simulations presented here, the
ammonia production is always dominated by the well-known chain of
gas-phase reactions, terminating in $\rm NH_4^+ + \rm e^- \rightarrow
\rm NH_3 + {\rm H}$ (e.g., \citealt{2014A&A...562A..83L};
\citealt{2015A&A...576A..99R}). As discussed
by \cite{2015A&A...581A.122S}, the dissociative ionisation of ${\rm
HNC}$ by ${\rm He^+}$ helps the initiation of this chain by
producing ${\rm NH^+}$, which otherwise would be solely dependent on
${\rm N^+} + {\rm o}\rm H_2 \rightarrow {\rm NH^+} + {\rm H}$
\citep{2012A&A...537A..20D}.
\vspace{2mm}
The evolution of the abundances of $\rm NH_3$ and $\rm N_2H^+$, and their
deuterated isotopologues in the gas phase are shown in
Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_a_vs_time} (top panel). The other two panels show
the fractionation ratios and the spin ratios for these species. In
Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_c_vs_time}, we show the abundances, fractionation
ratios, and the spin ratios of the grain-surface species $\rm NH_3^*$,
$\rm NH_2D^*$, $\rm NHD_2^*$, and $\rm ND_3^*$. The middle panel of this
latter figure also shows the atomic D$^*$/H$^*$ on grains.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig11.png}
\caption{Gas-phase fractional abundances of $\rm NH_3$ and $\rm N_2H^+$ and
their deuterated isotopologues as functions of time in
the core model. The
$\rm N_2D^+/\rm N_2H^+$ and m/p$\rm ND_3$ ratios are divided by 10 to make
the other ratios readable in these diagrams.}
\label{figure:abu_a_vs_time}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig12.png}
\caption{Evolution of the abundances of $\rm NH_3$ and
its deuterated isotopologues on grain surfaces for
the core model. The
m/p$\rm ND_3$ ratios are divided by 10. The
D/H ratio on grains shown in the middle panel is multiplied
by 0.2.}
\label{figure:abu_c_vs_time}
\end{figure}
In the present model, the gas-phase $\rm NH_3$ abundance is built up
early, and it does not change significantly at later times. The
largest variations are seen in the abundances of $\rm NHD_2$,
$\rm ND_3$, and $\rm N_2D^+$, which grow rapidly in the beginning, and
decay slowly after the deuteration peak. This behaviour seems to
reflect the variations in the $\rm D_2H^+$ and $\rm D_3^+$ abundances which
are shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_b_vs_time}. The $\rm D_3^+$ ion
reaches its maximum before $\rm D_2H^+$, which in turn peaks before
$\rm H_2D^+$. Likewise, the maximum fractionation ratio $\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2$
occurs earlier than the maximum in the $\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D$ ratio, which
again takes place long before the $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3$ peak.
In the bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_a_vs_time} one can see
that while the o/p-$\rm NH_2D$ ratio decreases slightly with time,
o/p-$\rm NHD_2$, m/p-$\rm ND_3$, and m/o-$\rm ND_3$ have increasing
tendencies. The predicted ratios are close to their statistical
values in the beginning of the simulation. The o/p-$\rm NHD_2$ and
m/p-$\rm ND_3$ ratios mimic the corresponding ratios of $\rm D_2H^+$ and
$\rm D_3^+$ shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_b_vs_time}, bottom panel. The
relationship between the spin modifications of $\rm NH_3$ and $\rm H_3^+$
is discussed in Sect.~6.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig13.png}
\caption{Evolution of the isotopologues of $\rm H_3^+$ in the core model.
The m/p$\rm ND_3$ ratio is divided by 10.}
\label{figure:abu_b_vs_time}
\end{figure}
The ammonia production on grain surfaces is very efficient in the
present model. The deuteration of ammonia occurs more slowly than in the gas
phase, and never reaches as large fractionation ratios as seen there.
The spin ratios on grains stay close to their statistical values at
all times, except that m$\rm ND_3^*$ is enhanced at the cost of
o$\rm ND_3^*$ and p$\rm ND_3^*$.
\subsection{Predicted spectra}
\label{ss:RT}
The radial distributions of the density, temperature, and the
(time-varying) chemical abundances in the gas phase are used as input
for a Monte Carlo radiative transfer program
\citep{1997A&A...322..943J} to predict observable rotational line
profiles. Like in simulations described in
Sect.~\ref{ss:ave_abus}, we use a larger non-thermal velocity
dispersion ($\sigma_{\rm N.T.} = 150\, {\rm ms}^{-1}$) for $\rm NH_3$
than for the deuterated species (for which $\sigma_{\rm N.T.} =
100\, {\rm ms}^{-1}$) in order to reach agreement with the observed
integrated intensities.
The line intensities depend, besides the (mass averaged)
abundances of the species within the telecope beam, also on their
radial distributions, which change with time. At early stages,
deuterated species are concentrated on the core centre with high
densities, whereas later on, when freezing onto grains reduces the
abundances in the centre, line emission is dominated by lower-density
outer parts of the core. The changes of the abundance profiles cause
that at early times, lines with large transition dipole moments like
$\rm N_2D^+(4-3)$ and m$\rm ND_3(1_0-0_0)$ are much stronger than the
o/p$\rm NH_2D(1_{11}-1_{01})$ lines, for example, but the reverse is true at
later times. The fractional abundances of selected species as
functions of the radius are shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_vs_rad}. The
distributions are taken at the time when most of the predicted spectra
agree reasonably well with the observations.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig14a.png}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig14b.png}
\caption{Fractional abundances of selected species as
functions of the radial distance from the core centre at the time
$3\,10^5$ yr from the beginning of the simulation. The abundances of
{\sl ortho} species are drawn with solid lines, and those of
{\sl para} species are drawn with dashed lines. The abundances of
{\sl meta} species ($\rm ND_3$ and $\rm D_3^+$) are indicated with dash-dotted
curves.}
\label{figure:abu_vs_rad}
\end{figure}
\vspace{2mm}
The intensities of the simulated $\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$, $\rm ND_3$,
$\rm N_2D^+$ spectra are comparable with those of the observed ones during
rather a short period around the $\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D$ peak, occurring at
$\sim 3 \,10^5$ yr from beginning of the simulation. At this time,
however, the predicted beam-averaged p$\rm NH_3$ abundance, $X({\rm
p}\rm NH_3)\sim5\,10^{-9}$, is about 30\% higher than needed to
reproduce the $\rm NH_3(1,1)$ and $(2,2)$ line intensites observed at the
GBT (see Table~\ref{table:const_abus}).
The simulated $\rm NH_3$ lines agree with the observed ones at an
early stage, around $10^5$ yr, and much later, around $2\,10^6$ yr,
when ammonia depletion has finally started to take effect. The
predicted spectra at the time $3\,10^5$ yr are shown in
Figs.~\ref{figure:model_ammo} ($\rm NH_3$), \ref{figure:model_dammo}
($\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$, and $\rm ND_3$), \ref{figure:model_ddiaz}
($\rm N_2D^+$), and \ref{figure:oh2d+_pd2h+} (o$\rm H_2D^+$ and p$\rm D_2H^+$).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig15.png}
\caption{$\rm NH_3(1,1)$ and $(2,2)$ spectra produced by the core
model at the time $3\,10^5$ yr (red curves) together with the
observed spectra (histograms). The model overpredicts the observed
intensities. The model agrees with observations at the times
$t=10^5$ and $t=2\,10^6$ yr. The intensities are given on the
main-beam brightness temperature ($T_{\rm MB}$) scale.}
\label{figure:model_ammo}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig16.png}
\caption{Deuterated ammonia spectra produced by the core model at the
time $3\,10^5$ yr (red curves) together with the observed
spectra (histograms).}
\label{figure:model_dammo}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig17.png}
\caption{Modelled and observed $\rm N_2D^+(2-1)$ and $\rm N_2D^+(4-3)$ spectra
on the $T_{\rm MB}$ scale. The modelled spectra
are predictions for the time $3\,10^5$ yr (red curves)
after the beginning of the simulation.}
\label{figure:model_ddiaz}
\end{figure}
The model predicts that the abundances of the different isotopologues
of $\rm NH_3$ and $\rm N_2H^+$ grow at different rates. This implies that the
fractionation ratios, $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3$, $\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D$,
$\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2$, do not necessarily reach their maxima at the same
time. This is illustrated in the middle panel of
Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_a_vs_time}. In this model, the peak fractionation
ratios range from 0.15 to 0.30, depending on the pair of species
considered. The $\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2$ ratio mimics the $\rm N_2D^+/\rm N_2H^+$
ratio divided by 10, and these two fractionation ratios are the first
to peak in all models we have run. This tendency is related to the
rapid growth of the $\rm D_3^+$ abundance occurring at early stages of
the simulation (Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_b_vs_time}). The fact that the
average temperature exceeds 10 K has a favourable effect on
deuteration, but its fast advancement is made possible by the low
initial o/p$\rm H_2$ ratio assumed in the simulation. A higher abundance
of o$\rm H_2$ would delay the deuterium peak by obstructing the primary
deuteration through reaction $\rm H_3^+ + {\rm HD} \leftrightarrow
\rm H_2D^+ + \rm H_2$ (\citealt{2006A&A...449..621F};
\citealt{2011ApJ...739L..35P}; \citealt{2013A&A...551A..38P};
\citealt{2015ApJ...804...98K}).
In Figs.~\ref{figure:oh2d+_pd2h+} and \ref{figure:n2h+_n2d+_c17o} we
compare our model predictions with the previous observations of
\cite{2011A&A...528C...2P} and \cite{2016A&A...587A.118P}. The
modelled o$\rm H_2D^+(1_{10}-1_{11})$ and p$\rm D_2H^+(1_{10}-1_{01})$ spectra
shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:oh2d+_pd2h+} are on the $T_{\rm A}^*$ scale
as observed with APEX to allow comparison with the spectra shown in
Fig.~3 of \cite{2011A&A...528C...2P}. These spectra are reproduced in
Fig.~\ref{figure:oh2d+_pd2h+}. The $13\arcsec$ offset from the
supposed core centre position is taken into account. The hyperfine
patterns of the lines have been adopted from
\cite{1997MolPh..91..319J}. The line profiles are dominated, however,
by the thermal broadening. While the simulated p$\rm D_2H^+$ line agrees
roughly with the observations, the simulated o$\rm H_2D^+$ line is
brighter than the observed one by a factor of three. A good agreement
with both observations would be found at very early times by setting
the initial o/p$\rm H_2$ ratio to $10^{-4}$. On the other hand, that
model cannot reproduce the observed line ratios for the other
molecules. After $t\sim 4\,10^5$ yr, the p$\rm D_2H^+$ line intensity
decreases rapidly below the observed $T_{\rm A}^* \sim 0.1$ K while
o$\rm H_2D^+$ remains relatively strong. This behaviour is determined by
the close correlation between o/p$\rm H_2D^+$ and o/p$\rm H_2$, and the
increase of the o/p$\rm D_2H^+$ ratio with time
(Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_b_vs_time}).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig18.png}
\caption{Comparison between the observed (black histograms) and
modelled (red curves) o$\rm H_2D^+(1_{10}-1_{11})$ and
p$\rm D_2H^+(1_{10}-1_{01})$ spectra as observed with APEX. The
observations are from \cite{2011A&A...528C...2P}. The spectra are
on the $T_{\rm A}^*$ scale. The model predictions are for the time
$3\,10^5$ yr after the beginning of the simulation.}
\label{figure:oh2d+_pd2h+}
\end{figure}
The $\rm N_2H^+(1-0)$, $\rm N_2D^+(1-0)$, and ${\rm C^{17}O}(1-0)$ spectra
observed at the IRAM 30-m telescope by \cite{2016A&A...587A.118P}
are shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:n2h+_n2d+_c17o} together with the
predicted spectra at the time $3\,10^5$ yr. The H-MM1 spectra of
\cite{2016A&A...587A.118P} were obtained towards the (0,0) of
\cite{2011A&A...528C...2P}, and also here the $13\arcsec$ offset
from the core centre is taken into account. The model reproduces the
observed $\rm N_2D^+(1-0)$ spectrum reasonably well, but gives
a vastly undervalued ${\rm C^{17}O}(1-0)$ intensity. According to the
model, CO is heavily depleted in the core at the time $3\,10^5$ yr
(Fig.~\ref{figure:co_etc}). The peak velocity and velocity
dispersion of the observed ${\rm C^{17}O}(1-0)$ line are, however,
different from those of the $\rm N_2H^+$ and $\rm N_2D^+$ lines. The ${\rm
C^{17}O}$ emission is probably dominated by the ambient cloud
which is not included in our model. Also the shape of the
$\rm N_2H^+(1-0)$ line suggests that part of the emission originates in
the ambient cloud. According to the radial abundance distributions
shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_vs_rad}, $\rm N_2H^+$ belongs to species
which are not confined to the core. Nevertherless, the model seems
to underpredict the $\rm N_2H^+(1-0)$ emission from the core.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.3cm]{harju_fig19.png}
\caption{Observed (black histograms) and modelled (red curves)
$\rm N_2H^+(1-0)$, $\rm N_2D^+(1-0)$, and ${\rm C^{17}O}(1-0)$ spectra as
observed with IRAM 30-m. The observations are from
\cite{2016A&A...587A.118P}. The spectra are on the $T_{\rm MB}$
scale. The model spectra correspond to the time $3\,10^5$ yr in the
simulation.}
\label{figure:n2h+_n2d+_c17o}
\end{figure}
To summarize comparisons with observations, the core model predicts
rather well the observed intensities of the $\rm N_2D^+$, $\rm NH_2D$,
$\rm NHD_2$, $\rm ND_3$, and para-$\rm D_2H^+$ lines, overproduces
para-$\rm NH_3$ and ortho-$\rm H_2D^+$, and gives too low $\rm N_2H^+(1-0)$ and
${\rm C^{17}O}(1-0)$ line intensities. Besides these
discrepancies, the present model has problems in reproducing the
observed spin ratios. Inspection of Fig.~\ref{figure:model_dammo}
reveals that the model underestimates the o/p$\rm NH_2D$ ratio, and
overestimates the o/p$\rm NHD_2$ ratio.
\section{Discussion}
\subsection{Ubiquity of ammonia}
\label{ss:ubiquity}
Our chemical network predicts that the ammonia abundance builds up
fast in the gas phase. The predicted fractional abundances are similar
to those found previously in molecular clouds, in particular, in the
Ophiuchus complex \citep{2009ApJ...697.1457F}, even though the model
overpredicts the p$\rm NH_3$ abundance in H-MM1 during the deuteration
peak. In the very beginning of the simulation, the production is
dominated by surface reactions followed by desorption, but in a few
thousand years, ion-molecule reactions in the gas phase take over as
the main source of gaseous ammonia. At early stages the rapidly
evolving carbon chemistry comes to aid as the dissociative ionization
reaction ${\rm HNC} + {\rm He^+}$ provides a short cut to NH$^+$, past
the slow formation of N$_2$ and the famous bottle-neck reaction
${\rm N}^+ + \rm H_2$.
The ammonia abundance stays high until very late stages of the
simulation. One of the reasons is the slow decrease of the molecular
nitrogen abundance which is sustained by desorption. In this respect
${\rm N_2}$ acts differently from CO which freezes out quickly. In
the presence of $\rm H_3^+$ and $\rm H^+$, ${\rm N_2}$ replenishes the
gas with the ${\rm NH^+}$ ion through the sequence ${\rm N_2}
\mathop{\rightarrow}\limits^{\rm H_3^+} \rm N_2H^+ \mathop{\rightarrow}\limits^{\rm e^-} {\rm NH} \mathop{\rightarrow}\limits^{\rm H^+} {\rm
NH^+}$. ${\rm NH^+}$, in turn, fuels the ammonia production through
successsive reactions with $\rm H_2$ (see, e.g.,
\citealt{2006A&A...456..215F}; \citealt{2014A&A...562A..83L}).
In the present model, ${\rm N_2}$ attached to a grain can either
photodissociate or be desorbed. N$_2$ and CO, even if isoelectronic,
have very different surface chemistries. The two molecules have
approximately the same adsorption energies on amorphous ice: about
1100~K for CO, about 1000~K for N$_2$ (\citealt{2013ChRv..113.8783H};
\citealt{2016ApJ...816L..28F}). Hydrogenation of CO ($\mathrm{CO^*
\rightarrow HCO^* \rightarrow H_2CO^* \rightarrow H_3CO^*\rightarrow
H_3COH^*}$) has been experimentally observed and characterized
(\citealt{2013ChRv..113.8783H}, and references therein), at
temperatures down to 3~K, where the intermediate HCO could be detected
\citep{2011CP....380...67P}. The reaction ${\rm CO} + {\rm H}
\rightarrow {\rm HCO}$ proceeds by tunneling through an activation
barrier computed to be about 2000~K in the gas phase, and probably
lower on the surface of amorphous ice (\citealt{2013JChPh.139p4310P};
\citealt{2014A&A...572A..70R}). The exothermicity of the reaction is
about 6700~K, while the endothermicity of the reaction ${\rm CO} +
{\rm H} \rightarrow {\rm COH}$ is about 10000~K
(\citealt{2007JChPh.126r4308Z}; note that this theoretical paper
overestimates the exothermicity of the reaction leading to HCO). The
case of N$_2$ is different: The reaction $\mathrm{N_2 + H \rightarrow
N_2H}$ is endothermic by about 4400~K ~\citep{2010JChPh.132f4308B}
and does not occur on ice surfaces. The CO and N$_2$ neutral chemistry
proceed thus in very different ways, with no surface hydrogenation of
N$_2^*$ towards ammonia NH$_3$ or hydrazine
$\mathrm{N_2H_4}$. However, the ionic chemistry on low temperature ice
surfaces is not fully characterized.
\subsection{Fractionation ratios}
\label{ss:fractionation}
The abundance of $\rm NH_2D$ starts to increase gradually, first through
the deuteron transfer to ammonia, primarily by ${\rm HCND^+}$ or ${\rm
DCNH^+}$, e.g., ${\rm HCND^+} + \rm NH_3 \rightarrow \rm NH_3D^+ + {\rm
HCN}$, followed by dissociative recombination of $\rm NH_3D^+$. The
depletion of CO boosts the abundance of $\rm H_3^+$, which in turn is
efficiently deuterated to $\rm H_2D^+$, $\rm D_2H^+$, and $\rm D_3^+$ in
successive reactions with HD. This stage is characterised by a rapid
increase of $\rm NHD_2$, $\rm ND_3$, and $\rm N_2D^+$. The most important
reactions contributing to the formation of $\rm NH_2D$ during the
deuteration peak are shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:dammo_formation}. These
comprise the deuteron transfer from $\rm H_2D^+$, or some other deuterated
ion, to $\rm NH_3$ giving $\rm NH_3D^+$, dissociative recombination of
$\rm NH_3D^+$, charge transfer between $\rm NH_2D$ and ${\rm H^+}$, and
hydrogen abstraction from $\rm H_2$ to the $\rm NH_2D^+$ ion.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\centering
\unitlength=1.0mm
\begin{picture}(90,22)(0,0)
\color{blue}
\put(3,13){\makebox(0,0){$\rm NH_3$}}
\color{black}
\put(7,13){\vector(1,0){18}}
\put(16,15){\makebox(0,0){$\rm H_2D^+$,$\rm D_2H^+$}}
\put(31,13){\makebox(0,0){$\rm NH_3D^+$}}
\put(35,13){\vector(1,0){19}}
\put(45,15){\makebox(0,0){$\rm e^-$}}
\color{blue}
\put(59,13){\makebox(0,0){$\rm NH_2D$}}
\color{black}
\put(64,13){\vector(1,0){17}}
\put(73,15){\makebox(0,0){$\rm H^+$}}
\put(59,10){\vector(0,-1){5}}
\put(59,3){\makebox(0,0){grains}}
\put(86,13){\makebox(0,0){$\rm NH_2D^+$}}
\put(86,15){\line(0,1){5}}
\put(86,20){\line(-1,0){56}}
\put(30,20){\vector(0,-1){5}}
\put(59,22){\makebox(0,0){$\rm H_2$}}
\color{black}
\end{picture}
\caption{Principal reactions forming and destroying $\rm NH_2D$ at
the deuteration peak.}
\label{figure:dammo_formation}
\end{figure}
Characteristic of the reaction scheme is the circulation between
neutral and ionic species generated by the charge transfer reaction
with $\rm H^+$, one of the ions which increase after the disappearance
of CO. Precursors of doubly and triply deuterated ammonia,
$\rm NH_2D_2^+$ and $\rm NHD_3^+$, are mainly formed from reactions
between $\rm NH_3$ and $\rm D_2H^+$ or $\rm D_3^+$ in the present model. This
reaction network is discussed in more detail in
\cite{2015A&A...581A.122S}.
The $\rm N_2D^+$ ion, which is mainly produced in reactions between ${\rm N_2}$
and $\rm H_2D^+$, $\rm D_2H^+$, or $\rm D_3^+$, is strongly favoured by the
successive deuteration of $\rm H_3^+$. At the time of the most vigorous
deuteration, the $\rm NH_3$ abundance decreases slightly owing to
accretion onto grains and enhanced charge exchange reactions caused by
the increase of ${\rm H^+}$. After that, until very late times,
probably exceeding the lifetime of the core, the $\rm NH_3$ abundance
remains almost constant, and so does the abundance of $\rm NH_2D$. In
contrast, the abundances of $\rm NHD_2$, $\rm ND_3$, $\rm N_2H^+$, and $\rm N_2D^+$
rise and fall in the time range shown in
Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_a_vs_time}. At late times these species are most
strongly influenced by the depletion of nitrogen and deuterium in the
gas phase.
The best overall agreement between the modelled and observed
$\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$, and $\rm ND_3$ spectra is achieved at the time
$\sim 3\,10^5$ yr after beginning of the simulation. At this
stage of the model, the fractionation ratios are $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3 \sim
\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D \sim 0.25$, and $\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2 \sim 0.1$ (while
the observed fractionation ratios are $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3 \sim 0.4$,
$\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D \sim 0.2$, and $\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2 \sim 0.06$).
The time is coincident with the $\rm NHD_2$ maximum, whereas $\rm ND_3$ is
already going down then. The obtained fractionation ratios are
reasonably close to what is found in previous observational studies
(\citealt{2005A&A...438..585R}; \citealt{2016MNRAS.457.1535D}), but it
should be noted that our results suggest that large temporal
variations are possible, also when the physical conditions remain
constant. The spectral line simulations show that all three deuterated
forms of ammonia should be easily detectable from a core like H-MM1
even if the fractionation ratios where reduced to half of those
derived here. In particular, the early formation of $\rm ND_3$ and the
large transition dipole moment of the rotation-inversion transition of
m$\rm ND_3$ at 309.9 GHz makes this line a useful signpost of the
deuterium peak.
According to the present chemistry model, the fractionation ratios on
grain surfaces are lower than those in the gas phase by a factor of
two. The atomic D$^*$/H$^*$ ratio on the grain surfaces, which
determines the overall degree of deuteration there, reaches a high value of
$\sim 0.4$ a little before $10^5$ yr in the present simulation
(Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_c_vs_time}). Because of competition between
various viable addition reactions for H$^*$ and D$^*$ (for example
with NO$^*$, HCO$^*$, and HS$^*$), the abundances of deuterated forms
of ammonia build up slowly. In the end of the simulation
the abundances settle, however, almost exactly to the values expected
from the statistical
rule $\rm NH_2D^*/\rm NH_3^* = \frac{3}{\sqrt{2}} {\rm D^*/H^*}$,
$\rm NHD_2^*/\rm NH_2D^* = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} {\rm D^*/H^*}$,
$\rm ND_3^*/\rm NHD_2^* = \frac{1}{3\sqrt{2}}
{\rm D^*/H^*}$, as predicted by \cite{1989MNRAS.240P..25B}.
\subsection{Spin ratios}
\label{ss:spinratios}
In the gas phase, the {\sl ortho/para} ratio of $\rm NH_2D$ is largely
determined by the cycle consisting of reactions with $\rm H^+$,
$\rm H_2$, and $\rm e^-$ shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:dammo_formation}. In the
present chemistry model, full scrambling of H nuclei is assumed to
take place in these reactions, and, owing to nuclear spin selection
rules, o/p$\rm NH_2D$ should settle to about 2.3
\citep{2015A&A...581A.122S}. The full reaction set predicts that the
ratio decreases to about 2.0 at late times
(Fig.~\ref{figure:abu_a_vs_time}).
Similar cycles involving $\rm NHD_2$ and $\rm ND_3$ preserve the spin
states of ${\rm D_2}$ and ${\rm D_3}$. Consequently, the spin ratios
of doubly and triply deuterated ammonia are determined by the primary
deuteration reactions $\rm D_2H^+ + \rm NH_3$ and $\rm D_3^+ + \rm NH_3$. The
reaction scheme is discussed in detail in
\cite{2015A&A...581A.122S}. The fact that o/p$\rm NHD_2$ follows closely
o/p$\rm D_2H^+$ can be seen in Figs.~\ref{figure:abu_a_vs_time} and
\ref{figure:abu_b_vs_time}. A tight correlation between m/p-$\rm ND_3$
and m/p-$\rm D_3^+$ is also evident from these figures.
By comparing the modelled and observed spectra shown in
Fig.~\ref{figure:model_dammo} one finds that while the modelled
o/p$\rm NH_2D$ ratio is too low, the corresponding ratio for $\rm NHD_2$ is
too high. The discrepancy is more pronounced in the case of p$\rm NHD_2$
for which the predicted spectrum underestimates the observed intensity
by about 40\%. As mentioned in Sect.~\ref{ss:chem_evolution}, the
timing and the strength of the deuterium peak can be affected by the
selection of the initial o/p-$\rm H_2$ ratio, the cosmic rays ionization
rate, and the average grain size, but these modifications do not
change the fact that the o/p$\rm NHD_2$ ratio given by our model during
the deuterium peak is larger than the observed ratio. If the adopted
deuteration scheme is correct, the implication is that also the
o/p$\rm D_2H^+$ ratio is overestimated in the model, because o/p$\rm NHD_2$
is directly related to o/p$\rm D_2H^+$.
However, the spin ratio of $\rm D_2H^+$ is determined by the well-studied
$\rm H_3^+ + \rm H_2$ isotopic system \citep{2009JChPh.130p4302H}, and the
prediction of a high o/p$\rm D_2H^+$ ratio seems to be well-founded. The
lower energy, {\sl ortho} form of $\rm D_2H^+$ is favoured over p$\rm D_2H^+$
both in the primary production through $\rm H_2D^+ + {\rm HD} \rightarrow
\rm D_2H^+ +\rm H_2$ and in the ``backward'' reactions ${\rm m/o}\rm D_3^+ +
{\rm o}\rm H_2 \rightarrow {\rm o/p}\rm D_2H^+ + {\rm HD}$ and ${\rm
o/p}\rm D_2H^+ + {\rm o}\rm H_2 \rightarrow {\rm o/p}\rm H_2D^+ + {\rm
HD}$. In addition, {\sl para - ortho} conversion of $\rm D_2H^+$ is
viable in cold clouds through reaction with HD (see discussion in
\citealt{2006A&A...449..621F} and \citealt{2010A&A...509A..98S}).
\subsection{Statistical abundance ratios}
\label{ss:statistical}
In their analysis of the deuterated ammonia observations towards
Barnard 1 and L1689N, \cite{2016MNRAS.457.1535D} concluded that the
observational data (considering the error margins) are consistent with
the assumption that both the fractionation ratios and the spin ratios
are equal to the corresponding statistical ratios.
\cite{2016MNRAS.457.1535D} point out that statistical
fractionation and spin ratios would be expected if the production of
ammonia molecules were dominated by surface reactions. On grain surfaces,
where ammonia formation takes place through H/D atom additions to N,
the fractionation ratios, $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3$, $\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D$, and
$\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2$, should successively diminish by a factor of three
(\citealt{1989MNRAS.240P..25B}; \citealt{2001ApJ...553..613R}), and
the spin ratios should follow the ratios of the corresponding nuclear
spin statistical weights.
Also in the present study, the nuclear spin ratios derived
directly from the observed lines agree with their statistical
values, and $\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D \sim 3 \rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2$ as
expected from combinatorial principles (see
Table~\ref{table:const_abus} in Sect.~\ref{ss:ave_abus}). The
$\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3$ ratio falls, however, below the value expected from
the other two fractionation ratios. On the other hand, the derived
$\rm NH_3$ abundance for the core may be an overestimate as discussed
in Sect.~\ref{ss:ave_abus}.
The observations pertain, however, gas-phase molecules, and also
sublimated species are likely to be exposed to rapid processing by
ion-molecule reactions in the gas phase. The fractionation ratios on
grain surfaces depend on the atomic D$^*$/H$^*$ ratio on grains, which
according to the present simulation is at any time much higher that
the atomic D/H ratio in the gas phase (Figs.~\ref{figure:co_etc} and
\ref{figure:abu_c_vs_time}). As mentioned in
Sect.~\ref{ss:fractionation}, the statistical fractionation ratios for
ammonia on grains are only reached at very late times of the
simulation.
The observations suggest therefore that the adopted gas-phase
deuteration scheme for ammonia (illustrated in Fig.~2 of
\citealt{2015A&A...581A.122S}) is not correct. The model assumes
complete scrambling of H or D nuclei in the intermediate reaction
complexes. This assumption is highly uncertain for several reactions
involved in the production of ammonia \citep{2013JPCA..117.9800R}.
An argument against a full scrambling of the reaction forming the
ammonium ion, $\rm NH_3^+ + \rm H_2 \rightarrow (\mathrm{NH_5^+})^\ddag
\rightarrow \rm NH_4^+ + {\rm H}$, comes from the energetics of this
reaction (an intermediate reaction complex is indicated here with
$()^\ddag$). The reaction is likely to occur through two minima on
the potential energy surfaces, $(\rm NH_3\cdot\cdot\rm H_2^+)^\ddag$ and
$(\mathrm{NH_4}\cdot\cdot\mathrm{H}^+)^\ddag$. According to the
calculations of \cite{1992JChPh..97.1191I}, some of the conceivable
interchanges of two H nuclei between different parts of these
complexes are facile, but most of them involve high energy
$(\mathrm{NH_5^+})^\ddag$ transition states with different
geometries. The D-substituted cases should be very similar. However,
since it is known experimentally that, for example, D/H exchange does
occur between $\rm NH_3^+$ and ${\rm D_2}$, \citet{1992JChPh..97.1191I}
proposed that it is possible to circumvent a high-energy transition
state by a process where hydrogen transfer is followed by internal
rotation and reverse transfer. In none of the configurations of
$(\mathrm{NH_5^+})^\ddag$ do all H (or D) nuclei occupy equivalent
positions. Consequently, the spin symmetry rules for this reaction are
far from obvious, all the more that internal rotations are likely to
occur.
For the reaction $\mathrm{NH_3 + H_2D^+}$ and its doubly deuterated
analogue (Fig.~\ref{figure:ammo+dtwoh} below), the situation is even
less clear. While the reaction proceeds at 30~K
(\citealt{1975JChPh..62.3549L}; \citealt{1989A&A...213L..29M}), there
is no theoretical computation on the $(\mathrm{NH_5D^+})^\ddag$
complex, see for example \citet{2013JPCA..117.9800R}. There is at the
moment no experimental or theoretical discrimination between
scrambling or proton hop mechanisms for this reaction.
In the present model we have assumed that the reaction $\rm NH_3 +\rm D_2H^+$
does form the complex $({\rm NH_4D_2^+})^\ddag$ which can dissociate to
$\rm NH_4^+$, $\rm NH_3D^+$, or $\rm NH_2D_2^+$. If this is true, the
reaction is one of the main sources of $\rm NHD_2$. If the reaction
complex is not formed, but $\rm D_2H^+$ just donates the proton or one of
the deuterons to ammonia, the outcome after dissociative recombination
can be either $\rm NH_3$ or $\rm NH_2D$, as illustrated in
Fig.~\ref{figure:ammo+dtwoh}. The statistical branching ratios are
indicated in this figure.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\centering
\unitlength=1.0mm
\begin{picture}(80,27)(0,0)
\color{black}
\put(7,15){\makebox(0,0){$\rm NH_3+\rm D_2H^+$}}
\put(45,25){\makebox(0,0){${\rm NH_4^+}$}}
\put(45,5){\makebox(0,0){${\rm NH_3D^+}$}}
\put(80,25){\makebox(0,0){$\rm NH_3$}}
\put(80,5){\makebox(0,0){$\rm NH_2D$}}
\put(18,15){\vector(2,1){20}}
\put(18,15){\vector(2,-1){20}}
\put(25,23){\makebox(0,0){1/3}}
\put(25,7){\makebox(0,0){2/3}}
\put(50,25){\vector(1,0){25}}
\put(50,5){\vector(1,0){25}}
\put(50,7){\vector(3,2){25}}
\put(60,27){\makebox(0,0){1/1}}
\put(60,17){\makebox(0,0){1/4}}
\put(60,2){\makebox(0,0){3/4}}
\end{picture}
\caption{Branching ratios of the reaction $\rm NH_3 + \rm D_2H^+$
assuming that this can be described as proton/deuteron hop.}
\label{figure:ammo+dtwoh}
\end{figure}
It seems that several important reactions which in the model have been
assumed to proceed through long-lived intermediate complexes where
nuclei can be scrambled, should rather be described as proton/deuteron
hops or hydrogen/deuterium abstractions. In these reactions H and D
nuclei are effectively added one by one, like in surface reactions,
and they produce each nuclear spin modification according to its
statistical weight.
The assumption that ammonia is primarily processed in reactions with
the isotopologues of $\rm H_3^+$, like the one described in
Fig.~\ref{figure:ammo+dtwoh}, can eventually lead to a ratio of 3 between
successive levels of deuteration, although now the fractionation
ratios would not depend on D/H nor D$^*$/H$^*$, but on the relative
abundances of $\rm H_3^+$, $\rm H_2D^+$, $\rm D_2H^+$, and $\rm D_3^+$. Using
combinatorics one can show that in steady state $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3 = 3\gamma$,
$\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D = \gamma$, and $\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2 =\frac{1}{3}\gamma$,
where
$$
\gamma=\frac{[\rm H_2D^+]+2[\rm D_2H^+]+3[\rm D_3^+]}{3[\rm H_3^+]+2[\rm H_2D^+]+[\rm D_2H^+]}\;.
$$
\cite{2016MolAs...3...10N} has recently discussed a simple statistical
model for the deuteration of interstellar ammonia which neglects the
reaction kinetics. In its simplest form this model leads to the same
rule for the fractionation ratios, $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3 = 3\,\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D =
9\, \rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2$, as the models discussed above, but now the
parameter $\gamma = \rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D$ depends on the elemental N/D ratio
through $\gamma = 1/(3\,{\rm N/D} - 1)$. The fractionation
ratio $\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D \sim 0.2$ observed in H-MM1 and in L1689N
\citep{2005A&A...438..585R} would imply N/D$\sim 2$, which is about
30\% lower than the ratio assumed in the chemistry model used
here. The inclusion of energetics into this model through the
molecular partition functions makes the fractionation ratios to
correspond to what would be obtained at local thermodynamic
equilibrium, giving $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3 \leq \rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D$. While this
agrees with the earlier results presented in
\cite{2005A&A...438..585R}, the fractionation ratios found in the
present study, and in the re-analysis of the B1b results by
\cite{2016MNRAS.457.1535D}, suggest $\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3 \sim 2-3\,
\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D$. Therefore, the assumption of thermal equilibrium
between different deuterated isotopologues of ammonia does not seem to
be universally valid. This situation is also unlikely because large
deviations from thermal equilibrium are usually found in cold
interstellar gas. On the other hand, as recommended by
\cite{2016MolAs...3...10N}, the energetics, and especially the
differences in the vibrational zero-point energies between different
ammonia isotopologues should be taken into account in kinetic models.
This would affect in particular reactions working against deuteration.
\section{Conclusions}
Ammonia and its three deuterated isotopologues were detected towards
the starless core H-MM1 in Ophiuchus. By modelling the observed
spectra we derived the following fractionation ratios:
$\rm NH_2D/\rm NH_3\sim0.4$, $\rm NHD_2/\rm NH_2D \sim 0.2$,
$\rm ND_3/\rm NHD_2\sim 0.06$. The relative line intensities of the
{\sl ortho} and {\sl para} modifications of $\rm NH_2D$ and $\rm NHD_2$ are
consistent with the statistical spin ratios o/p$\rm NH_2D=3$,
o/p$\rm NHD_2=2$. The fractionation and spin ratios are similar to
those obtained towards two young cores (L1689N and B1), which are the
only objects observed previously in all four molecules
(\citealt{2005A&A...438..585R}; \citealt{2015A&A...576A..99R};
\citealt{2016MNRAS.457.1535D}).
The observations towards H-MM1 were simulated using a gas-grain
chemistry model in conjunction with a Monte Carlo radiative transfer
program. In the chemistry model, which includes cosmic-ray induced
desorption and tunnelling through activation energy barriers in
surface reactions, ammonia forms early and stays long in the gas
phase. The model overpredicts p$\rm NH_3$ and o$\rm H_2D^+$, but can
approximately reproduce the observed $\rm NH_2D$, $\rm NHD_2$, $\rm ND_3$,
$\rm N_2D^+$, and p$\rm D_2H^+$ lines. The o$\rm H_2D^+$ and p$\rm D_2H^+$
observations used here are from \cite{2011A&A...528C...2P}. According
to the simulation, the longevity of $\rm NH_3$ and $\rm N_2H^+$ in the gas
phase can be traced back to the chemical inertness of ${\rm N_2}$ on
the grain surfaces. Unlike CO, the nitrogen molecule is not supposed
to be hydrogenated on grain surfaces, which makes it susceptiple
to desorption.
The present chemistry model cannot account for the observed
o/p$\rm NH_2D$ and o/p$\rm NHD_2$ ratios satisfactorily. In conditions
prevailing in H-MM1 and in other starless, dense cores, characterised
by a low temperature, high obscuration, and inefficient desorption,
the spin ratios should be determined by gas-phase ion-molecule
reactions. When complete scrambling of H and D nuclei in these
reactions is assumed, the spin ratios are predicted to settle to
o/p$\rm NH_2D\sim 2$ and o/p$\rm NHD_2\sim 3-4$ by the time all three
deuterated forms of ammonia become detectable, instead of their
statistical ratios 3 and 2, respectively. The fact that the observed
spin ratios nevertheless correspond to the nuclear spin statistical
weights suggests that full scrambling in reactions forming
deuterated ammonia is not a valid assumption. At the moment there are
very little experimental data and few theoretical calculations
concerning the probability of proton/deuteron scrambling in the
principal deuteration reactions of ammonia.
In constrast to what our chemistry model predicts, the currently
available observational data suggest that the nuclear spin ratios of
deuterated ammonia isotopologues do not depend strongly on physical
conditions or time. On the other hand, the degree of deuterium
fractionation does show clear variations from source to source, and is
also predicted to have a temporal pattern, depending on CO depletion,
the ortho/para-$\rm H_2$ ratio, and eventually on HD depletion. The
deuterium fractionation of ammonia has therefore the potential to be
used as a probe of dense core evolution. While the present core model
is static, chemical reaction rates depend strongly on the density,
i.e., the dynamical evolution. Therefore definitive conclusions on the
effects of cloud evolutionary stages on deuterium fractionation awaits
for models where deuterium chemistry is coupled to the dynamical
evolution.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We thank the anonymous referee for insightful comments which helped to
improve the manuscript. We thank Malcolm Walmsley and Juris
Kalv{\=a}ns for helpful discussions. J.H. and L.W. thank the
Max-Planck-Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics for generous
support. J.H. acknowledges financial support from the Academy of
Finland grant 258769. P.C., J.P., and A.P. acknowledge the financial
support of the European Research Council (ERC; project PALs
320620). F.D., L.W., A.F., and C.R. thank the Agence Nationale de la
Recherche (ANR-HYDRIDES), contract No. ANR-12-BS05-0011-01, and the
CNRS national program "Physique et Chimie du Milieu Interstellaire".
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Inputs and outputs}
\subsection{Input variables}
The main function \code{BFDA()} has three input arguments:
\begin{itemize}
\item A cell contains all functional data;
\item A cell contains all grids on which the functional data are collected;
\item A parameter structure outputted by function \code{setOptions_bfda()}, containing all required parameters:
\begin{itemize}
\item \code{smethod}, specifying the method used for analyzing the functional data. Default value is \code{'babf'} for BABF method with basis function approximation; other choices are \code{'bhm'} for BHM method without basis function approximation, \code{'bgp'} for standard Bayesian GP regression, \code{'bfpca'} for Bayesian principal components analysis;
\item \code{Burnin}, the number of burn-ins for the MCMC algorithm. Default value is \code{2000};
\item \code{M}, the number of iterations for the MCMC algorithm. Default value is \code{10000};
\item \code{cgrid}, set as \code{1} if the functional data are observed on a common-grid, otherwise set as \code{0} for uncommon or random grids. Default value is \code{1};
\item \code{Sigma_est}, estimated smooth covariance matrix from previous analysis. Default is empty and will be estimated by \pkg{PACE} or sample estimate from individually smoothed data;
\item \code{mu_est}, estimated smooth functional mean from previous analysis. Default is empty and will be set as the smoothed sample mean;
\item \code{mat}, set as \code{1} to use the Mate\'rn covariance function as prior structure for stationary functional data; set as \code{0} to use the empirical covariance estimate \code{Sigma_est} as the prior structure for nonstationary functional data. Default value is \code{1};
\item \code{nu}, order of smoothness for the Mate\'rn covariance function. Default is empty and will be estimated based on \code{Sigma_est};
\item \code{delta}, shape parameter $\delta$ of the IWP. Default is \code{5} for a non-informative prior;
\item \code{c}, determining the prior covariance for functional mean. Default is \code{1};
\item \code{w, ws}, determining the prior gamma distributions for $\sigma^2_{\epsilon}$ and $\sigma^2_s$. Defaults are \code{w}=1, \code{ws}=0.1. The parameter \code{ws} should be tuned for a proper magnitude of the posterior covariance estimate;
\item \code{pace}, if \code{Sigma_est} and \code{mu_est} are empty, set \code{pace}=1 to obtain \code{Sigma_est} and \code{mu_est} by \pkg{PACE}, and set \code{pace}=0 to use the empirical estimates from the individually smoothed data by CSS. Default is \code{1};
\item \code{m, tau}, working grid \code{tau} is only required for \code{'babf'} method. Default is empty and will be set up as the $(0:\frac{100}{m-1}:100)$ percentiles of the pooled observation grid with length \code{m};
\item \code{eval_grid}, evaluation grid for all functional estimates, only required for \code{'babf'} methods;
\item \code{lamb_min, lamb_max, lamb_step}, determining the smoothing parameter candidates for general cross validation of the CSS method. Defaults are \code{lamb_min}=0.9, \code{lamb_max}=0.99, \code{lamb_step}=0.01;
\item \code{a, b}, hyper parameters for the gamma distributions in \code{'bgp'}, and \code{'bfpca'}.
\item \code{resid_thin}, determine the MCMC thinning steps of the residuals that are used to test the goodness-of-fit of the model. Default is \code{10}.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Output variables}
The main function \code{BFDA()} has two output arguments, one structure outputted by the specified method, and the other parameter structure as specified by \code{setOptions_bfda()} containing updated parameter values.
Output structure with \code{smethod} = \code{'bhm'}:
\begin{itemize}
\item \code{Z, Z_CL, Z_UL}, smoothed functional data, lower and upper 95\% credible intervals;
\item \code{Sigma, Sigma_CL, Sigma_UL}, functional covariance estimate, lower and upper 95\% credible intervals;
\item \code{Sigma_SE}, the empirical covariance estimate by using the smoothed data \code{Z};
\item \code{mu, mu_CI}, functional mean estimate, 95\% credible intervals;
\item \code{rn, rn_CI}, estimate and 95\% credible interval for the noise precision;
\item \code{rs, rs_CI}, estimate and 95\% credible interval for $\sigma^2_s$;
\item \code{rho, nu}, estimated parameter values for the Mat\'ern function;
\item \code{residuals}, MCMC samples of the residuals that are used to test the goodness-of-fit;
\item \code{pmin_vec}, p-values for testing the goodness-of-fit for all functional samples. P-value > 0.25 suggests no evidence of model inadequacy; 0.05 < p-value < 0.25 suggests some evidence of model inadequacy; p-value < 0.05 suggests strong evidence of model inadequacy.
\end{itemize}
The output structure with \code{smethod} = \code{'babf'} has the following variables that are different from the ones with \code{smethod} = \code{'bhm'}:
\begin{itemize}
\item \code{Zt}, smoothed functional data on the observation grids;
\item \code{Z_cgrid, Z_cgrid_CL, Z_cgrid_UL}, smoothed functional data on the evaluation grid \code{eval_grid}, along with lower and upper 95\% credible intervals;
\item \code{Sigma_cgrid, Sigma_cgrid_CL, Sigma_cgrid_UL}, functional covariance estimate on the evaluation grid \code{eval_grid}, along with lower and upper 95\% credible intervals;
\item \code{mu_cgrid, mu_cgrid_CI}, functional mean estimate on the evaluation grid \code{eval_grid}, along with 95\% credible intervals;
\item \code{Zeta, Zeta_CL, Zeta_UL}, estimates for the coefficients of basis functions, along with lower and upper 95\% credible intervals;
\item \code{Sigma_zeta_SE}, the empirical covariance estimate with the estimated \code{Zeta};
\item \code{Sigma_zeta, Sigma_zeta_CL, Sigma_zeta_UL}, covariance estimate for the coefficients of basis functions, along with lower and upper 95\% credible intervals;
\item \code{mu_zeta, mu_zeta_CI}, mean estimate for the coefficients of basis functions, along with 95\% credible intervals;
\item \code{Btau}, the basis function evaluations on the working grid \code{tau};
\item \code{BT}, the basis function evaluations on the observation grids;
\item \code{Sigma_tau}, functional covariance estimate on the working grid \code{tau};
\item \code{mu_tau}, functional mean estimate on the working grid \code{tau};
\item \code{optknots}, the optimal knots selected by \code{optknt()} for evaluations on the working grid \code{tau}.
\end{itemize}
\section[Example MATLAB scripts for using BFDA]{Example \proglang{MATLAB} scripts for using \pkg{BFDA}}
\begin{verbatim}
addpath(genpath(cat(2, pwd, '/BFDA')))
addpath(genpath(cat(2, pwd, '/bspline')))
addpath(genpath(cat(2, pwd, '/fdaM')))
addpath(genpath(cat(2, pwd, '/mcmcdiag')))
addpath(genpath(cat(2, pwd, '/PACErelease2.11')))
n = 30;
p = 40;
s = sqrt(5);
r = 2;
rho = 1/2;
nu = 3.5;
pgrid = (0 : (pi/2)/(p-1) : (pi/2));
dense = 0.6;
au = 0; bu = pi/2;
m = 20;
stat = 1;
cgrid = 1;
GausFD_cgrid = sim_gfd(pgrid, n, s, r, nu, rho, dense, cgrid, stat);
param = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'bhm', 'cgrid', 1, 'mat', 1, ...
'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'w', 1, 'ws', 1);
[out_cgrid, param ] = ...
BFDA(GausFD_cgrid.Xraw_cell, GausFD_cgrid.Tcell, param);
GausFD_ucgrid = sim_gfd(pgrid, n, s, r, nu, rho, dense, 0, stat);
param_uc = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'bhm', 'cgrid', 0, 'mat', 1, 'M',...
10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'pace', 1, 'ws', 0.1);
[out_ucgrid, param_uc] = ...
BFDA(GausFD_ucgrid.Xraw_cell, GausFD_ucgrid.Tcell, param_uc);
GausFD_cgrid_ns = sim_gfd(pgrid, n, s, r, nu, rho, dense, cgrid, 0);
param_ns = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'bhm', 'cgrid', 1, 'mat', 0, 'M',...
10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'pace', 1, 'ws', 0.01);
[out_cgrid_ns, param_ns] = ...
BFDA(GausFD_cgrid_ns.Xraw_cell, GausFD_cgrid_ns.Tcell, param_ns);
GausFD_ucgrid_ns = sim_gfd(pgrid, n, s, r, nu, rho, dense, 0, 0);
param_uc_ns = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'bhm', 'cgrid', 0, 'mat', 0, ...
'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'pace', 1, 'ws', 0.01);
[out_ucgrid_ns, param_uc_ns ] = ...
BFDA(GausFD_ucgrid_ns.Xraw_cell, GausFD_ucgrid_ns.Tcell, param_uc_ns);
GausFD_rgrid = sim_gfd_rgrid(n, p, au, bu, s, r, nu, rho, stat);
param_rgrid = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'babf', 'cgrid', 0, 'mat', 1, ...
'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'm', m, 'eval_grid', pgrid, 'ws', 1, ...
'trange', [au, bu]);
[out_rgrid, param_rgrid]= ...
BFDA(GausFD_rgrid.Xraw_cell, GausFD_rgrid.Tcell, param_rgrid);
GausFD_rgrid_ns = sim_gfd_rgrid(n, p, au, bu, s, r, nu, rho, 0);
param_rgrid_ns = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'babf', 'cgrid', 0, 'mat', ...
0, 'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'm', m, 'eval_grid', pgrid, 'ws', 0.05, ...
'trange', [au, bu]);
[out_rgrid_ns, param_rgrid_ns] = ...
BFDA(GausFD_rgrid_ns.Xraw_cell, GausFD_rgrid_ns.Tcell, param_rgrid_ns);
display('RMSE of the estimated stationary covariance')
rmse(out_cgrid.Sigma_SE, GausFD_cgrid.Cov_true)
display('RMSE of the estimated functional data')
Xtrue_mat = reshape(cell2mat(GausFD_cgrid.Xtrue_cell), p, n);
rmse(out_cgrid.Z, Xtrue_mat)
display('RMSE of the estimated non-stationary covariance')
Ctrue_ns = cov_ns(pgrid, sf, nu, rho);
rmse(out_cgrid_ns.Sigma_SE, Ctrue_ns)
save('./Examples/Data/Simu_Data.mat', 'GausFD_cgrid', 'GausFD_ucgrid', ...
'GausFD_cgrid_ns', 'GausFD_ucgrid_ns', ...
'GausFD_rgrid', 'GausFD_rgrid_ns')
save('./Examples/Data/Simu_Output.mat', 'out_cgrid', 'out_ucgrid', ...
'out_cgrid_ns', 'out_ucgrid_ns', ...
'out_rgrid', 'out_rgrid_ns')
\end{verbatim}
\section[Example MATLAB scripts for functional regression using fdaM]{Example \proglang{MATLAB} scripts for functional regression using \pkg{fdaM}}
\begin{verbatim}
addpath(genpath(cat(2, pwd, '/fdaM')));
load('./Examples/Data/Simu_Data.mat');
load('./Examples/Data/Simu_Output.mat');
n = 30;
p = 40;
au = 0; bu = pi/2;
pgrid = (au : (bu)/(p-1) : bu);
trange = [au, bu];
sampind = sort(randsample(1:n,20,false)) ;
samptest = find(~ismember(1:n, sampind));
n_train = length(sampind); n_test = length(samptest);
cgrid = 0;
Xtrue = zeros(p, n);
Xraw = zeros(p, n);
Xsmooth = zeros(p, n);
if cgrid
Xtrue = reshape(cell2mat(GausFD_cgrid.Xtrue_cell), p, n);
Xsmooth = out_cgrid.Z(:, sampind);
Xraw = reshape(cell2mat(GausFD_cgrid.Xraw_cell), p, n);
else
for i = 1:n
xi = GausFD_rgrid.Xtrue_cell{i};
xrawi = GausFD_rgrid.Xraw_cell{i};
ti = GausFD_rgrid.Tcell{i};
h = mean(diff(ti));
Xtrue(:, i) = csaps(ti, xi, 1/(1 + h^3/6), pgrid);
Xraw(:, i) = csaps(ti, xrawi, 1/(1 + h^3/6), pgrid);
zi = out_rgrid.Zt{i};
Xsmooth(:, i) = csaps(ti, zi, 1/(1 + h^3/6), pgrid);
end
end
Xtrain = Xsmooth(:, sampind);
Xtest = Xsmooth(:, samptest);
Xraw_train = Xraw(:, sampind);
Xraw_test = Xraw(:, samptest);
rmse(Xtrue, Xsmooth)
rmse(Xtrue, Xraw)
betamat = (pgrid') .^ 2 ;
deltat = pgrid(2)-pgrid(1);
Avec_true = deltat.*(Xtrue'*betamat - ...
0.5.*(Xtrue(1, :)'.*betamat(1) + Xtrue(p,:)'.*betamat(p)) );
Avec = Avec_true + normrnd(0, 1, n, 1);
Avec_train = Avec(sampind);
Avec_test = Avec(samptest);
Avec_train_true = Avec_true(sampind);
Avec_test_true = Avec_true(samptest);
ymat_true = Xtrue .* repmat(betamat, 1, n) ;
ymat = ymat_true + normrnd(0, 1, p, n);
ymat_train = ymat(:, sampind);
ymat_test = ymat(:, samptest);
ymat_train_true = ymat_true(:, sampind);
ymat_test_true = ymat_true(:, samptest);
xnbasis = 20;
xbasis = create_bspline_basis(trange, xnbasis, 4);
xfd_true = smooth_basis(pgrid, Xtrue, xbasis);
xfd = smooth_basis(pgrid, Xtrain, xbasis);
xfd_raw = smooth_basis(pgrid, Xraw_train, xbasis);
[yfd_samp, df, gcv, beta, SSE, penmat, y2cMap, argvals, y] = ...
smooth_basis(pgrid, ymat_train, xbasis);
conbasis = create_constant_basis(trange);
wfd = fd([0, 1], conbasis);
wfdcell = fd2cell(wfd);
curvLfd = Lfd(2, wfdcell);
xfdcell = cell(1, 2);
xfdcell{1} = fd(ones(1, n_train), conbasis);
xfdcell{2} = xfd;
xfd_raw_cell = cell(1, 2);
xfd_raw_cell{1} = fd(ones(1, n_train), conbasis);
xfd_raw_cell{2} = xfd_raw;
betafd0 = fd(0, conbasis);
bnbasis = 10;
betabasis = create_bspline_basis(trange, bnbasis, 4);
betafd1 = fd(zeros(bnbasis, 1), betabasis);
betacell_vecy = cell(1, 2);
betacell_vecy{1} = fdPar(betafd0);
betacell_vecy{2} = fdPar(betafd1, curvLfd, 0);
betacell_fdy = cell(1, 2);
betacell_fdy{1} = fdPar(betafd1, curvLfd, 0);
betacell_fdy{2} = fdPar(betafd1, curvLfd, 0);
yfd_par = fdPar(yfd_samp, curvLfd, 0);
wt = ones(1, length(sampind));
lam = (0:0.1:1);
nlam = length(lam);
SSE_CV_vecy = zeros(nlam,1);
SSE_CV_raw_vecy = zeros(nlam, 1);
SSE_CV_fdy = zeros(nlam,1);
SSE_CV_raw_fdy = zeros(nlam, 1);
for ilam = 1:nlam;
lambda_vecy = lam(ilam);
betacelli_vecy = betacell_vecy;
betacelli_vecy{2} = putlambda(betacell_vecy{2}, lambda_vecy);
SSE_CV_vecy(ilam) = fRegress_CV(Avec_train, xfdcell, betacelli_vecy, wt);
fprintf('Scalar responses, lambda
lam(ilam), SSE_CV_vecy(ilam));
SSE_CV_raw_vecy(ilam) = fRegress_CV(Avec_train, xfd_raw_cell, betacelli_vecy, wt);
fprintf('Scalar responses, lambda
lam(ilam), SSE_CV_raw_vecy(ilam));
betacelli_fdy = betacell_fdy;
betacelli_fdy{1} = putlambda(betacell_fdy{1}, lambda_vecy);
betacelli_fdy{2} = putlambda(betacell_fdy{2}, lambda_vecy);
yfd_par_i = putlambda(yfd_par, lambda_vecy);
SSE_CV_fdy(ilam) = fRegress_CV(yfd_par_i, xfdcell, betacelli_fdy, wt);
fprintf('Functional respones, lambda
lam(ilam), SSE_CV_fdy(ilam));
SSE_CV_raw_fdy(ilam) = fRegress_CV(yfd_par_i, xfd_raw_cell, betacelli_fdy, wt);
fprintf('Functional respones, lambda
lam(ilam), SSE_CV_raw_fdy(ilam));
end
lambda = 0.1;
wt = ones(1, length(sampind));
betacell_vecy{2} = fdPar(betafd1, curvLfd, lambda);
fRegressStruct_vecy = fRegress(Avec_train, xfdcell, betacell_vecy, wt);
fRegressStruct_raw_vecy = ...
fRegress(Avec_train, xfd_raw_cell, betacell_vecy, wt);
betaestcell_vecy = fRegressStruct_vecy.betahat;
Avec_hat = fRegressStruct_vecy.yhat;
intercept_vecy = getcoef(getfd(betaestcell_vecy{1}));
disp(['Constant term = ',num2str(intercept_vecy)])
betaestcell_raw_vecy = fRegressStruct_raw_vecy.betahat;
Avec_hat_raw = fRegressStruct_raw_vecy.yhat;
intercept_raw_vecy = getcoef(getfd(betaestcell_raw_vecy{1}));
disp(['Constant term = ',num2str(intercept_raw_vecy)])
display(['Scalar reponses:', 'fitted mse = ', ...
num2str(mse(Avec_train_true, Avec_hat)), ...
'; fitted mse_raw = ',num2str(mse(Avec_train_true, Avec_hat_raw))])
covmat = cov([Avec_train, Avec_hat]);
Rsqrd = covmat(1,2)^2/(covmat(1,1)*covmat(2,2));
disp(['R-squared = ',num2str(Rsqrd)])
covmat_raw = cov([Avec_train, Avec_hat_raw]);
Rsqrd_raw = covmat_raw(1,2)^2/(covmat_raw(1,1)*covmat_raw(2,2));
disp(['raw R-squared = ',num2str(Rsqrd_raw)])
resid_vecy = Avec_train - Avec_hat;
SigmaE_vecy = mean(resid_vecy.^2);
disp(['Scalar responses: SigmaE = ',num2str(SigmaE_vecy)])
resid_raw_vecy = Avec_train - Avec_hat_raw;
SigmaE_raw_vecy = mean(resid_raw_vecy.^2);
disp(['Scalar responses: Raw SigmaE = ',num2str(SigmaE_raw_vecy)])
betacell_fdy{1} = fdPar(betafd1, curvLfd, lambda);
betacell_fdy{2} = fdPar(betafd1, curvLfd, lambda);
yfd_par = fdPar(yfd_samp, curvLfd, lambda);
fRegressStruct_fdy = fRegress(yfd_par, xfdcell, betacell_fdy, wt, y2cMap);
fRegressStruct_raw_fdy = ...
fRegress(yfd_par, xfd_raw_cell, betacell_fdy, wt, y2cMap);
betaestcell_fdy = fRegressStruct_fdy.betahat;
yfd_hat = fRegressStruct_fdy.yhat;
intercept_fdy = eval_fd(pgrid, getfd(betaestcell_fdy{1}));
betaestcell_raw_fdy = fRegressStruct_raw_fdy.betahat;
yfd_hat_raw = fRegressStruct_raw_fdy.yhat;
intercept_raw_fdy = eval_fd(pgrid, getfd(betaestcell_raw_fdy{1}));
ymat_fitted = eval_fd(pgrid, yfd_hat);
ymat_fitted_raw = eval_fd(pgrid, yfd_hat_raw);
display(['mse = ', num2str(mse(ymat_train_true, ymat_fitted)), ...
'; mse_raw = ',num2str(mse(ymat_train_true, ymat_fitted_raw))])
resid_fdy = ymat_train_true - ymat_fitted;
SigmaE_fdy = cov(resid_fdy');
resid_raw_fdy = ymat_train_true - ymat_fitted_raw;
SigmaE_raw_fdy = cov(resid_raw_fdy');
stderrStruct_vecy = fRegress_stderr(fRegressStruct_vecy, eye(n_train), SigmaE_vecy);
betastderrcell_vecy = stderrStruct_vecy.betastderr;
stderrStruct_raw_vecy = ...
fRegress_stderr(fRegressStruct_raw_vecy, eye(n_train), SigmaE_raw_vecy);
betastderrcell_raw_vecy = stderrStruct_raw_vecy.betastderr;
intercept_std_vecy = getcoef(betastderrcell_vecy{1});
intercept_ste_raw_vecy = getcoef(betastderrcell_raw_vecy{1});
stderrStruct_fdy = fRegress_stderr(fRegressStruct_fdy, y2cMap, SigmaE_fdy);
betastderrcell_fdy = stderrStruct_fdy.betastderr;
stderrStruct_raw_fdy = ...
fRegress_stderr(fRegressStruct_raw_fdy, y2cMap, SigmaE_raw_fdy);
betastderrcell_raw_fdy = stderrStruct_raw_fdy.betastderr;
intercept_std_fdy = eval_fd(pgrid, betastderrcell_fdy{1});
intercept_std_raw_fdy = eval_fd(pgrid, betastderrcell_raw_fdy{1});
xfd_test = smooth_basis(pgrid, Xtest, xbasis);
xfd_raw_test = smooth_basis(pgrid, Xraw_test, xbasis);
xfdcell_test = cell(1, 2);
xfdcell_test{1} = fd(ones(1, n_test), conbasis);
xfdcell_test{2} = xfd_test;
xfd_raw_test_cell = cell(1, 2);
xfd_raw_test_cell{1} = fd(ones(1, n_test), conbasis);
xfd_raw_test_cell{2} = xfd_raw_test;
Avec_pred = fRegressPred(xfdcell_test, betaestcell_vecy);
Avec_pred_raw = fRegressPred(xfd_raw_test_cell, betaestcell_raw_vecy);
display(['Scalar responses predict mse = ', ...
num2str(mse(Avec_test_true, Avec_pred)), ...
'; Scalar responses with raw data predict mse_raw = ',...
num2str(mse(Avec_test_true, Avec_pred_raw))])
ymat_test_pred = ...
eval_fd(pgrid, fRegressPred(xfdcell_test, betaestcell_fdy, xbasis));
ymat_test_pred_raw = ...
eval_fd(pgrid, fRegressPred(xfd_raw_test_cell, betaestcell_raw_fdy, xbasis));
display(['Functional response prediction mse = ', ...
num2str(mse(ymat_test_true, ymat_test_pred)), ...
'; Functional responses prediction with Raw data mse_raw = ',...
num2str(mse(ymat_test_true, ymat_test_pred_raw))])
\end{verbatim}
\end{appendices}
\section{Discussion}
\label{dis}
The \proglang{MATLAB} tool \pkg{BFDA} presented in this paper can simultaneously smooth multiple functional observations and estimate the mean-covariance functions, assuming the functional data are from the same GP. The smoothed data by \pkg{BFDA} are shown to be more accurate than the conventional individual smoothing methods, thus improving follow-up analysis results. The advantages of \pkg{BFDA} include:
\begin{itemize}
\item Simultaneously smoothing multiple functional samples and estimating mean-covariance functions in a nonparametric way;
\item Flexibly handling functional data with stationary and nonstationary covariance functions, common or uncommon (sparse) observation grids;
\item Efficiently dealing with high-dimensional functional data by the BABF method.
\end{itemize}
\pkg{BFDA} is suitable for analyzing data that can be roughly assumed as from the same GP distribution. We recommend using the BHM method for low-dimensional functional data with common grids or sparse functional data, and using the BABF method for high-dimensional data with dense grids (including both common and random grids). In addition, we recommend using the Mat\'ern function as the prior covariance structure for analyzing functional data with stationary covariance functions, while using the empirical covariance estimate (e.g., the estimate by \pkg{PACE} is recommended) for analyzing functional data with nonstationary covariance functions.
The follow-up functional data analysis can be conducted using the existing softwares (e.g., \pkg{fdaM} in \proglang{MATLAB}, \pkg{fda} in \proglang{R}). Examples are provided in \pkg{BFDA} about using \pkg{fdaM} with the smoothed data by \pkg{BFDA}, showing improved regression results than using the individually smoothed data. Details about the inputs and outputs of \pkg{BFDA}, and part of the example \proglang{MATLAB} scripts are provided in the Appendices. The \pkg{BFDA} tool and example scripts are freely available at \url{https://github.com/yjingj/BFDA}. We will continue integrating more options of basis functions, Bayesian functional data regression using GPs, and functional classification into \pkg{BFDA}.
\section{Examples with simulated data}
\label{exam}
In this Section, we provide examples of using \pkg{BFDA} to analyze simulated functional data with stationary and nonstationary covariance functions, common and uncommon (sparse) observation grids, as well as random observation grids. The simulation data used for the example results were generated with \code{n}=30, \code{p}=40, \code{au}=0, \code{bu}=$\pi/2$, \code{s}=$\sqrt{5}$, \code{r}=2, \code{nu}=3.5, \code{rho}=0.5, \code{dense}=0.6, and \code{pgrid} as the equally spaced grid over $(0, \pi/2)$ with length $40$.
\subsection{Simulate functional data}
\label{simfd}
\pkg{BFDA} provides the convenience of generating simulated functional data from the same GP with mean function $\mu(t) = 3sin(4t)$, stationary covariance function $s^2\mbox{Matern}_{cor}(d; \rho, \nu)$, and noises $\sim N(0, (s/r)^2)$ by
\code{
> GausFD_cgrid = sim_gfd(pgrid, n, s, r, nu, rho, dense, cgrid, stat);
}
where \code{pgrid} denotes the pooled grid, \code{n} denotes the number of functional samples, \code{r} denotes the signal to noise ratio (i.e., the ratio between the signal and noise standard deviations), \code{rho} denotes the Mat\'ern scale parameter, \code{nu} denotes the Mat\'ern order of smoothness. Here, \code{cgrid} is a boolean indicator that controls the output as either common-grid data on \code{pgrid} (\code{cgrid}=1) or uncommon-grid data with a randomly selected proportion (given by \code{dense}) of the full data on \code{pgrid} (\code{cgrid}=0). In addition, \code{stat}=1 specifies simulating stationary data from $GP(3sin(4t), s^2\mbox{Matern}_{cor}(d; \rho, \nu))$, while \code{stat}=0, specifies simulating data from a nonlinearly transformed GP with mean function $\mu(t) = 3(t+0.5)sin(4t^{2/3})$ and nonstationary covariance function
$\Sigma(t, t') = s^2(t+0.5)(t'+0.5)\mbox{Matern}_{cor}(|t^{2/3} - t'^{2/3}|;\rho, \nu).$
Let $p$ denote the length of \code{pgrid}.
The output \code{GausFD_cgrid} is a data structure consisted with a cell of true data ($\text{Xtrue\_cell}_{1\times n}$), a cell of noisy data ($\text{Xraw\_cell}_{1\times n}$), a cell of observation grids ($\text{Tcell}_{1\times n}$), a true covariance matrix on \code{pgrid} ($\text{Cov\_true}_{p\times p}$), and a true mean vector on \code{pgrid} ($\text{Mean\_true}_{1\times p}$).
\subsection{Analyze stationary data by BHM}
\label{statfd}
\subsubsection{Common grids}
First, we need to setup the required parameter structure by function \code{setOptions_bfda}. For example, to analyze functional data with common observation grids and stationary covariance function by BHM, the structure \code{param} can be set as
\code{
> param = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'bhm', 'cgrid', 1, 'mat', 1, 'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'w', 1, 'ws', 1);
}
where each parameter is followed by its value, and unspecified parameters are taken as default values (Appendix A.1.). Specifically, \code{smethod='bhm'} denotes using the BHM method; \code{cgrid=1} denotes the analyzed data are of common-grid; \code{mat=1} denotes taking $A(\cdot, \cdot)$ in Equation \ref{bhm_mod} as the Mat\'ern correlation function; \code{M=10000} denotes the number of MCMC iterations;
\code{Burnin=2000} denotes the number of MCMC burn-ins; \code{w=1} and \code{ws=1} are used to tune the Gamma priors for $\sigma_{\epsilon}^2$ and $\sigma_s^2$.
With both \code{param} and \code{GausFD_cgrid}, we can then call the main function \code{BFDA()} by
\code{
> [out_cgrid, param] = BFDA(GausFD_cgrid.Xraw_cell, GausFD_cgrid.Tcell, param);
}
for smoothing and estimating the common-grid functional data by BHM. The output structure \code{out_cgrid} contains smoothed estimates for the signals (\code{out_cgrid.Z}), mean function (\code{out_cgrid.mu}), covariance function (\code{out_cgrid.Sigma}), and other parameters in Equation \ref{bhm_mod}, along with the corresponding 95\% point-wise credible intervals (Appendix A.1.). The output argument \code{param} is the updated parameter structure.
\subsubsection{Uncommon grids}
To apply BHM on stationary functional data of uncommon-grid, e.g., \code{GausFD_ucgrid} generated by
\code{
> GausFD_ucgrid = sim_gfd(pgrid, n, s, r, nu, rho, dense, 0, stat);
}
the main function \code{BFDA} can be called by
\code{
> param_uc = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'bhm', 'cgrid', 0, 'mat', 1, 'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'pace', 1, 'ws', 0.1);
}
\code{
> [out_ucgrid, param_uc] = BFDA(GausFD_ucgrid.Xraw_cell, GausFD_ucgrid.Tcell, param_uc);
}
where \code{cgrid} is set as $0$ in \code{param_uc}.
\subsubsection{Example results}
In Figure \ref{fig:1}(a, b), we show that the smoothed signals by BHM (blue solid) are close to the truth (red dashed), and the coverage probabilities of the 95\% point-wise credible intervals (blue dotted) are $>0.95$, for both scenarios with common and uncommon grids. In addition, the nonparametric mean estimates by BHM (blue solid curves in Figure \ref{fig:1}(c, d)) are also smooth and close to the truth (red dashed), while the corresponding 95\% point-wise credible intervals (blue dotted) have coverage probabilities $>0.9$. In addition, we show that the Bayesian nonparametric covariance estimates in Figure \ref{fig:2}(a, b) are clearly smoother than the sample covariance estimate by using the raw common-grid data in Figure \ref{fig:2}(c), and close to the true stationary covariance in Figure \ref{fig:2}(d). Importantly, although 40\% information is lost for the uncommon-grid scenario, BHM still produces good smoothing and estimation results.
\begin{figure}[hb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{stat_sig.pdf}
\caption{Results of analyzing \textbf{Stationary} functional data by BHM: (a) two sample signal estimates with common grids; (b) two sample signal estimates with uncommon grids; (c) mean estimate with common grids; (d) mean estimate with uncommon grids; along with 95\% pointwise credible intervals (blue dots).}
\label{fig:1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{stat_cov.pdf}
\caption{Covariance estimates for \textbf{Stationary} functional data: (a) BHM estimate with common grids; (b) BHM estimate with uncommon grids; (c) sample estimate with raw common-grid data; (d) true covariance surface.}
\label{fig:2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\subsection{Analyze nonstationary data by BHM}
\label{nstat_fd}
\subsubsection{Common grids}
To apply BHM on functional data with nonstationary covariance function and common grids, e.g., \code{GausFD_cgrid_ns} generated by
\code{
> GausFD_cgrid_ns = sim_gfd(pgrid, n, s, r, nu, rho, dense, cgrid, 0);
}
the main function \code{BFDA()} can be called by
\code{
> param_ns = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'bhm', 'cgrid', 1, 'mat', 0, 'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'pace', 1, 'ws', 0.01);
}
\code{
> [out_cgrid_ns, param_ns] = BFDA(GausFD_cgrid_ns.Xraw_cell, GausFD_cgrid_ns.Tcell, param_ns);
}
Here, $A(\cdot, \cdot)$ in (\ref{bhm}) is set as the empirical smooth covariance estimate (\code{mat}=0) that is given by \pkg{PACE} \citep{Yao2005, PACE} with \code{pace}=1 (default), or by the sample covariance estimate using CSS smoothed data with \code{pace}=0.
\subsubsection{Uncommon grids}
If the nonstationary functional data are collected on uncommon (sparse) grids, e.g., \code{GausFD_ucgrid_ns} generated by
\code{
> GausFD_ucgrid_ns = sim_gfd(pgrid, n, s, r, nu, rho, dense, 0, 0);
}
we only need to set \code{cgrid}=0, \code{mat}=0 in the parameter structure for the common-grid scenario and then call the main function \code{BFDA()} by
\code{
> param_uc_ns = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'bhm', 'cgrid', 0, 'mat', 0, 'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'pace', 1, 'ws', 0.01);
}
\code{
> [out_ucgrid_ns, param_uc_ns ] = BFDA(GausFD_ucgrid_ns.Xraw_cell, GausFD_ucgrid_ns.Tcell, param_uc_ns);
}
where \code{cgrid} is set as $0$ in \code{param_uc_ns}.
\subsubsection{Example results}
Similarly, as shown in Figures \ref{fig:3} and \ref{fig:4}, the BHM estimates of signals and mean-covariance functions are close to the truth. Specifically, the $95\%$ pointwise credible intervals of the BHM signal estimates have coverage probabilities $>0.95$. Although BHM overestimated the covariance, BHM captured the major covariance structure and produced a smoothed estimate.
The magnitude of the BHM estimate can be tuned by \code{ws}, where a smaller \code{ws} will relatively shrink the magnitude of BHM covariance estimate. We suggest users to tune this parameter according to the magnitude of sample covariance estimate.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{non_stat_sig.pdf}
\caption{Results of analyzing \textbf{Nonstationary} functional data: (a) two sample signal estimates with common grids; (b) two sample signal estimates with uncommon grids; (c) mean estimate with common grids; (d) mean estimate with uncommon grids; along with 95\% pointwise credible intervals (blue dots).}
\label{fig:3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{non_stat_cov.pdf}
\caption{Covariance estimates for \textbf{Nonstationary} functional data: (a) BHM estimate with common grids; (b) BHM estimate with uncommon grids; (c) sample estimate with raw common-grid data; (d) true covariance surface.}
\label{fig:4}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\subsection{Analyze functional data by BABF}
\pkg{BFDA} also provides the convenience to simulate stationary and nonstationary functional data with random observation grids from the same GPs as in Section \ref{simfd}. For example, a structure of functional data \code{GausFD_rgrid}, with \code{n} independent observations and \code{p} random grids per observation (uniformly generated from [\code{au}, \code{bu}], can be generated by
\code{
> GausFD_rgrid = sim_gfd_rgrid(n, p, au, bu, s, r, nu, rho, stat);
}
where \code{stat=1} specifies simulating from the stationary GP, while \code{stat=0} specifies simulating from the nonstationary GP.
\subsubsection{Stationary data}
To analyze stationary functional data by BABF, simply call the main function \code{BFDA()} by:
\code{
> param_rgrid = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'babf', 'cgrid', 0, 'mat', 1, 'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'm', m, 'eval_grid', pgrid, 'ws', 1);
}
\code{
> [out_rgrid, param_rgrid]= BFDA(GausFD_rgrid.Xraw_cell, GausFD_rgrid.Tcell, param_rgrid);
}
where the working grid $\bm{\tau}$ will be set as the equally spaced quantiles of the pooled grid by default, with length \code{m} (when \code{tau} is not initialized in \code{param_rgrid}).
\subsubsection{Nonstationary data}
For nonstationary functional data, e.g., \code{GausFD_rgrid_ns} generated by
\code{
> GausFD_rgrid_ns = sim_gfd_rgrid(n, p, au, bu, s, r, nu, rho, 0);
}
we can call the main function \code{BFDA()} by
\code{
> param_rgrid_ns = setOptions_bfda('smethod', 'babf', 'cgrid', 0, 'mat', 0, 'M', 10000, 'Burnin', 2000, 'm', m, 'eval_grid', pgrid, 'ws', 0.05);
}
\code{
> [out_rgrid_ns, param_rgrid_ns] = BFDA(GausFD_rgrid_ns.Xraw_cell, GausFD_rgrid_ns.Tcell, param_rgrid_ns);
}
where \code{mat} is set as $0$ in \code{param_rgrid_ns}.
\subsubsection{Example results}
With random observation grids, the BABF method can efficiently analyze both stationary and nonstationary functional data, producing smooth estimates for signals and mean-covariance functions that are close to the truth (Figures \ref{fig:5}, \ref{fig:6}). Specifically, the 95\% pointwise credible intervals of signal estimates have coverage probabilities $>0.95$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{rand_sig.pdf}
\caption{Results of analyzing functional data with \textbf{Random grids} by BABF: (a) two sample signal estimates with stationary data; (b) two sample signal estimates with nonstationary data; (c) mean estimate with stationary data; (d) mean estimate with nonstationary data; along with 95\% pointwise credible intervals (blue dots).}
\label{fig:5}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{rand_cov.pdf}
\caption{Covariance estimates for functional data with \textbf{Random grids}: (a) BABF estimate with stationary data; (b) BABF estimate with nonstationary data; (c) true covariance surface for stationary data; (d) true covariance surface for nonstationary data.}
\label{fig:6}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Since \citet{ramsay1991some} first coined the term ``functional data analysis'' (FDA) for analyzing data that are realizations of a continuous function, many statistical methods and tools have been proposed for FDA. For examples, \citet{graves2010functional} provided both \proglang{R} package \pkg{fda} \citep{fda_rpack} and \proglang{MATLAB} package \pkg{fdaM} \citep{fda_M}
for standard functional data analysis \citep{ramsay2002applied, ramsay2005functional};
\citet{fda_usc} provided \proglang{R} package \pkg{fda.usc} for implementing nonparametric functional data analysis methods \citep{vieu2006nonparametric} with \pkg{fda} \citep{fda_rpack};
\citet{Yao2005, yao2005functional} developed the key technique of Functional Principal Component Analysis (FPCA) for analyzing sparse functional data, accompanied by the \proglang{MATLAB} package \pkg{PACE} \citep{PACE}; \citet{crainiceanu2010bayesian} proposed insights about implementing the standard Bayesian FDA using \pkg{WinBUGS} \citep{Winbugs}; and \citet{GPFDA_rpack} derived \proglang{R} package \pkg{GPFDA} for applying the Bayesian nonparametric Gaussian process (GP) regression models \citep{shi2011}.
However, the smoothing step that constructs functions from noisy discrete data has been neglected by most of the existing FDA methods and tools, where functional representations are integrated in the analyzing models. On the other hand, most of the existing smoothing methods process functional samples individually (e.g., cubic smoothing spline (CSS) and kernel smoothing \citep{green1993nonparametric, ramsay2005functional}), which is likely to induce bias when functional samples are of the same distribution.
Here, we provide a \proglang{MATLAB} toolbox \pkg{BFDA} for simultaneously smoothing multiple functional observations from the same distribution and estimating the underlying mean-covariance functions, using a nonparametric Bayesian Hierarchical Model (BHM) with Gaussian-Wishart processes \citep{yang2016}. This model-based approach borrows strength through modeling the shared mean-covariance functions, thus producing more accurate smoothing results than the individually smoothing methods \citep{yang2016}. Moreover, \pkg{BFDA} is flexible for analyzing sparse and dense functional data without the requirement of common observation grids, suitable for analyzing functional data with both stationary and nonstationary covariance functions, and efficient for high-dimensional functional data using a Bayesian framework with Approximations by Basis Functions (BABF) \citep{yang_arXiv}. In addition, \pkg{BFDA} provides options for implementing the standard Bayesian GP regression method, conducting Bayesian principal component analysis, and using the \pkg{fdaM} package for follow-up FDA.
In the following context, we first review the BHM and BABF methods in Section \ref{method}, and then provide examples using \pkg{BFDA} with simulated data in Section \ref{exam}. In Section \ref{reg}, we compare the functional linear regression results by \pkg{fdaM} using the smoothed data by \pkg{BFDA} and CSS. Last, we conclude with a discussion in Section \ref{dis}. Details of input options and outputs, as well as example \proglang{MATLAB} scripts of generating the simulation results in this paper, are provided in the Appendix.
\section{Methods overview}
\label{method}
\subsection{BHM}
\label{bhm}
Consider functional data $\{X_i(t);\, t\in \mathcal{T}, \, i = 1, 2, \cdots, n\}$ that are generated from the same stochastic process with independent measurement errors. In order to simultaneously smooth all noisy observations and estimate mean-covariance functions, \citet{yang2016} proposed the following Bayesian Hierarchical Model (BHM) with Gaussian-Wishart processes:
\begin{equation}
\label{bhm_mod}
X_i(t) = Z_i(t) + \epsilon_i(t); \; Z_i(\cdot) \sim GP(\mu_Z(\cdot), \Sigma_Z(\cdot, \cdot)),\; \epsilon_i(\cdot) \sim N(0, \sigma^2_{\epsilon});
\end{equation}
$$\mu_Z(\cdot)|\Sigma_Z(\cdot, \cdot) \sim GP\left(\mu_0(\cdot), \frac{1}{c}\Sigma_Z(\cdot, \cdot)\right), \; \Sigma_Z(\cdot, \cdot) \sim IWP(\delta, \sigma^2_sA(\cdot, \cdot)), \; \sigma^2_{\epsilon} \sim IG(a_{\epsilon}, b_{\epsilon}); $$
$$\sigma^2_s \sim IG(a_s, b_s); \; $$
where $\{Z_i(t); i = 1, \cdots, n\}$ denotes the underlying true functional data following the same GP distribution with mean function $\mu_Z(\cdot)$ and covariance function $\Sigma_Z(\cdot, \cdot)$, $IWP$ denotes the Inverse-Wishart process (IWP) prior \citep{dawid1981some} for the covariance function, $IG$ denotes the Inverse-Gamma prior, and $(\mu_0(\cdot), c, \delta, A(\cdot, \cdot), a_{\epsilon}, b_{\epsilon}, a_s, b_s)$ are hyper-parameters to be determined. The IWP prior on $\Sigma_Z(\cdot, \cdot)$ models the covariance function nonparametrically and therefore makes the BHM method suitable for analyzing functional data with unknown stationary and nonstationary covariance structures. The hyper parameter $\sigma_s^2$ provides the flexibility of estimating the scale of the covariance structure in the IWP prior from the data.
For the hyper-parameter setup, we take $\mu_0(\cdot)$ as the smoothed empirical mean estimate, $c$ as $1$ for the same data variation on the mean function, $\delta$ as $5$ for noninformative prior on the variance function, and determine $(a_{\epsilon}, b_{\epsilon}, a_s, b_s)$ by matching the hyper-prior moments with the empirical estimates. In addition, $A(\cdot, \cdot)$ can be taken as the Mat\'{e}rn correlation kernel for analyzing functional data with stationary covariance (default in \pkg{BFDA}),
$$
\mbox{Matern}_{cor}(d; \rho, \nu) = \frac{1}{\Gamma(\nu) 2^{\nu - 1}}
\left(\sqrt{2\nu}\frac{d}{\rho} \right)^{\nu} K_{\nu}\left( \sqrt{2\nu}\frac{d}{\rho}\right), \quad d\ge 0,\; \rho>0, \; \nu>0,
$$
where $d$ denotes the distance between two grid points,
$\rho$ is the scale parameter, $\nu$ is the order of smoothness, and $K_\nu(\cdot)$ is the modified Bessel function of the second kind; while as an smoothed empirical covariance estimate for analyzing functional data with nonstationary covariance.
Although the BHM is constructed with infinite-dimensional Gaussian-Wishart processes, practical posterior inference will be conducted in a finite manner, e.g., on the observation grids $\{\bm{t_i}\}$, pooled grid $\bm{t} = \cup_{i=1}^n \bm{t}_i$, or other evaluation grids. For accommodating uncommon observation grids, especially sparsely observed data, BHM evaluates data functions and mean-covariance functions on the pooled grid, while estimating the unobserved functional data by conditioning on the observations (similarly as \pkg{PACE}).
Denoting $X_i(\bm{t}_i)$ by ${\bm X}_{\bm{t}_i}$, $Z_i(\bm{t}_i)$ by ${\bm Z}_{\bm{t}_i}$, $\mu_0(\bm{t})$ by $\bm{\mu}_0$, $\mu_Z(\bm{t})$ by $\bm{\mu}_Z$, $\Sigma_Z(\bm{t}, \bm{t})$ by $\bm{\Sigma}_Z$, and $A(\bm{t}, \bm{t})$ by $\bm{A}$, BHM conducts Bayesian inference for
$(\{Z_i(\bm{t})\}, \bm{\mu}_Z, \bm{\Sigma}_Z, \sigma^2_{\epsilon}, \sigma_s^2 )$ by the Monte Carlo Markov Chain (MCMC) algorithm (essentially a Gibbs sampler \citep{geman1984stochastic}) as follows (refer to \citet{yang2016} for details):
\vspace{-0.1 in}
\begin{itemize}
\item[] Step 0: Set initial values. Set hyper-parameters $(c, \bm{\mu_0}, \nu, \rho, a_{\epsilon}, b_{\epsilon}, a_s, b_s)$. Take
$(\bm{\mu}, \sigma_{\epsilon}^2)$ as the empirical estimates, $\{{\bm Z}_{\bm{t}_i}\}$ as the raw data $\{{\bm X}_{\bm{t}_i}\}$, and $\bm{\Sigma}_Z$ as an identity matrix.
\item[] Step 1: Conditioning on $\{{\bm X}_{\bm{t}_i}\}$ and $(\bm{\mu}_Z,\bm{\Sigma}_Z)$, update $\{Z_i(\bm{t})\}$ from the corresponding conditional multivariate normal (MN) distributions;
\item[] Step 2: Conditioning on $\{{\bm X}_{\bm{t}_i}\}$ and $\{{\bm Z}_{\bm{t}_i}\}$,
update the noise variance $\sigma^2_{\epsilon}$ from the conditional Inverse-Gamma (IG) distribution;
\item[] Step 3: Conditional on $\{Z_i(\bm{t})\}$ and $\bm{\Sigma}_Z$, update $\bm{\mu}_Z$ from
the conditional MN distribution;
\item[] Step 4: Conditioning on $\{Z_i(\bm{t})\}$ and $\bm{\mu}_Z$, update $\bm{\Sigma}_Z$ from
the conditional Inverse-Wishart (IW) distribution;
\item[] Step 5: Conditioning on $\mathbf{\Sigma}_Z$, Update $\sigma_s^2$ from the conditional Gamma distribution.
\end{itemize}
\vspace{-0.1 in}
Specifically, the averages of posterior samples of $\{Z_i(\bm{t}), \bm{\mu}_Z, \bm{\Sigma}_Z\}$ are taken as estimates for functional signals and mean-covariance functions.
In addition, \pkg{BFDA} uses existing \proglang{MATLAB} package \pkg{mcmcdiag} \citep{mcmcdiag} to diagnosis the MCMC convergence by potential scale reduction factor (PSRF) \citep{gelman1992inference}, and implements the method proposed by \citet{yuan2012} with the pivotal discrepancy measures (PDM) of standardized residuals for the goodness-of-fit diagnosis of the assumed model.
\subsection{BABF}
\label{babf}
Because BHM \citep{yang2016} has computational complexity $O(np^3m)$ with $n$ samples, $p$ pooled-grid points, and $m$ MCMC iterations, the method encounters computational bottleneck for analyzing functional data with large pooled-grid dimension $p$.
To resolve this computational bottleneck issue with high-dimensional data, \pkg{BFDA} enables the option of using the BABF method proposed by \citet{yang_arXiv}, in which the posterior inference in BHM is conducted with approximations using basis functions. Here, we briefly outline the BABF method.
First select a working grid based on data density, $\bm{\tau} = (\tau_1, \tau_2, \cdots, \tau_L)^\top \subset \mathcal{T}$, $L<<p$, then approximate $\{Z_i(\bm{\tau})\}$ by a system of basis functions (e.g., cubic B-splines). Let $\bm{B}(\cdot) = [b_1(\cdot), b_2(\cdot), \cdots, b_K(\cdot)]$ denote $K$ selected basis functions with coefficients $\bm{\zeta_i} = (\zeta_{i1}, \zeta_{i2}, \cdots, \zeta_{iK})^\top$, then
$Z_i(\bm{\tau}) = \sum_{k = 1}^K \zeta_{ik} b_k(\bm{\tau}) = \bm{B(\tau)} \bm{\zeta_i}$.
Generally, $K$ can be selected as $L$, then $\bm{\zeta_i} = \bm{B(\tau)}^{-1} Z_i(\bm{\tau})$, a linear transformation of $Z_i(\bm{\tau})$. Note that even if $\bm{B(\tau)}$ is singular or non-square, $\bm{\zeta_i}$ can still be written as a linear transformation of $Z_i(\bm{\tau})$, e.g., using the generalized inverse \citep{james1978generalised} of $\bm{B(\tau)}$.
Because $\bm{\zeta_i}$ is a linear transformation of $Z_i(\bm{\tau})$ that follows a MN distribution under the assumptions in Equation~\ref{bhm_mod}, the induced Bayesian hierarchical model for $\{\bm{\zeta_i}\}$ is derived as
\begin{equation}
\label{zeta}
\bm{\zeta_i} \sim MN(\bm{\mu_{\zeta}},\; \bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}}); \; \bm{\mu_{\zeta}} = \bm{B(\tau)}^{-1} \mu_Z(\bm{\tau}); \; \bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}} = \bm{B(\tau)}^{-1} \Sigma_Z(\bm{\tau}, \bm{\tau}) \bm{B(\tau)}^{-\top}.
\end{equation}
Further, from the assumed priors of $(\mu_Z(\cdot), \Sigma_Z(\cdot, \cdot))$ in Equation~\ref{bhm_mod}, with $\Psi(\bm{\tau}, \bm{\tau})= \sigma_s^2 A(\bm{\tau}, \bm{\tau})$,
the following priors of $(\bm{\mu_{\zeta}}, \bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}})$ are also induced:
\begin{eqnarray}
\bm{\mu_{\zeta}}| \bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}} &\sim& MN\left(\bm{B(\tau)}^{-1} \mu_0(\bm{\tau}),\; c\bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}} \right); \label{mu_zeta_prior}\\
\bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}} &\sim& IW(\delta, \; \bm{B(\tau)}^{-1} \Psi(\bm{\tau}, \bm{\tau}) \bm{B(\tau)}^{-\top}). \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Then, the BABF approach has computation complexity $O(nK^3m)$ with the following MCMC algorithm (refer to \citet{yang_arXiv} for details):
\vspace{-0.1 in}
\begin{itemize}
\item[] Step 0: Set initial values similarly as in BHM. Set hyper-parameters $(c, \bm{\mu_0}, \nu, \rho, a_{\epsilon}, b_{\epsilon}, a_s, b_s)$. Take $(\mu_Z(\bm{\tau}), \Sigma_Z(\bm{\tau}, \bm{\tau}), \sigma^2_{\epsilon})$ as empirical estimates, inducing the initial values for $(\bm{\mu_{\zeta}}, \bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}})$ by Equation~\ref{zeta}.
\item[] Step 1: Conditioning on $\{{\bm X}_{\bm{t}_i}\}$ and $(\bm{\mu_{\zeta}}, \bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}}, \sigma_{\epsilon}^2)$, update $\{\bm{\zeta_i}\}$ from the conditional MN distribution.
\item[] Step 2: Conditioning on $\{\bm{\zeta_i}\}$, update $\bm{\mu_{\zeta}}$ and $\bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}}$ respectively from the conditional MN and IW distributions.
\item[] Step 3: Conditioning on $(\{\bm{\zeta_i}\}, \bm{\mu_{\zeta}}, \bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}})$, approximate $\{{\bm Z}_{\bm{t}_i}$, $\mu_Z(\bm{t_i})$, $\Sigma_Z(\bm{t_i}, \bm{t_i})$, $\Sigma_Z(\bm{\tau}, \bm{t_i}), \Sigma_Z(\bm{t_i}, \bm{\tau}), \Sigma_Z(\bm{\tau}, \bm{\tau})\}$ by
$${\bm Z}_{\bm{t}_i} = \bm{B(t_i)} \bm{\zeta_i}, \; \mu_Z(\bm{t_i}) = \bm{B(t_i)\mu_{\zeta}}, \; \Sigma_Z(\bm{t_i}, \bm{t_i}) = \bm{B(t_i)}\bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}} \bm{B(t_i)}^\top, \; $$
$$\Sigma_Z(\bm{\tau}, \bm{t_i})^\top = \Sigma_Z(\bm{t_i}, \bm{\tau}) = \bm{B(t_i)}\bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}} \bm{B(\tau)}^\top, \;
\Sigma_Z(\bm{\tau}, \bm{\tau}) = \bm{B(\tau)}\bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}} \bm{B(\tau)}^\top .$$
\item[] Step 4: Conditioning on $\{{\bm Z}_{\bm{t}_i}\}$ and $\{{\bm X}_{\bm{t}_i}\}$, update $\sigma_{\epsilon}^2$ by
the conditional IG distribution;
\item[] Step 5: Conditioning on $\Sigma_Z(\bm{\tau}, \bm{\tau})$, update $\sigma_s^2$ by the conditional Gamma distribution.
\end{itemize}
As a result, the posterior estimates of $(\{\bm{\zeta_i}\}, \bm{\mu_{\zeta}}, \bm{\Sigma_{\zeta}})$ are given by the averages of the MCMC samples, which are then used to estimate $\{{\bm Z}_{\bm{t}_i}$, $\mu_Z(\bm{t_i})$, $\Sigma_Z(\bm{t_i}, \bm{t_i})\}$ by the approximation formulas in Step 3.
\subsection{Basis-function construction}
\label{basis-func}
\pkg{BFDA} uses the existing \proglang{MATLAB} package \pkg{bspline} \citep{bspline} to construct B-spline basis functions, using the optimal knot sequence for interpolation at the working grid $\tau$. The optimal knot sequence is generated by the \proglang{MATLAB} function \verb|optknt| \citep{gaffney1976optimal, micchelli1976optimal, de1977computational}. \citet{yang_arXiv} instructed selecting $\tau$ to represent data densities ($L$ maybe selected by grid search with test data), such as taking the $\left(\frac{100}{L+1}, \cdots, \frac{L\times100}{L+1}\right)$ percentiles of the pooled grid, or the equally-spaced grid for evenly distributed data.
\section{Functional linear regression}
\label{reg}
We expect follow-up FDA results will be improved by using the accurately smoothed functional data produced by \pkg{BFDA}. Specifically, we show examples of functional linear regression in this Section, considering the following two models,
\begin{eqnarray}
\bm{Y} &=& \beta_0 + \int \bm{X(t)}^\top \bm{\beta(t)} \; dt + \bm{\epsilon} , \label{vecy} \\
\bm{Y(t)} &=& \beta_0(t) + \bm{X(t)}^\top \bm{\beta(t)}+ \bm{\epsilon(t)} ; \label{fdy}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{itemize}
\item $\bm{Y}$ in Equation \ref{vecy} denotes a $n\times 1$ vector of scalar responses; $\bm{Y(t)} = (y_1(t), \cdots, y_n(t))^\top$ in Equation \ref{fdy} denotes a vector of functional responses;
\item $\bm{X(t)}$ denotes a $n\times q$ design matrix of $q$ functional independent variables;
\item $\bm{\beta(t)}$ denotes a $q\times 1$ vector of coefficient functions for independent variables;
\item $\beta_0$ and $\beta_0(t)$ denote the intercept terms;
\item $\bm{\epsilon}$ and $\bm{\epsilon(t)}$ denote the error terms.
\end{itemize}
Note that $\bm{X(t)}$ and $\bm{\beta(t)}$ can also denote nonfunctional covariates and coefficients, because nonfunctional variables can be thought as constant functions of $t$.
\subsection{Simulate functional data}
To evaluate the improvement of regression results using the smoothed data by \pkg{BFDA}, we first simulated $30$ raw stationary GP trajectories $\{X_i(\bm{t_i})\}$ with random grids uniformly generated from $[0, \pi/2]$, by
\code{sim_gfd_rgrid(30, 40, 0, 1.5708, 2.2361, 2, 3.5, 0.5, 1)}. Then we simulated the scalar responses by $Y_i = \int_0^{1.5708} X_i(t)t^2 \, dt + \epsilon $, and the functional responses by $Y_i(t) = X_i(t)t^2 + \epsilon$, with $\epsilon \sim N(0, 1)$.
Because the functional regression function \code{fRegress()} in \pkg{fdaM} requires inputs of functional data with common grids, we interpolated the simulated true data, smoothed data by BABF with \pkg{BFDA}, and the raw data with noises on the equally spaced common grid (with length $40$) over $[0, \pi/2]$, by cubic smoothing spline (CSS, using the function \code{csaps()} with the suggested optimal smoothing parameter $1$). As a result, the interpolated signals from the raw data are equivalent to the individually smoothed ones by CSS (one example curve is shown in Figure \ref{simu_x}(a)).
With the smoothed data by BABF and CSS, we respectively fitted the functional linear models (Equations \ref{vecy} and \ref{fdy}) using $20$ randomly chosen signals, and then tested the prediction results using the remains. We replicated this fitting process for 100 times, and evaluated the performance by the average mean square errors (MSEs) of the fitted and predicted responses.
\subsection{Results with scalar responses}
For the case with scalar responses, although the fitted coefficient functions using both smoothed data by BABF and CSS are close to the truth (Figure \ref{simu_x}(b, c)), with coverage probabilities $>0.95$ for the 95\% confidence intervals, the average MSEs of the fitted and predicted responses from 100 replications are smaller for using the BABF smoothed data than the ones using the CSS smoothed data (0.311 vs.~0.388 for fitted responses, 0.497 vs.~0.677 for predicted responses, as shown in Table \ref{tb1}). Figure \ref{vecy_plot} shows the results of an example replication of this fitting and predicting process with scalar responses.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{reg_sample_curve.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{reg_vecy_beta.pdf}
\caption{(a) Example estimates of $X_i(t)$; (b) the estimate of $\beta(t)$ using the smoothed data by BABF; (c) the estimate of $\beta(t)$ using the smoothed data by CSS; along with the truth in the cyan dotted lines.}
\label{simu_x}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{reg_vecy_fitted.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{reg_vecy_pred.pdf}
\caption{(a) Fitted vs.~true scalar responses; (b) predicted vs.~true scalar responses.}
\label{vecy_plot}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Results with functional responses}
For the case with functional responses, we can see that the fitted intercept term using the BABF smoothed data is closer to the truth (constant $0$) with narrower 95\% confidence interval than the one using the CSS smoothed data (Figure \ref{beta}(a, c)). In addition, the coefficient function using BABF smoothed data has narrower 95\% confidence interval but higher coverage probability (Figure \ref{beta}(b, d)). Consequently, both fitted and predicted functional responses using the BABF smoothed data have smaller point-wise MSEs out of 100 replications, 0.417 vs.~1.190 for fitted functional responses, 0.464 vs.~1.354 for predicted functional responses (Table \ref{tb1}). Figure \ref{fdy_plot} shows the results of an example replication of this fitting and predicting process with functional responses.
\begin{table}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ c|cc|cc }
\hline
\multirow{2}{6em}{\centering MSE (std)} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{BABF smoothed} & \multicolumn{2}{|c}{CSS smoothed} \\
&$\bm{Y}$ & $\bm{Y(t)}$ & $\bm{Y}$ & $\bm{Y(t)}$ \\
\hline
Fitted & 0.311 (0.061) & 0.417 (0.049) & 0.388 (0.074) & 1.190 (0.186) \\
Predicted & 0.497 (0.289) & 0.464 (0.112) & 0.677 (0.435) & 1.354 (0.419) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Average MSEs of the fitted and predicted responses for 100 replicates, along with the standard deviations of these MSEs among 100 replicates in the parentheses, for scalar responses $\bm{Y}$ and functional responses $\bm{Y(t)}$.}
\label{tb1}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{reg_fdy_intercept.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{reg_fdy_beta.pdf}
\caption{(a) Intercept function $\beta_0(t)$ using the BABF smoothed data; (b) Intercept function $\beta_0(t)$ using the CSS smoothed data; (c) coefficient function $\beta(t)$ using the BABF smoothed data; (d) coefficient function $\beta(t)$ using the CSS smoothed data; along with 95\% confidence intervals and true coefficient functions in the cyan dotted lines.}
\label{beta}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{reg_fdy_fitted.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{reg_fdy_pred.pdf}
\caption{(a) Example fitted functional responses; (b) example predicted functional responses; with true signals in the cyan dotted lines.}
\label{fdy_plot}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction}
In his last letter to Hardy, dated three months before his death in early 1920, Ramanujan briefly described a new class of functions which he called mock theta functions, and he listed 17 examples \cite[p.~220]{ramanujan-letters}.
These he separated into three groups: four of third order, ten of fifth order, and three of seventh order.
The fifth order mock theta functions he further divided into two groups\footnote{While Ramanujan reused the letters $f$, $\phi$, $\psi$, $\chi$, and $F$ in each group, the usual convention is to write those in the first group with a subscript `0' and those in the second group with a subscript `1'.}; for example, four of these fifth order functions are
\begin{alignat*}{2}
f_0(q) &= \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{q^{n^2}}{(-q;q)_n}, \quad & \quad f_1(q) &= \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{q^{n(n+1)}}{(-q;q)_n}, \\
F_0(q) &= \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{q^{2n^2}}{(q;q^2)_n}, & F_1(q) &= \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{q^{2n(n+1)}}{(q;q^2)_{n+1}}.
\end{alignat*}
Here we have used the standard $q$-Pochhammer notation $(a;q)_n := \prod_{m=0}^{n-1} (1-aq^m)$.
The mock theta conjectures are ten identities found in Ramanujan's lost notebook, each involving one of the fifth-order mock theta functions.
The identities for the four mock theta functions listed above are (following the notation of \cite[p.~206]{gordon-mcintosh-57}, and correcting a sign error in the fourth identity in that paper; see also \cite{andrews-garvan,gordon-mcintosh-survey})
\begin{align}
f_0(q) &= -2q^2 M\left(\mfrac 15, q^{10}\right) + \theta_4(0,q^5) G(q), \label{mtc-1} \\
f_1(q) &= -2q^3 M\left(\mfrac 25, q^{10}\right) + \theta_4(0,q^5) H(q), \label{mtc-2}\\
F_0(q) - 1 &= q M\left(\mfrac 15, q^{5}\right) - q \psi(q^5)H(q^2), \label{mtc-3}\\
F_1(q) &= q M\left(\mfrac 25, q^{5}\right) + \psi(q^5)G(q^2). \label{mtc-4}
\end{align}
Here
\begin{equation*}
M(r,q) := \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{q^{n(n-1)}}{(q^r;q)_n(q^{1-r};q)_n},
\end{equation*}
the functions $\theta_4(0,q)$ and $\psi(q)$ are theta functions, and $G(q)$ and $H(q)$ are the Rogers-Ramanujan functions (see Section~\ref{sec:preliminaries} for definitions).
Andrews and Garvan \cite{andrews-garvan} showed that the mock theta conjectures fall naturally into two families of five identities each
(according to Ramanujan's original grouping), and that within each family the truth of each of the identities implies the truth of the others via straightforward $q$-series manipulations.
Shortly thereafter Hickerson \cite{hickerson-proof} proved the mock theta conjectures by establishing the identities involving $f_0(q)$ and $f_1(q)$.
According to Gordon and McIntosh \cite[p.~106]{gordon-mcintosh-survey}, the mock theta conjectures together form ``one of the fundamental results of the theory of [mock theta functions]'' and Hickerson's proof is a ``tour de force.''
In his PhD thesis \cite{zwegers}, Zwegers showed that the mock theta functions can be completed to real analytic modular forms of weight 1/2 by multiplying by a suitable rational power of $q$ and adding nonholomorphic integrals of certain unary theta series of weight 3/2.
This allows the mock theta functions to be studied using the theory of harmonic Maass forms.
Bringmann, Ono, and Rhoades remark in \cite[p.~1087]{bor-eulerian} that their Theorem 1.1, together with the work of Zwegers, reduces the proof of the mock theta conjectures to ``the verification of two simple identities for classical weakly holomorphic modular forms.''
Zagier makes a similar comment in \cite[\S 6]{zagier-survey}.
Following their approach, Folsom \cite{folsom-mock-theta} reduced the proof of the $\chi_0(q)$ and $\chi_1(q)$ mock theta conjectures to the verification of two identities in the space of modular forms of weight $1/2$ for the subgroup $G=\Gamma_1(144\cdot 10^2 \cdot 5^4)$.
Since $[{\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z}):G]\geq 5\times 10^{13}$, this computation is currently infeasible.
The purpose of the present paper is to provide a conceptual, unified proof of the mock theta conjectures that relies neither on computational verification nor on the work Andrews and Garvan \cite{andrews-garvan}.
Our method proves four of the ten mock theta conjectures simultaneously; two from each family (namely the identities \eqref{mtc-1}--\eqref{mtc-4} above).
Four of the remaining six conjectures can be proved using the same method, and the remaining two follow easily from the others (see Section~\ref{sec:remaining}).
To accomplish our goal, we recast the mock theta conjectures in terms of an equality between two nonholomorphic vector-valued modular forms $\bm F$ and $\bm G$ of weight 1/2 on ${\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z})$ which transform according to the Weil representation (see Lemma~\ref{lem:weil-rep} below),
and we show that the difference $\bm F-\bm G$ is holomorphic.
Employing a natural isomorphism between the space of such forms and the space $J_{1,60}$ of Jacobi forms of weight $1$ and index $60$, together with the result of Skoruppa that $J_{1,m}=\{0\}$, we conclude that $\bm F=\bm G$.
\section{Definitions and transformations} \label{sec:preliminaries}
In this section, we define the functions $M(\frac a5,q)$, $\theta_4(0,q)$, $\psi(q)$, $G(q)$, and $H(q)$ and describe the transformation behavior for these functions and the mock theta functions under the generators
\[
T := \pmmatrix 1101 \quad \text{ and } \quad S := \pmmatrix 0{-1}10
\]
of ${\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z})$.
We employ the usual $\sl_k$ notation, defined for $k\in \frac 12 \mathbb{Z}$ and $\gamma=\pmatrix abcd\in {\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z})$ by
\[
(f \sl_k \gamma )(z) := (cz+d)^{-k} f\left(\mfrac{az+b}{cz+d}\right).
\]
For $k\in \mathbb{Z}$ we have $f\sl_k AB=f\sl_k A\sl_k B$, but for general $k$ we have
\begin{gather} \label{eq:sl}
f\sl_k A B = e^{i k \left(\arg j_A(Bi)+\arg j_B(i)-\arg j_{AB}(i) \right)} f\sl_k A\sl_k B,
\end{gather}
where $j_\gamma(z)=cz+d$ for $\gamma=\pmatrix **cd$ (see \cite[\S 2.6]{iwaniec}).
When $k\notin \mathbb{Z}$, we always take $\arg z \in (-\pi,\pi]$.
Much of the arithmetic here and throughout the paper takes place in the splitting field of the polynomial $x^4-5x^2+5$, which has roots
\begin{equation} \label{eq:al-be}
\alpha := \sqrt{\mfrac{5-\sqrt 5}{2}} \quad \text{ and } \quad \beta := \sqrt{\mfrac{5+\sqrt 5}{2}}.
\end{equation}
We begin by giving the modular transformations satisfied by the mock theta functions $f_0$, $f_1$, $F_0$, and $F_1$ which are given in Section 4.4 of \cite{zwegers}.
The nonholomorphic completions are given in terms of the integral (see \cite[Proposition 4.2]{zwegers})
\[
R_{a,b}(z) := -i \int_{-\bar z}^{i\infty} \frac{g_{a,-b}(\tau)}{\sqrt{-i(\tau+z)}} d\tau,
\]
where $g_{a,b}$ (see \cite[\S 1.5]{zwegers}) is the unary theta function
\[
g_{a,b}(z) := \sum_{\nu\in a+\mathbb{Z}} \nu e^{\pi i \nu^2 z + 2\pi i \nu b}.
\]
We will simplify the components of $G_{5,1}(\tau)$ on page 75 of \cite{zwegers} by using the relation
\begin{align*}
g_{a,0}(z) - g_{a+\frac 12,0}(z) &= \mfrac 12 e^{-2\pi i a} g_{2a,\frac 12}(z/4)
\end{align*}
and Proposition 1.15 of \cite{zwegers}.
As usual, $q:=\exp(2\pi iz)$.
We define
\begin{align}
\widetilde f_0(z) &:= q^{-\frac1{60}} f_0(q) - \zeta_{10} \, \left(\zeta_{12}^{-1} \, R_{\frac 1{30},\frac 12} + \zeta_{12} \, R_{\frac {11}{30},\frac 12}\right)(30z), \label{eq:mt-complete-1} \\
\widetilde f_1(z) &:= q^{\frac{11}{60}} f_1(q) - \zeta_{5} \left(\zeta_{12}^{-1} \, R_{\frac {7}{30},\frac 12} + \zeta_{12} \, R_{\frac {17}{30},\frac 12}\right)(30z), \label{eq:mt-complete-2} \\
\widetilde F_0(z) &:= q^{-\frac 1{120}} (F_0(q)-1) + \mfrac 12 \, \zeta_{10} \left( \zeta_{12}^{-1} \, R_{\frac{1}{30},\frac 12} + \zeta_{12} \, R_{\frac{11}{30},\frac 12} \right)(15z), \label{eq:mt-complete-3} \\
\widetilde F_1(z) &:= q^{\frac {71}{120}} F_1(q) + \mfrac 12 \, \zeta_5 \left( \zeta_{12}^{-1} \, R_{\frac{7}{30},\frac 12} + \zeta_{12} R_{\frac{17}{30},\frac 12} \right)(15z). \label{eq:mt-complete-4}
\end{align}
The following is Proposition 4.10 of \cite{zwegers}.
The vector \eqref{eq:vec-F-def} below equals the vector $F_{5,1}(\tau)-G_{5,1}(\tau)$ of that paper (some computation is required to see this for the fifth and sixth components).
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:F-transformation}
The vector
\begin{equation} \label{eq:vec-F-def}
\bm F(z) := \left( \ \widetildeto{f} f_0(z), \ \widetildeto{f} f_1(z), \ \widetildeto{f} F_0\left(\tfrac z2\right), \ \widetildeto{f} F_1\left(\tfrac z2\right), \ \zeta_{240} \, \widetildeto{f} F_0\left(\tfrac {z+1}2\right), \ \zeta_{240}^{-71}\,\widetildeto{f} F_1\left(\tfrac {z+1}2\right) \ \right)^{\intercal}
\end{equation}
satisfies the transformations
\begin{equation*}
\bm F \sl_{\frac 12} T = M_T \, \bm F \quad \text{ and } \quad \bm F \sl_{\frac 12} S = \zeta_8^{-1} \sqrt{\mfrac 25} \, M_S \, \bm F,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
\def2{1.2}
\arraycolsep=.2em
M_T =
\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
\zeta_{60}^{-1} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \zeta_{60}^{11} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \zeta_{240}^{-1} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \zeta_{240}^{71} \\
0 & 0 & \zeta_{240}^{-1} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \zeta_{240}^{71} & 0 & 0
\end{array}
\right)
\quad \text{ and } \quad
\arraycolsep=.35em
M_S = \left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & \alpha & \beta & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & \beta & -\alpha & 0 & 0 \\
\frac \alpha2 & \frac \beta2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\frac \beta2 & -\frac \alpha2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \frac \beta{\sqrt 2} & \frac \alpha{\sqrt 2} \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \frac \alpha{\sqrt 2} & -\frac \beta{\sqrt 2}
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
Next we define the functions on the right-hand side of \eqref{mtc-1}--\eqref{mtc-4} and give their transformation properties.
Following \cite{bringmann-ono-dyson,gordon-mcintosh-57}, we define, for $a\in \{1,2,3,4\}$, the functions
\begin{align}
M\left(\mfrac a5,z\right) &:= \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{q^{n(n-1)}}{(q^{\frac a5};q)_n(q^{1-\frac a5};q)_n},\\
N\left(\mfrac a5,z\right) &:= 1 + \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{q^{n^2}}{(\zeta_5^a q;q)_n(\zeta_5^{-a}q;q)_n}. \label{eq:N-def}
\end{align}
Clearly we have $M(1-\frac a5,z)=M(\frac a5,z)$ and $N(1-\frac a5,z)=N(\frac a5,z)$.
Bringmann and Ono \cite{bringmann-ono-dyson} also define auxiliary functions $M(a,b,5,z)$ and $N(a,b,5,z)$ for $0\leq a\leq 4$ and $1\leq b \leq 4$.
Together, the completed versions of these functions form a set that is closed (up to multiplication by roots of unity) under the action of ${\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z})$ (see \cite[Theorem 3.4]{bringmann-ono-dyson}).
Garvan \cite{garvan} made the definitions of these functions and their transformations more explicit, so in what follows we reference his paper.
The nonholomorphic completions for $M(\frac a5,z)$ and $N(\frac a5,z)$ are given in terms of integrals of weight 3/2 theta functions $\Theta_1(\frac a5,z)$ and $\Theta_1(0,-a,5,z)$ (defined in Section 2 of \cite{garvan}).
A straightforward computation shows that
\begin{align*}
\Theta_1(0,-a,5,z) = 15\sqrt{3} \, \zeta_{10}^a \left( \zeta_{12}^{-1} \, g_{\frac{6a-5}{30},-\frac 12}(3z) + \zeta_{12} \, g_{\frac{6a+5}{30},-\frac 12}(3z) \right).
\end{align*}
Following (2.1), (2.2), (3.5), and (3.6) of \cite{garvan}, we define
\begin{align}
\widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac a5,z\right) &:= 2q^{\frac{3a}{10}\left(1-\frac a5\right)-\frac 1{24}} \, M\left(\mfrac a5, z\right) + \zeta_{10}^{a} \left( \zeta_{12}^{-1} R_{\frac{6a-5}{30},\frac 12} + \zeta_{12} R_{\frac{6a+5}{30},\frac 12} \right)(3z), \label{eq:mtil-def} \\
\widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac a5,z\right) &:= \csc \left(\mfrac {a\pi}5\right) q^{-\frac1{24}} N\left(\mfrac a5, z\right)
+\mfrac i{\sqrt 3} \int_{-\bar z}^{i\infty} \frac{\Theta_1(\frac a5,\tau)}{\sqrt{-i(\tau+z)}} \, d\tau.
\label{eq:ntil-def}
\end{align}
The completed functions $\widetildeto{f} M(a,b,z):=\mathcal G_2(a,b,5;z)$ and $\widetildeto{f} N(a,b,z):=\mathcal G_1(a,b,5;z)$ are defined in (3.7) and (3.8) of that paper.
By Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 of \cite{garvan} we have
\begin{align}
\widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac a5,z\right) \sl_{\frac 12} T^5 &= \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac a5,z\right) \times
\begin{cases}
\zeta_{120}^{-1} & \text{ if }a=1, \\
\zeta_{120}^{71} & \text{ if }a=2,
\end{cases} \label{eq:M-T}\\
\widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac a5,z\right) \sl_{\frac 12} T &= \zeta_{24}^{-1}\widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac a5,z\right),
\end{align}
and
\begin{align} \label{eq:M-S}
\widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac a5,z\right) \sl_{\frac 12} S = \zeta_8^{-1} \widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac a5,z\right).
\end{align}
The theta functions $\theta_4(0,q)$ and $\psi(q)$ are defined by
\begin{align*}
\theta_4(0,q) &:= \frac{(q;q)_\infty^2}{(q^2;q^2)_\infty} = \frac{\eta^2(z)}{\eta(2z)} \\
\psi(q) &:= \frac{(q^2;q^2)^2_\infty}{(q;q)_\infty} = q^{-\frac 18}\frac{\eta^2(2z)}{\eta(z)},
\end{align*}
where $\eta(z) = q^{1/24}(q;q)_\infty$ is the Dedekind eta function.
The transformation properties of these functions are easily obtained using the well-known transformation
\begin{equation} \label{eq:eta-S}
\eta(-1/z) = \sqrt{-i z} \, \eta(z).
\end{equation}
The Rogers-Ramanujan functions are defined by
\begin{align*}
G(q) &:= \frac{1}{(q;q^5)_\infty (q^4;q^5)_\infty}, \\
H(q) &:= \frac{1}{(q^2;q^5)_\infty (q^3;q^5)_\infty}.
\end{align*}
It will be more convenient for us to use the functions
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gh-def}
g(z) := q^{-\frac 1{60}} G(q) \quad \text{ and } \quad h(z) := q^{\frac{11}{60}} H(q).
\end{equation}
They satisfy the transformations (see \cite[p. 207]{gordon-mcintosh-57})
\begin{align}
g \sl_0 S &= \alpha^{-1} g + \beta^{-1} h, \label{eq:g-S} \\
h \sl_0 S &= \beta^{-1} g - \alpha^{-1} h. \label{eq:h-S}
\end{align}
Using the completed functions, the mock theta conjectures \eqref{mtc-1}--\eqref{mtc-4} are implied by the corresponding completed versions:
\begin{align}
\widetildeto{f} f_0(z) &= - \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15, 10z\right) + \frac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(10z)} g(z), \label{mtc-1a} \\
\widetildeto{f} f_1(z) &= - \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 25, 10z\right) + \frac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(10z)} h(z), \label{mtc-2a}\\
\widetildeto{f} F_0(z) &= \mfrac 12 \, \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15, 5z\right) - \frac{\eta^2(10z)}{\eta(5z)}h(2z), \label{mtc-3a}\\
\widetildeto{f} F_1(z) &= \mfrac 12 \, \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 25, 5z\right) + \frac{\eta^2(10z)}{\eta(5z)}g(2z). \label{mtc-4a}
\end{align}
Motivated by \eqref{eq:vec-F-def} and \eqref{mtc-1a}--\eqref{mtc-4a}, we define the vector
\begin{equation} \label{eq:vec-G-def}
\def2{2}
\bm{G}(z) :=
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
- \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15, 10z\right) + \dfrac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(10z)} g(z) \\
- \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 25, 10z\right) + \dfrac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(10z)} h(z) \\
\tfrac 12 \, \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15, \mfrac{5z}2\right) - \dfrac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(\frac{5z}2)} h(z) \\
\tfrac 12 \, \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 25, \mfrac{5z}2\right) + \dfrac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(\frac{5z}2)} g(z) \\
\tfrac 12 \, \zeta_{240} \, \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15, \mfrac{5z+5}2\right) - \zeta_{48}^{25}\dfrac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(\frac{5z+1}2)} h(z) \\
\tfrac 12 \, \zeta_{240}^{-71} \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 25, \mfrac{5z+5}2\right) + \zeta_{48} \dfrac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(\frac{5z+1}2)} g(z)
\end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
where we have used $\eta(z+1)=\zeta_{24}\eta(z)$, $g(z+1)=\zeta_{60}^{-1}g(z)$, and $h(z+1)=\zeta_{60}^{11}h(z)$ to simplify the second terms of the fifth and sixth components.
To prove that $\bm F=\bm G$ we begin by showing that they transform in the same way.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:G-transformation}
The vector $\bm G(z)$ defined in \eqref{eq:vec-G-def} satisfies the transformations
\begin{equation}
\bm G \sl_{\frac 12} T = M_T \, \bm G \quad \text{ and } \quad \bm G \sl_{\frac 12} S = \zeta_8^{-1} \sqrt{\mfrac 25} \, M_S \, \bm G,
\end{equation}
where $M_T$ and $M_S$ are as in Proposition~\ref{prop:F-transformation}.
\end{proposition}
Before proving this proposition, we require two identities that will be indispensable in the proof.
Equivalent identities can be found in \cite[(3.8) and (3.9)]{gordon-mcintosh-57}, where they are proved using $q$-series methods.
In Section~\ref{sec:lem-proof} we provide a purely modular proof.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:n1-identity}
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be as in \eqref{eq:al-be}. Then
\begin{multline} \label{eq:n1-identity}
\widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac 15, z\right) + \alpha \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 15, 25z\right) + \beta \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 25, 25z\right) \\
= 2 \frac{\eta^2(2z)}{\eta(z)} \left( \alpha^{-1} g(10z) + \beta^{-1} h(10z) \right) - 2 \, \frac{\eta^2(50z)}{\eta(25z)} \left( \beta \, g(10z) - \alpha \, h(10z) \right).
\end{multline}
\end{lemma}
Before proving Lemma~\ref{lem:n1-identity} we deduce an immediate consequence.
Note that the right-hand side of \eqref{eq:n1-identity} is holomorphic; this implies that the non-holomorphic completion terms on the left-hand side sum to zero.
By \eqref{eq:N-def}, the coefficients of $N(\frac a5,z)$ lie in $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_5+\zeta_5^{-1})=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt 5)$, and the automorphism $\sigma=(\sqrt 5\mapsto-\sqrt 5)$ maps $N(\frac 15,z)$ to $N(\frac 25,z)$.
By \eqref{eq:ntil-def} and the fact that
\[
\csc\left(\mfrac{\pi a}5\right) =
\begin{cases}
2\alpha^{-1} & \text{ if }a=1, \\
2\beta^{-1} & \text{ if }a=2,
\end{cases}
\]
it follows that the coefficients of both sides of \eqref{eq:n1-identity} lie in $\mathbb{Q}(\alpha)$.
The Galois group of $\mathbb{Q}(\alpha)$ is cyclic of order 4, generated by $\tau=(\alpha\mapsto\beta,\beta\mapsto-\alpha)$.
Since $\sqrt 5=\alpha\beta$, we have $\tau\mid_{Q(\sqrt 5)} = \sigma$.
Applying $\tau$ to Lemma~\ref{lem:n1-identity} gives the following identity.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:n2-identity}
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be as in \eqref{eq:al-be}. Then
\begin{multline} \label{eq:n2-identity}
\widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac 25, z\right) + \beta \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 15, 25z\right) - \alpha \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 25, 25z\right) \\
= 2 \frac{\eta^2(2z)}{\eta(z)} \left( \beta^{-1} g(10z) - \alpha^{-1} h(10z) \right) + 2 \, \frac{\eta^2(50z)}{\eta(25z)} \left( \alpha \, g(10z) + \beta \, h(10z) \right).
\end{multline}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:G-transformation}]
The transformation with respect to $T$ follows immediately from \eqref{eq:M-T}.
Let $G_j(z)$ denote the $j$-th component of $\bm G(z)$.
By \eqref{eq:M-S}, \eqref{eq:eta-S}, and \eqref{eq:g-S} we have
\begin{align*}
G_1(z) \sl_{\frac 12} S
&= \zeta_8^{-1} \sqrt{\mfrac 25} \, \left(-\mfrac 12 \, \widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac 15,\mfrac z{10}\right) + \frac{\eta^2(\frac z5)}{\eta(\frac z{10})} \big(\alpha^{-1}g(z) + \beta^{-1}h(z) \big) \right) \\
&= \zeta_8^{-1} \sqrt{\mfrac 25} \, \big(\alpha \, G_3(z) + \beta \, G_4(z) \big),
\end{align*}
where we used Lemma~\ref{lem:n1-identity} with $z$ replaced by $\frac z{10}$ in the second line.
For $G_2$, the situation is analogous, using Lemma~\ref{lem:n2-identity}.
For $G_3$ and $G_4$ we note that the transformations for $G_1$ and $G_2$ imply that
\begin{align*}
G_3 = \zeta_{8} \sqrt{\mfrac 25} \, \left(\mfrac \alpha2 \, G_1 \sl_{\frac 12} S + \mfrac \beta2 \, G_2 \sl_{\frac 12}S\right), \\
G_4 = \zeta_{8} \sqrt{\mfrac 25} \, \left(\mfrac \beta2 \, G_1 \sl_{\frac 12} S - \mfrac \alpha2 \, G_2 \sl_{\frac 12}S\right).
\end{align*}
By \eqref{eq:sl} we have $f\sl_{\frac 12}S\sl_{\frac 12}S=f\sl_{\frac 12} (-I) = -i f$, and we obtain the transformations for $G_3$ and $G_4$.
For $G_5$, we first observe that
\[
\pmmatrix 1502 \pmmatrix 0{-1}10 = T^3 S T^2 S \pmmatrix 1102.
\]
Using Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 of \cite{garvan} we compute
\begin{align*}
\widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15,z\right) \sl_{\frac 12} T^3 S T^2 S
&= (-\zeta_{50}^{-3}\zeta_{24}^{-1})^3 \widetildeto{f} M(1,3,z) \sl_{\frac12} ST^2S
= \zeta_{200}^{39} \zeta_8^{-1} \widetildeto{f} N(1,3,z) \sl_{\frac12}T^2S \\
&= \zeta_{30}^{-7} \widetildeto{f} N(0,3,z) \sl_{\frac 12} S
= \zeta_{120}^{77} \, \widetildeto{f} M(0,3,z).
\end{align*}
By (4.12) of \cite{garvan} this equals $\zeta_{120}^{47} \, \widetildeto{f} N(\frac 25,z)$, so we conclude that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:G5-1}
\widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15,\mfrac{5z+5}2\right) \sl_{\frac 12} S = \zeta_{120}^{47} \,\mfrac{1}{\sqrt 5} \, \widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac 25,\mfrac{z/5+1}2\right).
\end{equation}
Similarly, we have $\eta(\frac{z+1}{2})\sl_{\frac 12} S = \zeta_{8}^{-1} \, \eta(\frac{z+1}{2})$ which, together with \eqref{eq:eta-S} and \eqref{eq:h-S} gives
\begin{equation} \label{eq:G5-2}
\zeta_{48}^{25}\dfrac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(\frac{5z+1}2)} h(z) \sl_{\frac 12} S = \zeta_{48}^{19} \,\mfrac{1}{\sqrt 5} \, \dfrac{\eta^2(\frac z5)}{\eta(\frac z{10}+\frac 12)} \left( \beta^{-1} g(z) - \alpha^{-1} h(z) \right).
\end{equation}
Replacing $z$ by $\frac z{10}+\frac 12$ in Lemma \ref{lem:n2-identity} and using \eqref{eq:M-T} yields
\begin{multline} \label{eq:G5-3}
\widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac 25,\mfrac z{10}+\mfrac 12\right) + \beta \zeta_{60}^{-1} \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 15, \mfrac{5z+5}{2}\right) - \alpha \zeta_{60}^{11} \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 25, \mfrac{5z+5}{2}\right) \\
=2 \frac{\eta^2(\frac z5)}{\eta(\frac z{10}+\frac 12)} \left(\beta^{-1} g(z) - \alpha^{-1} h(z)\right) - 2 \frac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(\frac{5z+1}2)} \left(\alpha g(z) + \beta h(z)\right).
\end{multline}
Putting \eqref{eq:G5-1}, \eqref{eq:G5-2}, and \eqref{eq:G5-3} together we obtain
\begin{align*}
\mfrac 12 \zeta_{240} \, \widetildeto{f} M&\left(\mfrac 15,\mfrac{5z+5}2\right) - \zeta_{48}^{25}\dfrac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(\frac{5z+1}2)} h(z) \sl_{\frac 12} S \\
&= \frac{1}{\sqrt 5} \zeta_{8}^{-1} \left( \zeta_{240} \, \mfrac\beta2 \, \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15,\mfrac{5z+5}2\right) + \zeta_{240}^{-71} \, \mfrac\alpha2 \, \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 25,\mfrac{5z+5}2\right) - \zeta_{48}^{25} \frac{\eta^2(5z)}{\eta(\frac{5z+1}{2})} \left(\alpha \, g(z) + \beta \, h(z)\right) \right) \\
&= \frac{1}{\sqrt 5} \zeta_{8}^{-1}\left(\beta \, G_5(z) + \alpha \, G_6(z)\right).
\end{align*}
The transformation for $G_6(z)$ is similarly obtained by using Lemma 3.
\end{proof}
\section{Vector-valued modular forms and the Weil representation} \label{sec:weil-rep}
In this section we define vector-valued modular forms which transform according to the Weil representation, and we construct such a form from the components of $\bm F - \bm G$.
A good reference for this material is \cite[\S 1.1]{bruinier}.
Let $L=\mathbb{Z}$ be the lattice with associated bilinear form $(x,y)=-120xy$ and quadratic form $q(x)=-60x^2$.
The dual lattice is $L'=\frac 1{120}\mathbb{Z}$.
Let $\{\mathfrak e_h: \frac{h}{120}\in\frac1{120}\mathbb{Z}/\mathbb{Z}\}$ denote the standard basis for $\mathbb{C}[L'/L]$.
Let ${\rm Mp}_2(\mathbb{R})$ denote the metaplectic two-fold cover of ${\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{R})$; the elements of this group are pairs $(M,\phi)$, where $M=\pmatrix abcd\in {\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{R})$ and $\phi^2(z)=cz+d$.
Let ${\rm Mp}_2(\mathbb{Z})$ denote the inverse image of ${\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z})$ under the covering map; this group is generated by
\[
\widetildeto{f} T := (T,1) \quad \text{ and } \quad \widetildeto{f} S := (S,\sqrt z).
\]
The Weil representation can be defined by its action on these generators, namely
\begin{align}
\rho_L(T,1)\mathfrak e_h &:= \zeta_{240}^{-h^2} \mathfrak e_h, \label{eq:rho-T} \\
\rho_L(S,\sqrt z)\mathfrak e_h &:= \frac{1}{\sqrt{-120i}} \sum_{h'(120)} \zeta_{120}^{hh'} \, \mathfrak e_{h'}. \label{eq:rho-S}
\end{align}
A holomorphic function $\mathcal F:\mathbb{H}\to \mathbb{C}[L'/L]$ is a vector-valued modular form of weight $\frac 12$ and representation $\rho_L$ if
\begin{equation} \label{eq:weil-rep-transformation}
\mathcal F(\gamma z) = \phi(z) \rho_L(\gamma,\phi) \mathcal F(z) \qquad \text{ for all } (\gamma,\phi) \in {\rm Mp}_2(\mathbb{Z})
\end{equation}
and if $\mathcal F$ is holomorphic at $\infty$ (i.e. if the components of $\mathcal F$ are holomorphic at $\infty$ in the usual sense).
The following lemma shows how to construct such forms from vectors that transform as in Propositions \ref{prop:F-transformation} and \ref{prop:G-transformation}.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:weil-rep}
Suppose that $\bm H=(H_1,\ldots, H_6)$ satisfies
\[
\bm H \sl_{\frac 12} T = M_T \, \bm H \quad \text{ and } \quad \bm H \sl_{\frac 12} S = \zeta_{8}^{-1} \sqrt{\mfrac 25} \, M_S \, \bm H,
\]
where $M_T$ and $M_S$ are as in Proposition \ref{prop:F-transformation}, and
define
\begin{multline*}
\mathcal H(z) := \sum_{\substack{0<h<60 \\ h\equiv \pm 1(10) \\ (h,60)=1}} \left(a_h H_3(z) + b_h H_5(z) \right)(\mathfrak e_h - \mathfrak e_{-h})
- \sum_{\substack{0<h<60 \\ h\equiv \pm 2(10) \\ (h,60)=2}} H_1(z) (\mathfrak e_h - \mathfrak e_{-h}) \\
+ \sum_{\substack{0<h<60 \\ h\equiv \pm 3(10) \\ (h,60)=1}} \left(a_h H_4(z) + b_h H_6(z) \right)(\mathfrak e_h - \mathfrak e_{-h})
- \sum_{\substack{0<h<60 \\ h\equiv \pm 4(10) \\ (h,60)=2}} H_2(z) (\mathfrak e_h - \mathfrak e_{-h}),
\end{multline*}
where
\[
a_h =
\begin{cases}
+1 & \text{ if }0<h<30, \\
-1 & \text{ otherwise},
\end{cases}
\quad
\text{ and }
\quad
b_h =
\begin{cases}
+1 & \text{ if }h\equiv \pm 1, \pm 13 \pmod{60}, \\
-1 & \text{ otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\]
Then $\mathcal H(z)$ satisfies \eqref{eq:weil-rep-transformation}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is a straightforward but tedious verification involving \eqref{eq:rho-T} and \eqref{eq:rho-S} that is best carried out with the aid of a computer algebra system; the author used {\sc mathematica}.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of the mock theta conjectures} \label{sec:proof}
Let $\bm F$ and $\bm G$ be as in Section \ref{sec:preliminaries}.
To prove \eqref{mtc-1a}--\eqref{mtc-4a} it suffices to prove that $\bm F = \bm G$.
Let $\bm H := \bm F - \bm G$.
It is easy to see that the nonholomorphic parts of $\bm F$ and $\bm G$ agree, as do the terms in the Fourier expansion involving negative powers of $q$.
It follows that the function $\mathcal H$ defined in Lemma~\ref{lem:weil-rep} is a vector-valued modular form of weight $\frac 12$ with representation $\rho_L$.
By Theorem 5.1 of \cite{eichler-zagier}, the space of such forms is canonically isomorphic to the space $J_{1,60}$ of Jacobi forms of weight $1$ and index $60$.
By a theorem of Skoruppa \cite[Satz 6.1]{skoruppa-thesis} (see also \cite[Theorem 5.7]{eichler-zagier}), we have $J_{1,m}=\{0\}$ for all $m$; therefore $\mathcal H=0$.
The mock theta conjectures \eqref{mtc-1}--\eqref{mtc-4} follow.
\qed
\section{The six remaining identities} \label{sec:remaining}
Four of the six remaining identities, those involving the mock theta functions $\psi_0$, $\psi_1$, $\phi_0$, and $\phi_1$ (see \cite{andrews-garvan} for definitions), can be proved using the methods of Sections~\ref{sec:preliminaries}--\ref{sec:proof}.
For suitable completed nonholomorphic functions $\widetildeto{f}\psi_0$, $\widetildeto{f}\psi_1$, $\widetildeto{f} \phi_0$, and $\widetildeto{f}\phi_1$, these conjectures are (see \cite[p.~206]{gordon-mcintosh-57})
\begin{align}
2 \, \widetildeto{f} \psi_0(z) &= \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15,10z\right) + 2 \, \eta_{10,1}(z) \eta(10z) h(z), \label{eq:mtc2-1} \\
2 \, \widetildeto{f} \psi_1(z) &= \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 25,10z\right) + 2 \, \eta_{10,3}(z) \eta(10z) g(z), \label{eq:mtc2-2}\\
\widetildeto{f} \phi_0(z) &= -\mfrac 12 \, \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 15,5z\right) + \frac{\eta(5z)\eta(2z)}{\eta(10z)} g^2(2z) h(z), \label{eq:mtc2-3} \\
-\widetildeto{f} \phi_1(z) &= -\mfrac 12 \, \widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac 25,5z\right) + \frac{\eta(5z)\eta(2z)}{\eta(10z)} h^2(2z) g(z), \label{eq:mtc2-4}
\end{align}
where $\eta_{r,t}(z)$ is defined in \cite{robins}.
Here we have used that $g(z)h(z)=\frac{\eta(5z)}{\eta(z)}$ in the third and fourth formulas.
Following Section~\ref{sec:preliminaries}, we construct two six-dimensional vectors $\bm F_1$ and $\bm G_1$ out of the functions on the left-hand and right-hand sides, respectively, of \eqref{eq:mtc2-1}--\eqref{eq:mtc2-4}.
The transformation properties of $\bm F_1$ are given in Proposition~4.13 of \cite{zwegers}, and the corresponding properties of $\bm G_1$ follow from an argument similar to that given in the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:G-transformation}.
For the latter argument, we use the following identity (together with the identity obtained by applying the automorphism $\tau$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:n2-identity}):
\begin{align}
\widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac 15, 2z\right) &+ \alpha \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 15, 50z\right) + \beta \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 25, 50z\right) \notag \\*
&= 2 \, \frac{\eta(2z)\eta(5z)}{\eta(z)} \left(\alpha^{-1} g(5z) + \beta^{-1} h(5z)\right)^2 \big( \alpha \, g(10z) - \beta \, h(10z) \big) \notag \\*
& \hspace{1.5in}-2 \eta(50z) \big( \alpha \, \eta_{10,1}(5z) h(5z) + \beta \, \eta_{10,3}(5z) g(5z) \big). \label{eq:n1-id-2}
\end{align}
The proof of \eqref{eq:n1-id-2} is analogous to the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:n1-identity}, and requires the transformation properties of $\eta_{10,1}$ and $\eta_{10,3}$, given in \cite{robins}.
The proof that $\bm F_1 = \bm G_1$ follows exactly as in Section~\ref{sec:proof}.
The two remaining identities involve the mock theta functions $\chi_0$ and $\chi_1$.
Using the relations (discovered by Ramanujan and proved by Watson \cite[($B_0$) and ($B_1$)]{watson})
\begin{align*}
\chi_0(q) &= 2F_0(q) - \phi_0(-q), \\
\chi_1(q) &= 2F_1(q) + q^{-1} \phi_1(-q),
\end{align*}
these mock theta conjectures (see \cite[p. 206]{gordon-mcintosh-57}) are implied by the identities
\begin{align}
2 \widetildeto{f} F_0(z) - \widetildeto{f} \phi_0(z) &= \mfrac 32 \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 15,5z\right) - \eta(5z)\frac{g^2(z)}{h(z)}, \label{eq:mtc-chi-0} \\
2 \widetildeto{f} F_1(z) + \widetildeto{f} \phi_1(z) &= \mfrac 32 \, \widetildeto{f} M \left(\mfrac 25,5z\right) + \eta(5z)\frac{h^2(z)}{g(z)}. \label{eq:mtc-chi-1}
\end{align}
By \eqref{mtc-3a}, \eqref{mtc-4a}, \eqref{eq:mtc2-3}, and \eqref{eq:mtc2-4}, equations \eqref{eq:mtc-chi-0} and \eqref{eq:mtc-chi-1} follow from the identities (see \cite[(1.25) and (1.26)]{robins-thesis} for a proof using modular forms)
\begin{align*}
g^2(z) h(2z) - h^2(z)g(2z) &= 2h(z) h^2(2z) \frac{\eta^2(10z)}{\eta^2(5z)}, \\
g^2(z) h(2z) + h^2(z)g(2z) &= 2g(z) g^2(2z) \frac{\eta^2(10z)}{\eta^2(5z)}.
\end{align*}
This completes the proof of the remaining mock theta conjectures.
\section{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:n1-identity}} \label{sec:lem-proof}
Let $L(z)$ and $R(z)$ denote the left-hand and right-hand sides of \eqref{eq:n1-identity}, respectively.
Let $\Gamma$ denote the congruence subgroup
\[
\Gamma = \Gamma_0(50) \cap \Gamma_1(5) = \left\{\pmmatrix abcd : c\equiv 0\bmod 50 \text{ and }a,d\equiv 1\bmod 5\right\}.
\]
We claim that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:claim}
\eta(z) L(z), \eta(z) R(z) \in M_1 (\Gamma),
\end{equation}
where $M_k(G)$ (resp. $M_k^!(G)$) denotes the space of holomorphic (resp. weakly holomorphic) modular forms of weight $k$ on $G \subseteq {\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z})$.
We have
\[
\mfrac{1}{12}[{\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z}):\Gamma] = 15,
\]
so once \eqref{eq:claim} is established it suffices to check that the first 16 coefficients of $\eta(z) L(z)$ and $\eta(z) R(z)$ agree.
A computation shows that the Fourier expansion of each function begins
\begin{multline*}
\mfrac 2{\sqrt 5} \left( \beta - \alpha^2 \beta \, q^2 - \alpha \beta^2 \, q^3 + \beta^3 \, q^5 - \alpha^2 \beta \, q^7 + 2\alpha^2 \beta \, q^{10} - \alpha^2 \beta \, q^{12} - \alpha \beta^2 \, q^{13} + 2\alpha\beta^2 \, q^{15} + \ldots \right).
\end{multline*}
To prove \eqref{eq:claim}, we first note that Theorem 5.1 of \cite{garvan} shows that $\eta(25z)L(z) \in M_1^!(\Gamma_0(25) \cap \Gamma_1(5))$;
since $\eta(z)/\eta(25z) \in M_0^!(\Gamma_0(25))$ it follows that $\eta(z) L(z) \in M_1^!(\Gamma)$.
Suppose that $\gamma=\pmatrix abcd\in \Gamma$, and let
\[
\gamma_n := \pmmatrix{a}{nb}{c/n}{d}.
\]
Then $\pmatrix{n}001\gamma = \gamma_{n} \pmatrix{n}001$.
By a result of Biagioli \cite[Proposition 2.5]{biagioli} we have
\begin{equation}
g(10z) \sl_{0} \gamma = v_{\eta}^{14}(\gamma_{10}) \, g(10z) \quad \text{ and } \quad h(10z) \sl_{0} \gamma = v_{\eta}^{14}(\gamma_{10}) \, h(10z)
\end{equation}
where $v_{\eta}$ is the multiplier system for $\eta(z)$ (see \cite[(2.5)]{biagioli}).
For $d$ odd we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:eta-mult}
v_\eta^2(\gamma) = (-1)^{\frac{d-1}{2}} \zeta_{12}^{-ac(d^2-1)+d(b-c)}.
\end{equation}
We have
$\eta^2(2z) \sl_{1} \gamma = v_\eta^2(\gamma_2) \eta^2(2z)$
and
$\eta^2(50z) \sl_{1} \gamma = v_\eta^2(\gamma_{50}) \eta^2(50z)$.
A computation involving \eqref{eq:eta-mult} shows that
\[
v_\eta^2(\gamma_2) v_\eta^{14}(\gamma_{10}) = v_\eta^2(\gamma_{50}) v_\eta^{14}(\gamma_{10}) = 1.
\]
It follows that $\eta(z)R(z) \in M_1^!(\Gamma)$.
It remains to show that $\eta(z)L(z)$ and $\eta(z)R(z)$ are holomorphic at the cusps.
Using {\sc magma} we compute a set of $\Gamma$-inequivalent cusp representatives:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:cusps}
\left\{\infty, \, 0, \, \mfrac{1}{8}, \, \mfrac{2}{15}, \, \mfrac{1}{7}, \, \mfrac{3}{20}, \, \mfrac{1}{6}, \, \mfrac{1}{5}, \, \mfrac{13}{50}, \, \mfrac{4}{15}, \, \mfrac{11}{40}, \, \mfrac{7}{25}, \, \mfrac{3}{10}, \, \mfrac{7}{20}, \, \mfrac{9}{25}, \, \mfrac{11}{30}, \, \mfrac{2}{5}, \, \mfrac{8}{15}, \, \mfrac{11}{20}, \, \mfrac{3}{5}, \, \mfrac{7}{10}, \, \mfrac{29}{40}, \, \mfrac{11}{15}, \, \mfrac{4}{5}\right\}.
\end{equation}
Given a cusp $\mathfrak a \in \mathbb{P}^1(\mathbb{Q})$ and a meromorphic modular form $f$ of weight $k$ with Fourier expansion $f(z)=\sum_{n\in \mathbb{Q}}a(n) q^n$, the invariant order of $f$ at $\mathfrak a$ is defined as
\begin{align*}
\ord(f,\infty) &:= \min \{n: a(n)\neq 0\}, \\
\ord(f,\mathfrak a) &:= \ord(f\sl_{k} \gamma_{\mathfrak a}, \infty),
\end{align*}
where $\gamma_{\mathfrak a}\in {\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z})$ sends $\infty$ to $\mathfrak a$.
For $N\in \mathbb{N}$, we have the relation (see e.g. \cite[(1.7)]{biagioli})
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ord-relation}
\ord(f(Nz), \tfrac rs) = \mfrac{(N,s)^2}{N} \ord(f,\tfrac {Nr}s).
\end{equation}
We extend this definition to functions $f$ in the set
\[
S := \{\widetildeto{f} M(\tfrac a5,z), \widetildeto{f} N(\tfrac a5,z) : a=1,2\} \cup \{\widetildeto{f} M(a,b,z), \widetildeto{f} N(a,b,z) : 0\leq a\leq 4, 1\leq b\leq 4\}
\]
by defining the orders of these functions at $\infty$ to be the orders of their holomorphic parts at $\infty$ (see Section 6.2 and (2.1)--(2.4) of \cite{garvan}); that is,
\begin{align}
\ord\left(\widetildeto{f} M\left(\mfrac a5, z\right), \infty\right) = \ord\left(\widetildeto{f} M(a,b,z), \infty\right) &:= \mfrac{3a}{10}\left(1-\mfrac a5\right) - \mfrac 1{24}, \label{eq:m-ord}\\
\ord\left(\widetildeto{f} N\left(\mfrac a5, z\right), \infty\right) &:= -\mfrac 1{24}, \label{eq:n-ord-1}\\
\ord\left(\widetildeto{f} N(a,b,z), \infty\right) &:= \mfrac b5 k(b,5) - \mfrac{3b^2}{50} - \mfrac 1{24},\label{eq:n-ord-2}
\end{align}
where $k(b,5)=1$ if $b\in\{1,2\}$ and $2$ if $b\in\{3,4\}$.
Lastly, for $f\in S$ we define
\begin{equation}
\ord\left(f,\mathfrak a\right) := \ord(f\sl_{\frac 12}\gamma_{\mathfrak a}, \infty).
\end{equation}
This is well-defined since $S$ is closed (up to multiplication by roots of unity) under the action of ${\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Z})$.
By this same fact we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:eta-n-cusps}
\min_{\text{cusps }\mathfrak a} \ord\left(\widetildeto{f} N(\tfrac a5,z),\mathfrak a\right) \geq \min_{f\in S} \ord(f,\infty) = -\mfrac 1{24},
\end{equation}
from which it follows that
\[
\ord\left(\eta(z)\widetildeto{f} N(\tfrac a5,z),\mathfrak a\right) \geq 0 \qquad \text{ for all }\mathfrak a.
\]
To determine the order of $\eta(z)\widetildeto{f} M(\tfrac a5,25z)$ at the cusps of $\Gamma$, we write
\[
\eta(z)\widetildeto{f} M(\tfrac a5,25z) = \frac{\eta(z)}{\eta(25z)} m(25z), \qquad \text{ where } m(z) = \eta(z)\widetildeto{f} M(\tfrac a5,z).
\]
The cusps of $\Gamma_0(25)$ are $\infty$ and $\frac r5$, $0\leq r\leq 4$.
By \eqref{eq:ord-relation} the function $\eta(z)/\eta(25z)$ is holomorphic at every cusp except for those which are $\Gamma_0(25)$-equivalent to $\infty$ (the latter are $\frac{13}{50}$, $\frac 7{25}$, and $\frac{9}{25}$ in \eqref{eq:cusps}); there we have $\ord(\eta(z)/\eta(25z),\infty)=-1$.
Since $\widetildeto{f} M(\frac a5,z)$ also satisfies \eqref{eq:eta-n-cusps}, it suffices to check
$\frac {13}{50}$, $\frac {7}{25}$, and $\frac {9}{25}$.
By \eqref{eq:ord-relation}, \cite[Theorems 3.1 and 3.2]{garvan}, the fact that $\pmatrix{13}{6}{2}{1} = T^6S^{-1}T^{-2}S$, and \eqref{eq:sl}, we have
\begin{align*}
\ord\left(m(25z),\mfrac{13}{50}\right)
&= 25 \ord\left(m(z),\mfrac{13}{2}\right) \\
&= 25 \left(\mfrac 1{24} + \ord\left(\widetildeto{f} M(3a \bmod 5,a,z),\infty\right)\right) =
\begin{cases}
9 & \text{ if }a=1, \\
6 & \text{ if }a=2.
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
A similar computation shows that $\ord(m(25z),\frac 7{25}),\ord(m(25z),\frac 9{25}) \geq 4$.
Since $L(z)$ is holomorphic on $\mathbb{H}$,
we have, for each cusp $\mathfrak a$, the inequality
\[
\ord(\eta(z) L(z), \mathfrak a) \geq \min \left\{ \ord\left(\eta(z) f(z),\mathfrak a\right) : f(z)=\widetildeto{f} N(\tfrac 15,z), \widetildeto{f} M(\tfrac 15,25z), \widetildeto{f} M(\tfrac 25,25z) \right\} \geq 0.
\]
We turn to $\eta(z)R(z)$.
For this we require Theorem 3.3 of \cite{biagioli}, which states that
\begin{align}
\ord(g,\tfrac rs) &=
\begin{cases}
\mfrac{11}{60} & \text{ if } 5\mid s\text{ and } r\equiv \pm 2 \pmod 5, \\
-\mfrac{1}{60} & \text{ otherwise,}
\end{cases} \label{eq:g-cusp} \\
\ord(h,\tfrac rs) &=
\begin{cases}
\mfrac{11}{60} & \text{ if } 5\mid s\text{ and } r\equiv \pm 1 \pmod 5, \\
-\mfrac{1}{60} & \text{ otherwise.}
\end{cases} \label{eq:h-cusp}
\end{align}
Here we have corrected a typo in (3.2) of \cite{biagioli} (see (2.9) and Lemma 3.2 of that paper).
By \eqref{eq:ord-relation}, \eqref{eq:g-cusp}, and \eqref{eq:h-cusp} we have
\[
\ord\left( \eta(z)R(z), \tfrac rs \right) \geq - \mfrac{(10,s)^2}{600} + \min \left\{ \mfrac 1{24} + \mfrac{(50,s)^2-(25,s)^2}{600}, \mfrac{(2,s)^2}{24} \right\}.
\]
Since the latter expression is nonnegative for all $s\mid 50$, it follows that $\eta(z)R(z)$ is holomorphic at the cusps.
This completes the proof.
\qed
\bibliographystyle{alphanum-2}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:in}
In this note we investigate closure properties of context-free, ET0L, EDT0L and indexed languages under the operation of permuting a finite number of factors.
Let $S_k$ denote the set of permutations on $k$ letters.
We sharpen a result of \cite{MR630064} who proved that if $L$ is context-free (respectively one-counter, linear) then the language \[C^k(L)=\{w_{\sigma(1)}\ldots w_{\sigma(k)}\mid w_1\ldots w_k\in L,\sigma\in S_k\}\]
is not context-free (respectively one-counter, linear) in general for $k\geq 3$.
In our main result, Theorem \ref{thm:etolmain}, we prove that if $L$ is ET0L (respectively EDT0L), then $C^k(L)$ is also ET0L (respectively EDT0L). Since context-free languages are ET0L, it follows that if $L$ is context-free, then $C^k(L)$ is ET0L.
\cite{MR630064} proved that regular, context-sensitive and recursively enumerable languages are closed under $C^k$, so our results extend this list to include ET0L and EDT0L.
The language $C^2(L)$ is simply the
{\em cyclic closure} of $L$, given by
\[{cyc}(L)=\{w_2w_1\mid w_1w_2\in L\}.\]
\cite{MR0334597, MR0478788}
proved that the cyclic closure of a context-free language is context-free. In Theorem \ref{thm:firstmain} we show that the same is true for indexed languages.
The cyclic closure of a language, as well as the generalization $C^k$, are natural operations on languages, which can prove useful in determining whether a language belongs to a certain class. These operations are particularly relevant when studying languages attached to conjugacy in groups and semigroups (see \cite{CHHR}).
\section{Permutations of ET0L and EDT0L languages}
The acronym {ET0L} (respectively {EDT0L}) refers to {\em {\rm E}xtended, {\rm T}able,
{\rm 0} interaction, and {\rm L}indenmayer} (respectively D\emph{eterministic}).
There is a vast literature on Lindenmayer systems, see \cite{RozS86}, with various acronyms such as D0L, DT0L, ET0L, HDT0L and so forth.
The following inclusions hold: EDT0L $\subset$ ET0L $\subset$ indexed, and context-free $\subset$ ET0L.
Furthermore, the classes of EDT0L and
context-free languages are incomparable.
\begin{defn}[ET0L]
An \emph{ET0L-system} is a tuple $H=(V,\mathcal{A},\Delta,I)$, where
\begin{enumerate}
\item $V$ is a finite alphabet,
\item $\mathcal{A}\subseteq V$ is the subset of \emph{terminal symbols},
\item $\Delta=\{P_1,\ldots,P_n\}$ is a finite set of \emph{tables}, meaning
each $P_i$ is a finite subset
of $V\times V^*$, and
\item $I\subseteq V^*$ is a finite set of \emph{axioms}.
\end{enumerate}
A word over $V$ is called a \emph{sentential form (of $H$)}.
For $u,v\in V^*$, we write $u\Rightarrow_{H,i} v$ if $u=c_1\cdots c_m$
for some $c_1,\ldots, c_m\in V$ and $v=v_1\cdots v_m$ for some
$v_1,\ldots,v_m\in V^*$ with $(c_j,v_j) \in P_i$ for every $j\in \{1,\ldots, m\}$.
We write $u\Rightarrow_H v$
if $u\Rightarrow_{H,i} v$ for some $i\in\{1,\ldots,n\}$.
If there exist sentential forms $u_0,\ldots,u_k$ with $u_i\Rightarrow_{H} u_{i+1}$ for $0\leq i\leq n-1$,
then we write $u_0 \Rightarrow_H^* u_k$.
The language \emph{generated by $H$} is defined as
\begin{align*} L(H) & =\{ v\in \mathcal{A}^* \mid w\Rightarrow_H^* v~\text{for some $w\in I$} \}. \end{align*}
A language is ET0L if it is equal to $L(H)$ for some ET0L system $H$.
\end{defn}
We may write $c\to v\in P$ to mean $(c,v)\in P$.
We call $(c,v)$ a {\em rule for $c$},
and use the convention that if for some $c\in V$
no rule for $c$ is specified in $P$, then $P$ contains the
rule $(c,c)$.
\begin{defn}[EDT0L]
An \emph{EDT0L-system}
is an ET0L system where in each table there is
exactly one rule for each letter in $V$.
A language is EDT0L if it is equal to $L(H)$ for some EDT0L system $H$.
\end{defn}
In this section we prove the following:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:etolmain}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a finite alphabet.
If $L\subseteq \mathcal{A}^*$ is ET0L (respectively EDT0L) then $C^k(L)$ is ET0L (respectively EDT0L).
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} We start by showing that if $\#_0,\dots, \#_k$ are distinct symbols not in $\mathcal{A}$ and $L$ is ET0L (respectively EDT0L) then so is $$L'=\{\#_0w_1\#_1\dots \#_{k-1}w_k\#_k\mid w_1\dots w_k\in L\}.$$ This will be done in Lemma~\ref{lem:inserthash} below.
We then prove in Proposition~\ref{prop:moveright}
that if $L_1$ is an ET0L (respectively EDT0L) language where each word in $L_1$ has two symbols
$a,b$ appearing exactly once,
then $L_2=\{uabwv\mid uavbw \in L_1\}$ is ET0L (respectively EDT0L).
For each permutation $\sigma\in S_k$ we apply this result to $L'$ for $$(a,b)=\left(\#_{\sigma(1)-1},\#_{\sigma(1)}\right), \dots, \left(\#_{\sigma(k)-1},\#_{\sigma(k)}\right)$$ to obtain the ET0L (respectively EDT0L) language
\begin{align*}L_\sigma&=\{\#_0\#_1\dots \#_kw_{\sigma(1)}\dots w_{\sigma(k)}\mid \#_0w_1\#_1\dots \#_{k-1}w_k\#_k\in L'\}.\end{align*}
We obtain $C^k(L)$ by applying erasing homomorphisms to remove the $\#_i$, and taking the union over all $\sigma\in S^k$.
Since ET0L (respectively EDT0L) languages are closed under homomorphism and finite union, this shows that $C^k(L)$ is ET0L (respectively EDT0L).
Thus the proof will be complete once we established the above facts.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:insertonehash}
If $L\subseteq \mathcal A^*$ is EDT0L and $\#$ is a symbol not in $\mathcal A$ then the language
$$L_\#=\{u\#v\mid uv\in L\}$$ is EDT0L.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $H=(V,\mathcal{A},\Delta,I)$ be an EDT0L system with $L=L(H)$. Without loss of generality we can assume $I \subseteq V$.
Define an EDT0L system $H_\#=(V_\#,\mathcal{A}\cup\{\#\},\Delta_\#,I_\#)$ as follows: $V_\#$ is the disjoint union $V\cup\{c_\#\mid c\in V\}$, $I_\#=\{s_\#\mid s\in I\}$, and
$m=\max_{P\in \Delta}\{|w|\mid (c,w)\in P\}$, the length of the longest right-hand side of any table.
Furthermore, we define $\Delta_\#$ to be the disjoint union $\Delta\cup \{P_{i,\#}, P_{\#,i}\mid P\in \Delta, i\in [0,m] \}$, where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
P_{i,\#}&:=\{c_\# \to ud_\#v \mid c \to udv\in P, |u|=i, d\in V\} \cup P, \\
P_{\#,i}&:=\{c_\# \to u\#v \mid c \to uv\in P, |u|=i\} \cup P.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We point out that if $c\rightarrow\varepsilon\in P$, where $\varepsilon$ denotes the empty word, then $P_{\#,0}=\{c_\#\rightarrow \#\}$, so $\{c_\# \to \# \mid c \to \varepsilon \in P\}$
will be included in $\Delta_\#$.
The new system remains finite since we have added a finite number of new letters and tables, and deterministic since letters $v_\#$ appear exactly once on the left side of each rule in the new tables.
Each word in $L(H_\#)$ is obtained starting with $s_\#\in I_\#$ and applying tables of the form $P_{i,\#}$
some number of times, until at some point, since $\mathcal{A}\cup\{\#\}$ does not contain any letter with subscript $\#$,
a table of the form $P_{\#,i}$
must be applied. Before this point there is precisely one letter in the sentential form with subscript $\#$, and
after there are no letters with subscript $\#$.
Also, if $uv\in L(H)$, then there is some $a\in I$ with $a\Rightarrow_H^* uv$, and by construction $a_\#\Rightarrow_{H_\#}^* u\#v$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:inserthash}
If $L\in\mathcal{A}$ is ET0L (respectively EDT0L) and $\#_0,\dots, \#_n$ are distinct symbols not in $\mathcal A$, then
$$L'=\{\#_0u_1\#_1\dots u_n\#_n\mid u_1\dots u_n\in L\}$$ is ET0L (respectively EDT0L).
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since ET0L languages are closed under rational transduction (\cite{RozS86}), the
result is immediate for ET0L. In contrast, the EDT0L languages are not closed under inverse
homomorphism (for example, the language $\{a^{2^n}\mid n\in\mathbb N\}$ is
EDT0L and its inverse homomorphic image $\{w\in\{a,b\}^*\mid \exists n\in\mathbb
N(|w|_a=2^n)\}$ is not (\cite{MR0363010}, Example 3). Instead, we apply
Lemma~\ref{lem:insertonehash} $n+1$ times to insert single copies of the $\#_i$, then intersect
with the regular language $\{\#_0u_1\#_1\dots u_n\#_n\mid u_i\in \mathcal
A^*\}$ to ensure that the $\#_i$ appear in the correct order.
\end{proof}
\begin{defn}[$(a,b)$-language]
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a finite alphabet
and $a,b\in \mathcal{T}$ distinct symbols. We say that $w\in \mathcal{T}^*$ is an
\emph{$(a,b)$-word} if $w\in X^* a X^* b X^*$, where $X=\mathcal{T}\setminus \{a,b\}$. A
language $L\subseteq \mathcal{T}^*$ of $(a,b)$-words is called an \emph{$(a,b)$-language}.
We define a function $\pi$ on $(a,b)$-words as follows. If $w=xaybz\in\mathcal{T}^*$, then
$\pi(w)=xabzy$. For an $(a,b)$-language $L$, we set $\pi(L)=\{\pi(w) \mid w\in
L\}$.
\end{defn}
Suppose $L$ is an $(a,b)$-language and $H=(V,\mathcal{T}, \Delta, I)$ is an ET0L or EDT0L system with $L=L(H)$.
\begin{defn}[$(a,b)$-morphism]
A morphism $\varphi:V^*\rightarrow \{a,b\}^*$ is called an {\em $(a,b)$-morphism} (for $H$)
if \begin{enumerate}\item[(1)]
$\varphi(a)=a$, $\varphi(b)=b$, and $\varphi(c)=\varepsilon$ for $c\in \mathcal{T}\setminus \{a,b\}$, and
\item[(2)] if $u,v\in V^*$ with $u\Rightarrow_H v$ then $\varphi(u)=\varphi(v)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:abmorphism}
Let $L$ be an ET0L (respectively EDT0L) language that is an $(a,b)$-language. Then $L$ can be generated by
some ET0L-system (respectively EDT0L-system) that admits an $(a,b)$-morphism.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $L$ is generated by $H=(V,\mathcal{T},\Delta,I)$, where $a,b\in \mathcal{T}$ and $\Delta=\{P_1,\ldots,P_n\}$.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that $I\subseteq V$.
We define a new ET0L (respectively EDT0L) system $H'=(V',\mathcal{T},\Delta',I')$
as follows.
Let $\mathcal{F}= \{\varepsilon, a, b, ab\}$ be the set of factors of $ab$.
Let $V'=(V\times\mathcal{F})\cup \mathcal{T}$ be the new alphabet and define the morphism $\varphi\colon V'^*\to \{a,b\}^*$ by
$\varphi((c,f))=f$ for $(c,f)\in V\times \mathcal{F}$, $\varphi(a)=a$, $\varphi(b)=b$ and
$\varphi(c)=\varepsilon$ for $c\in \mathcal{T}\setminus \{a,b\}$.
The role of the $\mathcal{F}$-component of a symbol $(c,f)$ in $V'$ is to store the
$\varphi$-image of the terminal word to be derived from $c$. Since $H$ generates
only $(a,b)$-words, we choose as axioms $I'=I\times\{ab\}$. The role of
the tables is to distribute the two letters (in the $\mathcal{F}$-component) in each
word along a production.
In the ET0L case, the new set of tables is $\Delta'=\{P'_1,\ldots,P'_n,P'_{n+1}\}$, where
\begin{align*}
P'_i &= \{ (c, f) \to (c_1,f_1)\cdots (c_m,f_m) \mid c\to c_1\cdots c_m\in P_i,~~f=f_1\cdots f_m \} \end{align*}
for each $i\in \{1,\ldots,n\}$ and
\begin{align*}
P'_{n+1} = \{ (a, a) \to a,~ (b, b) \to b\} ~~\cup~~ \{ (c,\varepsilon) \to c \mid c\in \mathcal{T}\setminus\{a,b\} \} ~~\cup~~ \{c\to c \mid c\in \mathcal{T} \}.
\end{align*}
In the EDT0L case, we introduce a separate table for each choice of a factorisation $f=f_1\cdots f_\ell$ for each $f\in\mathcal{F}$, where $\ell$ is the maximal length of any right-hand side in $H$.
The idea underlying the definition of the tables $P'_i$ is that we make multiple copies of each rule in $P_i$ based on the choices for how to partition $f$ and distribute the factors among the $c_i$'s.
We claim now that $H'=(V',\mathcal{T},\Delta',I')$ admits the morphism $\varphi$. Property (1) follows from the definition of $\varphi$, and property (2) from the definition of the tables above.
Let $\psi\colon V'^*\to V^*$ be the `first coordinate projection' morphism with $\psi((c,f))=c$ for
$(c,f)\in V\times \mathcal{F}$ and $\psi(c)=c$ for $c\in \mathcal{T}$.
For the inclusion $L(H')\subseteq L(H)$, note that $u\Rightarrow_{H'} v$
implies $\psi(u)\Rightarrow_H \psi(v)$ or $\psi(u)=\psi(v)$, so in any case
$\psi(u)\Rightarrow_H^*\psi(v)$. Thus, if $v\in L(H')$ with $w\Rightarrow_{H'}^*
v$ and $w\in I'$, then $\psi(w)\Rightarrow_{H}^*\psi(v)$ and $\psi(w)\in I$,
hence $v=\psi(v)\in L(H)$. This implies $L(H')\subseteq L(H)$.
For the inclusion $L(H)\subseteq L(H')$, a straightforward induction on $n$
yields the following claim: If $u\Rightarrow_H^n v$ with $u\in V^*$ and an
$(a,b)$-word $v\in \mathcal{T}^*$, then we have $u'\Rightarrow_{H'}^* v$ for some $u'\in
V'^*$ such that $\psi(u')=u$ and $\varphi(u')=ab$. We apply this to a
derivation $s\Rightarrow_H^* v$ with $s\in I$. Then our claim yields an $s'\in
V'^*$ with $s'\Rightarrow_{H'}^* v$, $\psi(s')=s\in I$, and
$\varphi(s')=ab$. This means $s'\in I'$ and thus $v\in L(H')$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:moveright}
Let $L$ be an $(a,b)$-language that is ET0L (respectively EDT0L). Then $\pi(L)$ is ET0L (respectively EDT0L).
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $L=L(H)$, where $H=(V,\mathcal{T},\Delta,I)$. By \prref{lem:abmorphism}, we may assume that there is an
$(a,b)$-morphism $\varphi$ for $H$. We now use $\varphi$ to define a map
similar to $\pi$ on words over $V$. A word $w\in V^*$ is said to be an
\emph{$(a,b)$-form} (short for $(a,b)$-sentential-form) if $\varphi(w)=ab$. Such a word is either of the
form $xCy$, where $r,s\in V^*$ and $C\in V$, with
$\varphi(x)=\varphi(y)=\varepsilon$ and $\varphi(C)=ab$; or it is of the form
$xAyBz$ with $x,y,z\in V^*$ and $A,B\in V$ with
$\varphi(x)=\varphi(y)=\varphi(z)=\varepsilon$ and $\varphi(A)=a$,
$\varphi(B)=b$.
In the former case, $w$ is called \emph{fused}, in the latter it is called \emph{split}.
Let $p,q$ be symbols with $p,q\notin V$. We define the function $\tilde{\pi}$
on $(a,b)$-forms as follows. If $w$ is fused, then
$\tilde{\pi}(w)=wpq$. If $w$ is split with $w=xAyBz$ as above, then
$\tilde{\pi}(w)=xABzpyq$. In other words,
the factor between $a$ and $b$ in $w$ will be moved between $p$ and $q$.
For a set $L$ of $(a,b)$-forms, we set
$\tilde{\pi}(L)=\{\tilde{\pi}(w) \mid w\in L\}$. Note that $\tilde{\pi}$ differs from
$\pi$ by introducing the letters $p,q$. This will simplify the ensuing
construction.
The idea is to construct an ET0L (respectively EDT0L) system
$H'=(V',\mathcal{T}',\Delta',I')$, in which $V'$ is the disjoint union $V\cup \{p,q\}$
and $\mathcal{T}'=\mathcal{T}\cup \{p,q\}$, such that for $(a,b)$-forms $u,v\in V^*$, we have
\begin{align} &u\Rightarrow_H v && \text{if and only if} && \tilde{\pi}(u) \Rightarrow_{H'} \tilde{\pi}(v) \label{eq:eperm} \end{align}
Moreover, for each $(a,b)$-form $u\in V^*$ and $v'\in V'^*$ with
$\tilde{\pi}(u)\Rightarrow_{H'} v'$, there is an $(a,b)$-form $v\in
V^*$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fperm}
\begin{gathered}
\xymatrix@M=7pt@=20pt{
u \ar@2{->}[r]_>{H} \ar@{|->}[d]_{\tilde{\pi}} & v \ar@{|->}[d]^{\tilde{\pi}}\\
\tilde{\pi}(u) \ar@2{->}[r]_>{H'} & v'
}
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
For example, if the derivation $\tilde{\pi}(xAyBz)=xABzpyq \Rightarrow_{H'} x'A'B'z'py'q$ holds (the split-split case for $u$ and $v$), then $xAyBz \Rightarrow_{H}x'A'y'B'z'$, and similar implications hold in the other cases.
We define $I'$ as $I'=\{ \tilde{\pi}(w) \mid w\in I \}$, hence equation (\ref{eq:eperm})
implies $\tilde{\pi}(L(H))\subseteq L(H')$ and equation (\ref{eq:fperm}) implies
$L(H')\subseteq \tilde{\pi}(L(H))$. Together, we have
$L(H')=\tilde{\pi}(L(H))$, meaning $\tilde{\pi}(L(H))$ is an ET0L (respectively EDT0L) language.
Furthermore, we have $\pi(L(H))=\psi(\tilde{\pi}(L(H)))$, where $\psi$ is the
homomorphism that erases $p,q$. Thus, since the classes of ET0L and EDT0L languages are
closed under homomorphic images, proving equations (\ref{eq:eperm}), (\ref{eq:fperm}) implies that
$\pi(L(H))$ is an ET0L (respectively EDT0L) language and hence \prref{prop:moveright}.
As before, we write $\Delta=\{P_1,\ldots,P_n\}$.
Let $\ell$ be the maximal length of a right-hand side in the productions of $H$, and let $V^{\le \ell}$ denote the set of all words in $V^*$ of length at most $\ell$.
The set $\Delta'$ consists of the following tables:
\begin{align*}
&P'_{i} && \text{for each $1\le i\le n$}, \\
&P'_{i,w} && \text{for each $1\le i\le n$ and $w\in V^{\le \ell}$ with $\varphi(w)=\varepsilon$,} \\
&P'_{i,u,v} && \text{for each $1\le i\le n$ and $u,v\in V^{\le \ell}$ with $\varphi(u)=\varphi(v)=\varepsilon$,}
\end{align*}
which we describe next. The table $P'_i$ allows $H'$ to mimic (in the sense of
\eqref{eq:eperm}) steps in $P_i$ that start in a fused word and result in
a fused word. Each table $P'_i$ comprises the following productions:
\begin{align*}
& A\to z && \text{for each $A\to z\in P_i$ with $\varphi(A)=\varepsilon$,} \\
& C\to xDy && \text{for each $C\to xDy\in P_i$ with $D\in V$} \\
& && \text{and $\varphi(C)=\varphi(D)=ab$,} \\
& p \to p, && \\
& q\to q. &&
\end{align*}
The table $P'_{i,w}$ mimics all steps of $P_i$ where a fused word is
turned into a split one, such that between the introduced $A,B\in V$,
$\varphi(A)=a$, $\varphi(B)=b$, the word $w$ is inserted. It contains the
following productions:
\begin{align*}
& A\to z && \text{for each $A\to z\in P_i$ with $\varphi(A)=\varepsilon$,} \\
& C\to x A B y && \text{for each $C\to x A w B y \in P_i$ with $\varphi(C)=ab$,} \\
& && \text{$\varphi(A)=a$, and $\varphi(B)=b$,} \\
& p \to p w, && \\
& q\to q. &&
\end{align*}
Finally, the table $P'_{i,u,v}$ mimics a step of $P_i$ that starts in a split word and produces a split one, such that
(i) the symbol $A$ with $\varphi(A)=a$ generates $u$ to its right and (ii) the symbol $B$ with $\varphi(B)=b$ generates $v$ to its left.
It consists of the productions
\begin{align*}
& A\to z && \text{for each $A\to z\in P_i$ with $\varphi(A)=\varepsilon$,} \\
& A \to xA' && \text{for each $A\to xA'u\in P_{i}$ with $\varphi(A)=\varphi(A')=a$,} \\
& B \to B'y && \text{for each $B\to vB'y\in P_{i}$ with $\varphi(B)=\varphi(B')=b$,} \\
& p \to p u, && \\
& q\to vq. &&
\end{align*}
It can be verified straightforwardly that with these tables, equations (\ref{eq:eperm}), (\ref{eq:fperm})
are satisfied. In addition, if the table $P_i$ has exactly one rule for each letter in $V$ then $P'_i,P'_{i,w}$ and $P'_{iu,v}$ has exactly one rule for each letter in $V'$, so if $H$ is EDT0L then so is $H'$. We have thus proven \prref{prop:moveright}.
\end{proof}
\section{Cyclic closure of indexed is indexed}\label{sec:main}
Recall that an indexed language is one that is generated by the following type of grammar:
\begin{defn}
[Indexed grammar; \cite{MR0258547}]
An {\em indexed grammar} is a 5-tuple $(\mathcal N, \mathcal T, \mathcal I, \mathcal P, S)$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathcal N, \mathcal T, \mathcal I$ are three mutually disjoint sets of symbols, called {\em nonterminals, terminals} and {\em indices} (or {\em flags}) respectively.
\item $S\in\mathcal N$ is the {\em start symbol}.
\item $\mathcal P$ is a finite set of {\em productions}, each having the form of one of the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $A \rightarrow B^f$.
\item $A^f \rightarrow v$.
\item $A \rightarrow u$.
\end{enumerate}
where $A, B \in\mathcal N$, $f\in \mathcal I$ and $u,v\in(\mathcal N\cup\mathcal T)^*$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
As usual in grammars, indexed grammars successively transform sentential forms,
which are defined as follows. An \emph{atom} is either a terminal letter
$x\in\mathcal{T}$ or a pair $(A,\gamma)$ with $A\in \mathcal N$ and $\gamma\in
\mathcal{I}^*$. Such a pair $(A,\gamma)$ is also denoted $A^\gamma$. A
\emph{sentential form} of an indexed grammar is a (finite) sequence of atoms.
In particular, every string over $\mathcal T$ is a sentential form. The
language defined by an indexed grammar is the set of all strings of terminals
that can be obtained by successively applying production rules starting from
the sentential form $S$. Let $\A\in \mathcal N, \gamma\in \mathcal I^*$.
Define a letter homomorphism $\pi_\gamma$ by
\[
\pi_\gamma(c)=\begin{cases}c^\gamma & \text{if $c\in \mathcal N$},\\
c & \text{if $c\in \mathcal T$}.\end{cases}
\]
In contrast to ETOL systems, where each step replaces every symbol in the sentential form,
indexed grammars transform only one atom per step.
Production rules transform sentential forms as follows.
For an atom $A^\gamma$ in the sentential form:
\begin{enumerate}
\item applying $A \rightarrow B^f$ replaces one occurrence of $A^\gamma$ by $B^{f \gamma}$
\item if $\gamma=f\delta$ with $f\in \mathcal I$, applying $A^f\rightarrow v$ replaces one occurrence of $A^\gamma$ (with $\gamma\in\mathcal I^*$) by $\pi_\delta(v)$
\item applying $A\rightarrow u$ replaces one occurrence of $A^\gamma$ by $\pi_\gamma(u)$.
\end{enumerate}
We call the operation of successively applying productions starting from the
sentential form $S$ and terminating at a string $u\in\mathcal T^*$ a {\em
derivation} of $u$. We use the notation $\Rightarrow$ to denote a sequence of
productions within a derivation, and call such a sequence a {\em
subderivation}. Sometimes we abuse notation and write $u\to v$ for sentential
forms $u$ and $v$ to denote that $v$ results from $u$ by applying one rule.
We represent a derivation $S\Rightarrow u\in \mathcal T^*$ pictorially using a {\em parse tree},
which is defined in the same way as for context-free grammars (see for example \cite{MR645539} page 83)
with root labeled by $S$, internal nodes labeled by $A^\omega$ for $A\in \mathcal N$ and $\omega\in \mathcal{I}^*$
and leaves labeled by $\mathcal T\cup\{\varepsilon\}$.
A {\em path-skeleton} of a parse tree is the (labeled) $1$-neighbourhood of some path from the root vertex to a leaf.
See \prref{fig:pathskeleton} for an example.
\begin{defn}[Normal form]
An indexed grammar $(\mathcal N, \mathcal T, \mathcal I, \mathcal P, S)$ is in {\em normal form} if
all productions are of one of the following types:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $A \rightarrow B^f$
\item \label{second}$ A^f \rightarrow B$
\item \label{third} $A \rightarrow BC$
\item \label{forth} $A \rightarrow a$
\end{enumerate}
where $A, B, C \in\mathcal N$, $f\in \mathcal I$ and $a\in\mathcal T$.
\end{defn}
An indexed grammar can be put into normal form as follows.
For each production $\A^f \rightarrow v$ with $v\not\in\mathcal N$, introduce a new nonterminal $\B$, add productions $\A^f \rightarrow \B, \B \rightarrow v$, and remove $\A^f \rightarrow v$.
By the same arguments used for Chomsky normal form, each production $A \rightarrow u$ without flags can be replaced by a set of
productions of type \ref{third} and \ref{forth} above.
\cite{MR0334597, MR0478788}
proved that the cyclic closure of a context-free language is context-free.
A sketch of a proof of this fact is given in the solution to Exercise 6.4 (c) in \cite{MR645539},
and we generalise the approach taken there to show that the class of indexed languages is also closed
under the cyclic closure operation.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:firstmain}
If $L$ is indexed, then ${cyc}(L)$ is indexed.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The idea of the proof is to take the parse-tree of a derivation of $w_1w_2\in L$ in $\Gamma$ and ``turn it upside down",
using the leaf corresponding to the first letter of the word $w_2$ as the new start symbol.
Let $\Gamma = (\mathcal N, \mathcal T, \mathcal I, \mathcal P, S)$ be an indexed grammar for $L$ in normal form.
If $w = a_1\ldots a_n\in L$ with $a_i\in \mathcal T$ and we wish to generate the cyclic permutation $a_k\ldots a_n a_1\ldots a_{k-1}$ of $w$,
take some parse tree for $w$ in $\Gamma$ and draw the unique path $F$ from the start symbol $S$ to $a_k$.
Consider the path-skeleton for $F$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]
\draw[ultra thick,decorate] (2,7) -- (4,5) -- (1,2)--(3,0);
\draw[decorate] (2,7) -- (1,6);
\draw[decorate] (4,5) -- (5,4);
\draw[decorate] (3,4) -- (4,3);
\draw[decorate] (1,2) -- (0,1);
\draw (3,6) node {$\bullet$};
\draw (2,3) node {$\bullet$};
\draw (2,1) node {$\bullet$};
\draw (2.1,7.4) node {$S$};
\draw (0.7,6.2) node {$\A_1$};
\draw (3.3,6.2) node {$\B_1$};
\draw (4.4,5.2) node {$\B_2^{f}$};
\draw (5.3,4.2) node {$\A_4^{f}$};
\draw (2.7,4.2) node {$\B_3^{f}$};
\draw (4.3,3.2) node {$\A_3^{f}$};
\draw (1.7,3.2) node {$\B_4^{f}$};
\draw (0.7,2.2) node {$\B_5^{gf}$};
\draw (-.3,1.2) node {$\A_2^{gf}$};
\draw (2.5,1.2) node {$\B_6^{gf}$};
\draw (3,-.2) node {$a_k$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Path-skeleton in an indexed grammar.
\label{fig:pathskeleton}}
\end{figure}
In the example given in \prref{fig:pathskeleton},
the desired word $a_k\ldots a_n a_1\ldots a_{k-1}$ can be derived from the
string $a_k \A_3^{f} \A_4^{f} \A_1 \A_2^{gf}$, using productions in $\mathcal P$.
Therefore we wish to enlarge the grammar to generate all strings $$a_k \A_{k+1}^{w_{k+1}}\dots \A_n^{w_n} \A_1^{w_1} \ldots \A_{k-1}^{w_{k-1}},$$
where $\A_1^{w_1},\ldots,\A_{k-1}^{w_{k-1}}$ are the labels of the vertices lying immediately to the left of $F$ (in top to bottom order),
and $\A_{k+1}^{w_{k+1}},\ldots,\A_n^{w_n}$ are the labels of the vertices lying immediately to the right of $F$ (in bottom to top order).
We do this by introducing new `hatted' nonterminals, with which we label all the vertices along the path $F$,
and new productions which are the reverse of the old productions `with hats on'. By first nondeterministically guessing
the flag on the nonterminal immediately preceding $a_k$, we are able to essentially generate the path-skeleton in reverse.
The grammar for ${cyc}(L)$ is given by $\Gamma' = (\mathcal N', \mathcal T', \mathcal I', \mathcal P\cup \mathcal P', S_0)$,
where $\mathcal T'=\mathcal T$, $\mathcal I'=\mathcal I\cup \{\$\}$ (where $\$$ is a new symbol not in $\mathcal I$),
$S_0\in\mathcal N'\setminus \mathcal N$ is the new start symbol, and $\mathcal N'$ and $\mathcal P'$ are as follows.
Let $\hat{\mathcal N}$ be the set of symbols obtained from $\mathcal N$ by placing a hat on them.
Then the disjoint union $\mathcal N' = \mathcal N\cup \hat{\mathcal N}\cup\{S_0, \tilde{S}\}$ is the new set of nonterminals.
The productions $\mathcal P'$ are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $S_0 \rightarrow S$, $S_0 \rightarrow \tilde{S}^{\$}$, $\hat{S}^{\$}\rightarrow \varepsilon$
\item for each $f\in \mathcal I$, a production $\tilde{S} \rightarrow \tilde{S}^f$
\item for each production $\A \rightarrow a$ in $\mathcal P$, a production $\tilde{S} \rightarrow a\hat{\A} $
\item for each production $A\rightarrow B^f$ in $\mathcal P$, a production
$\hat{B}^f \rightarrow \hat{A}$
\item for each production $\A^f \rightarrow \B$ in $\mathcal P$, a production
$\hat{\B} \rightarrow \hat{\A}^f$
\item for each production $\A \rightarrow \B\C$ in $\mathcal P$, productions
$\hat{\B} \rightarrow \C \hat{\A}$ and $\hat{\C} \rightarrow \hat{\A} \B$
\end{enumerate}
Note that the new grammar is no longer in normal form.
Informally, the new grammar operates as follows.
Let $w = w_1 w_2\in L$ and suppose we wish to produce $w_2 w_1$.
If a derivation starts with $S_0 \rightarrow S$, then the word produced is some word from $L$.
(This corresponds to the case when one of the $w_i$ is empty.)
Otherwise derivations start with $S_0 \rightarrow \tilde{S}^\$$, followed by some sequence of productions
$\tilde{S} \rightarrow \tilde{S}^f$,
building up a flag word on $\tilde{S}$. This is how we nondeterministically guess the flag label
$\gamma$ on the second last node of the path-skeleton.
After this we apply a production $\tilde{S} \rightarrow a\hat{\A} $,
where $a$ is the first letter of $w_2$ (labelling the end leaf of the path-skeleton)
and $A$ is the non-terminal labelling the
second last vertex of the path-skeleton.
Note that the flag label $\gamma\$$ is transferred to $\hat{\A}$.
After this point, productions of types 4, 5, and 6 are applied to simulate going in
reverse along the path-skeleton, at each step producing a sentential form with
exactly one hatted symbol.
The only way to remove the hat symbol is to apply the production $\hat{S}^{\$}\rightarrow \varepsilon$.
Observe that all flags on nonterminals in a derivation starting from $S_0 \rightarrow \tilde{S}^{\$}$
are words in $\mathcal I^*\$$, and since $\$$ is always at the right end of a flag it
does not interfere with any productions from $\mathcal P$, so in particular rules $A\rightarrow a$
to the sides of the path-skeleton produce the same strings of terminals as they do in $\Gamma$.
We will show by induction on $n$ that in this new grammar, if $\A, \A_1, \ldots, \A_n\in \mathcal N$ then
\begin{equation}\A^w \Rightarrow \A^{w_1}_1\ldots \A^{w_i}_i \ldots \A^{w_n}_n \label{deriv:forward} \end{equation} if and only if
\begin{equation}\hat{\A}^{w_i}_i \Rightarrow \A^{w_{i+1}}_{i+1} \ldots \A^{w_n}_n \hat{\A}^{w} \A^{w_1}_1 \ldots \A^{w_{i-1}}_{i-1}
\label{deriv:rotated} \end{equation} for all $1\leq i\leq n$.
To see why this will suffice, suppose first that \[ S \Rightarrow \A^{w_1}_1\ldots
\A^{w_{i-1}}_{i-1} \A^{w_i}_i \A^{w_{i+1}}_{i+1} \ldots \A^{w_n}_n \rightarrow
\A^{w_1}_1\ldots \A^{w_{i-1}}_{i-1} a \A^{w_{i+1}}_{i+1} \ldots \A^{w_n}_n \] in the original grammar $\Gamma$.
So $\A_i\rightarrow a $ is in $\mathcal P$.
Then in the new grammar
\[
S_0 \Rightarrow \tilde{S}^{w_i\$} \rightarrow a \hat{\A}^{w_i\$}_i
\Rightarrow a \A^{w_{i+1}\$}_{i+1} \ldots \A^{w_n\$}_n \hat{S}^{\$} \A^{w_1\$}_1 \ldots \A^{w_{i-1}\$}_{i-1} \\
\rightarrow a \A^{w_{i+1}\$}_{i+1} \ldots \A^{w_n\$}_n \A^{w_1\$}_1 \ldots \A^{w_{i-1}\$}_{i-1}.
\]
Each $A^{w_j\$}_j$ produces exactly the same set of words in $\Gamma'$ as $A_j^{w_j}$ produces in $\Gamma$.
Hence every cyclic permutation of a word in $L$ is in the new language.
Conversely, suppose $S_0 \Rightarrow a \B^{v_1}_1 \ldots \B^{v_n}_n$ and that this subderivation does not start with $S_0 \rightarrow S$.
Then the subderivation begins with $S_0 \rightarrow \tilde{S}^{\$} \Rightarrow \tilde{S}^{u} \rightarrow a \hat{\A}^{u}$ for some $u\in {\mathcal I}^* \$$, $\A\in \mathcal N$.
Once a `hatted' symbol has been introduced, the only way to get rid of the hat is via the production $\hat{S}^{\$} \rightarrow \varepsilon$.
Hence we must have $\hat{\A}^{u} \Rightarrow \B^{v_1}_1 \ldots \B^{v_j}_j \hat{S}^{\$} \B^{v_{j+1}}_{j+1} \ldots \B^{v_n}_n$ for some ${0\leq j\leq n}$
(with the factor before or after $\hat{S}$ being empty if $j=0$ or $j=n$ respectively).
But then
\[
S^{\$}
\Rightarrow \B^{v_{j+1}}_{j+1} \ldots \B^{v_n}_n \A^u \B^{v_1}_1 \ldots \B^{v_j}_j \\
\rightarrow \B^{v_{j+1}}_{j+1} \ldots \B^{v_n}_n a \B^{v_1}_1 \ldots \B^{v_j}_j
\]
and so if a word is produced by the new grammar, some cyclic permutation of that word is in $L$.
We finish by giving the inductive proof of the equivalence of \eqref{deriv:forward} and \eqref{deriv:rotated}. For the case $n=1$,
the productions of type 5 and 6 in the definition of the grammar for ${cyc}(L)$ show that $\A^w \Rightarrow \B^u$ if and only if $\hat{\B}^{u} \Rightarrow \hat{\A}^{w}$.
For the case $n=2$, we have $\A^w \Rightarrow \B^u \C^v$ if and only if at some point in the parse tree,
we see a subtree labeled
$X^t \rightarrow Y^t Z^t$,
with $\A^w \Rightarrow X^t$, $Y^t \Rightarrow \B^u$ and $Z^t \Rightarrow \C^v$. The productions in these last three subderivations are all of the form
$D \rightarrow {E}^f$ or ${D}^f \rightarrow {E}$, so they are equivalent to
$\hat{X}^t \Rightarrow \hat{\A}^w$, $\hat{\B}^u \Rightarrow \hat{Y}^t$ and $\hat{\C}^v \Rightarrow \hat{Z}^t$.
Also $X \rightarrow Y Z$ if and only if $\hat{Y} \rightarrow Z \hat{X}$ and $\hat{Z} \rightarrow \hat{X} Y$.
Putting these together, we have $\A^w \Rightarrow \B^u \C^v$ if and only if
\[ \hat{\B}^u \Rightarrow \hat{Y}^t \rightarrow Z^t \hat{X}^t \Rightarrow \C^v \hat{\A}^w \]
and
\[ \hat{\C}^v \Rightarrow \hat{Z}^t \rightarrow \hat{X}^t Y^t \Rightarrow \hat{\A}^w \B^u, \]
as required.
Now for $n>2$, suppose our statement is true for $k<n$.
Then $\A^w \Rightarrow \A^{w_1}_1 \A^{w_2}_2 \ldots \A^{w_n}_n$ if and only if for each $1\leq i\leq n$
there are $X_i, Y_i, Z_i\in {\mathcal N}$ and $t\in {\mathcal I}^*$ such that $X_i\rightarrow Y_i Z_i$ and
for some $1\leq j\leq n$ either
\[ \A^w \Rightarrow \A^{w_1}_1 \ldots \A^{w_{i-1}}_{i-1} X_i^t \A^{w_j}_j \ldots \A^{w_n}_n, \]
with $Y_i^t \Rightarrow \A_i^{w_i}$ and $Z_i^t \Rightarrow \A_{i+1}^{w_{i+1}} \ldots \A_{j-1}^{w_{j-1}}$, or
\[ \A^w \Rightarrow \A^{w_1}_1 \ldots \A^{w_j}_j X_i^t \A^{w_{i+1}}_{i+1} \ldots \A^{w_n}_n, \]
with $Y_i^t \Rightarrow \A_{j+1}^{w_{j+1}} \ldots \A_{i-1}^{w_{i-1}}$ and $Z_i^t \Rightarrow \A_i^{w_i}$.
We will consider only the second of these, as it is the slightly more complicated one and the first is
very similar.
The right hand side of the displayed subderivation has fewer than $n$ terms, so by our assumption, this
subderivation is valid if and only if
\[ \hat{X}_i^t \Rightarrow \A^{w_{i+1}}_{i+1} \ldots \A^{w_n}_n \hat{\A}^w \A^{w_1}_1 \ldots \A^{w_{j}}_{j}. \]
But this, together with $Y_i^t \Rightarrow \A_{j+1}^{w_{j+1}} \ldots \A_{i-1}^{w_{i-1}}$ and $Z_i^t \Rightarrow \A_i^{w_i}$,
is equivalent to the existence of a derivation
\[ \hat{\A}^{w_i}_i \Rightarrow \hat{Z}_i^t \rightarrow \hat{X}_i^t Y_i^t \Rightarrow \A^{w_{i+1}}_{i+1} \ldots \A^{w_n}_n \hat{\A}^w \A^{w_1}_1 \ldots \A^{w_{i-1}}_{i-1}\]
such that $\hat{X}_i^t\Rightarrow \A^{w_{i+1}}_{i+1} \ldots \A^{w_n}_n \hat{\A}^w \A^{w_1}_1 \ldots \A^{w_{j}}_{j}$ and $Y_i^t \Rightarrow \A_{j+1}^{w_{j+1}} \ldots \A_{i-1}^{w_{i-1}}$.
Here, $\hat{\A}^{w_i}_i \Rightarrow \hat{Z}_i^t$ follows from the equivalence of \eqref{deriv:forward} and \eqref{deriv:rotated} for $n=1$.
\end{proof}
\section{Concluding remarks}
The results in this paper raise the question whether for an indexed language $L$ the language $C^k(L)$ is indexed as well, or if not, to which class of languages (within context-sensitive) it belongs.
A consequence of our main result (Theorem~\ref{thm:etolmain}) is that permutations of context-free languages
are indexed (a different proof of this based on parse trees can be found in \cite{BCE}).
It would be interesting to consider the possible extension of this result to the OI- and IO-hierarchies
(\cite{MR666544}, \cite{MR864744}) of languages built out of automata or grammars that extend
the pushdown automata and indexed grammars, respectively. They define level-$n$ grammars inductively,
allowing the flags at level $n$ to carry up to $n$ levels of parameters in the form of flags.
Thus level-$0$ grammars generate context-free languages, and level-$1$ grammars produce indexed languages.
We conjecture that the class of level-$n$ languages is closed under cyclic closure, and also that
if $L$ is a level-$n$ language then $C^k(L)$ is a level-$(n+1)$ language.
\nocite{*}
\bibliographystyle{abbrvnat}
|
\section{Introduction}
Ultracold low-dimensional atomic gases have been intensively
studied over the past two decades
\cite{Kinoshita,Paredes,Haller2009, Chin2010, Kohler2006}. Experimentally, they
are fabricated by employing optical traps which can confine the
system in one, two or three dimensions \cite{Bloch2008}. These low
dimensional systems now provide an ideal experimental tool to test
fundamental problems of few- and many-body physics. The atomic
interactions can be tuned in such structures by varying the trap width or with the help of magnetic Feshbach
resonance by varying the external magnetic field and thereby one
can reach the so-called confinement induced resonance (CIR) which
was first predicted by Olshanii \cite{Olshanii}.
\\
CIRs were confirmed in several experiments \cite{Kinoshita,
Paredes, Haller2009, Gunter2005, Haller2010}. Particularly, in a
prominent experiment \cite{Haller2010}, CIR properties were studied
for an ultracold quantum gas of Cs atoms confined in a quasi-1D
geometry with transverse anisotropy. Observed splitting of the
peek in atomic losses near the CIR, which repeated the splitting of the
binding energy of a two-atomic molecule in transverse excited
state~\cite{Haller2010}, has stimulated different theoretical
modeling~\cite{Peng, Zhang, Melezhik2011, Sala2012, Sala2013}.
Attempts~\cite{Peng, Zhang} to explain this effect in one-channel
pseudopotential approach~\cite{Olshanii} were not successful.
However, a multichannel model~\cite{Melezhik2011}, including the
contribution of transversely excited channels to the confined
quasi-1D scattering process, predicts a splitting in the minimum of atomic transmission curve which is qualitatively in agreement with the observed CIR splitting~\cite{Haller2010}. Alternatively, a quantitative agreement was obtained in~\cite{Sala2012} where Sala with
co-authors linked the experimentally observed
effect with the possibility of two-atomic molecule formation in
the center-of-mass (CM) excited states when the trap is assumed to be anharmonic. In this kind of traps, pair atomic collisions can lead to resonant molecule formation in the CM
excited states~\cite{Bolda2005,Melezhik2009} due to the coupling between the relative
and CM motions . The
model~\cite{Sala2012} which was dedicated to anharmonic traps was confirmed afterwards in a special experiment for the Li molecule formation in slightly anisotropic
and anharmonic traps~\cite{Sala2013}, but the observed splitting of the
transmission due to the anisotropy of harmonic
traps~\cite{Melezhik2011} still demands theoretical and direct
experimental investigations. Therefore, one of the goals of the
present work was more profound theoretical study of the multichannel
atomic scattering confined in harmonic but anisotropic traps by considering more realistic interatomic potentials of different effective ranges.
\\
For this aim, we applied here the general grid method suggested in
\cite{Saeidian} to investigate multi-channel scattering of
identical atoms confined in a transverse harmonic trap. We suggest
a modification which makes the method applicable for anisotropic
harmonic waveguides. In \cite{Melezhik2011}, an interatomic
potential was taken in the form $V(r)=-V_{0} \exp(-{r^2}/{r_0^2})$
with rather long-range interaction due to chose of rather large
scaling parameter $r_0 \approx 5 \bar{a}$, where $\bar{a}$ is the
appropriate unit of length for the problem. Here, we study the
influence of the form of the interaction potential on
multi-channel elastic scattering inside an anisotropic harmonic
waveguide. A spacial attention was payed to investigate how the
CIR can be affected by the form of the interparticle interaction
and the strength of trap anisotropy.
\\
Ultracold molecular effects have also attracted a great interest
and in order to control them more effectively, we have to
understand the reactive collisions of ultracold atoms
\cite{Carr2009}. Chemical reactions at extremely low temperatures
were studied both experimentally \cite{Ni2010, Ospelkaus2010} and
theoretically~\cite{Idziaszek2010} using a quantum defect model
\cite{Seaton, Greene, Mies}. Idziaszek et. al
\cite{Jachymski2013,Idziaszek2015} reported analytic formulas for
reactive collision rates inside an isotropic harmonic waveguide.
Here, employing our approach we investigate the reactive rates in
the presence of an isotropic as well as anisotropic transversal
confinement in the case of one- and multi-mode regime, describing
the reactive or inelastic part of the short-range interaction as
an absorbing potential $-iV_i \exp(-{{r^2}/{r_i^2}})$ which we
have added to a $C_{12}-C_{6}$ Van der Waals interaction
potential.
\section{Multichannel Scattering Problem in an Anisotropic Harmonic Waveguide}
We study the collision of two identical bosonic atoms under the transverse anisotropic harmonic confinement defined by frequencies $\omega_{x}$ and $\omega_{y}$ along the $x$ and $y$ directions, respectively. The corresponding Hamiltonian is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
H=\sum_{i=1}^{2}(-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\nabla_{i}^2+\frac{1}{2}m\omega_{x}^2x_{i}^2+\frac{1}{2}m\omega_{y}^2y_{i}^2)+V(|{\bf r}_{1}-{\bf r}_{2}|)
\end{eqnarray}
where $m$ is the mass of the atoms and $V(|{\bf r}_{1}-{\bf r}_{2}|)$ describes the interaction potential between atoms. The Hamiltonian permits the separation of the center-of-mass ${\bf r}_{cm}=({\bf r}_1+{\bf r}_2)/2$ and relative ${\bf r}={\bf r}_1-{\bf r}_2$ variables
\begin{eqnarray}
H=H_{cm}+H_{rel}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{cm}=-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2M}\nabla_{cm}^2+\frac{1}{2}M\omega_{x}^2x_{cm}^2+\frac{1}{2}M\omega_{y}^2y_{cm}^2
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{rel}=-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu}\nabla_{r}^2+\frac{1}{2}\mu\omega_{x}^2x^2+\frac{1}{2}\mu\omega_{y}^2y^2+V(r)
\end{eqnarray}
Here $M=2m$ and $\mu=m/2$ are the total and reduced masses, respectively. So, the problem is reduced to scattering of a single particle with the mass $\mu$ off a central potential $V(r)$, under a transverse anisotropic harmonic confinement
\begin{eqnarray}\label{5}
\left[ -\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu}\nabla_{r}^2+\frac{1}{2}\mu\omega_{x}^2x^2+\frac{1}{2}\mu\omega_{y}^2y^2+V(r) \right]\psi({\bf r})=E \psi({\bf r})
\end{eqnarray}
Here the energy of the relative two-body motion $E=E_{\perp}+E_{\parallel}$ is a sum of the transverse $E_{\perp}$ and longitudinal $E_{\parallel}={\hbar^2{k_{\parallel}}^2}/{(2\mu)}$ collision energy.\\
We assume that the interaction potential has the Gaussian
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r)=-V_{0}\exp(-\frac{r^{2}}{r_{0}^{2}})
\end{eqnarray}
or Van der Waals ($C_{12}-C_{6}$)
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r)=\frac{C_{12}}{r^{12}}-\frac{C_6}{r^6}
\end{eqnarray}
form, where $V_0$ and $r_0>0$ show the depth and the screening length of the Gaussian potential, respectively.
\\
It is more convenient to rewrite Eq.(\ref{5}) in the following rescaled form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{5a}
\left[ -\frac{1}{2}\nabla_{r}^2+\frac{1}{2}\omega_{x}^2x^2+\frac{1}{2}\omega_{y}^2y^2+V(r) \right]\psi({\bf r})=E \psi({\bf r})
\end{eqnarray}
with the scale transformation $r\rightarrow {r}/{\bar{a}}$ ($r_0\rightarrow {r_0}/{\bar a}$), $E\rightarrow {E}/{E_0}$, $\omega_{x(y)} \rightarrow {\omega_{x(y)}}/{\omega_0}$, $V\rightarrow V/{E_0}$, where $E_0={\hbar ^2}/({\mu \bar{a}^2})$ , $\omega_0={E_0}/{\hbar}$ , and $\bar{a}=4\pi {\Gamma({1}/{4})}^{-2}R_{vdW}$. Here $\Gamma(x)$ shows the gamma function and $R_{vdW}=1/2{({2\mu C_6}/\hbar^2)}^{1/4}$ stands for the Van der Waals radius~\cite{Rev2006}.
\\
In the asymptotic region $\left| z \right|\rightarrow\infty$, the transverse trapping potential dominates and the symmetrical (with respect to reflection $\bf{r}\rightarrow -\bf{r}$) wave function for the bosonic collision can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{7}
\psi_{n}(\bf{r })&=&\cos(k_{n}z)\phi_{n}(x,y)\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{{n}^{\prime}}f_{nn^{\prime}}\exp(ik_{{n}^{\prime}}\left| z \right|)\phi_{{n}^{\prime}}(x,y)
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
k_{n}=\sqrt{2(E-E_{\perp}^{n})}
\end{eqnarray}
\\
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi_{n}(x,y)=\phi_{n_{x},n_{y}}(x,y)=\phi_{n_{x}}(x)\phi_{n_{y}}(y)
\end{eqnarray}
is the eigenfunction of the 2D harmonic oscillator, corresponding to the transversal eigenenergy
\begin{eqnarray}
E_{\perp}^{n}=E_{\perp}^{n_{x},n_{y}}=\left[ \omega_{x}(n_{x}+\frac{1}{2})+\omega_{y}(n_{y}+\frac{1}{2}) \right]
\end{eqnarray}
$\phi_{n_{x}}(x) (\phi_{n_{y}}(y))$ being the eigenfunction of a 1D harmonic oscillator along the $x (y)$ axis.
The scattering amplitude $f_{n{n}^{\prime}}$ describes transition from the initial $n=(n_{x},n_{y})$ to the final $n^{\prime}=({n_{x}}^{\prime},{n_{y}}^{\prime})$ transverse state. The summation is over all open channels.
\\
The transmission probability from the initial transverse state $n$ to all possible final open states ${n}^{\prime}$ in the course of the collision of identical bosons is defined as
\begin{eqnarray} \label{13}
T_{n_{x}n_{y}}=T_n=\sum_{{n}^{\prime}}\frac{k_{{n}^{\prime}}}{k_{n}}{\left| \delta_{n{n}^{\prime}}+f_{n{n}^{\prime}} \right|}^2\,\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The scattering amplitude is related to the 1D S matrix via $S_{nn'}=\delta _{nn'}+2f_{nn'}$. At zero-energy limit, it is convenient to parameterize the 1D scattering through the 1D scattering length as $a_{1D}=i(1+f_{00})/(k_0f_{00})$ \cite{Olshanii}, where $f_{00}$ shows the scattering amplitude from the initial $n=0=(0,0)$ state to the same final state $n^{\prime}=0=(0,0)$.
\\
If there is an absorbing potential in short range, then the corresponding $a_{1D}$ becomes a complex value with the imaginary part related to inelastic processes (reactions). The loss mechanism characterised quantitatively by the reactive rate constant $K^{1D,re}$. In one dimension, the reactive and elastic collision rates for identical particles in channel $n$ are defined as~\cite{Simoni2015}
\begin{eqnarray}
K^{1D,re}&=&{k_n}\left( 1-{\left| S_{nn} \right|}^2 \right) \label{14}\\
K^{1D,el}&=&{k_n}{\left|1-S_{nn} \right|}^2
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Numerical Approach}
To obtain the transmission probability and the rate constants, we
have to calculate the scattering amplitude
$f_{n{n}^{\prime}}$ by
integration of the Schr\"odinger Eq.(\ref{5a}) with the boundary
asymptotic condition Eq.(\ref{7}). Due to the anisotropy of the
confinement, the scattering problem is non-separable in the three
dimensional space $(r,\theta,\phi)$. To resolve this problem we
use the discrete variable method suggested in \cite{Melezhik91,Melezhik2003}.
\\
First, we discretize the Schr\"odinger Eq.(\ref{5a}) on a 2D grid
over $(\theta,\phi)$ variables according to the non-direct product
DVR~\cite{Melezhik1997,Melezhik99,Melezhik2016}. The idea of this approach is in
expanding the desired wave function $\psi(r,\theta,\phi)$ in the
basis orthogonal and complete on the 2D grid
$\Omega_j=(\theta_j,\phi_j)$
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{j}(\Omega)\approx\sum_{\nu=1}^{N}\bar{Y}_{\nu}(\Omega)\left[
\mathbf{Y}^{-1}\right]_{\nu j}
\end{eqnarray}
so that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{15}
\psi(r,\theta,\phi)\approx\frac{1}{r}\sum_{j=1}^{N}f_{j}(\Omega)u_{j}(r)\,\,.
\end{eqnarray}
Here $N=N_{\theta}\times N_{\phi}$, where $N_{\theta}$ and
$N_{\phi}$ are the number of grid points over the $\theta$ and
$\phi$ variables respectively. The $N\times N$ matrix
$\mathbf{Y}^{-1}$ is inverse to the matrix $\mathbf{Y}$ defined
as $Y_{j\nu}=\sqrt{\lambda_{j}} \bar{Y}_{\nu}(\Omega_j)$, with
$\lambda_j=({2\pi \lambda_j^{\prime}})/{N_{\phi}}$ and
$\lambda_j^{\prime}$ being the weights of the Gaussian quadrature
over $\theta$. The angular grid points $\theta_{j}$ and $\phi_j$
are defined as the zeros of the Legendre polynomial
$P_{N_{\theta}}(\cos \theta)$ and
$\phi_j=2\pi j/N_{\phi}$ , respectively. The symbol $\nu$ represents the two fold
index $\nu=(l,m)$ and the summation over $\nu$ is equivalent to
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{\nu=1}^{N}=\sum_{m=-\frac{N_{\phi}-1}{2}}^{\frac{N_{\phi}-1}{2}}\sum_{l=\left| m \right|}^{\left| m \right|+N_{\theta}-1}
\end{eqnarray}
The polynomials $\bar{Y}_{\nu}(\Omega)$ are chosen as
\begin{eqnarray}
\bar{Y}_{\nu}(\Omega)=\bar{Y}_{lm}(\Omega)=e^{im\phi}\sum_{l^\prime}c_{l}^{l^\prime}P_{l^\prime}^m(\theta)
\end{eqnarray}
where $c_{l}^{l^\prime}=\delta_{ll^\prime}$ holds in general, thus $\bar{Y}_{\nu}(\Omega)$ coincide with the usual spherical harmonics $Y_{\nu}(\Omega)$
except some higher values of $\nu$ so that the orthogonality relation remains
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \bar{ Y}_{\nu} \, |\bar{ Y }_{\nu ^\prime} \rangle = \int {\bar{Y_{\nu}}}^{*}(\Omega)\bar{Y_{\nu^\prime}}(\Omega)d\Omega\approx\sum_{j=1}^{N}\lambda_{j}Y_{\nu}^{*}(\Omega_j)Y_{\nu^\prime}(\Omega_j)=\delta_{\nu\nu^\prime}
\end{eqnarray}
In a few cases involving the highest $l$ values ($l\geq N_{\theta}$), $Y_{\nu}(\Omega)$ have to be orthogonalized. We address the set of orthogonal basis as $\bar{ Y }_{lm}(\Omega)$. First, for $l=N_{\theta}$ we make a polynomial orthogonal to the ones of lower $l$ value
\begin{eqnarray}
\widetilde{ Y }_{lm}(\Omega)=Y_{lm}(\Omega)-\sum_{l^\prime=\left| m \right|}^{l-1}\langle Y_{lm} \, |\bar{ Y }_{l^\prime m} \, \rangle \bar{ Y }_{l^\prime m}(\Omega)
\end{eqnarray}
and, we make it normalized
\begin{eqnarray}
\bar{ Y }_{lm}(\Omega)=\frac{\widetilde{ Y }_{lm}(\Omega)}{\langle \widetilde{ Y }_{lm} \, |\widetilde{ Y }_{lm}\, \rangle}
\end{eqnarray}
then, we perform the above procedure iteratively in order to
obtain $\bar{ Y }_{lm}(\Omega)$ for the next values of
$l$. Such a way, the above orthogonalization Gramm-Schmidt
procedure leads as to the basis (16) which is orthonormal and
complete on the grid $\Omega_j$ for any chosen $N$.
\\
By substituting Eq.(\ref{15}) into Eq.(\ref{5a}), we reach to a system of $N(=N_{\theta} \times N_{\phi})$ Schr\"odinger-like coupled equations with respect to the $N-$dimensional unknown vector $\mathbf{u}(r)=\left\{ \sqrt{\lambda_{j}}u_{j}(r) \right\}_{1}^N$
\begin{eqnarray}\label{21}
\left\{ \textbf{H}^{(0)}(r)+2\left[E\textbf{I}-\textbf{V}(r) \right] \right\}\textbf{u}(r)=0
\end{eqnarray}
where \textbf{I} is the unit matrix and
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{H}_{jj^\prime}^{(0)}(r)=\delta_{jj^\prime}\frac{d^2 }{d r^2}-\frac{1}{r^2}\sum_{\nu=1}^{N}Y_{j\nu}l(l+1)(\mathbf{Y}^{-1})_{\nu j^\prime},\\
V_{jj^\prime}(r)=V(r,\Omega_{j})\delta_{jj^\prime}=\left\{
V(r)+\frac{1}{2}\omega_{x}^2x_{j}^2+\frac{1}{2}\omega_{y}^2y_{j}^2
\right\}\delta_{jj^\prime}
\end{eqnarray}
Here $x_{j}=r\sin \theta_{j}\cos \phi_{j}$ and $y_{j}=r\sin
\theta_{j}\sin \phi_{j}$ and the elements $u_j(r)$ of the vector
$\textbf{u}(r)$ coincide with the values $r\psi(r,\Omega_j)$ of
desired wave function on the grid points $\Omega_j$.
\\
We solve the system of Eqs. (\ref{21}) on a quasi-uniform radial grid \cite{Melezhik1997}
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{j}=R\frac{e^{\gamma x_{j}}-1}{e^\gamma-1},~~~~~j=1,2,...,N_{r}
\end{eqnarray}
of $N_r$ grid points $\left\{r_j \right\}$ defined by mapping $r_j \in [0,R \rightarrow +\infty ]$ onto the uniform grid $x_j \in [0,1]$ with the equi-distant distribution $x_j-x_{j-1}=1/N_r$. One can achieve a suitable distribution of the grid points for a specific interatomic and confining potential by varying $N_r$ and the parameter $\gamma >0$.
\\
Thus, after the finite difference approximation, the initial 3D Schr\"odinger Eq.(\ref{5a}) is reduced to the system of $N_{r}$ algebraic matrix equations
\begin{eqnarray}\label{25}
\sum_{p=1}^{3}A_{j-p}^ju_{j-p}+\left( A_{j}^j+2\left\{ EI-V_{j}\right\}\right)u_{j}+\sum_{p=1}^{3}A_{j+p}^ju_{j+p}=0,\nonumber\\
j=1,2,...,N_{r}-3,\nonumber\\
u_{j}+\alpha_{j}^{\left(1\right)}u_{j-1}+\alpha_{j}^{\left(2\right)}u_{j-2}+\alpha_{j}^{\left(3\right)}u_{j-3}=\gamma_{j},\nonumber\\
j=N_{r}-2,N_{r}-1,N_{r}
\end{eqnarray}
In the first three equations, the functions $u_{-3}$, $u_{-2}$, $u_{-1}$ and $u_0$ are set to zero by using the left-side boundary condition: $u_0=0$ and $u_{-j}=-u_j$. The last equation for large values of $j$ comes from the right-side boundary
condition Eq.(\ref{7}) at large $r$ by eliminating the unknown
scattering amplitudes from Eq.(\ref{7}) written for a few largest
values of $r_j$. We solve this boundary value problem
Eq.(\ref{25}) by using the LU decomposition approach \cite{PreTeu}
or the sweep method \cite{Gelfand} which is adopted to the
multichannel atomic scattering in \cite{Saeidian} (see Appendix
A).
By mapping the calculated wave function at the points $z_j=r_j\cos
\theta_j\rightarrow \pm\infty$ with the asymptotic boundary
condition (\ref{7}) we find the scattering amplitude
$f_{n{n}^{\prime}}$.
\section{Results and Discussion}
\subsection{Multichannel elastic scattering}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig1a.eps}}
\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig1b.eps}}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig1c.eps}}
\end{subfigure}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Partial transmission coefficients ($T_{00}$, $T_{02}$ ,$T_{20}$) for several $r_0$ as a function of ${a_{\perp}}/s$ when the anisotropy is fixed at ${\omega _{x}}/{\omega_{y}}=1.05$ ($\omega_y=0.02\omega_0$) and the initial state of the system is in the last open channel with a longitudinal energy ${E_\parallel}/{E_\perp ^0}=5\times 10^{-3}$ for the cases of (a) one open channel (b)two open channels (c) three open channels.}
\label{fig:Fig1}
\end{figure}
In this Subsection we analyze pair atomic collisions in anisotropic waveguides at colliding energies permitting transition between the first three transverse channels with $n=(n_x n_y)=(00),(02)$ and $(20)$. We investigate the influence of the form of interatomic interaction $V(r)$ and the strength of the anisotropy $1-\omega_x/\omega_y$ on the transmission coefficients $T_n(E,\omega_x/\omega_y)$ (13). Special attention is paid on what found in Ref.\cite{Melezhik2011}, i.e. splitting of the transmission coefficient $T_{02}(E,\omega_x/\omega_y)$ in the case $\omega_x/\omega_y\neq 1$ which can be responsible for the CIR splitting experimentally observed in the ultracold gas of Cs atoms confined in an anisotropic waveguide \cite{Haller2010}.
First, the interaction potential $V(r)$ was chosen in the Gaussian form $V(r)=-V_{0} \exp(-r^2/r_0^2)$ suggested in~\cite{Melezhik2011} for the fixed anisotropic waveguide with $\omega _{x}/\omega_{y}=1.05$ ($\omega_y=0.02 \omega_0$) and longitudinal colliding energies $E_\parallel/E_\perp ^0=5\times 10^{-3}$ which reckoned from the threshold of the last open channel. Calculations were performed with the varying parameters $V_0$ and $r_0$ which supplyed entering to the area near the point of CIR. As known, CIR was predicted~\cite{Olshanii} and experimentally observed~\cite{Haller2010} for an isotropic waveguide ($\omega_{\perp}=\omega_x=\omega_y$) at the point $a_{\perp}/s=1.46...$, i.e. when the dimensionless s-wave scattering length $s=-\lim_{k\rightarrow 0} {\delta_0(k)}/k$ approaches to the value of the trap width $a_{\perp}={1}/{\sqrt{\omega_{\perp}}}$. Here $\delta_0(k)$ represents the energy dependent phase shift due to the scattering in free space. Therefore, by integrating the scattering problem (8,9) for various depth $V_0$ and widths $r_0$ of the potential $V(r)$ and fixed $\omega_{\perp}$ and $E$, we get the transmission coefficients $T_{n_x n_y}(E,a_{\perp}/s,r_0)$ and find the CIR position where $\Re f_{00}(E,\omega_{\perp},V_0,r_0) \rightarrow -1$, $\Im f_{00}(E,\omega_{\perp},V_0,r_0)\rightarrow 0$ and $T_{00}(E,\omega_{\perp},V_0,r_0)\rightarrow 0$ (see definition CIR in ~\cite{Olshanii}). With the fixed parameters $V_0$ and $r_0$ the problem (8) is integrated for $\omega_{\perp}=0$ as well, and the scattering amplitude $f_0$ is extracted from the free-space scattering asymptotic. Such a way we calculate the scattering length corresponding to the chosen $V_0$ and $r_0$. In \figref{Fig1}(a) ( (b), (c)), we present the partial transmission coefficients for the cases when one (two, three) channel(s) are open, and the colliding atoms are initially in the last open channel. Rather smooth dependence of the transmission coefficients $T_{00}$ and $T_{20}$ on the ratio $a_{\perp}/s$ and $r_0$ near CIR is clear from \figref{Fig1}(a) and (b). However, the minimum of the coefficient $T_{02}$ at CIR splits with increasing $r_0$. The effect becomes observable for anisotropy $\omega_y/\omega_x=1.05$ at $r_0\geq 3.5$. So, we can conclude that the CIR splitting occurs only for rather long-range interaction considerably overlapping with the harmonic confining potential. The effect was already observed in~\cite{Melezhik2011} where the calculations of the transmission coefficients where performed with the same Gaussian potential (6) but for only one fixed parameter $r_0=5 \bar{a}$.
\figref{Fig2} illustrates the dependence of the value of the CIR splitting on the strength of the anisotropy by assuming a long-range character ($r_0=5 \bar{a}$) of the interaction potential $V(r)$ (6). As the anisotropy increases, the distance between the two minima in $T_{02}(a_{\perp}/s)$ increases, as well. The same phenomenon is observed in the experimental result \cite{Haller2010}, which is also in quantitative agreement with the theoretical modeling in \cite{Sala2012}. Squeezing or stretching the confinement along one axis while keeping it constant along the other axis, leads to elimination of the degeneracy between the eigenstates $(n_x,n_y)=(0,2)$ and $(2,0)$ of the transverse confining potential and increasing the energy splitting between the energy thresholds of these two scattering channels, and hence larger CIR splitting.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig2.eps}
\caption{ (Color online) Partial transmission coefficient $T_{02}$ for various anisotropies as a function of $a_{\perp}/s$ when $r_0=5 \bar{a}$ , ${E_\parallel}/{E_\perp ^0}=5\times 10^{-3}$ and $\omega _y=0.02 \omega _0$. }
\label{fig:Fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig3.eps}
\caption{ (color online) The dependence of the partial transmission coefficient $T_{02}$ on the longitudinal energy for ${\omega _{x}/}{\omega_{y}}=1.25$ ($\omega _y=0.02 \omega _0$) and $r_0=5 \bar{a}$ as a function of $a_{\perp}/s$.}
\label{fig:Fig3}
\end{figure}
In \figref{Fig3} we can see the effect of longitudinal energy $E_{\parallel}$ on the behaviour of transmission curve $T_{02}(E,a_{\perp}/s)$ for a considerable anisotropy in transversal confinement ($\frac{\omega _{x}}{\omega_{y}}=1.25$). It shows that the splitting becomes more pronounced with increasing energy.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig4.eps}
\caption{(color online) Transmission coefficient $T_{02}$, considering the van der Waals interacting potential, as a function of $a_{\perp}/s$ for various trap frequencies along the $y$ axis, when the anisotropy is fixed at ${\omega _x}/{\omega _y}=1.1$ and the longitudinal wave vector equals to $k_\parallel=0.02$ .}
\label{fig:Fig4}
\end{figure}
We have also analyzed the problem with more realistic $C_{12}-C_{6}$ interaction, i.e.
van der Waals potential. For the pair
of $^{133}{Cs}$ atoms the parameters of the van der Waals potential are $C_6=6890~a.u.$ , $R_{vdW}=101a_0$ ,
$\bar{a}=96.55 a_0$ (where $a_0$ is the Bohr radius). In this case, the units of the problem becaomes $E_0=8.8\times
10^{-10}E_h$ ,and $\omega_0=2\pi \times 5.7 \times 10^3 kHz$. In \figref{Fig4}
we present the calculated curve $T_{02}(E,a_{\perp}/s)$ of the transmission coefficient for a fixed value of
${\omega _{x}}/{\omega_{y}}=1.1$. As it can be seen, only for very
tight traps, the minimum is splitted. In this respect, one can evaluate the van der Waals potential
as a very short-range interaction that can lead to the CIR splitting only in the case of its
overlap with a very tight harmonic confinement. The form of the splitting in the case of $C_{12}-C_6$ interaction (7) is considerably different from the case of Gaussian interaction (6).
\subsection{Inelastic scattering}
In this Subsection we analyze the case where chemical reactions
occur at short distances that leads to inelastic scattering.
Here we consider collision of two particles interacting via the
$C_{12}-C_6$ van der Waals potential plus an imaginary term like $-i V_i
\exp(-{r^2}/{r_i^2})$ at short distances of the order $r_i$, which
models the loss mechanism due to presence of the inelastic channel
of a molecule formation. This process happens at distances much smaller than the length scale associated with the long range Van der Waals potential, $\bar{a}$. Here we have chosen
$r_i=0.4 \bar{a}$ in order
to reproduce the complex scattering length presented in
\cite{Idziaszek2010} where they used this value to compute the s-wave reactive collision rate for $^{40}{K} ^{87}{Rb}$ molecules and found it compatible with the corresponding
experimental data on \cite{Ospelkaus2010}.
\\
The scattering process can be parametrized by using two dimensionless quantum defect parameters $0\leqslant y \leqslant 1$ and $s$ , where $y$ (determined here by $V_i$ and $r_i$) is related to the short range reaction probability via $P^{re}={4y}/{(1+y)^2}$ \cite{Jachymski2013} and $s$ represents the dimensionless 3D scattering length in the absence of any loss process. In general, the phase shift $\delta_0$ of the s-wave scattering process in free space becomes a complex number $\tilde{\delta}_0$ leading to the complex scattering length $\tilde{ a }=\alpha-i \beta$ defined as $\tilde{ a }=-\lim_{k\rightarrow 0} {\tilde{\delta}_0(k)}/k$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig5.eps}
\caption{ (Color online) Real and imaginary parts of the scattering length in free
space with absorption as $k\rightarrow0$ and $s$ varies over its
full range $-\infty<s<\infty$ . Analytical (numerical) values for
different values of the loss parameter $y$ are shown with
curves (dots).} \label{fig:Fig5}
\end{figure}
In \figref{Fig5} we have plotted complex scattering length
($\tilde{ a }=\alpha-i \beta$) in free space obtained at the
numerical integration of Eq.(\ref{5a}) with $\omega_x=\omega_y=0$ along
with the corresponding analytical values for comparison. Our
results are in a good agreement with the analytical results which at the low energy limit is a function of $y$ and $s$ (in units of $\bar{a}$) \cite{Idziaszek2010}
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{ a }=s+y \frac{1+{(1-s)}^2}{i+y(1-s)}
\end{eqnarray}
In \figref{Fig6} we present the calculated real and imaginary
parts of the complex scattering length $\tilde{ a }=\alpha-i
\beta=-{1}/{a_{1D}}$ inside an isotropic harmonic waveguide for
various loss parameters, where $a_{1D}=i{k_0f_{00}}/{(1+f_{00})}$ is the quasi-1D scattering length (see the definition after Eq.(\ref{13})). When there is no absorption
($y=0$), $\alpha$ exhibits a resonance at $a_{\perp}/s=1.46$. But in
the presence of absorption ($y\neq 0$), the behaviour of $\alpha$ changes dramatically and there is no divergence at $a_{\perp}/s=1.46$, hence the resonance becomes less pronounced and disappears gradually by incresing $y$. The
strongest loss occurs at the maximum value of $\beta$ which is
located at the CIR position.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{Fig6a.eps}}
\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{Fig6b.eps}}
\end{subfigure}
\end{center}
\caption{ (Color online)(a)real and (b)imaginary part of the complex scattering length inside an isotropic harmonic waveguide with frequency $\omega_{\perp}=0.02\omega_0$ as a function of $a_{\perp}/s$ when $k_0 \rightarrow0$ for different loss parameters. The dashed line shows the position of CIR in the absence of absorption ($a_{\perp}/s=1.46$).}
\label{fig:Fig6}
\end{figure}
In \figref{Fig7} we show the reaction rate constant graph at low energies just
above the first channel threshold ($K^{1D,re}={\left( 1-{\left| S_{00} \right|}^2 \right)}/{(2k_0a_{\perp}^2)}$) for a special loss parameter $y=0.3$. Here, following the definition of the dimensionless reactive constant presented in \cite{Idziaszek2015}, we have divided $K^{1D,re}$ in Eq.(\ref{14}) by $2k_0^2a_{\perp}^2$. Our results show a good agreement with the low energy reaction constant formula
which is suggested in \cite{Idziaszek2015}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{re_K}
K^{1D,re}=\frac{2+s(s-2)}{s^2+y^2{(s-2)}^2}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig7.eps}
\caption{(Color online)The blue curve (red dots) show(s) the dimensionless reactive rate constant at very low collision energies in an isotropic harmonic trap with frequency $\omega_{\perp} =0.02 \omega_0$ obtained from our calculations (Eq.(\ref{re_K}) ) for a loss parameter $y=0.3$.}
\label{fig:Fig7}
\end{figure}
In \figref{Fig8} we present the one dimensional scattering length ($a_{1D}=\tilde {\alpha}+i\tilde {\beta}$) which we
have obtained numerically
for a slight anisotropy $\eta=\omega_x/\omega_y=1.05$ and $y=0.3$ along with the values predicted by the
following formula \cite{Peng}, for comparison
\begin{eqnarray}
a_{1D}=-\frac{a_{\perp}^2}{2\sqrt{\eta}\tilde{s}}\left( 1-C(\eta)\frac{\tilde{s}}{a_{\perp}} \right)
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $\tilde{s}$ is a complex number for the 3D scattering length in the presence of a loss mechanism and we have assumed $C(\eta=1.05)\approx C(\eta=1.0)=1.4603$. Our values show a good agreement with the analytical predictions.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{Fig8a.eps}}
\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{Fig8b.eps}}
\end{subfigure}
\end{center}
\caption{ (Color online)(a)Real and (b)imaginary part of the 1D scattering length
$a_{1D}$ as a function of 3D scattering length $s$ when
$k_0 \rightarrow0$ for $y=0.3$, $\omega_x/\omega_y=1.05$
and $\omega_y=0.02 \omega_0$. Dots (curves) correspond to the
numerical (analytical \cite{Peng}) results.}
\label{fig:Fig8}
\end{figure}
We show the effect of adding a slight anisotropy on one dimensional scattering length in \figref{Fig9}. The energy is assumed to be very small, just above the first channel energy threshold. As it is observed, when the anisotropy is raised a little bit, it does not have a great effect on the real part of the scattering length ($\alpha$) and it can only result in a small increase of the imaginary part ($\beta$) mainly around the CIR position ($a_{\perp}/s=1.46$).
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{Fig9a.eps}}
\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{Fig9b.eps}}
\end{subfigure}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) The effect of adding a slight anisotropy to the confining harmonic potential on (a)real and (b)imaginary part of the one dimensional scattering length as a function of 3D scattering length $s$ when $k_0 \rightarrow0$ for a loss parameter $y=0.3$. The frequency along the $y$ axis is fixed at $\omega_y=0.02 \omega_0$.}
\label{fig:Fig9}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{Fig10a.eps}}
\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{Fig10b.eps}}
\end{subfigure}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Reactive rate constant for anisotropic and isotropic harmonic waveguide for the cases of (a) one open channel (b) two open channels as a function of 3D scattering length $s$ when the energy is just above the last open channel threshold and the initial state is in the highest open channel ($k_0 \rightarrow0$ in (a) and $k_1 \rightarrow0$ in (b)) for a loss parameter $y=0.3$. The frequency along the $y$ axis is fixed at $\omega_y=0.02\omega_0$.}
\label{fig:Fig10}
\end{figure}
The anisotropy effect on the reactive rate when there is only one open channel differs from the case of two open channels.
We illustrate this phenomenon in \figref{Fig10}, when the initial energy of the system is slightly above the last open channel threshold. When only one transversal harmonic state is involved, there is no considerable impact on $K^{re}$ (\figref{Fig10} (a)). But for the multichannel scattering, as it can be seen in \figref{Fig10} (b), anisotropy yields a considerable increase in the $K^{re}$ value. However, the maximum appears around $s=0$ for both cases.
\section{Conclusions}
We have developed the computational scheme for ultracold
multichannel processes in harmonic waveguides with
transverse anisotropy. It is applicable to the case of elastic as
well as inelastic (reactive) multichannel scattering. By considering the effect of the transmission between higher transversal harmonic states, we have shown that a CIR splitting can occur for anisotropic harmonic confinement \cite{Melezhik2011} only if the interaction potential between colliding particles has long-range character with respect to the width of the confining trap. For the case of inelastic scattering, we have
reproduced the results of \cite{Idziaszek2010, Idziaszek2015} by
assuming a proper absorbing short range potential and studied the
multichannel issue in the presence of anisotropy, as well. We have
shown that although a slight anisotropy does not have a great
impact on inelastic one channel scattering, it can cause a
considerable change in the reactive rate constant when the
contribution of higher open channels is also included.
\section{Acknowledgements}
S.Sh would like to acknowlege the financial support by the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology of Iran. S.Sh thanks the Bogoliubov Laboratory of Theoretical Physics of JINR for their financial support and warm hospitality.
\section{Appendix A}
In Eq.(\ref{25}), each coefficient $A_{j^\prime}^j$ is a $N\times N$ matrix, each $\alpha_{j}$ ia a diagonal $N\times N$ matrix, and each $\gamma_{j}$ is a $N$-dimensional vector. \\
For up to three open channels $\left(n_{x},n_{y}\right)=\left(0,0\right),\left(0,2\right)$ and $\left(2,0\right)$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha_{j}^{\left(1\right)}&=&-\frac{r_{j}}{r_{j-1}}\frac{\phi_{n_{e}}\left(x_{j},y_{j}\right)}{\phi_{n_{e}}\left(x_{j-1},y_{j-1}\right)}e^{ik_{n_{e}}\left(\left|z_{j}\right|-\left|z_{j-1}\right|\right)}\left(1+W_{0}^{\left(j\right)}+W_{1}^{\left(j\right)}\right),\nonumber\\
\alpha_{j}^{\left(2\right)}&=&\frac{r_{j}}{r_{j-2}}\frac{\phi_{n_{e}}\left(x_{j},y_{j}\right)}{\phi_{n_{e}}\left(x_{j-2},y_{j-2}\right)}e^{ik_{n_{e}}\left(\left|z_{j}\right|-\left|z_{j-2}\right|\right)}\left(W_{0}^{\left(j\right)}+W_{1}^{\left(j\right)}+W_{1}^{\left(j\right)}W_{0}^{\left(j-1\right)}\right),\nonumber\\
\alpha_{j}^{\left(3\right)}&=&-\frac{r_{j}}{r_{j-3}}\frac{\phi_{n_{e}}\left(x_{j},y_{j}\right)}{\phi_{n_{e}}\left(x_{j-3},y_{j-3}\right)}e^{ik_{n_{e}}\left(\left|z_{j}\right|-\left|z_{j-3}\right|\right)}W_{1}^{\left(j\right)}W_{0}^{\left(j-1\right)}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma_{j}&=&\sqrt{\lambda_{j}}r_j\phi_{n_e}\left(x_{j},y_{j}\right)e^{ik_{n_e}\left| z_j \right|} \left\{e^{-ik_{n_e}\left| z_j \right|}\cos(k_qz_j)\frac{\phi_q(x_j,y_j)}{\phi_{n_e}(x_j,y_j)} \right. \nonumber\\
&-&e^{-ik_{n_e}\left| z_{j-1} \right|}\cos(k_qz_{j-1})\frac{\phi_q(x_{j-1},y_{j-1})}{\phi_{n_e}(x_{j-1},y_{j-1})}(1+W_{0}^{(j)}+W_1^{(j)})\nonumber\\
&+&e^{-ik_{n_e}\left| z_{j-2} \right|}\cos(k_qz_{j-2})\frac{\phi_q(x_{j-2},y_{j-2})}{\phi_{n_e}(x_{j-2},y_{j-2})}(W_{0}^{(j)}+W_1^{(j)}+W_1^{(j)}W_0^{(j-1)})\nonumber\\
&-&\left. e^{-ik_{n_e}\left| z_{j-3} \right|}\cos(k_qz_{j-3})\frac{\phi_q(x_{j-3},y_{j-3})}{\phi_{n_e}(x_{j-3},y_{j-3})}W_1^{(j)}W_0^{(j-1)}\right\}
\end{eqnarray}
where $q$ and $n_e$ refer to the initial transverse state and the highest open channel, respectively.\\
We define the following relations
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi_j&=&e^{i(k_{n_e-1}-k_{n_e})\left| z_j \right|}\frac{\phi_{n_e-1}(x_j,y_j)}{\phi_{n_e}(x_j,y_j)}-e^{i(k_{n_e-1}-k_{n_e})\left| z_{j-1} \right|}\frac{\phi_{n_e-1}(x_{j-1},y_{j-1})}{\phi_{n_e}(x_{j-1},y_{j-1})}\nonumber\\
\eta_j&=&e^{i(k_{n_e-2}-k_{n_e})\left| z_j \right|}\frac{\phi_{n_e-2}(x_j,y_j)}{\phi_{n_e}(x_j,y_j)}\nonumber\\
&-&e^{i(k_{n_e-2}-k_{n_e})\left| z_{j-1} \right|}\frac{\phi_{n_e-2}(x_{j-1},y_{j-1})}{\phi_{n_e}(x_{j-1},y_{j-1})}(1+\frac{\chi_j}{\chi_{j-1}})\nonumber\\
&+&\frac{\chi_j}{\chi_{j-1}}e^{i(k_{n_e-2}-k_{n_e})\left| z_{j-2} \right|}\frac{\phi_{n_e-2}(x_{j-2},y_{j-2})}{\phi_{n_e}(x_{j-2},y_{j-2})}
\end{eqnarray}
In the case of three open channels, the highest open channel is $(n_{e_x},n_{e_y})=(2,0)$ and we have
\begin{eqnarray}
W_0^{(j)}&=&\frac{\chi_j}{\chi_{j-1}}\nonumber\\W_1^{(j)}&=&\frac{\eta_j}{\eta_{j-1}},
\end{eqnarray}
while for two open channels, $(n_{e_x},n_{e_y})=(0,2)$ and
\begin{eqnarray}
W_0^{(j)}&=&0\nonumber\\W_1^{(j)}&=&\frac{\chi_j}{\chi_{j-1}}
\end{eqnarray}
finally single channel regime, $(n_{e_x},n_{e_y})=(0,0)$
\begin{eqnarray}
W_0^{(j)}&=&0\nonumber\\W_1^{(j)}&=&0
\end{eqnarray}
|
\section{Introduction}
Resonant silicon photonic devices, though capable of achieving very large quality factors with wavelength-scale mode volumes, suffer from the lack of large nonlinear optical ($\chi^{(2)}$), piezoelectric, and electro-optic coefficients. This has led to recent research into other materials such as GaP, GaAs, and AlN which can outperform silicon in many respects~\cite{Shambat2010,Xiong2012,Tadesse2014,Balram2015}. Nonetheless, the appeal of large-scale integration with silicon photonics (and its rapidly developing toolkit as well as several foundries) leads us to consider optically nonlinear materials that can be heterogeneously integrated with high quality silicon passive structures. Lithium niobate (LN) is a technologically important ferroelectric which has some of the largest nonlinear optical coefficients found in a bulk material, and can be obtained in ample quantity and high quality as a result of the demand from the telecommunications market. Unfortunately, it is far less amenable to microfabrication techniques than silicon, and processes such as dry etching high-quality wavelength scale optical structures are difficult and non-standard. Nonetheless, ion sliced thin films of LN have been developed in the last few years~\cite{Rabiei2004,Sulser2009,Poberaj2012,Lu2012,Rabiei2013} to facilitate among other things nanophotonic fabrication, and more recently, high quality chip-scale optical resonators have been demonstrated in these materials~\cite{Diziain2013,Chen2013,Lin2015,Wang2014,Wang2015}.
In a recent work on mid-infrared modulators, thin-film \emph{silicon} was wafer-bonded to LN~\cite{Chiles2014}. Very recently, CMOS-compatible integration of SOI photonic waveguides with LN has also been demonstrated~\cite{Weigel2015}. The major advantage of this method is the ease of integration with silicon photonics. Fabrication of the silicon device layer can be accomplished at a variety of different foundries, and the back-end processing involves only a single bonding and back-etch step.
A question we address in this work is whether it is possible to effectively confine light inside LN by only patterning a top bonded silicon layer. Effectiveness is this context is judged by confinement and optical resonator decay rate, and is encapsulated in the ratio of the quality factor to optical mode volume, $Q/V$. We design a device which shows record large $Q/V$ in the Si/LN material system and theoretically outline its performance characteristics and possible applications.
We start by introducing the Silicon/Lithium Niobate (Si/LN) platform in Section~\ref{sec:siln}, and by describing some of the fabrication flow involved. In Section~\ref{sec:cavity_design_sim} we introduce the design steps involved in generating a cavity on this platform. We calculate the expected electro-optic coupling coefficient obtained in Section~\ref{sec:eo}.
\section{Si/LN Platform Fabrication Flow}\label{sec:siln}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5in]{Figure1_v4.pdf}
\caption{(a) An SEM image of a fabricated nanobeam cavity in silicon-on-insulator bonded to LN. An enlarged image (b) shows the elliptical holes which generate the photonic band gap. (c) shows the fabrication steps for creating Si/LN platform. First, the crystalline Si device layer can be patterned using standard electron beam lithography techniques and silicon etching. The second step is room temperature bonding of the SOI wafer to the LN substrate, enabled by a surface-activating plasma treatment. Finally, the Si backside is removed (using a combination of mechanical polishing and wet or dry etching), followed by an HF dip to remove the oxide layer. }
\label{fig:fab_steps}
\end{figure}
One promising platform which has recently been demonstrated is the so-called Si/LN platform. This material system consists of a thin layer of high quality crystalline silicon from an SOI wafer transferred onto a bulk LiNbO$_3$~ wafer and is described in detail in \cite{Chiles2014}. The fabrication steps that we pursue for this process are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:fab_steps} and outlined below.
First, the silicon top layer is patterned using either e-beam or DUV lithography and dry etching. This process is CMOS compatible and can be done at a foundry, though the highest quality factor photonic resonators are typically fabricated with e-beam lithography and optimized etches. The SOI wafer and the LN wafer are then bonded together using a room-temperature direct bonding process (as described, eg. in \cite{Tulli2011, Takagi2001}). A key limitation in the bonding process is the large thermal expansion coefficient mismatch between Si and LN ($2.6\times10^{-6}~\text{K}^{-1}$ for Si compared to $15.7\times 10^{-6}~\text{K}^{-1}$ for LN along the x and y axes \cite{Nikogosyan2005}), which limits the temperature at which the bonding process can occur. The need for a high temperature step is averted by using an O$_2$ or Ar plasma treatment to activate the surface. This treatment introduces damage to the surface and creates dangling bonds, resulting in hydrophilic surfaces with a high surface energy \cite{Tulli2011}. After surface activation a strong bond can be achieved by applying only a minimal amount of pressure. The bulk Si can be removed using a combination of mechanical lapping and either a wet chemical etch or a dry plasma etch. The exposed SiO$_2$ can then be removed using a simple HF dip. It should be stressed that a key advantage of this platform is that it avoids the need to etch the LN. Figure \ref{fig:fab_steps}(a) shows an example 1D photonic crystal, fabricated in SOI using e-beam lithography and silicon etching, after being bonded to LN.
It should be mentioned that it is also possible to pattern the Si device layer after bonding the two wafers together and removing the SOI backside, which is the method used in \cite{Chiles2014}. The main advantage of patterning the Si device layer \textit{before} bonding is that it allows us to use silicon photonics processes (eg. etch tools) without the danger of contaminating sensitive CMOS silicon processing tools with lithium (or niobium). In fact, groups without access to lithography or silicon etching can simply bond foundry-fabricated silicon photonics devices onto LN. It is also worth noting that instead of bulk LN wafers, so-called ``lithium-niobate-on-insulator'' wafers which have a thin LN film can also be used without significantly changing the fabrication flow (as in \cite{Weigel2015}).
\section{Cavity Design and Simulation}\label{sec:cavity_design_sim}
Photonic crystal resonators in quasi-1D and 2D systems are implemented by fabricating a periodic array of holes into an optically thin beam or slab. The periodic variation of the dielectric constant leads to a photonic bandgap for index-confined waves, which can then be used to confine light in all dimensions through the introduction of a defect. In silicon, quality factors on the order of $10^6$ and approaching $10^7$ have been demonstrated for both 1D and 2D structures of this type \cite{Akahane2003a, Sekoguchi2014, Deotare2009}.
We follow a popular recipe for the creation of a high-$Q$ localized mode in a photonic crystal slab~\cite{Song2005,md2008ultra}. Firstly, we design a one-dimensional unit cell that has a photonic band gap at the resonant frequency of interest. This will form the ``mirror regions'' surrounding the cavity. Secondly, a central defect is introduced between the two mirror regions. This defect is generated by modifying the properties of the unit cell so that it supports modes with frequencies within the mirror region bandgap. The defect is introduced as ``smoothly'' as possible to prevent scattering of light into radiation modes, while also allowing for tight confinement of the light. Such cavities have been designed for a variety of suspended membrane materials such as silicon~\cite{Deotare2009}, GaAs~\cite{Buckley2014a}, and even diamond~\cite{Burek2014}. Non-suspended structures, i.e., photonic crystals made from silicon on top of glass, have also been demonstrated~\cite{md2008ultra}. In our case, since the silicon is surrounded on one side by air and on the other by LN, which has a fairly high index of $n \approx 2.2$, care must be taken to ensure that the nanobeam modes that would be bound for a beam in air or on glass do not leak into the LN substrate.
Several considerations go into designing the unit cell. In comparison to suspended silicon photonic crystals, the presence of the LN substrate causes a red-shift of the Bloch-waves which can be countered by reducing the lattice spacing. The presence of the LN also raises the lower limit of how small the effective index can be, since the nearby medium (LN) has an index of approximately $2.2$. This leads to a higher filling factor of silicon in the photonic structure or, equivalently, smaller holes. Finally, an important practical constraint on the unit cell geometry is that it should be fabricable using standard e-beam lithography techniques and extendable to DUV photolighography for foundry processes. We therefore adopted a minimum feature size of 75 nm as a design rule.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5in]{Figure2_v3.pdf}
\caption{(a) Unit cell geometry for the cavity mirror region. The design parameters are: $a = 325~\text{nm}$, $w = 630~\text{nm}$, $r_x = 70~\text{nm}$, $r_y = 240~\text{nm}$. The Si device layer thickness is 220 nm. (b) Plot of electric field y-component for the $X$-point mode of the nanobeam unit cell, with the cell geometry outlined in black. (c) Band diagrams showing the TE-like dielectric modes for the nanobeam mirror and defect regions. The defect here is a 10\% reduction in the photonic crystal lattice spacing. The defect mode is chosen to lie near the LN light line, but still within the TE band gap of the mirror region. Note that the TM-like modes are all above the LN light line. }
\label{fig:band_diagram}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Given the constraints described above, the mirror region unit cell shown in Fig. \ref{fig:band_diagram}(a) is designed to strike a balance between confining the light within the photonic crystal resonator while simultaneously having sufficient overlap with the LN substrate to take advantage of LN's nonlinear and electro-optic properties. The $X$-point dielectric mode for the unit cell is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:band_diagram}(b), with the electric field $y$-component shown in a color scale. For this unit cell, approximately 15\% of the electromagnetic energy is contained in the LN. The TE-like dielectric band for this nominal unit cell is shown as the red curve in Fig. \ref{fig:band_diagram}(c). Notice that for this design, the TE-like air band as well as all TM-like modes are above the LN light line, and are therefore excluded from the diagram.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5in]{Figure3-v6.pdf}
\caption{(a) The unit cell length (ie. the lattice spacing) vs. hole number along the length of the nanobeam. The nanobeam has a 39-hole defect consisting of a quadratic reduction in lattice spacing, down to a minimum of 90\% of the nominal spacing. On either side of the defect are mirror regions each consisting of 20 unit cells with the nominal spacing of 325 nm. Not all mirror holes are shown. (b) shows side and top views of the fundamental optical mode, which has a frequency of 203 THz. The color plot shows the y-component of the optical mode electric field. For both side and top views the cross-sections are taken through the center of the nanobeam. The black lines show the outline of the device (the vertical lines in the side view mark the ellipse centers). (c) shows an enlarged image of the optical mode, showing the field penetration into the LN substrate. Approximately 15\% of the electromagnetic energy is contained in the LN. (d) The nanobeam cavity supports various higher order longitudinal modes, separated by 2.6 to 2.8 THz.}
\label{fig:defect}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
From here, we move to designing the defect region. For nanobeam resonators, a defect with a quadratic profile has been shown to produce optical modes with smooth, Gaussian envelopes, resulting in low radiation losses and high quality factors \cite{Chan2009,Davanco2012, Li2015}. We use a quadratic defect in which the hole lattice spacing is reduced by 10\%, while the size and shape of the elliptical holes are kept fixed. The shift in the TE dielectric band due to this 10\% reduction is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:band_diagram}(c) (blue). Cavities based on other types of defects (eg. varying the hole dimensions or beam width) are also possible. A typical beam design simulated in this paper included 39 defect holes in the center of the beam, surrounded on either side by mirror regions containing 20 unit cells each. The hole spacing along the length of this nanobeam is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:defect}(a).
In order to judge the effectiveness of the cavity design, the optical modes of the structure were calculated using an electromagnetic finite-element solver (COMSOL). There are several different sources of loss for photonic crystal resonators, such as material absorption, scattering due to fabrication defects, as well as the leakage into radiation modes due to spatial confinement of the resonance. In our simulations, we neglected the first two loss mechanisms (which typically set an upper bound on the measured $Q>5\times 10^6$), and considered only the third, which is set fundamentally by the geometry and Maxwell's equations.
The radiation $Q$ factor, $Q_\text{rad}$, was determined by surrounding the simulation space with an absorbing layer so that far-field radiated light results in an imaginary eigenfrequency component.
One of the key ways to reduce radiation losses is to ensure that the transition from the mirror region to cavity defect occurs smoothly \cite{Akahane2003a}. In the case of a quadratic defect with a fixed ``depth'', the defect becomes more adiabatic as the number of unit cells in the defect region is increased. Figure \ref{fig:Q_vs_Length} shows the trend of increasing $Q_\text{rad}$ as the number of defect unit cells is increased. At a defect size of 39 unit cells, the simulated $Q_\text{rad}$ exceeds 14 million. The mode volume, important for understanding the quantum operation of the device, is also shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Q_vs_Length}. As the defect size increases, the mode volume increases roughly linearly, up to about 1.5 $(\lambda/n_{Si})^3$. Here we use the standard definition of mode volume: $V = \frac{\int \epsilon |\vec{E}|^2 d^3r}{\text{max}\left( \epsilon |\vec{E}|^2\right)}$ \cite{Vuckovic2002}.
The error bars in Fig. \ref{fig:Q_vs_Length} are approximate and were established by varying the size of the simulation space and progressively refining the mesh used in the finite-element calculation. For the last data point (39 defect unit cells) the estimate of the $Q_\text{rad}$ is limited by the computational size and mesh density rather than the cavity geometry. As such, the value of 14 million for the ultimate $Q_\text{rad}$ should be taken as a lower bound. The material parameters used for all simulations in this paper are summarized in Table \ref{tab:parameters}. It should be noted that the fraction of electromagnetic energy in the LN decreased modestly as the number of defect holes was increased, from 17\% at 9 defect holes to 13\% at 39 defect holes. This is due to a change in the overall silicon filling fraction seen by the optical mode.
\begin{table}[b]
\centering
\caption{Material parameters used for simulations. }
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Parameter & Description & Value & Ref.\\ \hline
$n_{Si}$ & Silicon refractive index (194 THz) & 3.48 & \cite{Weber}\\
- & LN-orientation & X-cut & - \\
$n_o$ & LN ordinary refractive index (194 THz) & 2.21 & \cite{Nikogosyan2005} \\
$n_e$ & LN extraordinary refractive index (194 THz) & 2.14 & \cite{Nikogosyan2005}\\
$\epsilon_{11}$ & LN relative permittivity (DC) & 46.5 & \cite{Weis1985}\\
$\epsilon_{33}$ & LN relative permittivity (DC) & 27.3 & \cite{Nikogosyan2005} \\
$r_{13}$ & LN electro-optic coefficient & 9 pm/V & \cite{Weis1985}\\
$r_{33}$ & LN electro-optic coefficient & 31 pm/V & \cite{Weis1985}\\
$\epsilon'_{\text{Al}}$ & Aluminum relative permittivity (real part, 203 THz) & $-$208.2 & \cite{Rakic1998}\\
$\epsilon''_{\text{Al}}$ & Aluminum relative permittivity (imag. part, 203 THz) & 41.89 & \cite{Rakic1998}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:parameters}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5in]{Figure4_v4.pdf}
\caption{Plot showing how the radiation-limited $Q$ factor (left axis) and mode volume (right axis) of the fundamental nanobeam mode changes with an increase in the number of holes in the defect region. A longer defect region results in a larger mode volume, but also a greatly reduced amount of out-of-plane scattering. The error bars for the mode volume and Q factor were established by varying the size of the simulation space and refining the mesh. It should be noted that these finite-element simulations only consider losses due to far-field radiation from a perfect structure; in reality, measured device $Q$ factors will likely be limited by material absorption and fabrication defects \cite{Quan2010}. Inset: The geometry of the high-Q nanobeam with 39 defect holes. }
\label{fig:Q_vs_Length}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Electro-optic Coupling}\label{sec:eo}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure5_v5.pdf}
\caption{(a) Plot showing the electro-optic overlap for the nanobeam cross-section. The optical mode electric field norm is plotted in color, and the white arrows indicate the DC electric displacement field due to the electrodes. The nanobeam geometry is outlined in black and the electrodes are shown in white. The distance between the electrodes and nanobeam edge is 600 nm and the electrode height is 50 nm. (b) shows how the simulated $Q_\text{metal}$ (due to metal absorption) and the electro-optic coupling rate $g_V/2\pi$ vary as a function of the electrode distance from the edges of the nanobeam. }
\label{fig:Electro-optic}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
One of the key applications for photonic devices based on an LN platform is electro-optic modulation \cite{Chen2014,Chen2012,Chiles2014,Rao2015}. For a photonic crystal type cavity, electro-optic modulation can be achieved by fabricating electrodes near the cavity optical mode. Applying a potential difference results in an electric field through the LN, which in turn causes a frequency shift of the optical mode via the electro-optic effect in LN.
To judge the effectiveness of our nanobeam cavity design for electro-optic applications, we performed combined electromagnetic simulations to find the electro-optic coupling rate between the optical modes of a nanobeam defect unit cell and the DC to mmWave electric field generated by the electrodes. In our simulation, we apply a fixed voltage $V_{\text{app}}$ between the two electrodes and calculate the resulting applied electric field $E^\text{app}$. This applied electric field in turn leads to an index perturbation $\Delta\varepsilon$ in the LN. In LN the dielectric tensor is diagonal and the largest electro-optic coefficients are $r_{33}$ and $r_{13}$, so $\Delta\varepsilon$ has three major components given by
\begin{equation}
\Delta \varepsilon_{xx(zz)} = - r_{13} n_o^4 ~E^\text{app}_{y},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\Delta \varepsilon_{yy} = - r_{33} n_e^4 ~E^\text{app}_{y},
\end{equation}
where $n_o$ ($n_e$) is the ordinary (extraordinary) refractive index. Notice that here we have taken the LN extraordinary crystal axis (often referred to as Z+) to lie along the y-axis of our simulation.
From first-order perturbation theory (see eg. \cite{Joannopoulos2008}), the frequency shift generated by an index perturbation $\Delta\varepsilon$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\Delta\omega = -\frac{\omega_0}{2}~ \sum_{ij}~ \frac{\int_\textrm{LN} E^*_{0i} \Delta\varepsilon_{ij} E_{0j} ~d^3r}{\int E^*_{0i} \varepsilon_{ij} E_{0j} ~d^3r},
\end{equation}
where $\omega_0$ is the original resonance frequency, $E_0 = (E_{0x},E_{0y},E_{0z})$ is the electric field of the unperturbed optical mode, and the top integral is taken over the LN substrate region. Finally, from this we can calculate the electro-optic coupling rate as
\begin{equation}
\frac{g_V}{2\pi} = \frac{\Delta\omega}{2\pi V_{\text{app}}}.
\end{equation}
Figure \ref{fig:Electro-optic}(a) shows a cross-section of the nanobeam (cut along a dielectric segment), illustrating the overlap between the optical mode and the applied electric field from the electrodes. Due to the high dielectric permittivity of LN at low frequencies, the applied electric field is almost completely confined to the LN substrate, increasing the overlap.
A key design parameter in such an electro-optic photonic device is the distance between the metal electrodes and the optical cavity. Bringing the electrodes closer to the cavity results in a stronger electro-optic interaction per volt, but runs the risk of reducing the cavity $Q$ factor due to absorption. We define a loss parameter, $Q_\text{metal}$, to be the $Q$ due only to absorption losses in the metal electrodes. For the simulations, we assumed the electrodes were aluminum (see Table \ref{tab:parameters}).
As the electrodes are moved farther from the nanobeam, the amount of field penetrating into the electrode region falls off exponentially, causing the $Q_\text{metal}$ (blue curve, left axis) to increase dramatically. However, the electro-optic coupling rate $g_V/2\pi$ (red curve, right axis) also decreases as the spacing is increased, suggesting an optimal spacing that balances this trade-off. It should be stressed that the $Q_\text{metal}$ reported here represents an approximate upper-bound on the real $Q$ factor which would include the radiation losses as well fabrication-induced and absorption losses.
A good design choice would be to choose an electrode distance where $Q_\text{metal}$ is one or two orders of magnitude larger than the expected cavity quality factor. For example, if we expect a fabrication-limited $Q$ of about $10^6$, then we can choose an electrode distance of 0.6 $\mu\text{m}$ (which has a simulated $Q_\text{metal} = 3.7\times 10^7$), and for this device we achieve a coupling rate of 0.59 GHz/V (4.3 pm/V). A more complete investigation of electro-optic modulation at GHz frequencies requires an analysis of the details of the driving circuit and will be studied in a future work.
\section{Conclusions}
In summary, we have proposed a new way of confining light in wavelength-scale optical resonators on a hybrid Silicon/Lithium Niobate system. By using a thin-film bonded silicon top layer, we leverage many of the techniques of silicon photonics processing to design a cavity on LN. We expect resonators of this type to have a wide range of applications, including achieving large coupling to isolated rare-earth ions (Er$^{3+}$:LiNbO$_3$) at telecom frequencies~\cite{mcauslan2009strong,zhong2015nanophotonic}, ultra-sensitive acousto- and electro-optic modulation, and achieving large three-wave mixing in resonant silicon devices.
\section*{Acknowledgements} JW gratefully acknowledges support from a Stanford Graduate Fellowship. This work was supported by NSF ECCS-1509107 and the Stanford Terman Fellowship, as well as start-up funds from Stanford University. We thank Martin Fejer, Carsten Langrock, Jeff Chiles, Oskar Painter, and Johannes Fink for useful discussions. Part of this work was performed at the Stanford Nano Shared Facilities (SNSF) and the Stanford Nanofabrication Facility (SNF).
\end{document}
\section{Introduction}
Resonant silicon photonic devices, though capable of achieving very large quality factors with wavelength-scale mode volumes, suffer from the lack of large nonlinear optical ($\chi^{(2)}$), piezoelectric, and electro-optic coefficients. This has led to recent research into other materials such as GaP, GaAs, and AlN which can outperform silicon in many respects~\cite{Shambat2010,Xiong2012,Tadesse2014,Balram2015}. Nonetheless, the appeal of large-scale integration with silicon photonics (and its rapidly developing toolkit as well as several foundries) leads us to consider optically nonlinear materials that can be heterogeneously integrated with high quality silicon passive structures. Lithium niobate (LN) is a technologically important ferroelectric which has some of the largest nonlinear optical coefficients found in a bulk material, and can be obtained in ample quantity and high quality as a result of the demand from the telecommunications market. Unfortunately, it is far less amenable to microfabrication techniques than silicon, and processes such as dry etching high-quality wavelength scale optical structures are difficult and non-standard. Nonetheless, ion sliced thin films of LN have been developed in the last few years~\cite{Rabiei2004,Sulser2009,Poberaj2012,Lu2012,Rabiei2013} to facilitate among other things nanophotonic fabrication, and more recently, high quality chip-scale optical resonators have been demonstrated in these materials~\cite{Diziain2013,Chen2013,Lin2015,Wang2014,Wang2015}.
In a recent work on mid-infrared modulators, thin-film \emph{silicon} was wafer-bonded to LN~\cite{Chiles2014}. Very recently, CMOS-compatible integration of SOI photonic waveguides with LN has also been demonstrated~\cite{Weigel2015}. The major advantage of this method is the ease of integration with silicon photonics. Fabrication of the silicon device layer can be accomplished at a variety of different foundries, and the back-end processing involves only a single bonding and back-etch step.
A question we address in this work is whether it is possible to effectively confine light inside LN by only patterning a top bonded silicon layer. Effectiveness is this context is judged by confinement and optical resonator decay rate, and is encapsulated in the ratio of the quality factor to optical mode volume, $Q/V$. We design a device which shows record large $Q/V$ in the Si/LN material system and theoretically outline its performance characteristics and possible applications.
We start by introducing the Silicon/Lithium Niobate (Si/LN) platform in Section~\ref{sec:siln}, and by describing some of the fabrication flow involved. In Section~\ref{sec:cavity_design_sim} we introduce the design steps involved in generating a cavity on this platform. We calculate the expected electro-optic coupling coefficient obtained in Section~\ref{sec:eo}.
\section{Si/LN Platform Fabrication Flow}\label{sec:siln}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5in]{Figure1_v4.pdf}
\caption{(a) An SEM image of a fabricated nanobeam cavity in silicon-on-insulator bonded to LN. An enlarged image (b) shows the elliptical holes which generate the photonic band gap. (c) shows the fabrication steps for creating Si/LN platform. First, the crystalline Si device layer can be patterned using standard electron beam lithography techniques and silicon etching. The second step is room temperature bonding of the SOI wafer to the LN substrate, enabled by a surface-activating plasma treatment. Finally, the Si backside is removed (using a combination of mechanical polishing and wet or dry etching), followed by an HF dip to remove the oxide layer. }
\label{fig:fab_steps}
\end{figure}
One promising platform which has recently been demonstrated is the so-called Si/LN platform. This material system consists of a thin layer of high quality crystalline silicon from an SOI wafer transferred onto a bulk LiNbO$_3$~ wafer and is described in detail in \cite{Chiles2014}. The fabrication steps that we pursue for this process are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:fab_steps} and outlined below.
First, the silicon top layer is patterned using either e-beam or DUV lithography and dry etching. This process is CMOS compatible and can be done at a foundry, though the highest quality factor photonic resonators are typically fabricated with e-beam lithography and optimized etches. The SOI wafer and the LN wafer are then bonded together using a room-temperature direct bonding process (as described, eg. in \cite{Tulli2011, Takagi2001}). A key limitation in the bonding process is the large thermal expansion coefficient mismatch between Si and LN ($2.6\times10^{-6}~\text{K}^{-1}$ for Si compared to $15.7\times 10^{-6}~\text{K}^{-1}$ for LN along the x and y axes \cite{Nikogosyan2005}), which limits the temperature at which the bonding process can occur. The need for a high temperature step is averted by using an O$_2$ or Ar plasma treatment to activate the surface. This treatment introduces damage to the surface and creates dangling bonds, resulting in hydrophilic surfaces with a high surface energy \cite{Tulli2011}. After surface activation a strong bond can be achieved by applying only a minimal amount of pressure. The bulk Si can be removed using a combination of mechanical lapping and either a wet chemical etch or a dry plasma etch. The exposed SiO$_2$ can then be removed using a simple HF dip. It should be stressed that a key advantage of this platform is that it avoids the need to etch the LN. Figure \ref{fig:fab_steps}(a) shows an example 1D photonic crystal, fabricated in SOI using e-beam lithography and silicon etching, after being bonded to LN.
It should be mentioned that it is also possible to pattern the Si device layer after bonding the two wafers together and removing the SOI backside, which is the method used in \cite{Chiles2014}. The main advantage of patterning the Si device layer \textit{before} bonding is that it allows us to use silicon photonics processes (eg. etch tools) without the danger of contaminating sensitive CMOS silicon processing tools with lithium (or niobium). In fact, groups without access to lithography or silicon etching can simply bond foundry-fabricated silicon photonics devices onto LN. It is also worth noting that instead of bulk LN wafers, so-called ``lithium-niobate-on-insulator'' wafers which have a thin LN film can also be used without significantly changing the fabrication flow (as in \cite{Weigel2015}).
\section{Cavity Design and Simulation}\label{sec:cavity_design_sim}
Photonic crystal resonators in quasi-1D and 2D systems are implemented by fabricating a periodic array of holes into an optically thin beam or slab. The periodic variation of the dielectric constant leads to a photonic bandgap for index-confined waves, which can then be used to confine light in all dimensions through the introduction of a defect. In silicon, quality factors on the order of $10^6$ and approaching $10^7$ have been demonstrated for both 1D and 2D structures of this type \cite{Akahane2003a, Sekoguchi2014, Deotare2009}.
We follow a popular recipe for the creation of a high-$Q$ localized mode in a photonic crystal slab~\cite{Song2005,md2008ultra}. Firstly, we design a one-dimensional unit cell that has a photonic band gap at the resonant frequency of interest. This will form the ``mirror regions'' surrounding the cavity. Secondly, a central defect is introduced between the two mirror regions. This defect is generated by modifying the properties of the unit cell so that it supports modes with frequencies within the mirror region bandgap. The defect is introduced as ``smoothly'' as possible to prevent scattering of light into radiation modes, while also allowing for tight confinement of the light. Such cavities have been designed for a variety of suspended membrane materials such as silicon~\cite{Deotare2009}, GaAs~\cite{Buckley2014a}, and even diamond~\cite{Burek2014}. Non-suspended structures, i.e., photonic crystals made from silicon on top of glass, have also been demonstrated~\cite{md2008ultra}. In our case, since the silicon is surrounded on one side by air and on the other by LN, which has a fairly high index of $n \approx 2.2$, care must be taken to ensure that the nanobeam modes that would be bound for a beam in air or on glass do not leak into the LN substrate.
Several considerations go into designing the unit cell. In comparison to suspended silicon photonic crystals, the presence of the LN substrate causes a red-shift of the Bloch-waves which can be countered by reducing the lattice spacing. The presence of the LN also raises the lower limit of how small the effective index can be, since the nearby medium (LN) has an index of approximately $2.2$. This leads to a higher filling factor of silicon in the photonic structure or, equivalently, smaller holes. Finally, an important practical constraint on the unit cell geometry is that it should be fabricable using standard e-beam lithography techniques and extendable to DUV photolighography for foundry processes. We therefore adopted a minimum feature size of 75 nm as a design rule.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5in]{Figure2_v3.pdf}
\caption{(a) Unit cell geometry for the cavity mirror region. The design parameters are: $a = 325~\text{nm}$, $w = 630~\text{nm}$, $r_x = 70~\text{nm}$, $r_y = 240~\text{nm}$. The Si device layer thickness is 220 nm. (b) Plot of electric field y-component for the $X$-point mode of the nanobeam unit cell, with the cell geometry outlined in black. (c) Band diagrams showing the TE-like dielectric modes for the nanobeam mirror and defect regions. The defect here is a 10\% reduction in the photonic crystal lattice spacing. The defect mode is chosen to lie near the LN light line, but still within the TE band gap of the mirror region. Note that the TM-like modes are all above the LN light line. }
\label{fig:band_diagram}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Given the constraints described above, the mirror region unit cell shown in Fig. \ref{fig:band_diagram}(a) is designed to strike a balance between confining the light within the photonic crystal resonator while simultaneously having sufficient overlap with the LN substrate to take advantage of LN's nonlinear and electro-optic properties. The $X$-point dielectric mode for the unit cell is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:band_diagram}(b), with the electric field $y$-component shown in a color scale. For this unit cell, approximately 15\% of the electromagnetic energy is contained in the LN. The TE-like dielectric band for this nominal unit cell is shown as the red curve in Fig. \ref{fig:band_diagram}(c). Notice that for this design, the TE-like air band as well as all TM-like modes are above the LN light line, and are therefore excluded from the diagram.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5in]{Figure3-v6.pdf}
\caption{(a) The unit cell length (ie. the lattice spacing) vs. hole number along the length of the nanobeam. The nanobeam has a 39-hole defect consisting of a quadratic reduction in lattice spacing, down to a minimum of 90\% of the nominal spacing. On either side of the defect are mirror regions each consisting of 20 unit cells with the nominal spacing of 325 nm. Not all mirror holes are shown. (b) shows side and top views of the fundamental optical mode, which has a frequency of 203 THz. The color plot shows the y-component of the optical mode electric field. For both side and top views the cross-sections are taken through the center of the nanobeam. The black lines show the outline of the device (the vertical lines in the side view mark the ellipse centers). (c) shows an enlarged image of the optical mode, showing the field penetration into the LN substrate. Approximately 15\% of the electromagnetic energy is contained in the LN. (d) The nanobeam cavity supports various higher order longitudinal modes, separated by 2.6 to 2.8 THz.}
\label{fig:defect}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
From here, we move to designing the defect region. For nanobeam resonators, a defect with a quadratic profile has been shown to produce optical modes with smooth, Gaussian envelopes, resulting in low radiation losses and high quality factors \cite{Chan2009,Davanco2012, Li2015}. We use a quadratic defect in which the hole lattice spacing is reduced by 10\%, while the size and shape of the elliptical holes are kept fixed. The shift in the TE dielectric band due to this 10\% reduction is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:band_diagram}(c) (blue). Cavities based on other types of defects (eg. varying the hole dimensions or beam width) are also possible. A typical beam design simulated in this paper included 39 defect holes in the center of the beam, surrounded on either side by mirror regions containing 20 unit cells each. The hole spacing along the length of this nanobeam is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:defect}(a).
In order to judge the effectiveness of the cavity design, the optical modes of the structure were calculated using an electromagnetic finite-element solver (COMSOL). There are several different sources of loss for photonic crystal resonators, such as material absorption, scattering due to fabrication defects, as well as the leakage into radiation modes due to spatial confinement of the resonance. In our simulations, we neglected the first two loss mechanisms (which typically set an upper bound on the measured $Q>5\times 10^6$), and considered only the third, which is set fundamentally by the geometry and Maxwell's equations.
The radiation $Q$ factor, $Q_\text{rad}$, was determined by surrounding the simulation space with an absorbing layer so that far-field radiated light results in an imaginary eigenfrequency component.
One of the key ways to reduce radiation losses is to ensure that the transition from the mirror region to cavity defect occurs smoothly \cite{Akahane2003a}. In the case of a quadratic defect with a fixed ``depth'', the defect becomes more adiabatic as the number of unit cells in the defect region is increased. Figure \ref{fig:Q_vs_Length} shows the trend of increasing $Q_\text{rad}$ as the number of defect unit cells is increased. At a defect size of 39 unit cells, the simulated $Q_\text{rad}$ exceeds 14 million. The mode volume, important for understanding the quantum operation of the device, is also shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Q_vs_Length}. As the defect size increases, the mode volume increases roughly linearly, up to about 1.5 $(\lambda/n_{Si})^3$. Here we use the standard definition of mode volume: $V = \frac{\int \epsilon |\vec{E}|^2 d^3r}{\text{max}\left( \epsilon |\vec{E}|^2\right)}$ \cite{Vuckovic2002}.
The error bars in Fig. \ref{fig:Q_vs_Length} are approximate and were established by varying the size of the simulation space and progressively refining the mesh used in the finite-element calculation. For the last data point (39 defect unit cells) the estimate of the $Q_\text{rad}$ is limited by the computational size and mesh density rather than the cavity geometry. As such, the value of 14 million for the ultimate $Q_\text{rad}$ should be taken as a lower bound. The material parameters used for all simulations in this paper are summarized in Table \ref{tab:parameters}. It should be noted that the fraction of electromagnetic energy in the LN decreased modestly as the number of defect holes was increased, from 17\% at 9 defect holes to 13\% at 39 defect holes. This is due to a change in the overall silicon filling fraction seen by the optical mode.
\begin{table}[b]
\centering
\caption{Material parameters used for simulations. }
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Parameter & Description & Value & Ref.\\ \hline
$n_{Si}$ & Silicon refractive index (194 THz) & 3.48 & \cite{Weber}\\
- & LN-orientation & X-cut & - \\
$n_o$ & LN ordinary refractive index (194 THz) & 2.21 & \cite{Nikogosyan2005} \\
$n_e$ & LN extraordinary refractive index (194 THz) & 2.14 & \cite{Nikogosyan2005}\\
$\epsilon_{11}$ & LN relative permittivity (DC) & 46.5 & \cite{Weis1985}\\
$\epsilon_{33}$ & LN relative permittivity (DC) & 27.3 & \cite{Nikogosyan2005} \\
$r_{13}$ & LN electro-optic coefficient & 9 pm/V & \cite{Weis1985}\\
$r_{33}$ & LN electro-optic coefficient & 31 pm/V & \cite{Weis1985}\\
$\epsilon'_{\text{Al}}$ & Aluminum relative permittivity (real part, 203 THz) & $-$208.2 & \cite{Rakic1998}\\
$\epsilon''_{\text{Al}}$ & Aluminum relative permittivity (imag. part, 203 THz) & 41.89 & \cite{Rakic1998}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:parameters}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5in]{Figure4_v4.pdf}
\caption{Plot showing how the radiation-limited $Q$ factor (left axis) and mode volume (right axis) of the fundamental nanobeam mode changes with an increase in the number of holes in the defect region. A longer defect region results in a larger mode volume, but also a greatly reduced amount of out-of-plane scattering. The error bars for the mode volume and Q factor were established by varying the size of the simulation space and refining the mesh. It should be noted that these finite-element simulations only consider losses due to far-field radiation from a perfect structure; in reality, measured device $Q$ factors will likely be limited by material absorption and fabrication defects \cite{Quan2010}. Inset: The geometry of the high-Q nanobeam with 39 defect holes. }
\label{fig:Q_vs_Length}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Electro-optic Coupling}\label{sec:eo}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure5_v5.pdf}
\caption{(a) Plot showing the electro-optic overlap for the nanobeam cross-section. The optical mode electric field norm is plotted in color, and the white arrows indicate the DC electric displacement field due to the electrodes. The nanobeam geometry is outlined in black and the electrodes are shown in white. The distance between the electrodes and nanobeam edge is 600 nm and the electrode height is 50 nm. (b) shows how the simulated $Q_\text{metal}$ (due to metal absorption) and the electro-optic coupling rate $g_V/2\pi$ vary as a function of the electrode distance from the edges of the nanobeam. }
\label{fig:Electro-optic}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
One of the key applications for photonic devices based on an LN platform is electro-optic modulation \cite{Chen2014,Chen2012,Chiles2014,Rao2015}. For a photonic crystal type cavity, electro-optic modulation can be achieved by fabricating electrodes near the cavity optical mode. Applying a potential difference results in an electric field through the LN, which in turn causes a frequency shift of the optical mode via the electro-optic effect in LN.
To judge the effectiveness of our nanobeam cavity design for electro-optic applications, we performed combined electromagnetic simulations to find the electro-optic coupling rate between the optical modes of a nanobeam defect unit cell and the DC to mmWave electric field generated by the electrodes. In our simulation, we apply a fixed voltage $V_{\text{app}}$ between the two electrodes and calculate the resulting applied electric field $E^\text{app}$. This applied electric field in turn leads to an index perturbation $\Delta\varepsilon$ in the LN. In LN the dielectric tensor is diagonal and the largest electro-optic coefficients are $r_{33}$ and $r_{13}$, so $\Delta\varepsilon$ has three major components given by
\begin{equation}
\Delta \varepsilon_{xx(zz)} = - r_{13} n_o^4 ~E^\text{app}_{y},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\Delta \varepsilon_{yy} = - r_{33} n_e^4 ~E^\text{app}_{y},
\end{equation}
where $n_o$ ($n_e$) is the ordinary (extraordinary) refractive index. Notice that here we have taken the LN extraordinary crystal axis (often referred to as Z+) to lie along the y-axis of our simulation.
From first-order perturbation theory (see eg. \cite{Joannopoulos2008}), the frequency shift generated by an index perturbation $\Delta\varepsilon$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\Delta\omega = -\frac{\omega_0}{2}~ \sum_{ij}~ \frac{\int_\textrm{LN} E^*_{0i} \Delta\varepsilon_{ij} E_{0j} ~d^3r}{\int E^*_{0i} \varepsilon_{ij} E_{0j} ~d^3r},
\end{equation}
where $\omega_0$ is the original resonance frequency, $E_0 = (E_{0x},E_{0y},E_{0z})$ is the electric field of the unperturbed optical mode, and the top integral is taken over the LN substrate region. Finally, from this we can calculate the electro-optic coupling rate as
\begin{equation}
\frac{g_V}{2\pi} = \frac{\Delta\omega}{2\pi V_{\text{app}}}.
\end{equation}
Figure \ref{fig:Electro-optic}(a) shows a cross-section of the nanobeam (cut along a dielectric segment), illustrating the overlap between the optical mode and the applied electric field from the electrodes. Due to the high dielectric permittivity of LN at low frequencies, the applied electric field is almost completely confined to the LN substrate, increasing the overlap.
A key design parameter in such an electro-optic photonic device is the distance between the metal electrodes and the optical cavity. Bringing the electrodes closer to the cavity results in a stronger electro-optic interaction per volt, but runs the risk of reducing the cavity $Q$ factor due to absorption. We define a loss parameter, $Q_\text{metal}$, to be the $Q$ due only to absorption losses in the metal electrodes. For the simulations, we assumed the electrodes were aluminum (see Table \ref{tab:parameters}).
As the electrodes are moved farther from the nanobeam, the amount of field penetrating into the electrode region falls off exponentially, causing the $Q_\text{metal}$ (blue curve, left axis) to increase dramatically. However, the electro-optic coupling rate $g_V/2\pi$ (red curve, right axis) also decreases as the spacing is increased, suggesting an optimal spacing that balances this trade-off. It should be stressed that the $Q_\text{metal}$ reported here represents an approximate upper-bound on the real $Q$ factor which would include the radiation losses as well fabrication-induced and absorption losses.
A good design choice would be to choose an electrode distance where $Q_\text{metal}$ is one or two orders of magnitude larger than the expected cavity quality factor. For example, if we expect a fabrication-limited $Q$ of about $10^6$, then we can choose an electrode distance of 0.6 $\mu\text{m}$ (which has a simulated $Q_\text{metal} = 3.7\times 10^7$), and for this device we achieve a coupling rate of 0.59 GHz/V (4.3 pm/V). A more complete investigation of electro-optic modulation at GHz frequencies requires an analysis of the details of the driving circuit and will be studied in a future work.
\section{Conclusions}
In summary, we have proposed a new way of confining light in wavelength-scale optical resonators on a hybrid Silicon/Lithium Niobate system. By using a thin-film bonded silicon top layer, we leverage many of the techniques of silicon photonics processing to design a cavity on LN. We expect resonators of this type to have a wide range of applications, including achieving large coupling to isolated rare-earth ions (Er$^{3+}$:LiNbO$_3$) at telecom frequencies~\cite{mcauslan2009strong,zhong2015nanophotonic}, ultra-sensitive acousto- and electro-optic modulation, and achieving large three-wave mixing in resonant silicon devices.
\section*{Acknowledgements} JW gratefully acknowledges support from a Stanford Graduate Fellowship. This work was supported by NSF ECCS-1509107 and the Stanford Terman Fellowship, as well as start-up funds from Stanford University. We thank Martin Fejer, Carsten Langrock, Jeff Chiles, Oskar Painter, and Johannes Fink for useful discussions. Part of this work was performed at the Stanford Nano Shared Facilities (SNSF) and the Stanford Nanofabrication Facility (SNF).
\end{document}
|
\section{Parity Games with Integer Costs}
\label{sec:concrete}
In this section, we extend the model of parity games with costs to non-negative integer costs.
Recall that the cost function~$\mathrm{Cst}\colon E \rightarrow \set{\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}, \ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}}$ assigns to each edge of~$\mathcal{G}$ either no cost, or a unit cost.
We now consider cost functions that assign to each edge a natural number.
Formally, let~$\mathcal{A}$ and~$\Omega$ be an arena and a coloring as defined previously and let~$\mathrm{Cst}\colon E \rightarrow \mathbb{N}$ be a cost function.
We call~$\mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{A}, \cp(\Omega, \mathrm{Cst}))$ a parity game with (non-negative) integer-valued costs.
Now the cost of a play infix is the sum of the costs of its edges and the winning condition~$\cp(\Omega, \mathrm{Cst})$ is defined analogously to the case of abstract costs.
We denote the highest cost assigned by~$\mathrm{Cst}$ by~$W$ if~$\mathrm{Cst}$ is clear from the context.
Since we assume~$\mathrm{Cst}$ to be encoded in binary encoding,~$W$ may be of exponential size in the number of bits required to describe~$\mathrm{Cst}$.
To distinguish these games from those we considered previously, we call a game~$\mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{A}, \mathrm{CostParity}(\Omega, \mathrm{Cst}))$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}\colon E \rightarrow \set{\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}, \ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}}$ a parity game with abstract costs and omit this qualifier if it is clear which game is meant from the context.
Formally, the size of a parity game with integer-valued costs is defined as $\size{\mathcal{G}} = \size{\mathcal{A}} + \log W$.
Similarly to the abstract case, we call an edge~$e$ an $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$- or an increment-edge if~$\mathrm{Cst}(e) = 0$ or~$\mathrm{Cst}(e) > 0$, respectively.
We first show that determining the winner in~$\mathcal{G}$ with respect to a given bound~$b$ is as easy as determining the winner in a parity game with abstract costs.
Since the former problem subsumes the latter one, this yields~\textsc{PSpace}\xspace-completeness of the former problem via Lemma~\ref{lemma_pspacehardness}.
Afterwards, we briefly discuss the memory requirements of both players as well as the potential tradeoffs present in this setting.
In particular, we show that the tradeoffs between the cost and the size of a strategy are, in general, more pronounced in the case of integer-valued costs.
\subsection{The Complexity of Solving Parity Games with Integer-Valued Costs Optimally}
We first examine the complexity of playing optimally in parity games with integer-valued costs and show that this problem is not harder than the special case of abstract costs.
Afterwards, we argue that this implies an exponential upper bound on the size of optimal strategies for both players.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:binary:pspace-completeness}
The following problem is $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$-complete: \myquot{Given a parity game with integer-valued costs~$\mathcal{G}$ and a bound~$b \in \mathbb{N}$ (in binary encoding), does Player~$0$ have a strategy~$\sigma$ for $\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \le b$?}
\end{thm}
\textsc{PSpace}\xspace-hardness of this problem follows directly from Lemma~\ref{lemma_pspacehardness}, as every finitary parity game is a parity game with integer-valued costs.
Thus, the remainder of this section is dedicated to showing \textsc{PSpace}\xspace-membership of the given problem.
We follow the same approach that solved the case of abstract costs, i.e., we first extend~$\mathcal{G}$ with the same memory structure yielding the qualitative parity game~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, which is still only of exponential size.
In contrast to the abstract case, however, plays of~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ are not settled after polynomially many moves, as the upper bound on~$b$ is now exponential.
Thus, we construct a novel finite-duration game~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$, which extends~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$ by a shortcut mechanism.
This reduces unsettled play prefixes to at most polynomial length.
By showing equivalence of~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ and~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ and by the fact that~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ can be simulated on a polynomially time-bounded alternating Turing machine, we obtain \textsc{PSpace}\xspace-membership of the given problem.
Due to the similarities between the two proofs, we reuse notation from Section~\ref{sec_pspacemembership}.
We begin by bounding the parameter~$b$ from above.
While we could assume~$b < n$ in the abstract case, this is not the case with integer-valued costs anymore: Here, a positional winning strategy for Player~$0$, which still exists, has cost at most~$nW$.
\begin{cor}
\label{cor:binary:cost-upperbound}
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a parity game with integer-valued costs with $n$ vertices and largest cost~$W$.
If Player~$0$ wins $\mathcal{G}$, then she has a strategy~$\sigma$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \le nW$, i.e., an optimal strategy has cost at most~$nW$.
\end{cor}
Due to this corollary, if~$b \geq n W$, we check for the existence of a winning strategy for Player~$0$ in~$(\mathcal{A}, \mathrm{CostParity}(\mathrm{Cst}', \Omega))$, where~$\mathrm{Cst}'(e) = \ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$, if~$\mathrm{Cst}(e) = 0$, and~$\mathrm{Cst}'(e) = \ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$ otherwise.
This can be decided in polynomial space due to Theorem~\ref{thm:previouswork}(\ref{thm:previouswork:cost}) and is equivalent to deciding the given problem.
Hence, we assume~$b < n W$ for the remainder of this proof.
Given~$\mathcal{G}$ and~$b$, we define~$\ensuremath{\game'} = (\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{M}, \mathrm{Parity}(\Omega'))$ as before, with~$M = [n+1] \times R$, where~$[n+1]$ implements the overflow counter and~$R = (\set{\bot} \cup [b+1])^D$ is the set of request functions.
Since the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:cost-parity-to-parity} does not rely on~$b < n$, Player~$0$ wins~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ if and only if she has a strategy of cost at most~$b$ for~$\mathcal{G}$.
Recall that~$v'_I$ is the initial vertex of~$\mathcal{A}'$ and that we call a play settled if it either contains a dominating cycle or if the overflow counter is saturated.
In contrast to the abstract case, plays of~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ are not settled after polynomially many steps, as up to~$nW$ many increment-edges may have to be traversed before an overflow occurs, which is exponential in the size of the game.
In order to be able to declare the winner of a play after polynomially many steps, we define~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
In this game, we skip infixes that form cycles when projected to~$\mathcal{A}$, during which the costs incurred by the relevant requests increase, but the set of these requests is stable.
We say that such infixes satisfy the shortcut criterion.
When such an infix~$\pi$ is traversed, Player~$1$ has demonstrated that he can increase the cost of the currently open relevant requests by $\mathrm{Cst}(\pi)$ without answering any such request, i.e., he can strictly improve his situation.
In~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$, Player~$1$ does not have to traverse this infix (or others) until an overflow occurs, but the play continues at a position that is as \myquot{close} to an overflow as Player~$1$ can get by repeatedly traversing~$\pi$ without actually causing an overflow.
Formally, we say that a play infix~$\pi = (v_0,o_0,r_0)\cdots(v_j,o_j,r_j)$ in~$\mathcal{A}'$ satisfies the shortcut criterion if~$v_0 = v_j$, if $o_0 = o_j$, if~$\textsc{RelReq}(r_0) = \textsc{RelReq}(r_{j'}) \neq \emptyset$ for all~$0 \leq {j'} \leq j$, if $\mathrm{Cst}(\pi) > 0$, and if~$r_j(c^*) + \mathrm{Cst}(\pi) \leq b$ for~$c^* = \argmax_{c}r_j(c)$.
Note that the condition~$r_j(c^*) + \mathrm{Cst}(\pi) \leq b$ is equivalent to demanding~$\mathrm{Cst}(\pi) \leq \frac{b - r_0(c^*)}{2}$.
For the sake of readability, we refrain from defining the arena underlying~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ formally.
We rather define the set of play prefixes of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ inductively, which are subsequences of plays in~$\mathcal{A}'$.
In particular, the vertices in~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ inherit the coloring from~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
First,~$v'_I$ is a play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
Now, let $\pi = (v_0,o_0,r_0) \cdots (v_j, o_j, r_j)$ be a play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ and let~$(v',o',r')$ be a successor of $(v_j, o_j, r_j)$ in~$\mathcal{A}'$.
If there exists no~$j'$ such that the infix $\pi' = (v_{j'}, o_{j'}, r_{j'}) \cdots (v_j, o_j, r_j) (v',o',r')$ of~$\pi$ satisfies the shortcut criterion, then~$\pi(v',o',r')$ is a play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
If, however, such a~$j'$ exists, let it be the maximal one, let~$c^* = \argmax_{c }r'(c)$, let~$s = \mathrm{Cst}(\pi')$, and let $t = \max\set{ t' > 0 \mid r'(c^*) + s \cdot t' \leq b}$.
Moreover, define~$r^*$ as~$r^*(c) = r'(c) + s \cdot t$ if~$r'(c) \neq \bot$ and~$r^*(c) = \bot$, otherwise.
Then,~$(v_0,o_0,r_0)\cdots(v_j, o_j, r_j) (v',o',r^*)$ is a play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
We define the cost of the transition from~$(v_j, o_j, r_j)$ to~$(v',o',r^*)$ as~$\mathrm{Cst}(v_j,v') + s \cdot t$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ and redefine the notions of the cost of a play accordingly in order to obtain uniform notation.
Moreover, we use the following notions:
\begin{itemize}
\item The transition from $(v_j, o_j, r_j)$ to $(v',o',r^*)$ is a \emph{shortcut}.
\item The infix $(v_{j'}, o_{j'}, r_{j'}) \cdots (v_j, o_j, r_j)(v',o',r^*)$ is a \emph{shortcut cycle}, where we call the vertex~$(v',o',r^*)$ its \emph{destination}.\footnote{Note that, similarly to the case of dominating cycles, a shortcut cycle is only a cycle when projected to its first component.}
\item The infix~$(v_{j'},o_{j'},r_{j'})\cdots(v_j, o_j, r_j) (v',o',r')$ is the \emph{detour} corresponding to the shortcut cycle, with \emph{destination}~$(v',o',r')$.
\end{itemize}
Let~$(v_j, o_j, r_j)(v',o',r^*)$ be a shortcut with~$(v',o',r')$ as the target of its associated detour as defined above.
We obtain~$\textsc{RelReq}(r') = \textsc{RelReq}(r^*)$ and~$r' \sqsubseteq r^*$.
Moreover, if~$c^*$ is the open request that has incurred the highest cost in~$r_{j'}$, this shortcut closes at least half the distance between~$r_{j'}(c^*)$ and~$b$, i.e.,~$r^*(c^*) \geq r_{j'}(c^*) + \frac{b - r_{j'}(c^*)}{2}$.
Hence, no infix~$\pi$ containing a shortcut~$\pi'$ satisfies the shortcut criterion, as the cost of~$\pi'$ is already larger than half the cost that would cause an overflow.
Thus,~$\pi$ violates the condition that it must be able to be traversed at least twice without causing an overflow.
However, a shortcut may be part of a dominating cycle.
If the maximal color along the detour associated with some shortcut is odd, then the shortcut cycle is an odd dominating cycle, i.e., a play may be settled due to a dominating cycle that contains a shortcut.
The introduction of shortcuts in~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ ensures that plays in~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ are settled in polynomial time.
Fix~$\ell_\curvearrowright = (\log(nW) + 1)(n+1)^6$, which is polynomial in the size of~$\mathcal{G}$.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:pspace-mem:binary:unsettled-bound}
Let~$\pi$ be a play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
If~$\card{\pi} > \ell_\curvearrowright$, then~$\pi$ is settled.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\pi = (v_0, o_0, r_0)\cdots(v_j, o_j, r_j)$.
First, due to the same argument as in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound},~$\pi$ may not contain a vertex repetition, as it is unsettled.
Also note that~$\pi$ only contains at most~$n$ overflow positions, each type 1 infix contains at most~$n$ debt-free positions, each type 2 infix contains at most~$d$ request-adding positions and each type 3 infix contains at most~$d$ relevance-reducing positions, again due to the same arguments as in Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound}.
Fix a non-empty type 4 infix~$\pi_4$ and recall that there is at least one request continuously open throughout~$\pi_4$.
Let~$c^*$ be the request that has incurred the greatest cost~$s$ at the beginning of~$\pi_4$ and note that the request for~$c^*$ is continuously open throughout~$\pi_4$, as~$\pi_4$ has no relevance-reducing positions.
We define the first \emph{halving position} as the minimal position~$k$ such that~$r_k(c^*) \geq s + \frac{b - s}{2}$ (if it exists).
Inductively, if~$k$ is a halving position, then the minimal~$k' > k$ with~$r_{k'}(c^*) \geq r_k(c^*) + \frac{b - r_k(c^*)}{2}$ is a halving position as well (if it exists).
Since at each halving position the difference between the currently incurred cost of~$c^*$ and the bound~$b$ has been halved when compared to the previous halving position, there exist at most~$\log(b) \leq \log(nW)$ many such positions.
Hence, splitting~$\pi_4$ at its halving positions yields at most~$\log(nW) + 1$ many infixes without overflow, debt-free, request-adding, relevance-reducing or halving positions.
We say such an infix has type~$4'$.
Fix a non-empty type~$4'$ infix~$\pi_{4'}$.
We show that~$\pi_{4'}$ contains at most~$n$ increment-edges.
Towards a contradiction assume that it contains~$n+1$ increment-edges and let~$c^*$ be the request that has incurred the highest cost~$s$ at the beginning of~$\pi_{4'}$.
Since there exist more than~$n$ increment-edges, there exist two such edges leading to the vertices~$(v_k,o_k,r_k)$ and~$(v_{k'}, o_{k'}, r_{k'})$ with~$k < k'$ and~$v_k = v_{k'}$.
If the cost of the infix~$(v_k,o_k,r_k) \cdots (v_{k'}, o_{k'}, r_{k'})$ is larger than~$\frac{b-s}{2}$, then~$\pi_{4'}$ contains a halving position, which yields the desired contradiction.
If the cost is lower, however, then this infix satisfies the shortcut condition, since~$\pi_{4'}$ does not contain overflow positions and the relevant requests are stable throughout~$\pi_{4'}$.
Hence, the vertex~$(v_{k'}, o_{k'}, r_{k'})$ is the destination of a shortcut cycle, which contradicts the infix from~$(v_k,o_k,r_k)$ to~$(v_{k'}, o_{k'}, r_{k'})$ having a cost of less than~$\frac{b-s}{2}$.
Thus,~$\pi_{4'}$ contains at most~$n$ increment-edges and, by splitting $\pi_{4'}$ at the increment-edges, we obtain a decomposition of $\pi_{4'}$ into at most $b+1$ infixes, each without increment-edges and without request-adding, debt-free, and overflow positions.
Moreover, as none of the infixes contain increment-edges, they also contain no shortcuts.
Hence, each infix is of type 5, i.e., at most of length~$n$ as argued in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound}.
Aggregating all these bounds yields an upper bound of~$(\log(nW) + 1)(n+1)^6$ on the length of an unsettled play prefix~$\pi$.
\end{proof}
We again define the winner of a play~$\rho$ of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ such that Player~$0$ wins~$\rho$ if the minimal settled prefix of~$\rho$ is settled due to an even dominating cycle.
Otherwise, Player~$1$ wins~$\rho$.
Due to Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:binary:unsettled-bound}, the winner of a play of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ is determined after finitely many moves, hence~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ is determined~\cite{Zermelo13}.
It remains to show that solving~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ actually solves~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
\begin{lem}
Player~$0$ wins~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ if and only if she wins~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We first show that, if Player~$0$ wins~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$, then she also wins~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
To this end, let~$\sigma_\curvearrowright$ be a winning strategy for Player~$0$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
We construct a winning strategy~$\sigma'$ for her in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ by mimicking the moves made in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ using a simulation function~$h$ mapping play prefixes in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ to play prefixes in~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
This simulation function satisfies the same invariant as in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:unary:infinite-to-finite}, i.e.:
\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}{0.8\linewidth}
Let $\pi$ be consistent with $\sigma'$ and end in $(v,o,r)$.
Then, $h(\pi)$ is consistent with $\sigma_\curvearrowright$, is unsettled, and ends in $(v,o',r')$ with $(o',r') \sqsupseteq (o,r)$.
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
We define~$h$ and~$\sigma'$ inductively and simultaneously, starting with~$h(v'_I) = v'_I$, which obviously satisfies the invariant.
Now let~$\pi$ be a play prefix of~$\mathcal{G}'$ consistent with~$\sigma'$, ending in~$(v,o,r)$, and assume~$h(\pi)$ is defined.
Due to the invariant,~$h(\pi)$ ends in some~$(v,o_\curvearrowright,r_\curvearrowright)$ with~$(o,r) \sqsubseteq (o_\curvearrowright,r_\curvearrowright)$.
If~$(v,o,r) \in V_0'$, let~$\sigma_\curvearrowright(h(\pi)) = (v^*,o^*_\curvearrowright,r^*_\curvearrowright)$ and define~$\sigma'(\pi) = (v^*, o^*, r^*)$, where~$(o^*, r^*) = \mathrm{Upd}((o,r),(v,v^*))$.
Otherwise, if $(v,o,r) \in V_1'$, let~$(v^*,o^*,r^*)$ be an arbitrary successor of~$(v,o,r)$ in~$\mathcal{A}'$.
In either case, let~$\pi^* = \pi \cdot (v^*,o^*,r^*)$.
It remains to define~$h(\pi^*)$.
To this end, let~$(o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ be the unique memory state such that~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright = h(\pi) \cdot (v^*, o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ is a play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
If~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright$ is unsettled, we define $h(\pi^*) = \pi^*_\curvearrowright$.
This choice satisfies the invariant:
If the vertex~$(v^*, o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ is the destination of a shortcut, then let~$(v^*,o^*_\rightarrow, r^*_\rightarrow)$ be the destination of its corresponding detour.
We obtain $(o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright) \sqsupseteq (o^*_\rightarrow, r^*_\rightarrow) \sqsupseteq (o^*, r^*)$ due to Lemma~\ref{lem:dominating-memory:stable-concatenation}.
Otherwise, i.e., if~$(v^*, o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ is not the destination of a shortcut, then Lemma~\ref{lem:dominating-memory:stable-concatenation} yields the invariant directly.
Now consider the case that~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright$ is settled.
Then it is settled due to containing an even dominating cycle as a suffix, due to the invariant and due to~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright$ being consistent with the winning strategy~$\sigma_\curvearrowright$ for Player~$0$.
We define~$h(\pi^*)$ by removing the settling dominating cycle similarly to the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:unary:infinite-to-finite}.
Using the same argument as in the proof of that lemma, we obtain that~$h(\pi^*)$ satisfies the invariant.
It remains to show that~$\sigma'$ is winning for Player~$0$.
To this end, consider a play~$\rho$ consistent with $\sigma'$ and let~$\pi_j$ be the prefix of length~$j$ of~$\rho$.
As all~$\pi_j$ are consistent with~$\sigma'$, due to the invariant, neither the overflow counter of the~$h(\pi_j)$, nor that of the~$\pi_j$ reaches~$n$.
Hence, the colors of the last vertices of~$\pi_j$ and~$h(\pi_j)$ coincide.
Recall the argument in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:unary:infinite-to-finite}: If the largest color~$c$ appearing infinitely often in~$\rho$ is odd, then it can only occur finitely often on even dominating cycles.
Hence, after some prefix, every time a vertex of color~$c$ is visited, this vertex is added to the simulated play prefix and never removed.
This unbounded growth contradicts the~$h(\pi_j)$ being unsettled, as every play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ of length~$\ell_\curvearrowright+1$ is settled due to Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:binary:unsettled-bound}.
Thus,~$\rho$ satisfies the parity condition, i.e.,~$\sigma'$ is indeed winning for Player~$0$.
For the other direction, we show that if Player~$1$ wins~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$, he wins~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, which suffices due to determinacy.
To this end, let~$\tau_\curvearrowright$ be a winning strategy for Player~$1$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
We construct a winning strategy~$\tau'$ for him in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ by simulating play prefixes in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ by such prefixes in~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$, from which we remove shortcut- and dominating cycles.
We again define a simulation function~$h$ that maintains the same invariant as in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:unary:infinite-to-finite}, i.e.:
\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}{0.8\linewidth}
Let $\pi$ be consistent with $\tau'$ and end in $(v,o,r)$ with $o <n$.
Then, $h(\pi)$ is consistent with $\tau_\curvearrowright$, is unsettled, and ends in $(v,o',r')$ with $(o',r') \sqsubseteq (o,r)$.
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
We define~$h$ and~$\tau'$ inductively and simultaneously, starting with~$h(v'_I) = v'_I$, which clearly satisfies the invariant.
Now let~$\pi$ be a play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ consistent with~$\tau'$ and ending in~$(v,o,r)$.
If~$(v,o,r) \in V_0'$, then let~$(v^*, o^*, r^*)$ be an arbitrary successor of~$(v,o,r)$ in~$\mathcal{A}'$.
Otherwise, if~$(v,o,r) \in V_1'$, let~$\tau_\curvearrowright(h(\pi)) = (v^*,o^*_\curvearrowright,r^*_\curvearrowright)$ and define~$\tau'(\pi) = (v^*, o^*, r^*)$, where~$(o^*, r^*) = \mathrm{Upd}((o,r),(v,v^*))$.
In either case, let~$\pi^* = \pi \cdot (v^*,o^*,r^*)$.
It remains to define~$h(\pi^*)$ in the case that~$o^* < n$.
To this end, let~$(o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ be the unique memory state such that~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright = h(\pi) \cdot (v^*, o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ is a play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
If~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright$ is unsettled and if~$(v^*, o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ is not the destination of a shortcut, we define $h(\pi^*) = \pi^*_\curvearrowright$, which satisfies the invariant due to Lemma~\ref{lem:dominating-memory:stable-concatenation}.
If~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright$ is settled due to~$o^*_\curvearrowright = n$, then, due to the invariant and Lemma~\ref{lem:dominating-memory:stable-concatenation}, we obtain~$o^* = n$, i.e., we can define~$h(\pi^*)$ arbitrarily.
If~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright$ is settled due to reaching a dominating cycle, we remove this cycle from~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright$ similarly to the construction from the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:unary:infinite-to-finite}.
Finally, consider the case that~$\pi^*_\curvearrowright$ is unsettled and~$(v^*, o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ is the destination of a shortcut, with~$(v^*, o^*_\rightarrow, r^*_\rightarrow)$ as the destination of the corresponding detour.
We differentiate whether the destination~$(v^*, o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ of the shortcut merely allows Player~$1$ to catch up to the play prefix constructed in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, or whether it is more advantageous for him than the position~$(v^*,o^*,r^*)$ actually reached in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
In the former case, i.e., if~$(o^*,r^*) \sqsupseteq (o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$, we define~$h(\pi^*) = \pi^*_\curvearrowright$, which satisfies the invariant by assumption.
In the latter case, however, i.e., if $(o^*,r^*) \sqsupseteq (o^*_\curvearrowright, r^*_\curvearrowright)$ does not hold true, we remove the shortcut cycle similarly to the removal of a settling dominating cycle, obtaining~$\pi_\curvearrowright$, and define~$h(\pi^*_\curvearrowright) = \pi_\curvearrowright$.
This satisfies the invariant due to~$(o^*,r^*) \sqsupseteq (o^*_\rightarrow, r^*_\rightarrow)$, which we obtain via Lemma~\ref{lem:dominating-memory:stable-concatenation}, and the definition of the shortcut condition.
It remains to show that~$\tau'$ is indeed winning for Player~$1$ in~$\mathcal{G}'$.
To this end, consider a play~$\rho$ consistent with $\tau'$ and let~$\pi_j = (v_0,o_0,r_0) \cdots (v_j,o_j,r_j)$ be the prefix of length~$j+1$ of~$\rho$.
If the overflow counter along~$\rho$ eventually saturates,~$\rho$ is clearly winning for Player~$1$.
Hence, assume the opposite, and note that, due to the invariant of~$h$, the colors of the last vertices of~$\pi_j$ and~$h(\pi_j)$ coincide for all~$j \in \mathbb{N}$.
Let~$c$ be the largest color occurring infinitely often along~$\rho$ and assume towards a contradiction that~$c$ is even.
Similarly to the previous argument,~$c$ must either occur on odd dominating cycles or on removed shortcuts after some finite prefix, as these are the only play infixes that are removed from the simulation.
Similarly to the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:unary:infinite-to-finite},~$c$ can only occur finitely often on odd dominating cycles, as each such occurrence implies one occurrence of some larger, odd color.
Now assume that~$c$ occurs infinitely often on removed shortcut cycles.
Since the overflow counter along~$\rho$ never saturates, none of the~$h(\pi_j)$ contains a saturated overflow counter either.
Moreover, as both the removal of an odd dominating cycle and that of a shortcut retain the value of the overflow counter, the values of the overflow counter of the~$h(\pi_j)$ eventually stabilize.
Let~$h(\pi_j) = (v^j_0,o^j_0,r^j_0)\cdots(v^j_{k_j},o^j_{k_j},r^j_{k_j})$.
Pick~$p$ such that~$o_p = o_j$ and $o^p_{k_p} = o^j_{k_j}$ for all~$j > p$, and such that~$c$ is the largest color occurring on the suffix of~$\rho$ starting at position~$p$.
If~$o^p_{k_p} < o_p$, then~$h(\pi_j)$ results from~$h(\pi_{j-1})$ by removing a shortcut cycle only finitely often.
In fact, after reaching~$\pi_p$, no shortcut cycle is removed anymore:
If a shortcut is used in the move from~$h(\pi_{j-1})$ to~$h(\pi_j)$, then~$(o_j, r_j) \sqsupseteq (o^j_{k_j}, r^j_{k_j})$, i.e., the shortcut cycle is not removed.
Hence, only finitely many shortcut cycles are removed, which contradicts~$c$ occurring on infinitely many of these.
Thus, we obtain~$o^p_{k_p} = o_p$, which implies~$r^p_{k_p} \sqsubseteq r_p$ due to the invariant of~$h$.
In particular, for each relevant request that is open in~$r^j_{k_j} $, some larger one is open in~$r_j$ for each~$j > p$.
If~$c$ occurs on a removed shortcut cycle, then~$c$ must be smaller than the smallest relevant request that is open during the witnessing infix: Otherwise it would answer that relevant request, due to~$c$ being even.
Hence the detour corresponding to the infix would violate the shortcut condition.
While there may be some open requests for colors~$c' < c$ in the corresponding infix in~$\rho$, visiting~$c$ does not answer all relevant requests in that corresponding infix in~$\rho$, as argued before.
This implies traversing the shortcut cycle increases the cost of some request in~$\rho$.
Furthermore, since~$c$ is the maximal color visited in the considered suffix, this request eventually overflows after traversing at most~$b+1$ many increment-edges.
This contradicts the choice of~$p$ such that no overflows occur after~$\pi_p$.
If less than~$b+1$ increment-edges occur during the remainder of the play, then also at most~$b+1$ shortcuts occur, since each shortcut requires the traversal of at least one increment-edge.
This in turn contradicts~$c$ occurring on infinitely many removed shortcuts.
Hence, since vertices of color~$c$ only occur finitely often on odd dominating cycles and on removed shortcut cycles, after some finite prefix, each visited vertex of color~$c$ is added to the simulated play and never removed.
Thus, the~$h(\pi_j)$ grow increasingly longer.
Such unbounded growth contradicts them being unsettled, as required by the invariant.
This is due to every play prefix of length at least~$l_\curvearrowright$ being settled, due to Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:binary:unsettled-bound}.
Hence,~$c$ is odd, i.e.,~$\rho$ is winning for Player~$1$.
\end{proof}
Having shown~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ to be equivalent to~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, which is in turn equivalent to~$\mathcal{G}$, we can use the same construction as in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma_pspacemembership}, i.e., simulate~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$ on an alternating Turing machine, in order to decide the winner of~$\ensuremath{\game'_\jump}$.
Due to Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:binary:unsettled-bound}, and due to~$\log(nW)$ being polynomial in the size of the description of~$\mathcal{G}$, this Turing machine is polynomially time-bounded.
Thus, a similar proof to that of Lemma~\ref{lemma_pspacemembership} yields \textsc{PSpace}\xspace-membership of the given problem.
Together with the previously stated \textsc{PSpace}\xspace-hardness of the given problem, this concludes the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:binary:pspace-completeness}
Due to the same reasoning as for the results of Section~\ref{sec:memory}, we obtain asymptotically tight exponential bounds for the memory required by both players in order to win with respect to a given bound~$b$.
The upper bounds are obtained as a corollary of the equivalence of~$\mathcal{G}$ and~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
\begin{cor}
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a parity game with integer-valued costs containing~$n$ vertices and~$d$ odd colors.
\begin{itemize}
\item If Player~$0$ has a strategy $\sigma$ for $\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) = b$, then she also has a strategy $\sigma'$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma') \leq b$ and $\card{\sigma'} = (b+2)^d$.
\item If Player~$1$ has a strategy~$\tau$ for~$\mathcal{G}$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\tau) = b$, then he also has a strategy~$\tau'$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\tau') \geq b$ and~$\card{\tau'} = n(b+2)^d$.
\end{itemize}
\end{cor}
We obtain matching lower bounds from Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0} and Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p1}.
\subsection{Tradeoffs Between Memory and Cost in Parity Games with Integer-Valued Costs}
As every finitary parity game is a parity game with integer-valued costs, Theorem~\ref{thm:tradeoffs:p0} holds true for the latter kind of games as well.
In this result, the tradeoff in terms of costs ranges over an interval of size~$d$, while the size of strategies ranges from positional ones to strategies of exponential size.
Hence, even a small improvement in the cost realized by a strategy comes at the price of an exponential increase in memory.
In the case of a binary encoding of integer-valued costs, however, an exponential increase in the size of memory used by a strategy may yield an exponential improvement in terms of the cost realized by the strategy.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:tradeoffs:binary:p0}
For each~$d \geq 1$, there exists a parity game with integer-valued costs~$\mathcal{G}_d$ with~$\card{\mathcal{G}_d} \in \bigo(d^2)$, such that for every~$j$ with~$1 \leq j \leq d$ there exists a strategy~$\sigma_j$ for Player~$0$ in~$\mathcal{G}_d$ such that
\begin{itemize}[beginpenalty=10000]
\item $(d+1)2^d + 2^{d-1} = \mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_1) > \mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_2) > \cdots > \mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_d) = (d+1)2^d$, and
\item $1 = \size{\sigma_1} < \size{\sigma_2} < \cdots < \size{\sigma_d} = 2^{d-1}$.
\end{itemize}
Also, for every strategy $\sigma'$ for Player~$0$ in $\mathcal{G}_d$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma') \leq \mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_j)$ we have $\card{\sigma'} \geq \card{\sigma_j}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We reuse the arena from the game~$\mathcal{G}_d$ constructed in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0} and redefine the cost function~$\mathrm{Cst}$.
We do so by assigning a cost of~$2^{c-1}$ to each edge leading to some vertex colored with either the odd color~$2c -1$ or the even color~$2c$.
Moreover, we assign a cost of~$2^d - 2^{c-1}$ to each edge leading away from some such vertex.
All other edges are edges of cost~$0$.
The traversal of such a gadget with costs incurs a uniform cost of~$2^d$, regardless of the path taken through it.
As the cost of each edge can be encoded using~$d$ bits,~$\mathcal{G}_d$ is indeed of size~$\bigo(d^2)$.
For any~$j$ with~$1 \leq j \leq d$ let~$\sigma_j$ be a strategy as defined in Theorem~\ref{thm:tradeoffs:p0}.
Due to similar arguments as in the proof of that theorem, we obtain~$\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_j) = (d+1)2^d + 2^{d-1} - 2^{j-1}$, which satisfies the first property stated in the given theorem.
As the strategies remain unchanged from the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:tradeoffs:p0}, they also satisfy~$\card{\sigma_j} < \card{\sigma_{j+1}}$.
Finally, similar reasoning to the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:tradeoffs:p0} yields that each~$\sigma_j$ is minimal for its cost.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Playing Parity Games with Costs Optimally is PSPACE-hard}
\label{sec_pspacehardness}
Next, we turn our attention to proving a matching lower bound on the complexity, which already holds for finitary parity games, i.e., parity games with costs in which every edge is an increment-edge.
This result is proven by a reduction from the canonical $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$-hard problem~$\mathrm{QBF}$:
Given a quantified boolean formula~$\varphi = Q_1 x_1 Q_2 x_2 \ldots Q_n x_n \psi$ with $Q_i \in \set{\exists, \forall}$ and where~$\psi$ is a boolean formula over the variables~$x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n$, determine whether $\varphi$ evaluates to true.
We assume w.l.o.g.\ that $\psi$ is in conjunctive normal form such that every conjunct has exactly three literals, i.e., $\psi = \bigwedge_{j = 1}^m (\ell_{j,1} \vee \ell_{j,2} \vee \ell_{j,3} )$, where every~$\ell_{j, k}$ is either~$x$ or~$\overline{x}$ for some~$x \in \set{x_1,\dots,x_n}$.
We call each $\ell_{j,k}$ for $k \in \set{1,2,3}$ a literal and each conjunct of three literals a clause.
Furthermore, we assume w.l.o.g.\ that the quantifiers~$Q_j$ are alternating with $Q_1 = Q_n = \exists$.
This proof uses the standard framework for reducing~$\mathrm{QBF}$ to infinite two-player games of polynomial size:
Player~$0$ implements existential choices, i.e., existential quantification and disjunctions.
Dually, Player~$1$ implements universal quantification and disjunction.
Intuitively, the players pick truth values for the variables in the order as they appear in the quantifier prefix.
Then, Player~$1$ picks a clause and then Player~$0$ picks a literal from that clause.
She wins if and only if the literal evaluates to true under the assignment constructed earlier.
This requirement has to be encoded by the winning condition, as the polynomial state space of the constructed game is insufficient to encode all possible assignments.
If this is the case, then Player~$0$ wins the game if and only if the formula evaluates to true.
Here, we employ a finitary parity condition with respect to a given bound to achieve this.
To this end, we encode assigning a truth value to a variable by opening requests, e.g., setting $x_j$ to false requests color~$4j+1$ and setting it to true requests color~$4j+3$.
Crucially, only one color can be requested, but the latter one only after a delay of one step.
Now, Player~$0$ picking a literal~$\ell$ answers the corresponding request, e.g., if $\ell = \overline{x_j}$, then the color~$4j+2$ occurs, and if $\ell = x_j$, then the color~$4j+4$ occurs.
Note that $4j+4$ answers both the request corresponding to setting $x_j$ to false and the one setting it to true.
But again, the answer~$4j+4$ comes only after a delay of one step, which allows to invalidate this answer in case $x_j$ has been assigned false, by requiring a well-chosen bound.
This is possible with a finitary parity condition with respect to a given bound, but neither with a classical parity condition nor with a finitary parity condition with an existentially quantified bound, which explains the increase in complexity.
\begin{lem}
\label{lemma_pspacehardness}
The following problem is $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$-hard: \myquot{Given a finitary parity game~$\mathcal{G}$ and a bound~$b \in \mathbb{N}$, does Player~$0$ have a strategy~$\sigma$ for $\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \le b$?}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varphi = Q_1 x_1 Q_2 x_2 \ldots Q_n x_n \psi$ be a quantified boolean formula with $\psi = \bigwedge_{j = 1}^m C_j$ and $C_j = (\ell_{j,1} \vee \ell_{j,2} \vee \ell_{j,3} )$, where every $\ell_{j,k}$ is either $x$ or $\overline{x}$ for some $x \in \set{x_1,\dots,x_n}$.
We construct a finitary parity game $\mathcal{G}_\varphi$ such that Player~$0$ has a strategy~$\sigma$ for $\mathcal{G}_\varphi$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) = 3n + 5$ if and only if the formula $\varphi$ evaluates to true.
The arena consists of three parts: In the first part, which begins with the initial vertex $v_I$, Player~$0$ and Player~$1$ determine an assignment for the variables $x_1$ through $x_n$, where Player~$0$ and Player~$1$ pick values for the existentially and universally quantified variables, respectively.
Each choice of a truth value by either player incurs a request.
In the second part, Player~$1$ first picks a clause, after which Player~$0$ picks a literal from that clause.
In the last part, the play then proceeds without any choice by the players and checks whether or not the chosen literal was set to true in the first part of the arena.
If it was set to true, then the corresponding request is answered with cost $3n + 5$.
Otherwise, that request is answered with cost $3n + 6$.
Furthermore, all other potentially open requests are answered with cost at most $3n + 5$ and the play returns to the initial vertex $v_I$.
Thus, all these gadgets are traversed infinitely often and the traversals are independent of each other.
This idea indeed requires the target of the reduction to be a finitary parity game instead of a classical one, as Player~$0$ is able to answer all requests within at most $3n + 6$ steps independently of the truth value of~$\varphi$.
Only the additional requirement for her to do so within at most~$3n + 5$ moves forces her to provide a witness for~$\varphi$ being true.
If~$\varphi$ evaluates to true, then Player~$0$ can enforce that all requests are answered with cost at most $3n + 5$.
Hence, there exists a strategy~$\sigma$ for Player~$0$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \leq 3n + 5$.
If~$\varphi$ evaluates to false, however, then Player~$1$ can enforce requests that remain unanswered for at least $3n + 6$ steps.
Thus, there exists no strategy~$\sigma$ for Player~$0$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \leq 3n + 5$.
We begin by constructing the arena~$\mathcal{A}$ together with its coloring~$\Omega$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick]
\node[p0,assign] (p0-0-0) at (-7,2.05) {$0$};
\node[p1,assign] (p0-1-0) at (-7,1.05) {$0$};
\node[p1,assign] (p0-0-1) at (-5.75,2.05) {$4j + 1$};
\node[p1,assign] (p0-1-1) at (-5.75,1.05) {$4j + 3$};
\node[p1,assign] (p0-0-2) at (-4.5,2.05) {$0$};
\node[p1,dashed] (p0-1-2) at (-4.5,1.05) {$0$};
\begin{scope}
\clip (p0-1-2.south west) -- (p0-1-2.north east) -- (p0-1-2.north west) -- cycle;
\path[draw=mydarkblue,assign,ultra thick] (p0-1-2.south west) rectangle (p0-1-2.north east);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}
\clip (p0-1-2.south west) -- (p0-1-2.north east) -- (p0-1-2.south east) -- cycle;
\path[draw=mydarkred,choice,ultra thick] (p0-1-2.south west) rectangle (p0-1-2.north east);
\end{scope}
\node[p1,dashed] (p0-1-2) at (-4.5,1.05) {$0$};
\node[anchor=south] at (p0-0-0.north) {$a_j$};
\node[anchor=north] at (p0-1-0.south) {$x_j$};
\node[anchor=south] at (p0-0-1.north) {$\overline{x_j}$};
\path[draw,dashed] ($(p0-0-0) - (1,0)$) edge (p0-0-0);
\path[draw,dashed] (p0-1-2) edge ($(p0-1-2) + (1,0)$);
\path[draw] (p0-0-0) edge (p0-0-1);
\path[draw] (p0-0-0) edge (p0-1-0);
\path[draw] (p0-0-1) edge (p0-0-2);
\path[draw] (p0-1-0) edge (p0-1-1);
\path[draw,dashed] (p0-1-1) edge (p0-1-2);
\path[draw,dashed] (p0-0-2) edge (p0-1-2);
\node[anchor=north] at (p0-1-2.south) {\textcolor{mydarkblue}{$a_{j + 1}$} / \textcolor{red}{$\psi$}};
\node[p1,assign] (p1-0-0) at (-7,-.95) {$0$};
\node[p1,assign] (p1-1-0) at (-7,-1.95) {$0$};
\node[p1,assign] (p1-0-1) at (-5.75,-.95) {$4j + 1$};
\node[p1,assign] (p1-1-1) at (-5.75,-1.95) {$4j + 3$};
\node[p1,assign] (p1-0-2) at (-4.5,-.95) {$0$};
\node[p0,draw=mydarkblue,assign] (p1-1-2) at (-4.5,-1.95) {$0$};
\node[p0,dashed] (p1-1-2) at (-4.5,-1.95) {$0$};
\node[anchor=south] at (p1-0-0.north) {$a_j$};
\node[anchor=north] at (p1-1-0.south) {$x_j$};
\node[anchor=south] at (p1-0-1.north) {$\overline{x_j}$};
\path[draw,dashed] ($(p1-0-0) - (1,0)$) edge (p1-0-0);
\path[draw,dashed] (p1-1-2) edge ($(p1-1-2) + (1,0)$);
\path[draw] (p1-0-0) edge (p1-0-1);
\path[draw] (p1-0-0) edge (p1-1-0);
\path[draw] (p1-0-1) edge (p1-0-2);
\path[draw] (p1-1-0) edge (p1-1-1);
\path[draw,dashed] (p1-1-1) edge (p1-1-2);
\path[draw,dashed] (p1-0-2) edge (p1-1-2);
\node[anchor=north] at (p1-1-2.south) {$a_{j + 1}$};
\node[p1,dashed] (lit-true) at (-2,-1.5) {};
\node[p1,draw=mydarkblue,assign] at (lit-true) {};
\node[p1,dashed] (lit-true) at (-2,-1.5) {};
\node[p1,dashed] (lit-false) at (-2,1.5) {};
\node[p1,draw=mydarkblue,assign] at (lit-false) {};
\node[p1,dashed] (lit-false) at (-2,1.5) {};
\node[p1,label=left:{$\psi$},choice] (pick-clause) at (-1,0) {$0$};
\path[draw,dashed] (lit-true) edge (pick-clause);
\path[draw,dashed] (lit-false) edge (pick-clause);
\foreach \label/\labelpos/\ypos in {1/left/2.2,2/below/1.1,m-1/above/-1.1,m/left/-2.2}
\node[p0,label=\labelpos:$C_{\label}$,choice] (c-\label) at (.5,\ypos) {$0$};
\node (c-dots) at (2,0) {$\rvdots$};
\foreach \x [count=\i from 1] in {2.35,1.55,0.75} {
\node[p1,dashed,label=right:$\ell_{1,\i}?$] (l-1-\i) at (3.5,\x) {};
\node[p1,draw=mydarkyellow,check] at (l-1-\i) {};
\node[p1,dashed,label=right:$\ell_{1,\i}?$] (l-1-\i) at (3.5,\x) {};
}
\foreach \x [count=\i from 1] in {-0.75,-1.55,-2.35} {
\node[p1,dashed,label=right:$\ell_{m,\i}?$] (l-m-\i) at (3.5,\x) {};
\node[p1,draw=mydarkyellow,check] at (l-m-\i) {};
\node[p1,dashed,label=right:$\ell_{m,\i}?$] (l-m-\i) at (3.5,\x) {};
}
\node (x-dots) at (3.5,0) {$\rvdots$};
\foreach \j in {1,2,m-1,m}
\path (pick-clause) edge (c-\j);
\foreach \literal in {1,2,3} {
\foreach \clause in {1,m}
\path[draw,dashed] (c-\clause) edge (l-\clause-\literal);
\foreach \clause/\offset in {2/0cm,m-1/.4cm} {
\foreach \ypos in {0cm,-.2cm,-.4cm}
\path[draw, dashed] (c-\clause) edge ($(c-\clause) + (1cm,\offset) + (0,\ypos)$);
\node (c-\clause-dots) at ($(c-\clause) + (0,\offset) + (1.25cm,-.2cm)$) {$\cdots$};
}
}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The gadget for existentially and universally quantified variables (left, from top to bottom), and the middle part of the arena (right).}
\label{fig:pspace-hard:choose-literal}
\end{figure}
The left-hand side of Figure~\ref{fig:pspace-hard:choose-literal} shows the gadgets that assign a truth value to variable~$x_j$.
The vertex~$a_j$ belongs to Player~$0$ if~$x_j$ is existentially quantified, and to Player~$1$ if~$x_j$ is universally quantified.
The dashed edges indicate the connections to the pre- and succeeding gadget, respectively.
We construct the first part of~$\mathcal{A}$ out of~$n$ copies of this gadget.
Moreover, the vertex~$a_1$ has an incoming edge from the end of~$\mathcal{A}$, in order to allow for infinite plays, and is the initial vertex~$v_I$ of the arena.
In the remainder of this proof, let $c_{x_j} =4j + 3$ and $c_{\overline{x_j}} = 4j + 1$ be the colors associated with assigning true or false to $x_j$, respectively.
The second part of the arena starts with a vertex~$\psi$ of Player~$1$, from which he picks a clause by moving to a vertex~$C_j$ of Player~$0$.
Each vertex $C_j$ is connected to three gadgets, one for each of the three literals contained in $C_j$.
We show this construction in the right-hand side of Figure~\ref{fig:pspace-hard:choose-literal}.
Note that moving from the vertex of color~$c_{x_j}$ or of color~$c_{\overline{x_j}}$ to the vertex~$\psi$ takes~$3(n-j) + 1$ or~$3(n-j)+2$ steps, respectively..
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick]
\node[p1,dashed] (a1-true) at (9,0) {};
\node[p1,assign,draw=mydarkblue] at (a1-true) {};
\node[p1,dashed,label=south:$a_1$] (a1-true) at (9,0) {};
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,.5)}]
\node[p0,dashed] (c-j) at (-1.5,.0) {};
\node[p0,draw=mydarkred,choice] (c-j) at (-1.5,0) {};
\node[p0,dashed] (c-j) at (-1.5,0) {};
\node[p1,check,label=north:$x_j?$] (equal-begin) at (0,0) {$4j$};
\node[p1,check,label=north:$x_{j,1}!$,minimum width=1.3cm] (check-1) at (3,0) {$4j$};
\node[p1,check,label=north:$x_{j,2}!$] (check-2) at (5,0) {$4j+4$};
\node[p1,check,label=north:$x_{j,3}!$] (check-3) at (7,0) {$4(n+1)$};
\path[draw] (equal-begin) edge node[anchor=south] {$\mathbf{3j+1}$} (check-1);
\path[draw] (check-1) edge (check-2);
\path[draw] (check-2) edge (check-3);
\path[draw,dashed] (check-3) edge (a1-true);
\path[draw,dashed] (c-j) edge (equal-begin);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-.5)}]
\node[p0,dashed] (c-j) at (-1.5,0) {};
\node[p0,draw=mydarkred,choice] at (c-j) {};
\node[p0,dashed] at (c-j) {};
\node[p1,check,label=south:$\overline{x_j}?$] (equal-begin) at (0,0) {$4j$};
\node[p1,check,label=south:$\overline{x_{j,1}}!$] (check-1) at (3,0) {$4j+2$};
\node[p1,check,label=south:$\overline{x_{j,2}}!$] (check-2) at (5,0) {$4j+2$};
\node[p1,check,label=south:$\overline{x_{j,3}}!$] (check-3) at (7,0) {$4(n+1)$};
\path[draw] (equal-begin) edge node[anchor=north] {$\mathbf{3j+1}$} (check-1);
\path[draw] (check-1) edge (check-2);
\path[draw] (check-2) edge (check-3);
\path[draw,dashed] (check-3) edge (a1-true);
\path[draw,dashed] (c-j) edge (equal-begin);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Gadgets checking the assignment of true to~$x_j$ (top) or to~$\overline{x_j}$ (bottom).}
\label{fig:pspace-hard:check-eval}
\end{figure}
The last part of the arena consists of one gadget for each literal $x_1$, $\overline{x_1}$ through $x_n$, $\overline{x_n}$ occurring in $\varphi$.
These gadgets check whether or not the literal picked in the middle part was actually set to true in the first part of the arena.
We show these gadgets in Figure~\ref{fig:pspace-hard:check-eval}.
In these gadgets, neither player has a non-trivial choice.
Thus, the play proceeds by first answering requests for all colors smaller than $c_{x_j}$ and $c_{\overline{x_j}}$.
It then either grants the request for color~$c_{x_j}$ after $3j + 2$ steps, or the request for color~$c_{\overline{x_j}}$ after $3j + 1$ steps, both counted from the vertices $x_j?$ and $\overline{x_j}?$, respectively.
Since traversing the middle part of the arena incurs a constant cost of $2$, a request for color~$c_{x_j}$ has incurred a cost of $3(n-j) + 3$ at~$x_j?$ and $\overline{x_j}?$, while a request for color~$c_{\overline{x_j}}$ has incurred a cost of $3(n-j) + 4$ at these vertices.
Hence, the total cost incurred by the request for color~$c_{x_j}$ is $(3(n-j)+3) + (3j+2) = 3n + 5$ in the gadget corresponding to $x_j$, and $(3(n-j)+3) + (3j + 3) = 3n + 6$ in the gadget corresponding to $\overline{x_j}$.
The dual reasoning holds true for requests for color~$c_{\overline{x_j}}$.
Hence, the bound of $3n + 5$ is only achieved if the request corresponding to the chosen literal was posed in the initial part of the arena.
After traversing this last gadget, all requests are answered in the vertex~$x_{j,3}!$ or~$\overline{x_{j,3}}!$ and the play resets to the initial vertex via an edge to $a_1$.
The size of $\mathcal{A}$ is polynomial in $\card{\varphi}$:
The first part consists of one constant-size gadget per variable, while the second part is of linear size in the number of clauses in $\varphi$.
The final part contains a gadget of size $\bigo(n)$ for each literal occurring in $\varphi$.
Thus, the size of the arena is in $\mathcal O(n^2+m)$.
It remains to argue that Player~$0$ has a strategy $\sigma$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) = 3n+ 5$ if and only if $\varphi$ evaluates to true.
For any quantifier-free boolean formula~$\psi$ that contains variables $x_1$ through $x_n$ and any partial assignment $\alpha\colon \set{x_1,\dots,x_j} \rightarrow \set{\mathit{true}, \mathit{false}}$ we denote by $\alpha(\psi)$ the formula resulting from replacing the variables in $\alpha$'s domain with their respective truth values.
It suffices to argue about finite plays that begin and end in $a_1$, as all plays start in $a_1$, visit $a_1$ infinitely often, and all requests are answered before moving back to $a_1$.
Hence, for the remainder of this proof, we only consider a finite play infix~$\pi$ starting and ending in $a_1$.
First assume that $\varphi$ evaluates to true.
We construct a strategy $\sigma$ for Player~$0$ with the properties described above.
Pick $j$ as some index such that $x_j$ is existentially quantified and consider the prefix $\pi'$ of $\pi$ up to, but not including $a_j$.
We associate $\pi'$ with an assignment $\alpha_{j-1}\colon\set{x_1,\dots,x_{j-1}}\rightarrow\set{\mathit{true}, \mathit{false}}$, where $\alpha_{j-1}(x_k) = \mathit{true}$ if~$\pi'$ visits~$x_k$, and $\alpha_{j-1}(x_k) = \mathit{false}$ if~$\pi'$ visits~$\overline{x_k}$.
Due to the structure of the arena, exactly one of these cases holds true, hence $\alpha_{j-1}$ is well-defined.
For $j=1$, $\exists x_j\cdots Q_n x_n \alpha_{j-1}(\psi)$ evaluates to true by assumption.
Let $t \in \set{\mathit{true}, \mathit{false}}$ such that $\forall x_{j+1} \cdots Q_n x_n (\alpha_{j-1}[x_j \mapsto t])(\psi)$ evaluates to true as well, where $\alpha_{j-1}[x_j \mapsto t]$ denotes the mapping $\alpha_{j-1}$ augmented by the mapping $x_j \mapsto t$.
Moreover, we define $\sigma(\cdots a_j) = x_j$ if $t = \mathit{true}$, and $\sigma(\cdots a_j) = \overline{x_j}$ otherwise.
We proceed inductively, constructing $\sigma(\cdots a_j)$ for all existentially quantified variables $x_j$ according to the Boolean values that satisfy the formulas $\exists x_j Q_{j+1} x_{j+1} \ldots Q_n x_n \alpha_{j-1}(\psi)$, until we reach the vertex $\psi$.
At this point, the analysis of the play prefix so far yields an assignment of truth values to variables $\alpha_n \colon \set{x_1,\dots,x_n} \rightarrow \set{\mathit{true}, \mathit{false}}$, such that $\alpha_n(\psi)$ evaluates to true.
Let $\alpha = \alpha_n$.
At vertex $\psi$ there exist $n$ open requests.
As previously argued, if $\alpha(x_j) = \mathit{true}$, then there is an open request for $c_{x_j}$ with cost $3(n-j) + 1$.
Otherwise, there is an open request for $c_{\overline{x_j}}$ with cost $3(n-j) + 2$.
At vertex $\psi$, Player~$1$ picks a clause $C_j$ by moving to its vertex.
Since $\alpha(\psi)$ evaluates to true, there exists a $k \in \set{1,2,3}$ with $\alpha(\ell_{j,k}) = \mathit{true}$.
We pick $\sigma(\cdots C_j) = \ell_{j,k}?$.
If $\ell_{j,k} = x_l$, then $\alpha(x_l) = \mathit{true}$ and hence, there is an open request for $c_{x_l}$.
As argued previously, this request is then answered with cost~$3n+5$, since we picked the gadget corresponding to $x_l$.
Similarly, if $\ell_{j,k} = \overline{x_l}$, then $\alpha(x_l) = \mathit{false}$ and thus there is an open request for $x_{\overline{x_l}}$, which is answered with cost~$3n+5$ as well.
All other open requests are answered with cost at most $3n+5$, as argued previously.
After this traversal of the final gadget, all requests are answered, and the play automatically moves to vertex $a_1$ to begin anew.
The same reasoning then applies ad infinitum.
Thus, Player~$0$ is able to answer all requests with a cost of at most $3n + 5$.
Now assume that $\varphi$ evaluates to false.
Then, irrespective of the choices made by Player~$0$ when constructing $\alpha$ in the first part of the arena, Player~$1$ can pick truth values for the universally quantified variables such that $\alpha(\psi)$ evaluates to false and then pick a clause $C_j$ such that $\alpha(C_j)$ evaluates to false.
Hence, Player~$0$ has to pick some $\ell_{j,k}$ with $\alpha(\ell_{j,k}) = \mathit{false}$.
If $\ell_{j,k} = x_l$, then there is an open request for $c_{\overline{x_j}}$ at $x_{l,1}!$, which is answered with cost $3n+6$.
Similarly, if $\ell_{j,k} = \overline{x_l}$, then $\alpha(x_l) = \mathit{true}$, hence there is an open request for $c_{x_l}$, which is also answered with cost~$3n+6$.
Thus, in each round Player~$1$ can open a request that is only answered with cost at least~$3n+6$, i.e., Player~$0$ has no strategy with cost~$3n+ 5$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Solving Parity Games with Costs Optimally is in Polynomial Space}
\label{sec_pspacemembership}
The remainder of this section is dedicated to showing that parity games with costs with respect to a given bound can be solved in polynomial space.
To this end, we fix a parity game with costs $\mathcal{G} = (\mathcal{A}, \mathrm{CostParity}(\Omega, \mathrm{Cst}))$ with $\mathcal{A} = (V, V_0, V_1, E, v_{\initmark})$ and a bound~$b$.
Let $n = \card{V}$.
First, let us remark that we can assume w.l.o.g.\ $b < n$:
If $b \geq n$, then, due to Corollary~\ref{corollary_costupperbound}, we just have to check whether Player~$0$ wins $\mathcal{G}$.
This is possible in polynomial space due to Theorem~\ref{thm:previouswork}(\ref{thm:previouswork:cost}).
To obtain a polynomial space algorithm, we first turn the quantitative game $\mathcal{G}$ into a qualitative parity game $\ensuremath{\game'}$ in which the cost of open requests is explicitly tracked up to the bound $b$.
To this end, we use functions~$r$ mapping odd colors to $\set{\bot} \cup [b+1] = \set{\bot} \cup \set{0,\dots,b}$, where $\bot$ denotes that no open request of this color is pending.
Additionally, whenever the bound~$b$ is exceeded for some request, all open requests are reset and a so-called overflow counter is increased, up to value~$n$. This accounts for a bounded number of unanswered requests, which are allowed by the parity condition with costs.
Intuitively, Player~$1$ wins $\ensuremath{\game'}$ if he either exceeds the upper bound $b$ at least $n$ times, or if he enforces an infinite play of finite cost with infinitely many unanswered requests.
If he wins by the former condition, then he can also enforce infinitely many excesses of $b$ via a pumping argument.
The latter condition accounts for plays in which Player~$1$ wins without violating the bound~$b$ repeatedly, but by violating the classical parity condition.
We show that Player~$0$ has a strategy $\sigma$ in $\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \leq b$ if and only if she wins $\ensuremath{\game'}$ from its initial vertex.
The resulting game~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ is of exponential size in the number of odd colors~$d$ and can therefore in general not be solved in polynomial space in~$n$.
Thus, in a second step, we construct a finite-duration variant~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$ of $\ensuremath{\game'}$, which is played on the same arena as $\ensuremath{\game'}$, but the winner of a play is determined after a polynomial number of moves.
We show that Player~$0$ wins $\ensuremath{\game'}$ if and only if she wins $\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
To conclude, we show how to simulate $\ensuremath{\game'_f}$ on the fly on an alternating Turing machine in polynomial time in~$n$, which yields a polynomial space algorithm by removing the alternation~\cite{ChandraKS81}.
We begin by defining $\ensuremath{\game'}$.
Let $R =( \set{\bot} \cup[b+1])^D$ be the set of request functions, where~$D$ is the set of odd colors occurring in $\mathcal{G}$.
Here, $r(c) = \bot$ denotes that there is no open request for the color $c$, while $r(c) \neq \bot$ encodes that the oldest open request of $c$ has incurred cost~$r(c)$.
Using these functions, we define the memory structure $\mathcal{M} = ([n+1] \times R, m_\initmark, \mathrm{Upd})$, where the first component~$[n+1]$ implements the previously mentioned overflow counter.
It suffices to bound this counter by $n$, since, as we will show, if Player~$1$ can enforce~$n$ overflows in $\mathcal{G}$, then he can also enforce infinitely many by a pumping argument.
If this counter reaches~$n$, we say that it is saturated.
The initial memory state $m_\initmark$ is the pair $(0, r_{v_I})$, where, for an arbitrary~$v \in V$, $r_v$ is the function mapping all odd colors to $\bot$, if $\Omega(v)$ is even.
If $\Omega(v)$ is odd, however, $r_v$ maps~$\Omega(v)$ to $0$, and all other odd colors to $\bot$.
The update function $\mathrm{Upd}(m, e)$ is defined such that traversing an edge $e = (v, v')$ updates the memory state $(o,r)$ to the memory state $(o',r')$ by performing the following steps in order:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $e$ is an increment-edge, then for each $c$ with $r(c) \neq \bot$, set $r'(c) = r(c) + 1$.
For all other~$c$, set~$r'(c) = r(c) = \bot$.
If~$e$ is an~$\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$-edge, however, then set~$r'(c) = r(c)$ for all~$c$.
\item Now, if there exists a color $c$ such that $r'(c) > b$, then set~$r'(c) = \bot$ for all~$c$ and set $o'$ to the minimum of $o+1$ and $n$.
Otherwise, set~$o'$ to~$o$.
\item If $\Omega(v')$ is even, set~$r(c')$ to~$\bot$ for every $c' \leq \Omega(v')$.
\item If $\Omega(v')$ is odd, then set $r'(\Omega(v'))$ to the maximum of the previous value of $r'(\Omega(v'))$ and $0$, where $\max\set{\bot, 0} = 0$.
\end{itemize}
The resulting $o'$ is at most $n$ and the resulting function~$r'$ is an element of $R$.
We show an example of the evolution of the memory states on a play prefix in Figure~\ref{fig:pspace-membership:example-requests}.
In particular, the move from the fifth vertex to the sixth one causes an overflow that resets all requests, but also increments the overflow counter.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick,xscale=1.5]
\begin{scope}
\foreach \color [count=\index from 0] in {3,0,1,1,2,4,1,0} {
\node[p0,assign] (node-\index) at (\index,0) {\color};
}
\node (node-8) at (8,0) {$\dots$};
\foreach \label [count=\from from 0,count=\to from 1] in {\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}},\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}} {
\path (node-\from) edge node [anchor=south] {$\label$} (node-\to);
}
\end{scope}
\draw[] (-1.5,-.6) -- (8.5,-.6);
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-1)}]
\node[anchor=east] at (-.5,0) {$o$};
\foreach \overflowcounter [count=\xpos from 0] in {0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,\dots} {
\node at (\xpos,0) {$\overflowcounter$};
}
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-1.5)}]
\node[anchor=east] at (-.5,0) {$r(1)$};
\foreach \requestone [count=\xpos from 0] in {\bot,\bot,0,1,\bot,\bot,0,1,\dots} {
\node at (\xpos,0) {$\requestone$};
}
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-2)}]
\node[anchor=east] at (-.5,0) {$r(3)$};
\foreach \requestthree [count=\xpos from 0] in {0,0,1,2,2,\bot,\bot,\bot,\dots} {
\node at (\xpos,0) {$\requestthree$};
}
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Example of the evolution of the request-functions during a play for~$b =2$.}
\label{fig:pspace-membership:example-requests}
\end{figure}
We define the parity game $\ensuremath{\game'} = (\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{M}, \mathrm{Parity}(\Omega'))$, with $\Omega'(v, o, r) = \Omega(v)$ for $o < n$ and $\Omega'(v, n, r) = 1$.
Note that every play that encounters a vertex of the form $(v, n, r)$ at some point, for some~$v \in V$ and some~$r \in R$, is winning for Player~$1$, since these vertices form a winning sink component for him.
Intuitively, reaching a vertex of this form means that Player~$1$ is able to often open~$n$ requests that are not answered with cost at most~$b$.
We show that this implies him being able to open infinitely many such requests.
However, there is another way of winning the original parity game with costs~$\mathcal{G}$ for him, i.e., by violating the underlying parity condition of~$\mathcal{G}$.
This is possible even if no request incurs a cost greater than~$b$.
Hence,~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ is a parity game.
Let $\mathcal{A}' = \mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{M} = (V', V_0', V_1', E', v_{\initmark}')$, in particular $V' = V \times M $ and $V_i' = V_i \times M$.
Even though $\ensuremath{\game'}$ has no cost function, we say that an edge $((v,m),(v',m'))$ of $\ensuremath{\game'}$ is an increment-edge if $(v,v')$ is an increment-edge in $\mathcal{G}$, otherwise we call it an $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$-edge.
It suffices to solve $\ensuremath{\game'}$ to determine whether Player~$0$ can bound the cost in $\mathcal{G}$ by $b$.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:cost-parity-to-parity}
Player~$0$ has a strategy $\sigma$ in $\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \leq b$ if and only if Player~$0$ wins~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We first introduce some notation.
Let $(v_0, o_0, r_0) (v_1, o_1, r_1) (v_2, o_2, r_2) \cdots$ be a play or a play prefix in $\mathcal{A}'$.
An \emph{overflow position} is a $j$ such that either $j = 0$ or $o_j = o_{j-1} +1$.
Note that we have $r_j = r_{v_j}$ for every overflow position, i.e., the request function is reset at each such position.
For the direction from right to left, assume that Player~$0$ wins~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ and let $\sigma' \colon V_0' \rightarrow V'$ be a positional winning strategy for her from $v_{\initmark}'$ in $\ensuremath{\game'}$.
We define the finite-state strategy~$\sigma$ for Player~$0$ in $\mathcal{G}$ using the memory structure~$\mathcal{M}$ and the next-move function~$\mathrm{Nxt}$ with $\mathrm{Nxt}(v,m) = v'$, if $\sigma'(v,m) = (v',m')$ for some $m'$.
Let $\rho = v_0 v_1 v_2 \cdots$ be a play that is consistent with $\sigma$.
A straightforward induction shows that the unique extended play $\mathrm{ext}(\rho) = (v_0, o_0, r_0)(v_1, o_1, r_1)(v_2, o_2, r_2)\cdots$ in $\ensuremath{\game'}$ is consistent with $\sigma'$ and therefore winning for Player~$0$.
This in particular implies~$o_j < n$ for all~$j \in \mathbb{N}$, as the vertices~$(v, n, r)$ form a rejecting sink component.
First, assume that~$\rho$ traverses infinitely many increment-edges.
The overflow-counter in $\mathrm{ext}(\rho)$ stabilizes at some value less than~$n$ at some point, i.e., there is a position~$j$ such that $o_{j'} = o_j < n$ for every $j' >j$.
We claim $\mathrm{Cor}(\rho, j') \le b$ for every $j' >j$, which finishes this direction of the proof.
Assume towards a contradiction that a request at some position after $j$ of $\rho$ is unanswered for $b+1$ increment-edges.
During every traversal of one of these increment-edges, its associated counter in $\mathrm{ext}(\rho)$ is increased by one and not reset until $b+1$ increment-edges are traversed, which implies encountering an overflow position.
This contradicts the choice of the position~$j$.
Thus, if~$\rho$ traverses infinitely many increment-edges, then almost every request is answered with cost at most~$b$, i.e., $\mathrm{Cst}(\rho) \le b$.
Now, consider the case where $\rho$ contains only finitely many increment-edges.
Such a play satisfies the parity condition with costs if and only if it satisfies the parity condition. Thus, it suffices to note that $\rho$ and $\mathrm{ext}(\rho)$ coincide on their color sequences, due to~$o_j < n$ for all~$j \in \mathbb{N}$, and that $\mathrm{ext}(\rho)$ satisfies the parity condition, as it is winning for Player~$0$.
For the other direction, we prove the contrapositive.
Assume that Player~$0$ does not win~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
Then, due to determinacy of parity games, Player~$1$ wins $\ensuremath{\game'}$, say using the positional strategy $\tau' \colon V_1' \rightarrow V'$.
This strategy is only useful as long as the overflow counter is not yet saturated, as a play is trivially winning for Player~$1$ as soon as the sink component is reached.
Thus, whenever the overflow counter is increased, we reset it to the smallest possible value for which $\tau'$ is still able to enforce a winning play for Player~$1$.
We introduce the set~$\mathcal{R}$ that contains all vertices~$(v, o, r)$ that are visited by some play that is consistent with~$\tau'$.
Then, given a vertex~$v$, let~$o_v = \min\set{o \mid (v,o,r_v) \in \mathcal{R}}$ with~$\min\emptyset = n$.
Note that we have $o_{v_I} = 0$ and that the strategy~$\tau'$ is winning from~$(v,o_v,r_v)$ in $\ensuremath{\game'}$ for all~$v \in V$.
Now we define a new memory structure~$\mathcal{M}' = (M', m_I', \mathrm{Upd}')$ with $M' = M = [n+1] \times R$, $m_I' = m_I = (0,r_{v_I})$, and
\[
\mathrm{Upd}'((o,r),(v,v')) = \begin{cases}
(o,r') &\text{if } \mathrm{Upd}((o,r),(v,v')) = (o,r')\\
(o_{v'},r') &\text{if } \mathrm{Upd}((o,r),(v,v')) = (o+1,r')\\
\end{cases}\enspace.
\]
Note that we have $r' = r_{v'}$ in the second case.
Now, let $\tau$ be the finite-state strategy implemented by $\mathcal{M}'$ and the next-move function~$\mathrm{Nxt}$ given by $\mathrm{Nxt}(v,m) = v'$, if $\tau'(v,m) = (v',m')$ for some $m' \in M$.
Let $\rho = v_0 v_1 v_2 \cdots $ be some play in~$\mathcal{G}$ that is consistent with $\tau$ and, moreover, let $\rho' = (v_0, o_0, r_0) (v_1, o_1, r_1) (v_2, o_2, r_2) \cdots$ be the extended play of~$\rho$ with respect to $\mathcal{M}'$.
We say that $j$ is a \emph{reset position} if $j=0$ or if $\mathrm{Upd}((o_{j-1},r_{j-1}),(v_{j-1},v_{j})) = (o_{j-1}+1,r_{j})$, i.e., the second case in the definition of $\mathrm{Upd}'$ is applied.
Note that~$\rho'$ is not necessarily a play in $\ensuremath{\game'}$, but every maximal infix of~$\rho'$ between two reset positions is a play infix in that game that is consistent with~$\tau'$.
Furthermore, at every reset position, instead of incrementing the overflow counter, we set it to the minimal value~$o_v$.
As a reset position in~$\rho'$ is only reached when incurring an overflow, for every reset position but the first one there exists at least one request in~$\rho$ that is open for at least~$b+1$ increment-edges.
We now prove that the play~$\rho$ in~$\mathcal{G}$ is winning for Player~$1$.
Recall that the play $\rho' = (v_0,o_0,r_0)(v_1,o_1,r_1)(v_2,o_2,r_2)\cdots$ is the extension of~$\rho$ with respect to~$\mathcal{M}'$.
In order to show~$\rho$ to be winning, we proceed in two steps.
First, we show that we have~$o_j < n$ for all~$j$, i.e., the strategy~$\tau$ always uses meaningful moves of~$\tau'$ for its choice of move.
This allows us to argue that~$\tau$ is indeed winning for Player~$1$.
First, note that even though~$\rho'$ is not a play in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, every vertex~$(v_j, o_j, r_j)$ of $\rho'$ is in~$\mathcal{R}$.
We show this claim by induction over~$j$.
For $j = 0$, we obtain~$(v_0,o_0,r_0) = v'_I \in \mathcal{R}$.
For $j > 0$, we obtain~$v'_{j-1} = (v_{j-1},o_{j-1},r_{j-1}) \in \mathcal{R}$ by induction hypothesis.
Hence, let~$\pi$ be a play prefix ending in~$v'_{j-1}$ that is consistent with~$\tau'$.
If $v'_{j-1} \in V'_0$, then $\pi \cdot (v_j, o_j, r_j)$ is consistent with~$\tau'$.
Otherwise, i.e., if $v'_{j-1} \in V'_1$, then we obtain $\tau(\pi) = (v_j, o, r_j)$ for some~$o \in [n+1]$.
In case $o = o_j$, $(v_j, o_j, r_j) \in \mathcal{R}$ follows directly.
If $o \neq o_j$, however, then $o_j = o_{v_j}$ and $r_j = r_{v_j}$, i.e., $(v_j, o_j, r_j) \in \mathcal{R}$ by definition of~$o_{v_j}$.
Next, we show $o_{j+1} \leq o_j+1$ for all $j \in \mathbb{N}$.
Assume we have $o_{j+1} > o_j$ for some~$j$.
As argued above, the vertex~$(v_j, o_j, r_j)$ is in~$\mathcal{R}$.
As $o_j \neq o_{j+1}$, there is an edge from $(v_j, o_j, r_j)$ to $(v_{j+1}, o_j+1, r_{j+1})$ in $\mathcal{A}'$, where $r_{j+1} = r_{v_{j+1}}$.
By construction of $\tau$, we obtain~$(v_{j+1}, o_j+1, r_{j+1}) \in \mathcal{R}$ as argued above.
Hence, we indeed have $o_{j+1} = o_{v_{j+1}} \le o_j+1$.
Now, we argue $o_j < n$ for all $j \in \mathbb{N}$
by proving the following property by induction over~$j$:
\begin{quote}
If $o_j = k$, then for every $k' \le k$ there is a reset position~$j_{k'} \le j$ with $o_{j_{k'}} = k'$.
\end{quote}
Let us first argue that this indeed implies $o_j < n$.
Towards a contradiction, assume $o_j = n$.
Then, there are $n+1$ reset positions, one for each value~$k$ in the range~$0 \le k \le n$ for the overflow counter.
Thus, two such positions~$j', j''$ share the same vertex~$v_{j'} = v_{j''}$, which implies that they also share the same overflow counter value $o_{j'} = o_{v_{j'}} = o_{v_{j''}} = o_{j''}$.
This yields the desired contradiction to $o_{j'}$ and $o_{j''}$ being distinct.
For the induction start, we have $o_0 = 0$ and pick $j_0 = 0$, which is a reset position.
Now, let $j >0$ and~$o_j = k$.
If $k \le o_{j-1}$, then the induction hypothesis yields the necessary positions.
Hence, assume we have $k > o_{j-1}$, which implies $k = o_{j-1}+1$ as shown above. Then, $j$ is a reset position and we can define $j_{k} = j$ and obtain the remaining $j_{k'}$ for $k' < k$ from the induction hypothesis.
It remains to show that~$\rho$ is indeed winning for Player~$1$.
First assume that the overflow counter of~$\rho'$ stabilizes, i.e., there exists some~$j \in \mathbb{N}$ such that~$o_{j'} = o_j$ for all~$j' > j$.
Then, there exists a suffix of~$\rho'$ that is consistent with~$\tau'$, which therefore violates the parity condition.
Hence, it suffices to note that the colors of~$\rho'$ and~$\rho$ coincide, i.e.,~$\rho$ violates the parity condition and thus also the parity condition with costs with respect to any bound.
Now assume that the overflow counter of~$\rho'$ does not stabilize.
Then, there are infinitely many reset positions in~$\rho'$.
Between any two adjacent such positions, by construction, there exists a request that remains unanswered for at least~$b+1$ steps in~$\rho$.
Hence,~$\rho$ violates the parity condition with costs with respect to bound~$b$ and is winning for Player~$1$.
\end{proof}
As the parity game $\ensuremath{\game'}$ is of exponential size and can therefore not be constructed and solved in polynomial space in $\size{\mathcal{G}}$, we now construct a finite-duration variant $\ensuremath{\game'_f}$ of $\ensuremath{\game'}$.
One such variant is obtained by playing the parity game up to the first vertex repetition and declaring the winner according to the maximal color on the induced cycle~\cite{AminofRubin14}.
However, one can show that such a play in $\ensuremath{\game'}$ is still of exponential length in the worst case.
In the following, we exploit the structure of the arena to proclaim a winner after a polynomial number of moves.
In particular, we define a preorder on the memory elements and stop a play as soon as a pseudo-cycle is reached, i.e., an infix whose projection to $V$ is a cycle in $\mathcal{A}$ and whose memory states at the start and at the end are in the order relation.
We first introduce the preorder on memory states.
To this end, note that not all open requests are \myquot{relevant}.
In fact, a small request that is opened while a larger one is already open is irrelevant.
Answering the larger request is more urgent, as it has already incurred at least as much cost as the newly opened request and answering the larger one answers the smaller one as well.
Following this intuition, we define the relevant requests of a request function~$r$ as follows:~$c$ is relevant in~$r$ if and only if~$r(c) \neq \bot$ and if there does not exist a color~$c' > c$ such that~$r(c') \geq r(c)$.
Then, for each open request~$c$ in~$r$, there exists some~$c' \geq c$ such that the request for~$c'$ is relevant and~$r(c') \geq r(c)$.
Also, the largest open request and the one with the highest cost are always relevant.
We denote the set of relevant requests of~$r$ by~$\textsc{RelReq}(r)$.
Using the relevant requests, we define a preorder~$\sqsubseteq$ on request functions: For two request functions~$r$ and $r'$, we say that $r'$ dominates~$r$, if for each color~$c$ that is relevant in~$r$, there exists a relevant request~$c'$ in~$r'$ that is \myquot{more urgent} than that for color~$c$.
Formally, we write~$r \sqsubseteq r'$ if and only if for each~$c$ that is relevant in~$r$, there exists a~$c'$ with $c \leq c'$ that is relevant in~$r'$ with~$r(c) \leq r'(c')$.
The relation~$\sqsubseteq$ is reflexive and transitive.
Moreover, if~$r \sqsubseteq r'$ and~$r \sqsupseteq r'$ both hold true, we write~$r \approx r'$.
Finally, we have that~$r \approx r'$ implies~$\textsc{RelReq}(r) = \textsc{RelReq}(r')$ and~$r(c) = r'(c)$ for all~$c \in \textsc{RelReq}(r)$.
We extend the preorder~$\sqsubseteq$ to memory elements.
Since the overflow counter is non-decreasing and every one of its increments brings a play closer towards the winning sink vertices for Player~$1$, we value this component of the memory state more strongly.
Following this intuition, we say that the memory state~$(o,r)$ is dominated by the memory state~$(o',r')$, written $(o,r) \sqsubseteq (o',r')$, if either~$o < o'$, or if both~$o = o'$ and~$r \sqsubseteq r'$ hold true.
Similarly, we extend the notation of~$\approx$ such that~$(o,r) \approx (o',r')$, if and only if both~$(o,r) \sqsubseteq (o',r')$ and~$(o,r) \sqsupseteq (o',r')$ hold true.
The preorder on memory elements is preserved under concatenation.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:dominating-memory:stable-concatenation}
Let~$(v,o_1,r_1),(v,o_2,r_2)$ be vertices in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, let~$(v,v') \in E$, and, for~$j \in \set{1,2}$, let $\mathrm{Upd}((o_j,r_j),(v,v')) = (o'_j,r'_j)$.
If~$(o_1,r_1) \sqsubseteq (o_2,r_2)$ and~$o_2 < n$, then~$(o'_1,r'_1) \sqsubseteq (o'_2,r'_2)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
First assume~$o_1 < o_2$.
Due to the construction of~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, this implies~$o'_1 \leq o'_2$.
If~$o'_1 < o'_2$, the given statement holds true.
If~$o'_1 = o'_2$, however, then~$r'_1 = r_{v'}$ and thus~$(o'_1,r'_1) \sqsubseteq (o'_2,r'_2)$, since for every~$(v,o,r)$ with incoming edges in $\mathcal{A}'$, we have~$r \sqsupseteq r_v$.
Thus, assume~$o_1 = o_2$ and~$r_1 \sqsubseteq r_2$ for the remainder of this proof.
First, assume that~$o'_1 = o_1 + 1$
We show the following claim: If the move to~$v'$ causes an overflow when starting from~$(v,o_1,r_1)$, then the same move causes an overflow when starting from~$(v,o_2,r_2)$.
This then implies~$r'_1 = r'_2 = r_{v'}$ and hence, $(o'_1,r'_1) \sqsubseteq (o'_2,r'_2)$.
Formally, we claim that if~$o'_1 = o_1 + 1$, then~$o'_2 = o_2 + 1$.
It remains to show~$o'_2 = o_2 + 1$.
Since the move from~$v$ to~$v'$ causes an overflow when starting in~$(v,o_1,r_1)$, we have~$\mathrm{Cst}(v, v') = \ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$.
Let~$c_1$ be some color that causes the overflow in~$r_1$, i.e.,~$c_1 \in \set{c \mid r_1(c) = b}$.
Since~$r_2 \sqsupseteq r_1$, there exists a color~$c_2 \geq c_1$ with~$r_2(c_2) \geq r_1(c_1)$.
Moreover, since the range of~$r_2$ is upwards bounded by~$b$, this implies~$r_2(c_2) = b$.
Hence, the move from~$v$ to~$v'$ also causes an overflow in~$r_2$, which implies~$o'_2 = o_2 + 1$.
This completes the proof in the case~$o'_1 = o_1 + 1$.
If, however,~$o'_1 = o_1$, we again distinguish two cases:
If~$o'_2 = o_2 + 1$, then~$o'_1 < o'_2$ and hence,~$(o'_1,r'_1) \sqsubseteq (o'_2,r'_2)$.
On the other hand, if~$o'_2 = o_2$, then let~$c_1$ be relevant in~$r'_1$.
We show that there exists a color~$c_2 \geq c_1$ with~$r'_2(c_2) \geq r'_1(c_1)$.
Should~$c_2$ be non-relevant, then there exists a larger one in~$r'_2$ that dominates~$c_2$.
If a request for~$c_1$ was already open in~$r_1$, then let~$c_2 \geq c_1$ with~$r_2(c_2) \geq r_1(c_1)$.
Such a color~$c_2$ exists due to~$r_2 \sqsupseteq r_1$.
Since the request for~$c_1$ was not answered during the move to~$v'$, and since~$o_2 = o_2' < n$, neither was the request for~$c_2$ during the same move.
Hence, we have~$r'_2(c_2) \geq r'_1(c_1)$.
If, however, a request for~$c_1$ was not already open in~$r_1$, then the request for~$c_1$ must have been opened by moving to~$v'$, i.e.,~$\Omega(v') = c_1$.
Thus, we directly obtain~$r'_1(c_1) = 0$ and $r'_2(c_1) \geq 0$.
Picking~$c_2 = c_1$ concludes the proof in this case.
\end{proof}
We now define the winning condition in the finite game~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
To this end, let~$\pi = (v_0,o_0,r_0)\cdots(v_j,o_j,r_j)$ be a play prefix in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ and let~$\pi' = (v_k, o_k, r_k)\cdots(v_{k'},o_{k'},r_{k'})$ be an infix of~$\pi$.
We say~$\pi'$ is a dominating cycle\footnote{Note that a dominating cycle is only a cycle when projected to a play in $\mathcal{A}$.} if~$v_k = v_{k'}$,~$o_k = o_{k'} < n$, and either
\begin{itemize}
\item the maximal color occurring on~$\pi'$ is even and~$r_k \sqsupseteq r_{k'}$, or
\item the maximal color occurring on~$\pi'$ is odd and~$r_k \sqsubseteq r_{k'}$.
\end{itemize}
We call the former and latter type of dominating cycles even and odd, respectively.
Moreover, we say that a play prefix~$\pi = (v_0,o_0,r_0)\cdots(v_j,o_j,r_j)$ is \emph{settled} if either~$o_j = n$, or if~$\pi$ contains a dominating cycle.\footnote{This definition differs from the one presented in the conference version~\cite{WeinertZimmermann16}. The definition here is easily amenable to the case of integer-valued cost functions in Section~\ref{sec:concrete}, simplifies the proofs of Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound} and Lemma~\ref{lem:unary:infinite-to-finite}, and fixes a bug in the conference version, which caused plays to be settled too early in favor of Player~$1$.}
Fix~$\ell = (n+1)^6$.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound}
Let~$\pi$ be a play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
If~$\card{\pi} > \ell$, then~$\pi$ is settled.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\pi = (v_0, o_0, r_0) \cdots (v_j, o_j, r_j)$ be an unsettled play prefix of~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
We show~$\card{\pi} \leq \ell$, which implies the given statement.
Note that, since~$\pi$ is not settled, it does not contain a vertex repetition, since such a repetition induces a dominating cycle.
The structure of our argument is sketched in Figure~\ref{fig:pspace-membership:play-analysis}: We recall the definition of overflow positions, define debt-free, request-adding, and relevance-reducing positions, and show
\begin{enumerate}
\item that there are at most $n$ overflow positions in $\pi$,
\item that there are at most $n$ debt-free positions between any two adjacent overflow positions,
\item that there are at most $d$ request-adding positions between any two adjacent debt-free positions, where $d$ is the number of odd colors,
\item that there are at most~$d$ relevance-reducing positions between any two adjacent request-adding positions,
\item that there are at most $b+1$ increment-edges between any two adjacent relevance-reducing positions, and
\item that there are at most~$n$ vertices between two such increment-edges.
\end{enumerate}
Aggregating these bounds then yields the desired result.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick,
vertex/.style={draw,shape=circle,fill=black,minimum size=.15cm,inner sep=0,line width=.3mm},
specvertex/.style={draw,shape=circle,fill=mydarkyellow,minimum size=.15cm,inner sep=0, line width=.15mm}
]
\begin{scope}
\node[anchor=east] at (-.2, 0) {$\pi$};
\foreach \Omega [evaluate=\Omega as \xpos using \Omega] in {0,2,4,6,8}
\node[specvertex] (\Omega-0) at (\xpos, 0) {};
\node[vertex] (10-0) at (10, 0) {};
\foreach \Omega [evaluate=\Omega as \xpos using \Omega] in {1,3,5,7,9}
\node[] (\Omega-0) at (\xpos, 0) {$\dots$};
\foreach \i [evaluate=\i as \nexti using int(\i+1)] in {0,...,9}
\path (\i-0) edge (\nexti-0);
\node[anchor=west,align=left] (overflow-label) at (10.5,0) {$\le n$ overflow \\ positions};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-1)}]
\node[anchor=east] at (-.2,0) {$\pi_1$};
\foreach \Omega [evaluate=\Omega as \xpos using \Omega] in {0,1,2,4,6,7,8,10}
\node[specvertex] (\Omega-1) at (\xpos,0) {};
\foreach \Omega [evaluate=\Omega as \xpos using \Omega] in {3,5,9}
\node[] (\Omega-1) at (\xpos,0) {$\dots$};
\foreach \i [evaluate=\i as \nexti using int(\i+1)] in {0,...,9}
\path (\i-1) edge (\nexti-1);
\node[anchor=west,align=left] (debt-free-label) at (10.5,0) {$\le n$ debt-free \\ positions};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-2)}]
\node[anchor=east] at (-.2,0) {$\pi_2$};
\foreach \Omega [evaluate=\Omega as \xpos using \Omega] in {0,1,2,4,6,8,10}
\node[specvertex] (\Omega-2) at (\xpos,0) {};
\node[vertex] (8-2) at (8,0) {};
\node[vertex] (10-2) at (10,0) {};
\foreach \Omega [evaluate=\Omega as \xpos using \Omega] in {3,5,7,9}
\node[] (\Omega-2) at (\xpos,0) {$\dots$};
\foreach \i [evaluate=\i as \nexti using int(\i+1)] in {0,...,9}
\path (\i-2) edge (\nexti-2);
\node[anchor=west,align=left] (request-add-label) at (10.5,0) {$\leq d$ request-\\adding positions};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-3)}]
\node[anchor=east] at (-.2,0) {$\pi_3$};
\foreach \Omega in {2,3,5,7,9}
\node[specvertex] (\Omega-3) at (\Omega,0) {};
\node[vertex] (0-3) at (0,0) {};
\node[vertex] (10-3) at (10,0) {};
\foreach \Omega in {1,4,6,8}
\node[] (\Omega-3) at (\Omega,0) {$\dots$};
\foreach \i [evaluate=\i as \nexti using int(\i+1)] in {0,...,9}
\path (\i-3) edge (\nexti-3);
\node[anchor=west,align=left] (rel-req-answer-label) at (10.5,0) {$\leq d$ relevance-\\ reducing positions};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-4)}]
\node[anchor=east] at (-.2,0) {$\pi_4$};
\foreach \Omega in {0,1,3,4,5,7,8,10}
\node[vertex] (\Omega-4) at (\Omega,0) {};
\foreach \Omega in {2,6,9}
\node[] (\Omega-4) at (\Omega,0) {$\dots$};
\foreach \i [evaluate=\i as \nexti using int(\i+1)] in {0,3,4,7}
\path (\i-4) edge node[anchor=south] (increment-\i) {$\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$} (\nexti-4);
\foreach \i [evaluate=\i as \nexti using int(\i+1)] in {1,2,5,6,8,9}
\path (\i-4) edge node[anchor=south] {$\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$} (\nexti-4);
\node[anchor=west,align=left] (increment-label) at (10.5,0) {$\leq b+1$ \\ in\-crement edges};
\draw[decorate,decoration={brace,amplitude=3pt}]
($(2-4.south east) + (.1cm,0)$) --
node[anchor=north,yshift=-.1cm,align=center] {$\leq n$ \\ vertices}
($(2-4.south west) - (.1cm,0)$);
\draw[decorate,decoration={brace,amplitude=3pt}]
($(6-4.south east) + (.1cm,0)$) --
node[anchor=north,yshift=-.1cm,align=center] {$\leq n$ \\ vertices}
($(6-4.south west) - (.1cm,0)$);
\draw[decorate,decoration={brace,amplitude=3pt}]
($(9-4.south east) + (.1cm,0)$) --
node[anchor=north,yshift=-.1cm,align=center] {$\leq n$ \\ vertices}
($(9-4.south west) - (.1cm,0)$);
\end{scope}
\draw[dashed,gray]
(3-0.south west) ..
controls (2-1.north west) and (1-0.south west) ..
(0-1.north west);
\draw[dashed,gray]
(3-0.south east) ..
controls (3-1.north east) and (10-0.south east) ..
(10-1.north east);
\draw[dashed,gray]
(5-1.south west) ..
controls (5-2.north west) and (0-1.south west) ..
(0-2.north west);
\draw[dashed,gray]
(5-1.south east) ..
controls (5-2.north east) and (10-1.south east) ..
(10-2.north east);
\draw[dashed,gray]
(5-2.south west) ..
controls (4-3.north west) and (0-2.south west) ..
(0-3.north west);
\draw[dashed,gray]
(5-2.south east) ..
controls (6-3.north east) and (10-2.south east) ..
(10-3.north east);
\draw[dashed,gray]
(4-3.south west) ..
controls (3-4.north west) and (0-3.south west) ..
(0-4.north west);
\draw[dashed,gray]
(4-3.south east) ..
controls (5-4.north east) and (10-3.south east) ..
(10-4.north east);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Bounding the length of unsettled play prefixes. The relevant special vertices are marked in yellow.}
\label{fig:pspace-membership:play-analysis}
\end{figure}
Recall that an overflow position of $\pi$ is a $k$ with $k = 0$ or with $o_k = o_{k-1}+1$.
As~$\pi$ is unsettled and the $o_k$ are non-decreasing, $\pi$ has at most $n$ overflow positions, $n-1$ real increments and the initial position.
Hence, by splitting $\pi$ at the overflow positions we obtain at most $n$ non-empty infixes of $\pi$, each without overflow positions.
We say such an infix has type~$1$.
Fix a non-empty type~$1$ infix $\pi_1$.
A \emph{debt-free position} of $\pi$ is a $k$ with $r_k = r_{v_k}$, i.e., a position that has no other costs than those incurred by visiting $v_k$.
As all vertices of $\pi_1$ share the same overflow counter value, there are at most $n$ debt-free positions in $\pi_1$: $n+1$ such positions would induce a vertex repetition, which we have ruled out above.
Hence, by splitting $\pi_1$ at the debt-free positions we obtain at most $n+1$ non-empty infixes of $\pi_1$, each without debt-free and overflow positions.
We say such an infix has type~$2$.
Fix a non-empty type~$2$ infix $\pi_2$.
A \emph{request-adding position} of $\pi$ is a $k$ with odd $\Omega(v_k)$ such that $r_{k-1}(c) = \bot$ for all $c \geq \Omega(v_k)$.
We define $d$ as the number of odd colors assigned by $\Omega$ and claim that there are at most $d$ request-adding positions in $\pi_2$.
Assume there are $d+1$. Then, two request-adding positions~$k<k'$ share a color, call it $c$.
As $k'$ is request-adding, only requests strictly smaller than $c$ are open at position~$k'-1$, i.e., $c$ and all larger requests have to be answered in between $k$ and $k'$.
Hence, there is a debt-free position between $k$ and $k'$, which contradicts $\pi_2$ being of type 2.
Hence, by splitting $\pi_2$ at the request-adding positions we obtain at most $d+1$ non-empty infixes of $\pi_2$, each without request-adding, debt-free, and overflow positions.
We say such an infix has type~$3$.
Fix a non-empty type~$3$ infix~$\pi_3$.
A \emph{relevance-reducing position} of~$\pi$ is a~$k$ such that $\textsc{RelReq}(r_{k-1}) \supsetneq \textsc{RelReq}(r_k)$.
We show that~$\pi_3$ contains at most~$d$ relevance-reducing positions.
To this end, we first argue that there is at least one request that is open throughout~$\pi_3$.
First note that some request must be open at the beginning of~$\pi_3$, as otherwise the first vertex would be at a debt-free position, which do not occur in~$\pi_3$.
Let~$c^*$ be the maximal open request at the beginning of~$\pi_3$.
Due to~$\pi_3$ not containing debt-free nor request-adding positions, all colors~$c$ visited during~$\pi_4$ must satisfy~$c \leq c^*$.
Hence, the request for~$c^*$ remains open throughout~$\pi_3$.
We now show that the sets of relevant requests along~$\pi_3$ form a descending chain in the subset-relation.
Assume towards a contradiction that an infix $(v,o,r)(v',o',r')$ of~$\pi_3$ and a color~$c$ exist such that~$c \notin \textsc{RelReq}(r)$, but~$c \in \textsc{RelReq}(r')$, i.e, $\Omega(v') = c$.
Then,~$c > c^*$, i.e., there exists a request-adding position in~$\pi_3$, a contradiction.
Hence, the sets of relevant requests indeed form a descending chain.
As at the beginning of~$\pi_3$ at most~$d$ requests are relevant, there are at most~$d$ relevance-reducing positions.
Thus, by removing relevance-reducing positions, we obtain at most~$d+1$ non-empty infixes, each without relevance-reducing, request-adding, debt-free, and overflow positions.
We say such an infix has type~$4$.
Fix a non-empty type~$4$ infix $\pi_4$.
We show that $\pi_4$ contains at most $b$ increment-edges.
As argued above, there exists some color~$c$ for which a request is open at the beginning of~$\pi_4$, which is not answered throughout this infix.
Thus, $b+1$ increment-edges in $\pi_4$ would lead to an overflow position.
However, $\pi_4$ has no overflow positions by construction.
Thus, there are at most $b$ increment-edges in $\pi_4$.
Hence, by splitting $\pi_4$ at the increment-edges, we obtain a decomposition of $\pi_4$ into at most $b+1$ infixes, each without increment-edges and without relevance-reducing, request-adding, debt-free, and overflow positions.
We say such an infix has type~$5$.
Fix a non-empty type~$5$ infix~$\pi_5$.
We show that~$\pi_5$ is of length at most~$n$.
Assume towards a contradiction that~$\pi_5$ contains at least~$n+1$ vertices.
Then there exists an infix~$\pi' = (v,o,r)\cdots(v,o,r')$ of~$\pi_5$, since~$\pi_5$ does not contain overflow positions.
As argued above, we have~$\textsc{RelReq}(r) = \textsc{RelReq}(r')$.
Moreover, as~$\pi_5$ contains no increment-edges, we furthermore obtain~$r \approx r'$.
Thus,~$\pi'$ is a dominating cycle, which contradicts~$\pi$ being unsettled.
Hence,~$\pi_5$ is of length at most~$n$.
Aggregating all these bounds yields an upper bound of~$(n+1)^6$ on the length of the unsettled play prefix~$\pi$, as we have $d \le n$ and $b \le n$.
\end{proof}
Using the notion of settled plays, we now define the finite game~$\ensuremath{\game'_f} = (\mathcal{A}', \mathrm{Win}_f)$, in which both players try to settle the play in their favor.
Due to Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound}, every play in~$\mathcal{A}'$ is settled.
Thus, let~$\rho$ be an infinite play in~$\mathcal{A}'$ and let~$\pi$ be the minimal settled prefix of~$\rho$, which can be settled due to three mutually exclusive criteria.
If~$\pi$ is settled due to containing an even dominating cycle, then~$\rho$ is winning for Player~$0$.
Otherwise, i.e., if~$\pi$ is settled due to saturating the overflow counter or due to containing an odd dominating cycle, $\rho$ is winning for Player~$1$.
The game $\ensuremath{\game'_f}$ is indeed a game of finite duration, as the winner is certain after $\ell$ moves, due to Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound}.
Hence, $\ensuremath{\game'_f}$ is determined~\cite{Zermelo13}.
Moreover, in order to solve~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, it suffices to solve~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:unary:infinite-to-finite}
Player~$0$ wins~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ if and only if she wins~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We first show that Player~$0$ wins~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ if she wins~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
Let $\sigma_f'$ be a winning strategy for Player~$0$ in $\mathcal{G}_f'$.
We construct a winning strategy~$\sigma'$ for Player~$0$ in $\ensuremath{\game'}$ by simulating a play in $\mathcal{G}_f'$ that is consistent with $\sigma_f'$.
As this strategy is only useful as long as the simulating play is not settled, we have to keep the simulating play short by removing settling dominating cycles.
We define the simulation~$h\colon (V \times M)^+ \rightarrow (V \times M)^+$ and the strategy~$\sigma'$ simultaneously.
The function~$h$ satisfies the following invariant:
\begin{quote}
Let $\pi$ be consistent with $\sigma'$ and end in $(v,o,r)$.
Then, $h(\pi)$ is consistent with $\sigma'_f$, is unsettled, and ends in $(v,o',r')$ with $(o',r') \sqsupseteq (o,r)$.
\end{quote}
Since~$h(\pi)$ is consistent with the winning strategy~$\sigma'_f$ for Player~$0$ and unsettled, this implies that neither the overflow counter of~$h(\pi)$ nor that of~$\pi$ reaches the value~$n$.
To begin, let $h(v_{\initmark}') = v_{\initmark}'$, which satisfies the invariant.
Now, assume we have a play prefix~$\pi$ consistent with $\sigma'$ ending in $(v, o, r)$ and let $h(\pi) = (v_0, o_0, r_0) \cdots (v_j, o_j, r_j)$.
We consider two cases, depending on whose turn it is at the last vertex $(v,o,r)$ of $\pi$.
If $(v,o,r) \in V'_1$, Player~$1$ moves to some successor of $(v, o, r)$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, say $(v^*, o^*, r^*)$.
Furthermore, define~$(o^*_f, r^*_f) = \mathrm{Upd}((o_j, r_j),(v_j, v^*))$, which is the corresponding memory update in~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
If $(v,o,r) \in V'_0$, let $\sigma'_f(h(\pi)) = ( v^*, o^*_f, r^*_f)$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
We mimic the move to $(v^*, o^*_f, r^*_f)$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ by defining $\sigma'(\pi) = (v^*, o^*, r^*)$ with $(o^*,r^*) = \mathrm{Upd}((o,r), (v, v^*) ))$.
This is well-defined due to the invariant~$v_j = v$.
In both cases, for a given successor~$v^*$ of~$v$ in~$\mathcal{A}$, we have $(o^*_f, r^*_f) = \mathrm{Upd}((o_j, r_j),(v, v^*))$ and $(o^*,r^*) = \mathrm{Upd}((o,r), (v, v^*) ))$.
It remains to define $h(\pi \cdot (v^*, o^*, r^*))$.
We distinguish two cases: If $ \pi^*_f = h(\pi) \cdot (v^*, o^*_f, r^*_f)$ is not settled, we pick $h(\pi \cdot (v^*, o^*, r^*)) = \pi^*_f$.
This satisfies the invariant due to Lemma~\ref{lem:dominating-memory:stable-concatenation}.
Now assume $\pi^*_f$ is settled.
Since~$\pi^*_f$ is consistent with the winning strategy~$\sigma'_f$ for Player~$0$,~$\pi^*_f$ is settled due to containing an even dominating cycle.
Moreover, since~$h(\pi)$ is not settled, the dominating cycle is a suffix of~$\pi^*_f$.
Thus, the cycle starts in a vertex $(v_{j'}, o_{j'}, r_{j'})$ with $v_{j'} = v^*$ and~$r_{j'} \sqsupseteq r^*_f$.
Removing the settling cycle, we define $h(\pi \cdot (v^*, o^*, r^*)) = (v_0, o_0, r_0) \cdots (v_{j'}, o_{j'}, r_{j'})$, which satisfies the invariant due to transitivity of~$\sqsubseteq$.
Now, consider a play~$\rho$ consistent with $\sigma'$ and let~$\pi_j$ be the prefix of length~$j$ of~$\rho$.
As argued before, neither the overflow counter of the~$\pi_j$ nor that of the~$h(\pi_j)$ reaches~$n$.
Hence, the colors of the last vertices of~$\pi_j$ and~$h(\pi_j)$ coincide for all~$j$.
Towards a contradiction, assume that the maximal color occurring infinitely often along~$\rho$ is odd, call it~$c$.
After some finite prefix,~$c$ cannot occur on even dominating cycles in the $h(\pi_j)$ anymore, since each occurrence on such a cycle implies at least one occurrence of an even higher even color in $\rho$.
Hence, after this prefix, each time a vertex of color~$c$ is visited, say at the end of the prefix~$\pi_j$, a vertex of the same color is appended to the simulated play~$h(\pi_j)$.
Moreover, this vertex is never removed from the simulated play, since only vertices occurring on even dominating cycles are removed from the simulated play.
Hence, the simulated play becomes longer with each visit to a vertex of color~$c$ after a finite prefix.
This contradicts the~$h(\pi_j)$ being unsettled, as every play of length~$\ell + 1$ is settled due to Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound}.
Thus, the maximal color occurring infinitely often in~$\rho$ must be even, i.e.,~$\sigma'$ is winning for Player~$0$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
For the other direction, we show that Player~$1$ wins~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ if he wins~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
Due to determinacy of~~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ and $\ensuremath{\game'_f}$, this suffices to show the result.
Let $\tau_f'$ be a winning strategy for Player~$1$ in~$\mathcal{G}_f'$.
Similarly to the previous case, we simulate play prefixes~$\pi$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ by play prefixes~$h(\pi)$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$ and define a simulation function~$h$ and a winning strategy~$\tau'$ for Player~$1$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ simultaneously.
Again, we need to make sure that the simulating play prefixes remain short and unsettled, as long as the overflow counter of the play in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ is not saturated.
We do so by removing settling dominating cycles from the simulating play prefixes in~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
Formally, $h$ satisfies the following invariant:
\begin{quote}
Let $\pi$ be consistent with $\tau'$ and end in $(v,o,r)$ with $o <n$.
Then, $h(\pi)$ is consistent with $\tau_f'$, is unsettled, and ends in $(v,o',r')$ with $(o',r') \sqsubseteq (o,r)$.
\end{quote}
If~$o=n$, we can stop the simulation and let Player~$1$ pick arbitrary successor vertices in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$, since the play has reached the winning sink component for Player~$1$ in $\ensuremath{\game'}$.
At the beginning, we pick $h(v_{\initmark}') = v_{\initmark}'$, which satisfies the invariant.
Now, let~$\pi$ be a play prefix consistent with $\tau'$ ending in $(v, o, r)$ and let~$h(\pi)$ be defined.
We obtain the next vertex similarly to the previous case, i.e., as an arbitrary successor of~$(v,o,r)$ if~$(v,o,r) \in V'_0$, and by applying~$\tau'_f$ to~$h(\pi)$ if~$(v,o,r) \in V'_1$.
In the latter case, we moreover define~$\tau'$ as simulating the move of~$\tau'_f$ as previously.
In both cases, we obtain~$v^*$ as the first component of the next vertex in both~$\ensuremath{\game'}$ and~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
Again, we define~$(o^*,r^*)$ and~$(o^*_f,r^*_f)$ as previously.
Let~$\pi^* = \pi \cdot (v^*, o^*, r^*)$.
It remains to define~$h(\pi^*)$.
If $o^* = n$, Player~$1$ has already won and we can define $h(\pi^*)$ arbitrarily since the invariant contains an empty premise.
If~$o^* < n$, however, we define~$h(\pi^*)$ as in the previous case, i.e., as~$\pi^*_f$, if~$\pi^*_f$ is not settled, and by removing the settling odd dominating cycle otherwise.
No even dominating cycle may occur, since~$\pi^*_f$ is consistent with~$\tau'_f$.
This maintains the invariant due to the same argument as previously.
Now consider a play~$\rho$ that is consistent with $\tau'$.
If the overflow counter along $\rho$ reaches the value $n$, then $\rho$ is winning for Player~$1$.
Thus, we consider the case where the counter is always smaller than $n$.
In this case, however, the maximal color seen infinitely often in~$\rho$ is odd, due to the same argument as in the previous case:
If it were even, vertices of that color would be appended to the simulation infinitely often without being removed, contradicting the simulated play being unsettled.
Hence,~$\tau'$ is winning for Player~$1$ in~$\ensuremath{\game'}$.
\end{proof}
The combination of Lemmas~\ref{lem:cost-parity-to-parity} and \ref{lem:unary:infinite-to-finite} shows that Player~$0$ wins~$\mathcal{G}$ with respect to the bound~$b$ if and only if she wins~$\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
Thus it remains to show that we can simulate $\ensuremath{\game'_f}$ on an alternating Turing machine in polynomial time.
\begin{lem}
\label{lemma_pspacemembership}
The following problem is in $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$: \myquot{Given a parity game with costs~$\mathcal{G}$ and a bound~$b \in \mathbb{N}$, does Player~$0$ have a strategy~$\sigma$ for $\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \le b$?}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Given~$\mathcal{G}$ and~$b$, we show how to simulate the finite-duration game $\ensuremath{\game'_f}$ on an alternating polynomial time Turing machine using the game semantics of such machines, i.e., two players construct a single path of a run of the machine.
The existential and universal player take the roles of Player~$0$ and Player~$1$, respectively.
The Turing machine keeps track of the complete prefix of the simulated play of $\mathcal{G}_f'$.
Since every vertex of~$\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{M}$ can be represented in polynomial size and since the length of the play is bounded from above by~$(n+1)^6$ due to Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound}, the Turing machine can keep track of the history explicitly and check after each step whether a dominating cycle has occurred in polynomial time.
If the play is settled due to an even dominating cycle, the machine accepts, if it is settled otherwise, the machine rejects.
Note that this algorithm involves neither the explicit construction of $\ensuremath{\game'}$ nor that of $\ensuremath{\game'_f}$.
The Turing machine accepts $\mathcal{G}$ and $b$ if and only if Player~$0$ wins~$\mathcal{G}_f'$.
Due to Lemma~\ref{lem:pspace-mem:unary:unsettled-bound}, this machine terminates after polynomially many steps.
Hence, $\textsc{APTime} = \textsc{PSpace}\xspace$~\cite{ChandraKS81} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{The Complexity of Solving Parity Games with Costs Optimally}\label{sec:complexity}
In this section we study the complexity of determining the cost of an optimal strategy for a parity game with costs. Recall that solving such games is in $\textsc{UP} \cap \textsc{co-UP}$ (and therefore unlikely to be $\textsc{NP}$-complete or $\textsc{co-NP}$-complete) while solving the special case of finitary parity games is in $\textsc{PTime}$. Our main result of this section shows that checking whether a strategy of cost at most $b$ exists is $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$-complete, where hardness already holds for finitary parity games. Therefore, this decision problem is harder than just solving the game (unless $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace \subseteq \textsc{UP} \cap \textsc{co-UP}$, respectively $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace \subseteq \textsc{PTime}$).
\begin{thm}
The following problem is $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$-complete: \myquot{Given a parity game with costs~$\mathcal{G}$ and a bound~$b \in \mathbb{N}$, does Player~$0$ have a strategy~$\sigma$ for $\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \le b$?}
\end{thm}
Note that we do not specify how $b$ is encoded: We will argue at the beginning of Section~\ref{sec_pspacemembership} that the problem is trivial for bounds~$b > n$, i.e., the complexity of the problem is independent of the encoding of $b$.
The proof of the theorem is split into two lemmas, Lemma~\ref{lemma_pspacemembership} showing membership and Lemma~\ref{lemma_pspacehardness} showing hardness, which are presented in Section~\ref{sec_pspacemembership} and Section~\ref{sec_pspacehardness}, respectively.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conc}
In this work we have shown that playing parity games with costs optimally is harder than just winning them, both in terms of computational complexity as well as in terms of memory requirements of strategies.
We proved checking an upper bound on the value of an optimal strategy to be complete for polynomial space, while just solving such games is in~$\textsc{UP} \cap \textsc{co-UP}$, respectively in~$\textsc{PTime}$ for the special case of finitary parity games.
Moreover, we have shown that optimal strategies in general require exponential memory, but also that exponential memory is always sufficient to implement optimal strategies.
In contrast, winning strategies in these games are positional.
Finally, we have shown that, in general, there exists a gradual tradeoff between the size and the cost of strategies.
Also, we considered Streett games with costs: checking an upper bound on the cost of an optimal strategy is $\textsc{ExpTime}$-complete and exponential memory is sufficient to implement optimal strategies.
Thus, playing optimally is as hard as just winning.
All our proofs can be adapted for the case of bounded parity (Streett) games and bounded parity (Streett) games with costs~\cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn09,FZ14}.
While the parity condition with costs only restricts the cost-of-response in the limit, the bounded parity condition prohibits any unanswered request with cost~$\infty$ (but still allows finitely many unanswered requests with finite cost).
The other conditions are defined similarly.
In further research, we are considering two additional directions in which to extend the cost function: By allowing negative integers as costs and by allowing multiple cost functions, i.e., by extending the parity winning condition with a family of cost functions similar to the case of Streett conditions.
Moreover, we investigate tradeoffs in delay games with quantitative winning conditions.
Preliminary results exhibited a tradeoff between costs of strategies and delay~\cite{Zimmermann17}, but there are no results involving the size of strategies.
\section{Parity Games with Costs}\label{sec:costparity}
In this section, we introduce the parity condition with costs~\cite{FZ14}. Fix an arena~$\mathcal{A} = (V, V_0, V_1, E, v_{\initmark})$. A cost function for $\mathcal{A}$ is an edge-labeling~$\mathrm{Cst} \colon E \rightarrow \set{\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}},\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}}$.\footnote{Note that using the abstract costs~$\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$ and $\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$ essentially entails a unary encoding of costs. We discuss the case of a binary encoding of arbitrary costs in Section~\ref{sec:concrete}.}
Edges labeled with $\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$ are called increment-edges while edges labeled with
$\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$ are called $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$-edges. We extend the
edge-labeling to a cost function over plays obtained by
counting the number of increment-edges traversed during the play, i.e., $\mathrm{Cst}(\rho) \in \mathbb{N} \cup \set{\infty}$ for any play~$\rho$.
The cost of a finite play infix is defined analogously. Also, fix a coloring~$\Omega \colon V \rightarrow
\mathbb{N}$ of $\mathcal{A}$'s vertices.
The classical parity condition requires almost all occurrences of odd colors to be answered by a later occurrence of a larger even color.
Hence, let $\answer{c} = \set{c' \in \mathbb{N} \mid c' \ge c \text{ and $c'$ is even}}$ be the
set of colors that answer a request of color~$c$.
Let $\rho = v_0 v_1 v_2 \cdots$ be a play.
We define the cost-of-response at position~$j \in \mathbb{N}$ of $\rho$ by
\[
\mathrm{Cor}(\rho, j) = \min \set{ \mathrm{Cst} (v_j \cdots v_{j'}) \mid j' \ge j \text{ and } \Omega(v_{j'}) \in \answer{\Omega(v_j)} }\enspace,
\]
where we use $\min \emptyset = \infty$, i.e., $\mathrm{Cor}(\rho, j)$ is the cost of the infix of $\rho$ from position~$j$ to its first answer, and $\infty$ if there is no answer.
We say that a request at position~$j$ is answered with cost~$b$, if $\mathrm{Cor}(\rho, j) = b$.
Consequently, a request with an even color is answered with cost zero.
The cost-of-response of an unanswered request is infinite, even if it only incurs finite cost during the remainder of the play, i.e., if there are only finitely many increment-edges succeeding the request.
The parity condition with costs is defined as
\[\mathrm{CostParity}(\Omega, \mathrm{Cst}) = \set{ \rho \in V^\omega \mid \limsup\nolimits_{j\rightarrow \infty} \mathrm{Cor}(\rho, j) < \infty } \enspace,\]
i.e., $\rho$ satisfies the condition, if there exists a bound~$b \in \mathbb{N}$ such that all but finitely many requests are answered with cost less than $b$.
In particular, only finitely many requests may be unanswered, even with finite cost.
Note that the bound~$b$ may depend on the play $\rho$.
A game~$\mathcal{G} = (\mathcal{A}, \mathrm{CostParity}(\Omega, \mathrm{Cst}))$ is called a parity game with costs and its size is defined to be $\size{\mathcal{A}}$.
If $\mathrm{Cst}$ assigns $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$ to every edge, then $\mathrm{CostParity}(\Omega, \mathrm{Cst})$ is a classical (max-) parity condition, denoted by $\mathrm{Parity}(\Omega)$.
Dually, if $\mathrm{Cst}$ assigns $\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$ to every edge,
then $\mathrm{CostParity}(\Omega, \mathrm{Cst})$ is equal to the
finitary parity condition over $\Omega$, as introduced by Chatterjee et al.~\cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn09} and denoted by $\mathrm{FinParity}(\Omega)$. In these cases, we refer to $\mathcal{G}$ as a parity or a finitary parity game, respectively.
As most of our examples are finitary parity games, we omit the edge-labeling when drawing them for the sake of readability.
For the same reason, we sometimes use non-negative integer costs on the edges of finitary parity games.
Such games can be transformed into finitary parity games as defined above by subdividing these edges and coloring the newly added vertices with color~$0$.
In all cases in this work, this only incurs a polynomial blowup.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\hfill
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick]
\node[p0,assign] (0-0) {$1$};
\node[p1,right=of 0-0,assign] (0-1) {$0$};
\node[p0,right=of 0-1,assign] (0-2) {$2$};
\path
($(0-0) - (1cm,0)$) edge (0-0)
(0-0) edge node[anchor=south] {$\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$} (0-1)
(0-1) edge[loop above] node[anchor=south] {$\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$} (0-1)
(0-1) edge node[anchor=south] {$\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$} (0-2)
(0-2) edge[bend left] node[anchor=north] {$\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$} (0-0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\hfill
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick]
\node[p0,assign] (0-0) {$1$};
\node[p1,right=of 0-0,assign] (0-1) {$0$};
\node[p0,right=of 0-1,assign] (0-2) {$2$};
\path
($(0-0) - (1cm,0)$) edge (0-0)
(0-0) edge node[anchor=south] {$\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$} (0-1)
(0-1) edge[loop above] node[anchor=south] {$\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$} (0-1)
(0-1) edge node[anchor=south] {$\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$} (0-2)
(0-2) edge[bend left] node[anchor=north] {$\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$} (0-0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\hspace*{\fill}
\caption{Two parity games with costs. Player~$1$ only wins the left game.}
\label{fig:parity-cost-example}
\end{figure}
Player~$1$ has two ways of winning a parity game with costs: Either he violates the classical parity condition, or he delays answers to requests arbitrarily.
Consider the two parity games with costs shown in Figure~\ref{fig:parity-cost-example}.
In the game on the left-hand side, Player~$1$ has a winning strategy, by taking the self-loop of the middle vertex~$j$ times upon the~$j$-th visit to it via the increment-edge from the leftmost vertex.
Thus, he delays answers to the request for~$1$ arbitrarily and wins by the second condition.
In the game on the right-hand side, however, Player~$1$ does not have a winning strategy.
If he eventually remains in the vertex labeled with $0$, then there are only finitely many requests, only one of which is unanswered.
Thus, the cost of the play is~$0$, i.e., it is won by Player~$0$.
If he, on the other hand, always leaves the middle vertex eventually, then each request is answered with cost~$2$, hence Player~$0$ wins as well.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:previouswork}\leavevmode
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{thm:previouswork:parity}
Parity games can be solved in quasi-polynomial time and the problem is in $\textsc{UP} \cap \textsc{co-UP}$. The winner has a positional winning strategy~\cite{CaludeJainKhoussainovLiStephan17,Jurdzinski98,EmersonJutla91,Mostowski91}.
\item\label{thm:previouswork:finitary}
Solving finitary parity games is in $\textsc{PTime}$. If Player~$0$ wins, then she has a positional winning strategy, but Player~$1$ has in general no finite-state winning strategy~\cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn09}.
\item\label{thm:previouswork:cost}
Parity games with costs can be solved in quasi-polynomial time and the problem is in $\textsc{UP} \cap \textsc{co-UP}$. If Player~$0$ wins, then she has a positional winning strategy, but Player~$1$ has in general no finite-state winning strategy~\cite{MogaveroMS15,CaludeJainKhoussainovLiStephan17,FZ14}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
A winning strategy for Player~$0$ in a parity game with costs does not have to realize a uniform bound~$b$ on the value~$\limsup_{j\rightarrow \infty} \mathrm{Cor}(\rho , j)$ among all plays~$\rho$ that are consistent with $\sigma$, but the bound may depend on the play.
To capture the cost of a strategy, we first define the cost of a play~$\rho$ as $\mathrm{Cst}(\rho) = \limsup_{j\rightarrow \infty} \mathrm{Cor}(\rho , j)$ and the cost of a strategy~$\sigma$ as $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) = \sup_{\rho} \mathrm{Cst}(\rho)$, where the supremum ranges over all plays~$\rho$ that are consistent with~$\sigma$. A strategy is optimal for $\mathcal{G}$ if it has minimal cost among all strategies for $\mathcal{G}$.
Analogously, for a strategy~$\tau$ for Player~$1$, we define $\mathrm{Cst}(\tau) = \inf_\rho \mathrm{Cst}(\rho)$, where $\rho$ again ranges over all plays consistent with~$\tau$.
A corollary of Theorem~\ref{thm:previouswork}(\ref{thm:previouswork:cost}) yields an upper bound on the cost of an optimal strategy: A straightforward pumping argument shows that a positional winning strategy, which always exists if there exists any winning strategy, realizes a uniform bound~$b \le n$ for every play, where~$n$ is the number of vertices of the game.
\begin{cor}
\label{corollary_costupperbound}
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a parity game with costs with $n$ vertices. If Player~$0$ wins $\mathcal{G}$, then she has a strategy~$\sigma$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \le n$, i.e., an optimal strategy has cost at most~$n$.
\end{cor}
This bound is tight, as it trivial to construct finitary parity games~$\mathcal{G}_n$ with~$n+1$ vertices and a unique play such that Player~$0$ wins~$\mathcal{G}_n$ with respect to bound~$b = n$, but not with respect to any bound~$b' < n$.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:defs}
We denote the non-negative integers by $\mathbb{N}$ and define $[n] = \set{0, 1, \ldots, n-1}$ for every $n \ge 1$.
An \textit{arena}~$\mathcal{A}=(V, V_0, V_1, E, v_{\initmark})$ consists of a finite, directed graph~$(V, E)$, a partition~$\{V_0, V_1\}$ of $V$ into the positions of Player~$0$ (drawn as circles) and Player~$1$ (drawn as rectangles), and an initial vertex~$v_{\initmark} \in V$. The size of $\mathcal{A}$, denoted by $\size{\mathcal{A}}$, is defined as $\size{V}$.
A \textit{play} in $\mathcal{A}$ is an infinite path~$\rho = v_0 v_1 v_2 \cdots$ through $(V, E)$ starting in $v_{\initmark}$.
To rule out finite plays, we require every vertex to be non-terminal.
A \textit{game}~$\mathcal{G} = ( \mathcal{A}, \mathrm{Win} )$ consists of an arena $\mathcal{A}$ with vertex set~$V$ and a set~$\mathrm{Win} \subseteq V^\omega$ of winning plays for Player~$0$.
The set of winning plays for Player~$1$ is $V^\omega \setminus \mathrm{Win}$.
A \textit{strategy} for Player~$i$ is a mapping $\sigma \colon V^*V_i \rightarrow V$ where $(v, \sigma(wv)) \in E$ for all $wv \in V^* V_i$.
We say that $\sigma$ is \textit{positional} if $\sigma(wv) = \sigma(v)$ for every $wv \in V^*V_i$.
We often view positional strategies as a mapping~$\sigma \colon V_i \rightarrow V$.
A play $v_0 v_1 v_2 \cdots$ is \textit{consistent} with a strategy~$\sigma$ for Player~$i$, if $v_{j+1} = \sigma( v_0 \cdots v_j)$ for every~$j$ with $v_j \in V_i$. A strategy~$\sigma$ for Player~$i$ is a \textit{winning strategy} for $\mathcal{G}$ if every play that is consistent with $\sigma$ is won by Player~$i$.
If Player~$i$ has a winning strategy, then we say she wins $\mathcal{G}$.
\textit{Solving} a game amounts to determining its winner.
A \textit{memory structure}~$\mathcal{M} = (M, m_\initmark, \mathrm{Upd})$ for an arena $(V, V_0, V_1, E, v_{\initmark})$ consists of a finite set~$M$ of memory states, an initial memory state $m_\initmark \in M$, and an update function~$\mathrm{Upd}\colon M \times E \rightarrow M$.
The update function can be extended to finite play prefixes in the usual way: $\mathrm{Upd}^+(m, v) = m$ and $\mathrm{Upd}^+(m, w v v') = \mathrm{Upd}(\mathrm{Upd}^+(m, w v), (v,v'))$ for $w \in V^*$ and $(v,v') \in E$.
A next-move function $\mathrm{Nxt} \colon V_i \times M \rightarrow V$ for Player~$i$ has to satisfy $(v, \mathrm{Nxt}(v, m)) \in E$ for all $v \in V_i$ and all $m \in M$.
It induces a strategy~$\sigma$ for Player~$i$ with memory~$\mathcal{M}$ via $\sigma(v_0\cdots v_j) = \mathrm{Nxt}(v_j, \mathrm{Upd}^+(m_\initmark, v_0 \cdots v_j))$.
A strategy is called \textit{finite-state} if it can be implemented by a memory structure.
We define $\card{\mathcal{M}} = \card{M}$.
The size of a finite-state strategy is the size of a smallest memory structure implementing it.
An arena $\mathcal{A} = (V, V_0, V_1, E, v_{\initmark})$ and a memory structure $\mathcal{M} = (M, m_\initmark, \mathrm{Upd})$ for $\mathcal{A}$ induce the expanded arena $\mathcal{A}\times\mathcal{M} = (V \times M, V_0 \times M, V_1 \times M, E', (v_{\initmark}, m_\initmark))$ where~$E'$ is defined via $((v,m), (v',m')) \in E'$ if and only if $(v,v') \in E$ and $\mathrm{Upd}(m, (v,v') ) = m'$.
Every play $\rho = v_0 v_1 v_2\cdots$ in $\mathcal{A}$ has a unique extended play $\mathrm{ext}(\rho) = (v_0, m_0) (v_1, m_1)
(v_2, m_2) \cdots$ in $\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{M}$ defined by $m_0 = m_\initmark$ and $m_{j+1} = \mathrm{Upd}(m_j, (v_j, v_{j+1}))$, i.e., $m_j = \mathrm{Upd}^+(m_\initmark, v_0 \cdots v_j)$. The extended play of a finite play prefix in $\mathcal{A}$ is defined similarly.
\section{Introduction}
Recently, the focus of research into infinite games for the synthesis of reactive systems moved from studying qualitative winning conditions to quantitative ones. This paradigm shift entails novel research questions, as quantitative conditions induce a (partial) ordering of winning strategies. In particular, there is a notion of semantic optimality for strategies which does not appear in the qualitative setting. Thus, in the quantitative setting, one can ask whether computing optimal strategies is harder than computing arbitrary ones, whether optimal strategies are necessarily larger than arbitrary ones, and whether there are tradeoffs between different quality measures for strategies, e.g., between the size of the strategy and its semantic quality (in terms of satisfaction of the winning condition).
As an introductory example consider the classical (max)-parity condition, which is defined for an infinite sequence drawn from a finite subset of the natural numbers, so-called colors. The parity condition is satisfied if almost all occurrences of an odd color are \emph{answered} by a later occurrence of a larger even color, e.g., the sequence
\[ \pi = 1\, 0 \, 2 \,\, 1\, 0\, 0 \, 2 \,\, 1\, 0\, 0\, 0 \, 2 \,\, 1\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0 \, 2 \,\, 1\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0 \, 2 \,\, 1\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0 \, 2 \,\, 1\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0\, 0 \, 2 \, \cdots \]
satisfies the parity condition, as every $1$ is eventually answered by a $2$.
The finitary parity condition~\cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn09} is obtained by additionally requiring the existence of a bound~$b$ such that almost every odd color is answered within at most $b$ steps, i.e., $\pi$ does not satisfy the finitary parity condition, as the length of the zero-blocks is unbounded. Thus, solving a finitary parity game is a boundedness problem: In order to satisfy the condition, an arbitrary, but fixed bound has to be met.
In particular, winning strategies for finitary parity games are naturally ordered by the minimal bound they realize along all consistent plays. Thus, finitary parity games induce an optimization problem: Compute an optimal winning strategy, i.e., one that guarantees the smallest possible bound.
Other examples for such quantitative winning conditions include mean payoff~\cite{EhrenfeuchtMycielski79, ZwickPaterson95} and energy~\cite{BouyerFLMS08,ChakrabartiAHS03} conditions and their combinations and extensions, request-response conditions~\cite{HornThomasWallmeierZimmermann15, Zimmermann09}, parity with costs~\cite{FZ14}, and parameterized extensions of Linear Temporal Logic (LTL)~\cite{AlurEtessamiLaTorrePeled01,FaymonvilleZimmermann14,KupfermanPitermanVardi09,Zimmermann13,Zimmermann15}. Often, these conditions are obtained by interpreting a classical qualitative winning condition quantitatively, as exemplified by the finitary parity condition introduced above.
Often, the best algorithms for solving such boundedness conditions are as fast as the best ones for their respective qualitative variant, while the fastest algorithms for the optimization problem are worse. For example, solving games with winning conditions in Prompt-LTL, a quantitative variant of LTL, is $\textsc{2ExpTime}$-complete~\cite{KupfermanPitermanVardi09} (i.e., as hard as solving classical LTL games~\cite{PnueliRosner89a}), while computing optimal strategies is only known to be in $\textsc{3ExpTime}$~\cite{Zimmermann13}. The same is true for the bounds on the size of winning strategies, which jump from tight doubly-exponential bounds to triply-exponential upper bounds. The situation is similar for other winning conditions as well, e.g., request-response conditions~\cite{HornThomasWallmeierZimmermann15}. These examples all have in common that there are no known lower bounds on the complexity and the memory requirements in the optimization variant, except for the trivial ones for the qualitative case. A notable exception are finitary parity games, which are solvable in polynomial time~\cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn09} and thus simpler than parity games (according to the state-of-the-art).
In this work, we study optimal strategies in parity games with costs, a generalization of finitary parity games. In this setting, we are able to show that computing optimal strategies is indeed harder than computing arbitrary strategies, and that optimal strategies have exponentially larger memory requirements in general. A parity game with costs is played in a finite directed graph whose vertices are partitioned into those of Player~$0$ and those of Player~$1$. Starting at an initial vertex, the players move a token through the graph: If it is placed at a vertex of Player~$i$, then this player has to move it to some successor. Thus, after $\omega$~rounds, the players have produced an infinite path through the graph, a so-called play. The vertices of the graph are colored by natural numbers and the edges are labeled by (non-negative) costs. These two labelings induce the parity condition with costs: There has to be a bound~$b$ such that almost all odd colors are followed by a larger even color such that the cost incurred between these two positions is at most $b$. Thus, the sequence~$\pi$ from above satisfies the parity condition with costs, if the cost of the zero-blocks is bounded. Note that the finitary parity condition is the special case where every edge has cost one and the parity condition is the special case where every edge has cost zero.
Thus, to win a parity game with costs, Player~$0$ has to bound the costs between requests and their responses along all plays. If Player~$0$ has any such strategy, then she has a positional strategy~\cite{FZ14}, i.e., a strategy that determines the next move based only on the vertex the token is currently at, oblivious to the history of the play. Let $n$ denote the number of vertices of the graph the game is played in and let $W$ denote its largest edge cost. Then, a positional winning strategy uniformly bounds the costs to some bound~$b \le nW$, which we refer to as the cost of the strategy. Furthermore, Mogavero et al.\ showed that the winner of a parity game with costs can be determined in $\textsc{UP} \cap \textsc{co-UP}$~\cite{MogaveroMS15}. All previous work on parity games with costs was concerned with the boundedness variant, i.e., the problems ask to find some bound, but not necessarily the best one. Here, in contrast, we study optimal strategies in parity games with costs.
When considering parity games with costs as a boundedness problem, the actual edge costs can be abstracted away: It is only relevant whether an edge has cost zero or not. Thus, it suffices to consider only costs~$0$ and $1$ (typically denoted as $\ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$ and $\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$). We call this setting one of \emph{abstract costs}.
For the optimization variant, abstracting away the actual costs is no longer valid and encoding larger costs by subdividing them into edges of cost~$\ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$, i.e., of cost~$1$, comes at the price of an exponential blowup in the graph's size. Thus, we also consider the case of costs in~$\mathbb{N}$, given in binary encoding. Here, the upper bound~$nW$ on the cost of an optimal strategy might be exponential in the size of the game.
Furthermore, we also study Streett conditions, which generalize parity conditions by relaxing the hierarchical structure of the requests and responses: In a parity condition, a large even color answers requests for \emph{all} smaller odd colors. In contrast, in a Streett condition, any two kinds of responses are potentially independent of each other. It is known that solving the boundedness problem for finitary Streett games and for Streett games with costs is $\textsc{ExpTime}$-complete~\cite{FZ14}, which has to be compared to the $\textsc{co-NP}$-completeness of solving classical Streett games~\cite{Horn05}. Furthermore, finite-state strategies of exponential size suffice for Player~$0$ to implement a winning strategy in a Streett game with costs~\cite{FZ14}. As above, one obtains $mnW$ as upper bound on the cost of an optimal strategy in a Streett game with costs with $n$ vertices and largest cost $W$, where $m$ is the size of a finite-state winning strategy.
\subsection{Our Contribution}
Our first four results are concerned with the special case of abstract costs, i.e., costs~$0$ and $1$ only; the remaining ones are about games with costs in ~$\mathbb{N}$.
The first result shows that determining whether Player~$0$ has a strategy in a parity game with costs whose cost is smaller than a given bound~$b$ is $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$-complete. Thus, computing the bound of an optimal strategy is strictly harder than just deciding whether or not some bound exists (unless $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace \subseteq \textsc{UP} \cap \textsc{co-UP}$). The hardness result is shown by a reduction from $\mathrm{QBF}$ and uses the bound~$b$ to require Player~$0$'s strategy to implement a satisfying Skolem function for the formula, where picking truth values is encoded by requests of odd colors. The lower bound is complemented by a polynomial space algorithm that is obtained from an alternating polynomial time Turing machine that simulates a finite-duration variant of parity games with costs that is won by Player~$0$ if and only if she can enforce a cost of at most $b$ in the original game. To obtain the necessary polynomial upper bound on the play length we rely on the upper bound $n$ on the optimal bound and on a first-cycle variant of parity games (cf.\ \cite{AminofRubin14}) tailored to our setting.
Our second result concerns memory requirements of optimal strategies. A corollary of the correctness of the finite-duration game yields exponential upper bounds: If Player~$0$ has a strategy of cost~$b$, then she also has one of cost~$b$ and of size~$(b+2)^d = 2^{d \log (b+2)}$, where $d$ is the number of odd colors in the game. A similar result holds true for Player~$1$ as well: If he can exceed a given bound~$b$, then he can also do so with a strategy of size~$n(b+2)^d$.
Furthermore, we show that the exponential upper bounds are asymptotically tight: We present a family~$\mathcal{G}_d$ of parity games with costs such that $\mathcal{G}_d$ has $d$ odd colors and Player~$0$ requires strategies of size~$2^{d-1}$ to play optimally in each $\mathcal{G}_d$. This result is based on using the bound~$b$ to require Player~$0$ to store which odd colors have an open request and in which order they were posed. Our result improves a linear bound presented by Chatterjee and Fijalkow~\cite{CF13arxiv}. Dually, we present an exponential lower bound on the memory size necessary for Player~$1$ to exceed a given bound~$b$.
Moreover, we study the tradeoff between memory size and cost of a strategy witnessed by the results above: Arbitrary winning strategies are as small as possible, i.e., positional, but in general have cost~$n$. In contrast, optimal strategies realize a smaller bound, but might have exponential size. Hence, one can trade cost for memory and vice versa.
We show that this tradeoff is gradual in the games~$\mathcal{G}_d$: There are strategies~$\sigma_1, \sigma_2, \ldots, \sigma_d$ such that $1 = \size{\sigma_1} < \size{\sigma_2} < \cdots < \size{\sigma_d} = 2^{d-1}$ and $b_1 > b_2 > \cdots > b_d$, where $b_j$ is the cost of $\sigma_j$. Furthermore, we show that the strategy~$\sigma_j$ has minimal size among all strategies of cost~$b_j$. Equivalently, the strategy~$\sigma_j$ has minimal cost among all strategies whose size is not larger than $\sigma_j$'s size.
Both lower bounds we prove and the tradeoff result already hold for the special case of finitary parity games, which can even be solved in polynomial time~\cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn09}. Hence, in this case, the gap between just winning and playing optimally is even larger.
After the results for the special case of abstract costs (i.e., $0$ and $1$ only), we consider the general case of arbitrary non-negative costs given in binary encoding. We show that determining whether Player~$0$ has a strategy in a parity game with costs whose cost is smaller than a given bound~$b$ is still $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$-complete, i.e., having \emph{larger} costs does not influence the complexity of the problem. The lower bound on the complexity carries over from the special case of abstract costs but the proof of the upper bound is affected by this generalization: The upper bound on the cost of an optimal strategy is now exponential, which implies that the finite-duration variant has exponentially long plays as well. We devise a shortcut criterion to skip parts of a play and prove that this yields the desired alternating polynomial-time algorithm, which places to problem in $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$.
As before, this reduction also yields exponential upper bounds on the necessary memory to implement a winning strategy: The memory requirements do not increase asymptotically when considering arbitrary costs, and they still match the lower bounds.
Finally, we consider quantitative Streett conditions. We show that, given Streett game with costs and a bound~$b$, determining whether Player~$0$ has a strategy with cost at most~$b$ is $\textsc{ExpTime}$-complete. Thus, playing quantitative Streett games optimally is not harder than just winning them. This is due to the fact that just winning them is already very hard. Furthermore, we present tight exponential bounds on the memory necessary to implement a winning strategy for Player~$0$ in such a game. All lower bounds already hold for the special case of finitary Streett games while the upper bounds hold for arbitrary costs encoded in binary.
\subsection{Related Work}
Tradeoffs in infinite games have been studied before, e.g., in stochastic and timed games, one can trade memory for randomness, i.e., randomized strategies are smaller than deterministic ones~\cite{ChatterjeeAH04,ChatterjeeHP08}. A detailed overview of more recent results in this direction and of tradeoffs in multi-dimensional winning conditions is given in the thesis of Randour~\cite{RandourThesis}. The nature of these results is quite different from ours.
Lang investigated optimal strategies in the resource reachability problem on pushdown graphs~\cite{Lang14}, where there exists a finite number of counters, which may be increased and reset, but not read during a play.
He shows that in order to keep the values of the counters minimal during the play, exponential memory in the number of counters is both necessary and sufficient for Player~$0$.
While the author shows the corresponding decision problem to be decidable, he does not provide a complexity analysis of the problem.
Furthermore, the setting of the problem is quite different from the model considered in this work: He considers infinite graphs and multiple counters, but only reachability conditions, while we consider finite graphs and implicit counters tied to the acceptance condition, which is a general parity~condition.
Also, Fijalkow et al.\ proved the non-existence of a certain tradeoff between size and quality of strategies in boundedness games~\cite{FijalkowHKS15}, which refuted a conjecture with important implications for automata theory and logics. Such games are similar to those considered by Lang in that they are played in potentially infinite arenas and have multiple counters.
Recently, Bruy{\'e}re et al. introduced window-parity games~\cite{BruyereHautemRandour16}, another quantitative variant of parity games, and proved tight complexity bounds for the scenario with multiple colorings of the arena.
They were also able to show a tight connection between window-parity and finitary parity games.
Finally, the winning conditions considered here have also been studied in the setting of delay games. In such games, Player~$0$ may delay her moves to obtain a lookahead on her opponent's moves, thereby gaining an advantage that allows her to win games she loses without delay. Now, there are potential tradeoffs between quality, size, and amount of delay. Most importantly, one can trade delay for quality and vice versa~\cite{Zimmermann17} which allows Player~$0$ to improve the quality of her strategies by taking advantage of the delay.
\subsection{Organization of the Paper}
In Section~\ref{sec:defs}, we introduce basic definitions about infinite games; in Section~\ref{sec:costparity}, we introduce parity games with costs. First, we study the variant with abstract costs: we prove the $\textsc{PSpace}\xspace$-completeness result (Section~\ref{sec:complexity}), the exponential bounds on the memory requirements of optimal strategies (Section~\ref{sec:memory}), and the gradual tradeoff between cost and size of winning strategies (Section~\ref{sec:tradeoffs}). Then, we turn our attention to the setting of integer-valued costs in Section~\ref{sec:concrete} and to Streett games with costs in Section~\ref{sec:streett}. Finally, we conclude in Section~\ref{sec:conc} by discussing further research.
\section{Memory Requirements of Optimal Strategies in Parity Games with Costs}\label{sec:memory}
Next, we study the memory needed by both players to play optimally in parity games with costs.
Recall that Player~$0$ always has a positional winning strategy if she wins the game, while Player~$1$ requires infinite memory.
In contrast, our main result of this section shows that the memory requirements of optimal strategies are exponential for Player~$0$, i.e., playing optimally comes at a price in terms of memory, too.
Standard complexity theoretic assumptions already rule out the existence of small strategies:
If they existed, guessing and verifying such a strategy would contradict \textsc{PSpace}\xspace-completeness of solving finitary parity games with respect to a given bound.
However, here we explicitly present games in which either player requires exponential memory, which we later use to demonstrate gradual tradeoffs between memory and cost in Section~\ref{sec:tradeoffs}.
We obtain our lower bound by a generalization of a construction of Chatterjee and Fijalkow~\cite{CF13arxiv} which yielded a linear lower bound.
First, however, let us state a corollary of the construction of the parity game $\mathcal{G}'$ in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma_pspacemembership}, which gives an exponential upper bound on the necessary memory states for both players.
Recall that the memory structure used in that proof has one counter with a range of size $b+2$ for each odd color.
Furthermore, it has an additional counter that is bounded by $n$, which counts the number of times the bound $b$ is exceeded.
Using similar techniques to \cite{FZ14}, it is possible to remove the overflow counter for Player~$0$: She can play assuming the largest value for this latter counter that still allows her to win.
\begin{cor}
\label{cor:parity:memory:upper-bound}
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a parity game with costs containing~$n$ vertices and~$d$ odd colors.
\begin{itemize}
\item If Player~$0$ has a strategy $\sigma$ for $\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) = b$, then she also has a strategy $\sigma'$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma') \leq b$ and $\card{\sigma'} = (b+2)^d$.
\item If Player~$1$ has a strategy~$\tau$ for~$\mathcal{G}$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\tau) = b$, then he also has a strategy~$\tau'$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\tau') \geq b$ and~$\card{\tau'} = n (b+2)^d$.
\end{itemize}
\end{cor}
Again, our matching lower bounds already hold for finitary parity games, i.e., parity games with costs in which all edges are increment-edges.
These proofs reuse principles underlying the \textsc{PSpace}\xspace-hardness proof presented in Section~\ref{sec_pspacehardness}, e.g., having a fixed bound requires a player, in the worst case, to store all open requests in order to answer them timely.
We begin by showing the lower bound for Player~$0$.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:memory-upper-p0}
For every $d \geq 1$, there exists a finitary parity game~$\mathcal{G}_d$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{G}_d$ has $d$ odd colors and $\card{\mathcal{G}_d} \in \bigo(d^2)$,
\item Player~$0$ has a strategy~$\sigma$ in~$\mathcal{G}_d$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) = d^2 + 2d$, but
\item every strategy~$\sigma$ for Player~$0$ in~$\mathcal{G}_d$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \leq d^2 + 2d$ has size at least~$2^{d-1}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $d \geq 1$.
We construct a finitary parity game~$\mathcal{G}_d$ that has the stated properties.
To this end, after defining~$\mathcal{G}_d$, we construct a strategy with cost~$d^2 + 2d$ for Player~$0$ and argue that it is optimal, followed by the proof that every optimal strategy has at least size~$2^{d-1}$.
The game $\mathcal{G}_d$ is played in rounds.
In each round, which starts at the initial vertex of~$\mathcal{G}_d$, Player~$1$ poses $d$ requests for odd colors in the range~$1$ through~$2d-1$.
Subsequently, Player~$0$ gives~$d$ answers using colors in the range $2$ through $2d$.
If she recalls the choices made by Player~$1$ in the first part of the round, she is able to answer each request optimally.
Otherwise, we show that Player~$1$ can exploit her having not enough memory in order to force requests to go unanswered for more than~$d^2+2d$ steps.
After each round, the play returns to the initial vertex in order to allow for infinite plays.
The arena $\mathcal{A}$ consists of gadgets that each allow exactly one request or response to be made.
Moreover, each path through a gadget has the same length~$d+2$, including the edge connecting a gadget to its successor.
However, low-priority requests and responses are made earlier than high-priority ones when traversing such a gadget, due to its structure.
We show both gadgets in Figure~\ref{fig:memory-upper-bound:player-0:gadgets}.
The dashed lines denote the edges to the pre- and succeeding gadget and the edge between the final and the initial gadget.
As the owner of the succeeding vertex depends on the succeeding gadget's owner, we draw it as a diamond.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick,yscale=.95]
\newcommand{0}{0}
\newcommand{-1}{-1}
\newcommand{-2}{-2}
\foreach \offset/\player/\labelA/\labelB/\labelC/\labelD [
evaluate = \offset as \colOne using (\offset + 1.5),
evaluate = \offset as \colTwo using (\offset + 2.5),
evaluate = \offset as \colThree using (\offset + 3.5),
evaluate = \offset as \colFour using (\offset + 4.5),
evaluate = \offset as \exitCol using (\offset + 6)
]
in {
0/p1/1/3/2d-3/2d-1,
6/p0/2/4/2d-2/2d
} {
\IfStrEq{\player}{p1}{\defassign}}{\def\MyStyle{choice}{assign}}{\defassign}}{\def\MyStyle{choice}{choice}}
\foreach \x/\label/\xCount in {\colOne/\labelA/0,\colTwo/\labelB/1,\colFour/\labelD/3} {
\node[\player,assign}}{\def\MyStyle{choice}] (\xCount-0) at (\x,0) {$0$};
\node[p1,assign}}{\def\MyStyle{choice}] (\xCount-1) at (\x,-1) {$\label$};
\node[p1,assign}}{\def\MyStyle{choice}] (\xCount-2) at (\x,-2) {$0$};
}
\node (2-0) at (\colThree,0) {$\dots$};
\node (2-1) at (\colThree,-1) {$\dots$};
\node (2-2) at (\colThree,-2) {$\dots$};
\foreach \x in {0,1,3} {
\path (\x-0) edge (\x-1);
\path (\x-1) edge (\x-2);
}
\foreach \y in {0,2} {
\foreach \x [evaluate=\x as \nextX using int(\x + 1)] in {0,...,2} {
\path (\x-\y) edge (\nextX-\y);
}
}
\node[p1] (entry) at (\offset,0) {};
\begin{scope}
\clip (entry.south west) -- (entry.south east) -- (entry.north east) -- cycle;
\path[fill=myblue] (entry.south west) -- (entry.south east) -- (entry.north east) -- cycle;
\draw[mydarkblue] (entry.south west) -- (entry.south east) -- (entry.north east);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}
\clip (entry.south west) -- (entry.north west) -- (entry.north east) -- cycle;
\path[fill=myred] (entry.south west) -- (entry.north west) -- (entry.north east) -- cycle;
\draw[mydarkred] (entry.south west) -- (entry.north west) -- (entry.north east);
\end{scope}
\node[p1,dashed] (entry) at (\offset,0) {};
\node[diamond,minimum size = .7cm] (exit) at (\exitCol,-2) {};
\begin{scope}
\clip (exit.north) -- (exit.west) -- (exit.south) -- cycle;
\path[fill=myblue] (exit.north) -- (exit.west) -- (exit.south) -- cycle;
\draw[mydarkblue] (exit.north) -- (exit.west) -- (exit.south);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}
\clip (exit.north) -- (exit.east) -- (exit.south) -- cycle;
\path[fill=myred] (exit.north) -- (exit.east) -- (exit.south) -- cycle;
\draw[mydarkred] (exit.north) -- (exit.east) -- (exit.south);
\end{scope}
\node[diamond,minimum size = .7cm,draw,dashed] (exit) at (\exitCol,-2) {};
\path[dashed] (entry) edge (0-0);
\path[dashed] (3-2) edge (exit);
}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The gadgets for Player~$1$ (left) and Player~$0$ (right).}
\label{fig:memory-upper-bound:player-0:gadgets}
\end{figure}
More precisely, the arena~$\mathcal{A}$, consists of~$d$ repetitions of the gadget for Player~$1$, followed by $d$ repetitions of the gadget for Player~$0$.
The initial vertex $v_I$ of the arena is the top-left vertex of the first gadget for Player~$1$.
Moreover, the final gadget of Player~$0$ has a single back-edge to the initial vertex.
Clearly, $\mathcal{A}$ satisfies the first statement of the theorem.
Similarly to the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma_pspacehardness}, it suffices to consider finite plays infixes.
Even though the requests are not necessarily all answered after each round, we argue that Player~$0$ can always do so while playing optimally.
We now construct an optimal strategy from $v_I$ for Player~$0$.
In order to play optimally, Player~$0$ needs to track the requests made by Player~$1$ in the first part of each round.
Instead of tracking each request precisely, however, it suffices to store the order in which the relevant requests were posed.
In order to use memory efficiently, we do not initialize our memory structure with the empty sequence, but rather with the memory element encoding that all requests are relevant.
Recall that relevant requests can only be opened by visiting some larger color than all currently open requests.
Hence, we define the set of strictly increasing odd sequences
\begin{align*}
\mathit{IncSeq}_d = \set{ (c_1,\ldots,c_d) \mid &1 \leq c_1 \leq \cdots \leq c_d = 2d-1, \\
&c_j \neq 2d-1 \text{ implies } c_j < c_{j+1}, \text{ all } c_j \text{ are odd}}
\end{align*}
and use them as the set of memory states $M_d = \mathit{IncSeq}_d$.~\footnote{This definition differs from the one presented in the conference version~\cite{WeinertZimmermann16}. There, the padding to length~$d$ (here with requests for~$2d-1$) was kept implicit. We show that an optimal strategy for Player~$0$ can be implemented with~$\card{M_d} = 2^{d-1}$ many memory states. This invalidates the lower bound of~$2^d-2$ claimed in the conference version.}
Note that $\card{M_d} = 2^{d-1}$, as each increasing sequence is isomorphic to a subset of~$\set{1,3,5,\dots,2d-3}$.
In order to obtain~$\mathcal{M}$, we define~$m_I = (1,3,\dots,2d-3,2d-1)$.
Moreover, we define the update function~$\mathrm{Upd}$ as follows:~$\mathrm{Upd}(m,e) = m_I$ if~$e$ leads to the initial vertex of~$\mathcal{G}_d$, and as~$\mathrm{Upd}(m, e) = m$, if~$e$ leads to some other vertex of even color.
If~$e$ leads to the (unique) vertex of odd color~$c$ in the~$j$-th gadget of Player~$1$, however, we differentiate two cases.
Let~$m = (c_1,\dots,c_d)$.
If~$c_j \geq c$, then~$\mathrm{Upd}(m,e) = m$.
Otherwise, we define
\[ \mathrm{Upd}(m,e) = (c_1,\dots,c_{j-1},c,c+2,c+4,\dots,2d-1,2d-1,\dots,2d-1) \enspace. \]
Note that this definition of~$\mathrm{Upd}$ implies that the memory state is fixed once a partial play leaves the gadgets of Player~$1$, remains unchanged throughout the traversal of the gadgets of Player~$0$ and is only reset upon moving to the initial vertex of~$\mathcal{G}_d$.
Finally, we define the next-move function~$\mathrm{Nxt}$ such that, if the play leaves the gadgets of Player~$1$ with memory state~$m = (c_1,\dots,c_d)$, then Player~$0$ moves to color~$c_j + 1$ in her~$j$-th gadget.
Now consider a play in which Player~$0$ plays according to this strategy and consider the request for color~$c$ made by Player~$1$ in his~$j$-th gadget.
If the request for color~$c$ is the largest request made by Player~$1$ so far in the current round,, then Player~$0$ answers the $j$-th request from Player~$1$ in her $j$-th gadget.
The cost of this request then consists of three components.
First, the play has to leave Player~$1$'s $j$-th gadget, incurring a cost of $d - (c+1) / 2 + 2$.
Then, the play passes through $d-1$ gadgets, incurring a cost of~$d+2$ in each.
Finally, moving to color~$c+1$ in Player~$0$'s gadget incurs a cost of $(c+1)/2$.
Hence, answering Player~$1$'s request incurs a cost of $d^2 + 2d$.
If there, however, exists some~$j' < j$ such that Player~$1$ has already requested some color~$c' > c$ in his~$j'$-th gadget, then the request for color~$c'$ will be answered in gadget~$j'$ of Player~$0$.
Hence, Player~$0$ answers the request with cost at most $(d-1)(d+2) < d^2 + 2d$.
This cost is indeed optimal.
Consider the play in which Player~$1$ always requests $2d-1$.
Even if Player~$0$ answers this request in her first gadget, it still incurs a cost of $d^2 + 2d$.
It remains to show that no optimal strategy of size less than $\card{M_d}$ exists.
To this end we show that Player~$1$ can exploit a strategy of Player~$0$ with less than~$\card{M_d}$ memory states and pose requests that will be answered suboptimally.
We associate with each~$m \in M_d$ the partial play~$\mathit{req}(m)$ which starts in the initial vertex, where Player~$1$ requests the colors occurring in~$m$ in order.
Clearly,~$m \neq m' \in M_d$ implies~$\mathit{req}(m) \neq \mathit{req}(m')$.
Let~$\sigma$ be a strategy for Player~$0$ that is implemented by $(M, m_\initmark, \mathrm{Upd})$ with $\card{M} < \card{M_d}$ and let $m \in M$.
Due to the pigeon-hole principle, there exist $m'_1 \neq m'_2 \in M_d$, such that $\mathrm{Upd}^+(m, \mathit{req}(m'_1)) = \mathrm{Upd}^+(m, \mathit{req}(m'_2))$, i.e., Player~$0$ answers both sequences of requests in the same way.
Since $\mathit{req}(m'_1) \neq \mathit{req}(m'_2)$, there exists a gadget of Player~$1$ in which the requests posed during $\mathit{req}(m'_1)$ and $\mathit{req}(m'_2)$ differ.
Pick $j$ as the minimal index of such a gadget and assume that in his $j$-th gadget, Player~$1$ requests color $c$ during $\mathit{req}(m'_1)$, and color $c'$ during $\mathit{req}(m'_2)$, where, w.l.o.g., $c < c'$.
If Player~$0$ has already answered the request for $c'$ before her $j$-th gadget, then some earlier request is not answered optimally when reacting to~$\mathit{req}(m'_2)$, as requests are posed in strictly increasing order.
Thus, assume that the request for color~$c'$ has not been answered upon entering Player~$0$'s $j$-th gadget.
If she visits some color $c'' < c'$ in this gadget, she will only answer $c'$ in some later gadget, thereby incurring a cost of more than $d (d+2) = d^2 + 2d$ when reacting to~$\mathit{req}(m'_2)$.
If she visits some color $c'' \geq c'$, then she does not answer the request for $c$ optimally, thus incurring a cost of at least $d^2 + 2d + (c' - c)/2 > d^2 + 2d$ when reacting to~$\mathit{req}(m'_1)$.
Hence, one of the sequences of requests $\mathit{req}(m'_1)$ or $\mathit{req}(m'_2)$ leads to Player~$0$ answering at least one request non-optimally.
As such sequences $m'_1$ and $m'_2$ exist for each $m \in M$, Player~$1$ can force such an \myquot{expensive} request in each round.
Thus, $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) > d^2 + 2d$, i.e., $\sigma$ is not~optimal.
\end{proof}
After having shown that Player~$0$ requires exponential memory to keep the cost of the play below a given bound, we now show a similar result for Player~$1$:
In general, he also requires exponential memory to enforce costs above a given bound.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:memory-upper-p1}
For every $d \geq 1$, there exists a finitary parity game~$\mathcal{G}_d$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{G}_d$ has $2d$ odd colors and $\card{\mathcal{G}_d} \in \bigo(d)$,
\item Player~$1$ has a strategy~$\tau$ in $\mathcal{G}_d$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\tau) = 5(d-1)+7$, but
\item every strategy $\tau$ for Player~$1$ in $\mathcal{G}_d$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\tau) \geq 5(d-1)+7$ has size at least $2^d$.
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Fix some~$d \geq 1$.
Similarly to the previous proof, we construct an arena~$\mathcal{A}$ using two kinds of gadgets, one for each player, each of which is repeated~$d$ times.
In~$\mathcal{A}$, first Player~$0$ opens~$d$ requests and subsequently picks one of these requests to be answered.
If Player~$1$ recalls the requests, then he can delay the answer to any chosen request up to~$5(d-1) + 7$ steps.
Otherwise, Player~$0$ can find a sequence of requests that is answered optimally.
We show the gadgets in Figure~\ref{fig:memory-upper-bound:player-1:gadgets} together with their coloring, and call them~$G^0_j$ and~$G^1_j$ for the $j$-th gadget of Player~$0$ and Player~$1$, respectively.
The gadget~$G^0_j$ contains the colors~$0$,~$4j-3$, and~$4j-1$, while the gadget~$G^1_j$ contains the colors~$0$,~$4j-2$, and~$4j$.
The complete arena~$\mathcal{A}$ is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:memory-upper-bound:player-1:game}.
We fix the initial vertex of $G^0_1$ to be the initial vertex~$v_I$ of~$\mathcal{G}_d$.
Clearly,~$\mathcal{A}$ satisfies the first item of the theorem.
\begin{figure} \centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick,xscale=2]
\begin{scope}
\node[p0,draw=mydarkyellow,check] (p0-entry) at (-1,0) {};
\begin{scope}
\clip ($(p0-entry) + (-1,-2)$) -- ($(p0-entry) + (-1,2)$) -- ($(p0-entry) + (1,2)$) -- cycle;
\node[p0,draw=mydarkyellow,check] at (p0-entry) {};
\node[p0,dashed,check] at (p0-entry) {};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}
\clip ($(p0-entry) + (-1,-2)$) -- ($(p0-entry) + (1,-2)$) -- ($(p0-entry) + (1,2)$) -- cycle;
\node[p0,draw=mydarkblue,assign] at (p0-entry) {};
\node[p0,dashed,assign] at (p0-entry) {};
\end{scope}
\node[p0,assign] (p0-0-2) at (0,0) {$0$};
\node[p0,assign,ellipse, inner sep =0] (p0-1-2) at (1,0) {$4j-3$};
\node[p0,assign] (p0-2-2) at (2,0) {$0$};
\node[p0,assign] (p0-3-2) at (3,0) {$0$};
\node[p0,assign] (p0-0-1) at (0,-1) {$0$};
\node[p0,assign] (p0-0-0) at (1,-1) {$0$};
\node[p0,assign,ellipse, inner sep =0] (p0-1-0) at (2,-1) {$4j-1$};
\node[p0,assign] (p0-3-0) at (3,-1) {$0$};
\path
(p0-entry) edge[dashed] (p0-0-2)
(p0-0-2) edge (p0-1-2) edge (p0-0-1)
(p0-1-2) edge (p0-2-2)
(p0-2-2) edge (p0-3-2)
(p0-3-2) edge (p0-3-0)
(p0-0-1) edge (p0-0-0)
(p0-0-0) edge (p0-1-0)
(p0-1-0) edge (p0-3-0);
\node[p0,draw=mydarkyellow,check] (p0-exit) at (4,-1) {};
\begin{scope}
\clip ($(p0-exit) + (-1,-2)$) -- ($(p0-exit) + (-1,2)$) -- ($(p0-exit) + (1,2)$) -- cycle;
\node[p0,draw=mydarkyellow,check] at (p0-exit) {};
\node[p0,dashed,check] at (p0-exit) {};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}
\clip ($(p0-exit) + (-1,-2)$) -- ($(p0-exit) + (1,-2)$) -- ($(p0-exit) + (1,2)$) -- cycle;
\node[p0,draw=mydarkblue,assign] at (p0-exit) {};
\node[p0,dashed,assign] at (p0-exit) {};
\end{scope}
\path (p0-3-0) edge[dashed] (p0-exit);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-2)}]
\node[p0,draw=mydarkyellow,check] (p1-entry) at (-1,0) {};
\node[p0,check,dashed] at (p1-entry) {};
\node[p1,choice] (p1-0-1) at (0,0) {$0$};
\node[p1,choice] (p1-1-1) at (1,0) {$4j-2$};
\node[p1,choice] (p1-2-1) at (2,0) {$0$};
\node[p1,choice] (p1-3-1) at (3,0) {$0$};
\node[p1,choice] (p1-0-0) at (0,-1) {$0$};
\node[p1,choice] (p1-1-0) at (1,-1) {$4j-2$};
\node[p1,choice] (p1-3-0) at (3,-1) {$4j$};
\path
(p1-entry) edge[dashed] (p1-0-1)
(p1-0-1) edge (p1-1-1) edge (p1-0-0)
(p1-0-0) edge (p1-1-0)
(p1-1-1) edge (p1-2-1)
(p1-2-1) edge (p1-3-1)
(p1-3-1) edge (p1-3-0)
(p1-1-0) edge (p1-3-0);
\node[p0,draw=mydarkyellow,check] (p1-exit) at (4,-1) {};
\node[p0,check,dashed] at (p1-exit) {};
\path (p1-3-0) edge[dashed] (p1-exit);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The gadgets $G^0_j$ (above) and $G^1_j$ (below).}
\label{fig:memory-upper-bound:player-1:gadgets}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure} \centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick,xscale=2]
\node[p0,check,label=north:$v_I$] (reset) at (-1,0) {$4d$};
\path ($(reset) - (.5,0)$) edge (reset);
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,0)}]
\node[draw,dashed] (G0-1-3) at (0,0) {$G^0_1$};
\node[draw,dashed] (G0-5-7) at (1,0) {$G^0_2$};
\node[draw,dashed] (G0-9-11) at (2,0) {$G^0_3$};
\node (G0-dots) at (3,0) {$\cdots$};
\node[draw,dashed] (G0-2d-3-2d-1) at (4,0) {$G^0_d$};
\path[draw,rounded corners,->]
(reset) edge (G0-1-3)
(G0-1-3) edge (G0-5-7)
(G0-5-7) edge (G0-9-11)
(G0-9-11) edge (G0-dots)
(G0-dots) edge (G0-2d-3-2d-1);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(0,-1.5)}]
\node[p0,check,outer sep=0] (choice-0) at (0,0) {$0$};
\node[anchor=south east,inner sep=.5pt] at (choice-0.north west) {$c_1$};
\node[draw,dashed] (G1-2-4) at (0,-1) {$G^1_1$};
\path
(choice-0) edge (G1-2-4);
\path[draw,->,rounded corners]
(G1-2-4) -- (0,-2) -| (reset);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(1,-1.5)}]
\node[p0,check,outer sep=0] (choice-1) at (0,0) {$4$};
\node[anchor=south east,inner sep=.5pt] at (choice-1.north west) {$c_2$};
\node[draw,dashed] (G1-4-8) at (0,-1) {$G^1_2$};
\path
(choice-1) edge (G1-4-8);
\path[draw,->,rounded corners]
(G1-4-8) -- (0,-2) -| (reset);
\end{scope}
\path (choice-0) edge node[anchor=south] {$\mathbf{5}$} (choice-1);
\begin{scope}[shift={(2,-1.5)}]
\node[p0,check,outer sep=0] (choice-2) at (0,0) {$8$};
\node[anchor=south east,inner sep=.5pt] at (choice-2.north west) {$c_3$};
\node[draw,dashed] (G1-10-12) at (0,-1) {$G^1_3$};
\path
(choice-2) edge (G1-10-12);
\path[draw,->,rounded corners]
(G1-10-12) -- (0,-2) -| (reset);
\end{scope}
\path (choice-1) edge node[anchor=south] {$\mathbf{5}$} (choice-2);
\node (choice-dots) at (3,-1.5) {$\cdots$};
\path
(choice-2) edge node[anchor=south] {$\mathbf{5}$} (choice-dots);
\begin{scope}[shift={(4,-1.5)}]
\node[p0,check,outer sep=0,ellipse,inner sep=0] (choice-d) at (0,0) {$4(d-1)$};
\node[anchor=south east,inner sep=.5pt] at (choice-d.north west) {$c_d$};
\node[draw,dashed] (G1-4d-2-4d) at (0,-1) {$G^1_d$};
\path
(choice-d) edge (G1-4d-2-4d);
\path[draw,->,rounded corners]
(G1-4d-2-4d) -- (0,-2) -| (reset);
\end{scope}
\path (choice-dots) edge node[anchor=south] {$\mathbf{5}$} (choice-d);
\path[draw,rounded corners,->] (G0-2d-3-2d-1) -| (4.5,-.5) |- (-.5,-.75) |- (choice-0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The arena~$\mathcal{A}$ of~$\mathcal{G}_d$ showing necessity of exponential memory for Player~$1$.}
\label{fig:memory-upper-bound:player-1:game}
\end{figure}
The game is played in rounds.
Each such round starts and ends in the initial vertex~$v_I$ that answers every request.
Thus, it suffices to analyze a single round of the game:
In each round, Player~$0$ starts by posing~$d$ requests.
With her~$j$-th request, she may either request the color~$4j-3$ and take three steps before leaving~$G^0_j$, or she may request the color~$4j-1$ and take a single step before leaving~$G^0_j$.
After posing~$d$ requests, Player~$0$ then moves to some~$G^1_j$ for~$1 \leq j \leq d$ while answering all requests for colors~$c \leq 4(j-1)$.
In~$G^1_j$, Player~$1$ answers the request posed in~$G^0_j$.
After he has done so, all requests are reset and the next round begins.
All requests posed in~$G^0_{j'}$ for $j' < j$ are answered before entering $G^1_j$ due to the structure of the arena.
Similarly, all requests posed in~$G^0_{j'}$ for $j' > j$ are answered immediately after leaving~$G^1_j$.
We show that by remembering all requests, which takes $2^d$ memory states, Player~$1$ can ensure that one request is only answered with cost~$5(d-1)+7$.
If he uses less memory states, we show that Player~$0$ is able to answer every request with cost~$5(d-1)+6$, i.e., that strategy has cost at most~$5(d-1) + 6$.
First, consider the strategy~$\tau$ for Player~$1$ that is defined as follows:
During Player~$0$'s part of the round, Player~$1$ stores the requests that she makes using $2^d$ memory states.
Assume Player~$0$ then moves to~$G^1_j$.
If Player~$0$ requested color~$4j-3$ during her part of the round, Player~$1$ picks the upper branch shown in Figure~\ref{fig:memory-upper-bound:player-1:gadgets}, while he chooses the lower branch in case Player~$0$ requested color~$4j-1$.
It remains to argue that this strategy indeed enforces a cost at least $5(d-1)+7$.
Consider a play prefix that starts in~$v_I$ and ends in~$c_j$ for some $1 \leq j \leq d$.
At this point, the request with the highest cost incurred so far is either a request for color~$4j-3$ with cost~$5(d-1)+4$, or a request for color~$4j-1$ with cost~$5(d-1)+2$.
All requests for colors~$c < 4j-3$ have already been answered due to the structure of the arena.
By coloring the vertices resulting from the subdivision of the edges labeled with cost~$\mathbf 5$ with the color of the target of these edges, these requests incur cost at most~$5(d-1) + 5$.
Moreover, all requests for colors~$c > 4j - 1$ have incurred a cost of at most~$5(d-1) - 1$.
Now, assume that Player~$0$ enters $G^1_j$.
First, consider the case with an open request for color~$4j-3$.
Then Player~$1$ moves through the lower branch of his gadget, answering this request with cost~$5(d-1)+7$.
If there is, however, an open request for color~$4j-1$, then Player~$1$ moves through the upper branch of his gadget, answering the open request with cost~$5(d-1)+7$ as well.
Thus, the strategy~$\tau$ has cost~$5(d-1) + 7$.
All other requests are answered immediately after leaving the gadget at vertex~$v_I$ with a cost of at most $5(d-1) + 5$.
We now show that Player~$1$ indeed needs at least~$2^d$ many memory states to enforce a cost of at least~$5(d-1)+7$.
Towards a contradiction assume that Player~$1$ has a finite-state strategy~$\tau$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\tau) \geq 5(d-1)+7$ that is implemented by a memory structure~$(M, m_I, \mathrm{Upd})$, where $\card{M} < 2^d$.
We inductively construct a play~$\rho$ consistent with $\tau$ such that $\mathrm{Cst}(\rho) \leq 5(d-1)+6$.
Assume we have already defined a prefix~$\pi$ of $\rho$ ending in the initial vertex~$v_I$.
We determine a sequence of~$d$ requests and a choice of~$1 \leq j \leq d$ and prolong $\pi$ by letting Player~$0$ first pick the sequence of requests and then move into some gadget~$G^1_j$.
Then, Player~$1$ applies his strategy, which leads back to the initial vertex.
To this end, let~$m = \mathrm{Upd}^+(m_I, \pi)$.
Since $\card{M} < 2^d$, and since there exist~$2^d$ play infixes leading from the unique successor of~$v_I$ to~$c_1$, there exist two such infixes~$\pi_1$ and~$\pi_2$, such that $\mathrm{Upd}^+(m, \pi_1) = \mathrm{Upd}^+(m, \pi_2)$.
Let~$j$ be minimal such that the choices made in~$G^0_j$ by Player~$0$ differ in~$\pi_1$ and~$\pi_2$, and w.l.o.g. assume that Player~$0$ poses a request for color~$4j-3$ when playing~$\pi_1$, while she poses a request for color~$4j-1$ when playing~$\pi_2$.
Now consider the response of Player~$1$ consistent with~$\tau$ if Player~$0$ moves to~$G^1_j$ after the play prefix~$\pi \pi_1$ and note that this response is the same as the one to the play prefix~$\pi \pi_2$ due to~$\mathrm{Upd}^+(m, \pi_1) = \mathrm{Upd}^+(m, \pi_2)$.
If Player~$1$ traverses the upper branch of~$G^1_j$ after witnessing~$\pi \pi_1$ or~$\pi \pi_2$, then he answers the request for~$4j-3$ posed during the traversal of~$\pi_1$ with cost~$5(d-1) + 6$.
If he, however, traverses the lower branch of~$G^1_j$ after witnessing~$\pi \pi_1$ or~$\pi \pi_2$, then he answers the request for~$4j-1$ posed during~$\pi_2$ with cost~$5(d-1) + 6$.
In the former case, we continue~$\pi$ by letting Player~$0$ play according to~$\pi_1$, while in the latter case we continue~$\pi$ by letting her play according to~$\pi_2$.
In either case, we move to~$G^1_j$ afterwards.
In~$G^1_j$, Player~$1$ plays consistently with~$\tau$.
In both cases all requests posed in gadgets~$G^0_{j'}$ for~$j' < j$ are answered after at most~$5(d-1)+5$ steps, namely upon reaching the first vertex of the subdivision of the edge leading to the vertex~$c_{j' + 1}$.
Also, the request posed in~$G^0_j$ is answered after~$5(d-1) + 6$ steps.
Finally, all requests posed in gadgets~$G^0_{j'}$ for~$j' > j$ are answered after at most $5(d+j-j'-1) + 10 \leq 5(d-1) + 5$ steps upon visiting the vertex~$v_I$.
Since all requests are reset when reaching~$v_I$, and since the reasoning above holds true for any memory state~$m$ reached at the end of any~$\pi$ as above, the play~$\rho$ resulting from an inductive application of this construction has $\mathrm{Cst}(\rho) \leq 5(d-1) + 6$.
Since~$\rho$ is consistent with $\tau$, this contradicts~$\mathrm{Cst}(\tau) \geq 5(d-1) + 7$ and concludes the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}
Note that Player~$1$ does not win the games~$\mathcal{G}_d$ with regards to the classical finitary parity condition, i.e., he cannot unbound the cost of an open request arbitrarily.
\section{Streett Games with Costs}
\label{sec:streett}
In this section, we consider the Streett condition with costs~\cite{FZ14}, which generalizes both the parity condition with costs as well as the classical Streett condition.
We show that, given some Streett game with costs~$\mathcal{G}$ and bound~$b$, the problem of deciding whether there exists a strategy for Player~$0$ in~$\mathcal{G}$ with cost at most~$b$, is $\textsc{ExpTime}$-complete.
Thus, this problem is harder to solve than that of solving classical Streett games (unless $\textsc{co-NP} = \textsc{ExpTime}$), and as hard as solving both finitary Streett games and Streett games with costs~\cite{FZ14}.
As a corollary of this result and of those previously obtained in this work we furthermore obtain tight exponential bounds on the memory required by both players in such a game.
We begin by formally defining the Streett condition with costs, before examining its complexity and the memory required by both players.
Let $\mathcal{A} = (V, V_0, V_1, E, v_I)$ be an arena and let $\Gamma = (Q_c, P_c)_{c \in [d]}$ for some $d \geq 1$ be a non-empty, finite family of so-called Streett pairs of subsets of $V$.
Intuitively, for each $c \in [d]$, the set $Q_c$ denotes vertices requesting condition~$c$, which are answered by visiting some vertex in $P_c$.
Finally, let $\mathrm{Cst} = (\mathrm{Cst}_c)_{c \in [d]}$ be a family of cost functions, where $\mathrm{Cst}_c\colon E \rightarrow \mathbb{N}$ for each $c \in [d]$, which we extend to cost functions over plays as usual.
We denote the highest cost assigned by any $\mathrm{Cst}_c \in \mathrm{Cst}$ by~$W$.
Let $\rho = v_0 v_1 v_2\cdots$ be a play in~$\mathcal{A}$ and let $j \in \mathbb{N}$ be a position.
We first define the cost-of-response for a single Streett pair $(Q_c, P_c)$ as
\[
\mathrm{StCor}_c(\rho, j) =
\begin{cases}
\min \set{ \mathrm{Cst} (v_j \cdots v_{j'}) \mid j' \ge j \text{ and } v_{j'} \in P_c } &\text{if } v_j \in Q_c \\
0 &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\]
with~$\min\emptyset = \infty$.
Note that, in contrast to parity games, the visit to $v_j$ may open multiple requests, as there may exist multiple $c$ such that $v_j \in Q_c$.
Thus, we define the (total) cost-of-response at position~$j \in \mathbb{N}$ of $\rho$ by
\[
\mathrm{StCor}(\rho, j) = \max \set { \mathrm{StCor}_c(\rho, j) \mid c \in [d] } \enspace.
\]
Thus, $\mathrm{StCor}(\rho, j)$ is the cost of the infix of $\rho$ from position~$j$ to the earliest position where all requests opened at position $j$ are answered, and $\infty$, if at least one such request is not answered.
Moreover, $\mathrm{StCor}(\rho, j)$ is zero if no requests are opened at position~$j$.
The Streett condition with costs is then defined as
\[\mathrm{CostStreett}(\Gamma, \mathrm{Cst}) = \set{ \rho \in V^\omega \mid \limsup\nolimits_{j\rightarrow \infty} \mathrm{StCor}(\rho , j) < \infty } \enspace,\]
i.e., $\rho$ satisfies the condition if there exists a bound~$b \in \mathbb{N}$ such that all but finitely many requests are answered with cost less than $b$.
In particular, only finitely many requests may be unanswered, even if they only incur finite cost.
Similarly to the case of the parity condition with costs, the bound~$b$ may depend on the play $\rho$.
A game~$\mathcal{G} = (\mathcal{A}, \mathrm{CostStreett}(\Gamma, \mathrm{Cst}))$ is called a Streett game with costs.
If all $\mathrm{Cst}_c$ assign~$0$ to every edge, then $\mathrm{CostStreett}(\Gamma, \mathrm{Cst})$ is a classical Streett condition \cite{streett81}, denoted by $\mathrm{Streett}(\Gamma)$.
Dually, if all $\mathrm{Cst}_c$ assign~$1$ to every edge, then $\mathrm{CostStreett}(\Omega, \mathrm{Cst})$ is equal to the finitary Streett condition over $\Gamma$, as introduced by Chatterjee et al.~\cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn09} and denoted by $\mathrm{FinStreett}(\Gamma)$.
In these cases, we refer to $\mathcal{G}$ as a Streett or a finitary Streett game, respectively.
We assume the cost functions to be given in binary encoding.\footnote{All lower bounds shown for this setting already hold for that of finitary Streett games.}
Hence, in general, the largest cost~$W$ is exponential in~$2^{\card{\mathrm{Cst}}}$, where $\card{\mathrm{Cst}}$ is the length of the encoding of $\mathrm{Cst}$.
Thus, we define~$\card{\mathcal{G}} = \card{\mathcal{A}} + d + \log W$.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:previouswork-streett}\leavevmode
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{thm:previouswork-streett:streett}
Solving Streett games is $\textsc{co-NP}$-complete.
If Player~$0$ wins, then she has a winning strategy of size~$d!$, while Player~$1$ has uniform positional winning strategies~\cite{Horn05}.
\item\label{thm:previouswork-streett:finitary}
Solving finitary Streett games is $\textsc{ExpTime}$-complete.\footnote{Shown in unpublished work by Chatterjee, Henzinger, and Horn, obtained by a minor modification to the proof of \textsc{ExpTime}-hardness of solving request-response games \cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn11}.}
If Player~$0$ wins, then she has a winning strategy of size $d2^d$, but Player~$1$ has in general no finite-state winning strategy~\cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn09}.
\item\label{thm:previouswork-streett:cost}
Solving Streett games with costs is $\textsc{ExpTime}$-complete.
If Player~$0$ wins, then she has a winning strategy of size $2^d((2d)!)$, but Player~$1$ has in general no finite-state winning strategy~\cite{FZ14}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
We define the cost of strategies for Streett games with costs analogously to the parity case.
In contrast to that case, however, we obtain an exponential upper bound on the cost of an optimal strategy for a Street game with costs by using Theorem~\ref{thm:previouswork-streett}(\ref{thm:previouswork-streett:cost}) and applying the same pumping argument as for Corollary~\ref{corollary_costupperbound}.
\begin{cor}
\label{corollary_costupperbound_streett}
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a Streett game with costs with $n$ vertices and $d$ Streett pairs.
Moreover, let~$W$ be the largest cost in~$\mathcal{G}$.
If Player~$0$ wins $\mathcal{G}$, then she has a strategy~$\sigma$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \le nW \cdot 2^d((2d)!)$.
\end{cor}
Similarly to the case of parity games with costs, this bound is tight.
The games demonstrating the lower bound are, however, no longer trivial.
We adapt the games used in~\cite{ChatterjeeHenzingerHorn11} for demonstrating the necessity for exponential memory for Player~$0$ in request-response games in order to show this bound.
\begin{thm}
For each~$d \geq 0$, there exists a finitary Streett game~$\mathcal{G}_d$ with~$\bigo(d)$ vertices and~$d + 1$ Streett pairs, such that Player~$0$ has a strategy with cost~$b = 3 (2^d - 1) + 2$, but no strategy with cost less than~$b$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Figure~\ref{fig:streett-lower-bound} shows the game~$\mathcal{G}_3$.
In general, the game~$\mathcal{G}_d$ consists of an initializing prefix, i.e., the vertices~$P$ and~$Q$, a central vertex~$m$, and one branch for each of the~$d+1$ Streett pairs, which can be entered from~$m$.
Each branch consists of one path leading back to the central vertex as well as one path restarting the game via moving to the initializing prefix.
The vertices~$P$ and~$Q$ answer and open all~$d+1$ requests, respectively, while a visit to~$m$ neither opens nor answers any requests.
When moving into the branch associated with condition~$c$, the initial visit to~$P_c$ answers the request for condition~$c$.
Afterwards, visiting~$c$ or~$\overline{c}$ opens requests for all conditions~$c' < c$ and answers all requests for conditions~$c' > c$, respectively.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick,yscale=2,xscale=2]
\tikzset{
prefixnode/.style={fill=myred},
middlenode/.style={fill=myyellow},
bladenode/.style={fill=myblue}
}
\node[p0,prefixnode] (entry) at (0,-1.25) {$P$};
\node[p0,prefixnode] (request) at (0,-.625) {$Q$};
\node[p0,middlenode] (center) at (0,0) {$m$};
\path
($(entry) - (0,.5)$) edge (entry)
(entry) edge (request)
(request) edge (center);
\begin{scope}[shift={(1,-.5)}]
\node[p1,bladenode] (blade-1-start) at (0,0) {$P_0$};
\node[p1,bladenode] (blade-1-trap) at (1,0) {$\overline{0}$};
\node[p0,bladenode] (blade-1-end) at (2,0) {$0$};
\path
(center) edge (blade-1-start)
(blade-1-start) edge (blade-1-trap) edge [bend left=20] (blade-1-end)
(blade-1-trap) edge [loop below,looseness=8] (blade-1-trap) edge [bend left=5] (entry)
(blade-1-end) edge[out=150,in=-5] (center);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(1,.5)}]
\node[p1,bladenode] (blade-2-start) at (0,0) {$P_1$};
\node[p1,bladenode] (blade-2-trap) at (1,0) {$\overline{1}$};
\node[p0,bladenode] (blade-2-end) at (2,0) {$1$};
\path
(center) edge (blade-2-start)
(blade-2-start) edge (blade-2-trap) edge [bend right=20] (blade-2-end)
(blade-2-trap) edge [loop above,looseness=8] (blade-2-trap)
(blade-2-end) edge[out=-150,in=5] (center);
\path[draw,thick,->,rounded corners]
(blade-2-trap) -- ($(blade-2-trap) + (.5,.25)$) -| ($(center) + (3.5,0)$) |- (entry);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(-1,.5)}]
\node[p1,bladenode] (blade-3-start) at (0,0) {$P_2$};
\node[p1,bladenode] (blade-3-trap) at (-1,0) {$\overline{2}$};
\node[p0,bladenode] (blade-3-end) at (-2,0) {$2$};
\path
(center) edge (blade-3-start)
(blade-3-start) edge (blade-3-trap) edge [bend left=20] (blade-3-end)
(blade-3-trap) edge [loop above,looseness=8] (blade-3-trap)
(blade-3-end) edge[out=-30,in=-185] (center);
\path[draw,thick,->,rounded corners]
(blade-3-trap) -- ($(blade-3-trap) + (-.5,.25)$) -| ($(center) - (3.5,0)$) |- (entry);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(-1,-.5)}]
\node[p1,bladenode] (blade-4-start) at (0,0) {$P_3$};
\node[p1,bladenode] (blade-4-trap) at (-1,0) {$\overline{3}$};
\node[p0,bladenode] (blade-4-end) at (-2,0) {$3$};
\path
(center) edge (blade-4-start)
(blade-4-start) edge (blade-4-trap) edge [bend right=20] (blade-4-end)
(blade-4-trap) edge [loop below,looseness=8] (blade-4-trap) edge [bend right=5] (entry)
(blade-4-end) edge[out=30,in=185] (center);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The game~$\mathcal{G}_3$.}
\label{fig:streett-lower-bound}
\end{figure}
Intuitively, by moving to~$P_c$, Player~$0$ claims that~$c$ is the smallest index for which a request is open and answers the request for that condition.
If this claim holds true, the best choice for Player~$1$ is to move to~$c$, where requests for all conditions~$c' < c$ are opened and the play returns to~$m$.
If, on the other hand, this claim does not hold true, then Player~$1$ can move to~$\overline{c}$, where all requests for conditions~$c' > c$ are answered and Player~$1$ can increase the cost of the remaining requests arbitrarily before moving to~$P$ and thereby starting the next round.
Note that staying in~$\overline{c}$ infinitely long is losing for Player~$1$, as no requests are opened in that vertex and thus, the cost of the resulting play is~$0$.
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\shifttext}[2]{%
\settowidth{\@tempdima}{#2}%
\makebox[\@tempdima]{\hspace*{#1}#2}%
}
\makeatother
The optimal strategy for Player~$0$ implements a binary counter: Whenever the play reaches~$m$, she has to recall the smallest~$c$ for which there is an open request and move to~$P_c$.
Since moving to~$P_c$ and returning to~$m$ via~$c$ reopens requests for all conditions~$c' < c$, Player~$0$ has to repeat answering these requests from smallest to largest before she can answer the outstanding request for condition~$c+1$.
Figure~\ref{fig:street-lower-bound:example} shows the cost of requests during a play consistent with this strategy in~$\mathcal{G}_3$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tabular}{l*{17}{c}} \toprule
Branch & & \shifttext{-1.5em}{0} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{1} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{0} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{2} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{0} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{1} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{0} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{3} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{0} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{1} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{0} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{2} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{0} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{1} & \shifttext{-1.5em}{0} & $\cdots$ \\ \midrule
$r(0)$ & $1$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $\bot$ & $\cdots$ \\
$r(1)$ & $1$ & $4$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $4$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $4$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $4$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\cdots$ \\
$r(2)$ & $1$ & $4$ & $7$ & $10$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $1$ & $4$ & $7$ & $10$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\cdots$ \\
$r(3)$ & $1$ & $4$ & $7$ & $10$ & $13$ & $16$ & $19$ & $22$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\bot$ & $\cdots$ \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{An optimal play for Player~$0$ in~$\mathcal{G}_3$. We only consider the positions at which the play is at vertex~$m$. The topmost row denotes the branch visited in-between two visits to that vertex.}
\label{fig:street-lower-bound:example}
\end{figure}
Note that, in this example, after answering the request for~$3$, Player~$0$ continues implementing a binary counter until no more requests are open.
At this point, Player~$0$ may choose an arbitrary branch.
If Player~$1$ then moves to the trap-vertex and subsequently to~$P$, he starts the next round of the game.
If he, however, returns to~$m$, Player~$0$ obtains new open requests which she has to answer as she did before.
Since no request for~$3$ can be opened without moving to~$P$, not moving on to the next round will not yield higher costs than doing so.
As illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:street-lower-bound:example}, answering the request for condition~$d$ posed at the beginning of each round requires~$2^d-1$ many visits to branches, as well as an additional step into the first vertex of the branch of condition~$d$.
As each of the visits to the branches implies the traversal of three edges, this request is answered~$b$ steps after it is posed.
Hence, the strategy implementing a binary counter has a cost of~$b = 3 (2^d - 1) + 2$.
Moreover, as argued above, in each round in which Player~$0$ deviates from this strategy, Player~$1$ can move the play into the \myquot{trap}-vertex~$\overline{c}$ of the current branch upon the first deviation, where he can loop until the cost of an open request increases beyond~$b$, before he moves to the next round.
Hence, Player~$0$ has to adhere to this strategy after finitely many rounds, i.e., each strategy for her has cost at least~$b$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The Complexity of Solving Streett Games with Costs Optimally}
We now show that solving Streett games with costs with respect to a given bound~$b$ is \textsc{ExpTime}-complete.
Since solving finitary Streett games is complete for the same complexity class, and since an exponential~$b$ suffices for Player~$0$ to win in such games due to Corollary~\ref{corollary_costupperbound_streett}, we can encode the problem of solving a finitary Streett game as the given problem with only a linear blowup, due to binary encoding of~$b$.
Hence, the latter problem is \textsc{ExpTime}-hard.
In order to show membership of the given problem in \textsc{ExpTime}, we reduce it to that of solving a classical Streett game with exponentially many vertices, but with only a single additional Streett pair.
Since Streett games with~$n$ vertices and~$d$ Streett pairs can be solved in time~$\bigo(nd(d!))$ using the algorithm from Piterman and Pnueli~\cite{PitermanPnueli06}, this construction yields \textsc{ExpTime}-membership of the given problem.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:streett:complexity:completeness}
The following problem is $\textsc{ExpTime}$-complete: \myquot{Given a Streett game with costs~$\mathcal{G}$ and a bound~$b \in \mathbb{N}$ in binary encoding, does Player~$0$ have a strategy~$\sigma$ for $\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \le b$?}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
$\textsc{ExpTime}$-hardness of this problem follows from the $\textsc{ExpTime}$-hardness of deciding the winner in a finitary Streett game~\cite{FZ14} as argued above.
We now show the given problem to be in $\textsc{ExpTime}$.
The idea for this proof is the same as for the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma_pspacemembership}, i.e., we reduce the problem to solving a classical Streett game $\mathcal{G}'$.
Instead of simulating $\mathcal{G}'$ on the fly, however, we construct and solve it explicitly.
Let $\mathcal{G} = (\mathcal{A}, \mathrm{CostStreett}(\Gamma, \mathrm{Cst}))$ be a Streett game with costs with $n$ vertices and $d$ Streett pairs.
Moreover, let~$W$ be the largest cost assigned by any~$\mathrm{Cst}_c$ in~$\mathrm{Cst}$.
If $b \geq nW \cdot 2^d((2d)!)$, then we construct~$\mathcal{G}' = (\mathcal{A}, \mathrm{CostStreett}(\Gamma, \mathrm{Cst}'))$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}'(e) = \ensuremath{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}$, if $\mathrm{Cst}(e) = 0$ and $\mathrm{Cst}'(e) = \ensuremath{\mathbf{i}}$ otherwise and solve $\mathcal{G}'$ using an exponential-time algorithm~\cite{FZ14}.
If Player~$0$ can ensure some upper bound on the cost incurred in~$\mathcal{G}'$, then she can also do so in~$\mathcal{G}$ using the same strategy.
Thus, by Corollary~\ref{corollary_costupperbound_streett}, she can bound the cost from above by~$b$.
Similarly, if Player~$1$ wins~$\mathcal{G}'$, then he can still do so in~$\mathcal{G}$ using the same strategy.
Hence, solving~$\mathcal{G}'$ solves~$\mathcal{G}$ with respect to~$b$.
Thus, assume $b < nW \cdot 2^d ((2d)!)$.
For the reduction of $\mathcal{G}$ to a Streett game we again use a memory structure that keeps track of the costs of responses accumulated so far, up to the bound $b$, while allowing this counter to overflow at most~$n$ times.
Hence, let $\mathcal{M} = (M, m_\initmark, \mathrm{Upd})$ be the memory structure with memory states $M = [n+1] \times (\set{\bot} \cup [b+1])^{[d]}$, where we define~$m_\initmark$ and~$\mathrm{Upd}$ analogously to the parity case.
Note that $\mathcal{M}$ is of size $\card{\mathcal{M}} = (n + 1) \cdot (b + 2)^d$.
Also, given $\Gamma = (Q_c, P_c)_{c \in [d]}$, we construct $\Gamma' = (Q'_c, P'_c)_{c \in [d + 1]}$ as $(Q'_c, P'_c) = (Q_c \times M, P_c \times M)$ for $c \in [d]$, and $(Q'_d, P'_d) = (V \times (\set{\bot} \cup [b+1])^{[d]} \times \set{n},\emptyset)$.
Thus, $\Gamma'$ is the conjunction of the extension of $\Gamma$ to the game $\mathcal{G} \times \mathcal{M}$ and one additional Streett pair which causes Player~$0$ to lose once the overflow counter reaches the value~$n$.
Hence~$\card{\Gamma'} = \card{\Gamma} + 1$.
We define $\mathcal{G}' = (\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{M}, \mathrm{Streett}(\Gamma'))$.
Player~$0$ wins $\mathcal{G}'$ if and only if she has a strategy with cost at most~$b$ in~$\mathcal{G}$, due to the same arguments as in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:cost-parity-to-parity}.
Moreover, using the algorithm presented in \cite{PitermanPnueli06}, we can solve $\mathcal{G}'$ in exponential time in $\card{\mathcal{G}}$.
The Streett game $\mathcal{G}'$ has $n' \in \bigo(n^2 b^d)$ vertices.
Since we assume $b \leq nW \cdot 2^d((2d)!)$, we obtain
$n' \in \bigo(( nW \cdot 2^d((2d)!) ) ^d)$.
Moreover, $\mathcal{G}'$ has $d' = d+1$ many Streett pairs.
As discussed above, by using the algorithm for solving Streett games by Piterman and Pnueli~\cite{PitermanPnueli06}, we obtain an algorithm that is polynomial in the number of vertices~$n$ of~$\mathcal{G}$, while it is exponential in the number of Streett pairs~$d$ and~$\log W$.
Hence, the given problem is in \textsc{ExpTime}.
\end{proof}
This result also holds true if the bound~$b$ is given in unary encoding.
As every number in unary encoding can be rewritten in binary encoding in polynomial time, membership in \textsc{ExpTime}\ follows directly.
Moreover, recall that \textsc{ExpTime}-hardness of the problem of Theorem~\ref{thm:streett:complexity:completeness} follows from \textsc{ExpTime}-hardness of solving finitary Streett games.
This problem is in turn shown to be \textsc{ExpTime}-hard via a reduction from the word problem for polynomially time-bounded alternating Turing machines.
A minor modification of that proof yields that a polynomial bound suffices for Player~$0$ in order to win the resulting finitary parity game.
Hence, the problem is still \textsc{ExpTime}-hard when considering a unary encoding of the bound~$b$.
\subsection{Memory Requirements of Optimal Strategies in Streett Games with Costs}
As we have shown in the previous section, Streett games with costs can be solved by reducing them to classical Streett games of exponential size, but with only linearly many Streett pairs.
Similarly to Corollary~\ref{cor:parity:memory:upper-bound}, we obtain an exponential upper bound on the memory necessary for both players to win a Streett game with costs with respect to a given bound as a corollary of Theorems~\ref{thm:previouswork-streett}(\ref{thm:previouswork-streett:streett}) and~\ref{thm:streett:complexity:completeness}.
Also, similarly to Corollary~\ref{cor:parity:memory:upper-bound}, we are able to remove the overflow counter from our memory structure for Player~$0$ by letting her play according to the largest value of this counter for which she still has a winning strategy.
This yields an improved upper bound on her required memory.
Moreover, we obtain matching lower bounds for both players as a corollary of Theorems~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0} and~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p1}, as every finitary parity game with costs with~$d$ colors can be turned into a finitary Streett game of the same size with~$d$ Streett pairs.
\begin{cor}
\label{cor:streett:memory:upper-bound}
Let~$\mathcal{G}$ be a Streett game with costs with~$n$ vertices and~$d$ Streett pairs.
Moreover, let~$b \in \mathbb{N}$ be some bound.
\begin{enumerate}[beginpenalty=10000]
\item If Player~$0$ has a strategy~$\sigma$ in~$\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma) \leq b$, then she also has a strategy~$\sigma'$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma') \leq b$ and~$\card{\sigma'} = (d+1)! \cdot (b + 2)^d$.
\item If Player~$1$ has a strategy~$\tau$ in~$\mathcal{G}$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\tau) \geq b$, then he also has a strategy~$\tau'$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\tau') \geq b$ and~$\card{\tau'} = n(b + 2)^d$.
\end{enumerate}
These bounds are asymptotically tight already for finitary Streett conditions.
\end{cor}
\section{Tradeoffs Between Memory and Cost}\label{sec:tradeoffs}
In the previous section, we have shown that an optimal strategy for either player in a parity game with costs requires exponential memory in general.
In contrast, winning strategies of minimal size for Player~$0$ in parity games with costs are known to be positional~\cite{FZ14}, while winning strategies for Player~$1$ require infinite memory already in the case of finitary parity games in order to violate every bound infinitely often.
Here we show that, in general, there exists a gradual tradeoff between the size and the cost of a strategy for both players.
For Player~$0$, this means that she can choose to lower the guaranteed bound~$b$ by using a larger winning strategy.
Dually, Player~$1$ can reduce the amount of memory he has to use by not violating every bound, but only a fixed bound~$b$.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:tradeoffs:p0}
Fix some $d \geq 1$ and let the game $\mathcal{G}_d$ be as defined in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0}. For every $j$ with~$1 \leq j \leq d$ there exists a strategy $\sigma_j$ for Player~$0$ in $\mathcal{G}_d$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $d^2 + 3d - 1 = \mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_1) > \mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_2) > \cdots > \mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_d) = d^2 + 2d$, and
\item $1 = \size{\sigma_1} < \size{\sigma_2} < \cdots < \size{\sigma_d} = 2^{d-1}$.
\end{itemize}
Also, for every strategy $\sigma'$ for Player~$0$ in $\mathcal{G}_d$ with $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma') \leq \mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_j)$ we have $\card{\sigma'} \geq \card{\sigma_j}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Recall that we defined the set of strictly increasing odd sequences $\mathit{IncSeq}_d$ in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0} and showed that a memory structure using $\mathit{IncSeq}_d$ as memory states implements an optimal strategy with cost $d^2 + 2d$.
Intuitively, such a strategy stores up to $d-1$ requests made by Player~$1$ in his part of each round, as the final element of each increasing sequence is fixed to be~$2d-1$.
The idea behind the construction of the strategies~$\sigma_j$ is to restrict the memory of Player~$0$ such that she can only store up to $j-1$ requests.
In the extremal cases of $j=1$ and $j=d$ this implements a positional strategy and the strategy from the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0}, respectively.
We implement $\sigma_j$ by again using strictly increasing odd sequences, where we restrict the maximal number of entries that differ from the maximal value of~$2d-1$.
Hence, in strategy $\sigma_j$, Player~$0$ stores at most $j-1$ requests.
To this end, we define the length-restricted set of strictly increasing odd sequences
\[ \mathit{IncSeq}_d^j = \mathit{IncSeq}_d \cap \set{s = (c_1,\dots,c_{j-1},2d-1,\dots,2d-1) \mid s \in \mathbb{N}^d } \]
and pick $M_d^j = \mathit{IncSeq}_d^j$.
Note that $M_d^d = M_d$ as defined in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0} and that~$M_d^1$ is a singleton set.
Clearly, the second claim of the theorem holds true, since $\mathit{IncSeq}^{j-1}_d \subsetneq \mathit{IncSeq}^j_d$ for each $d \geq 1$ and each~$j$ with~$1 \leq j \leq d$.
The initial memory state is $(1,3,\dots,2j-3,2d-1,\dots,2d-1)$, the update function only stores the first~$j$ relevant requests, and the next-move function~$\mathrm{Nxt}_j$ for Player~$0$ is the same as that from the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0} in order to obtain the memory structure $\mathcal{M}_j$ implementing $\sigma_j$ via~$\mathrm{Nxt}_j$.
It remains to show that each strategy $\sigma_j$ realizes a cost of $d^2 + 3d - j$ and that it is minimal for its respective cost.
To this end, we fix some $j$ with $1 \leq j \leq d$ for the remainder of this proof.
First, we show that Player~$1$ can enforce a cost of $d^2 + 3d - j$ if Player~$0$ plays consistently with $\sigma_j$.
Intuitively, Player~$1$ fills the memory of Player~$0$ as quickly as possible, and requests the minimal color that has not yet been requested afterwards.
Thus, he maximizes the gap between the smallest unstored request and the \myquot{default} answer of~$2d$.
More precisely, in each turn Player~$1$ requests the colors $1,3,\dots,2j-3,2j-1,2j-1,\dots,2j-1$.
Playing consistently with~$\sigma_j$, Player~$0$ answers these requests with $2, 4, \dots, 2j-2, 2d, 2d, \dots, 2d$.
Hence, the cost of the resulting play is that incurred by answering a request for $2j-1$ in the $j$-th gadget of Player~$1$ with~$2d$ in the $j$-th gadget of Player~$0$.
As argued in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0}, the cost incurred by such a request-response-pair amounts to
\[\left[d - j + 2\right] + \left[(d-1)(d+2)\right] + d = d^2 + 3d - j.\]
As the game restarts after Player~$0$'s turn, Player~$1$ can enforce this cost infinitely often.
Hence, $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_j) \geq d^2 + 3d - j$.
This sequence of requests is indeed optimal for Player~$1$, i.e., he cannot enforce a higher cost.
Assume that Player~$1$ does not pose requests as specified above, but poses the requests $c_1, \dots, c_d$.
Then either there exist some $k$ and $k'$ with $k < k' \leq j$, such that $c_k \geq c_{k'}$, or there exists a $k \leq j$ with $2j-1 < c_k \leq 2d-1$.
In the former case, let~$k'$ be minimal such that such a~$k$ exists.
Player~$0$ answers the first~$k' - 1$ requests optimally before answering all remaining requests with costs at most $(d-1)(d+2)$, as she ignores the request for $c_{k'}$.
In the latter case, Player~$0$ again answers all requests up to the first request as described above optimally.
Afterwards, she answers all succeeding requests with cost at most $d^2 + 2d + (2d - 1 - c_k) / 2 \leq d^2 + 3d - j$.
Hence, there exists no play $\rho$ consistent with $\sigma_j$ and $\mathrm{Cst}(\rho) > d^2 + 3d - j$.
To conclude the proof, we observe that there exists no strategy $\sigma'$ with $\card{\sigma'} < \card{\sigma_j}$ and $\mathrm{Cst}(\sigma') \leq \mathrm{Cst}(\sigma_j)$.
The argument is nearly identical to the argument of minimality of the strategy constructed in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p0} and can in fact be obtained by replacing all occurrences of $2^{d-1}$ and $d^2+2d$ by $\card{\sigma_j}$ and $d^2 + 3d - j$, respectively.
Hence, the strategies~$\sigma_j$ are minimal for their respective cost.
\end{proof}
The similar result for Player~$1$ has a much simpler proof.
Again, it suffices to reuse the games from the lower bound.
\begin{thm}
For each~$d \geq 1$ there exists a finitary parity game~$\mathcal{G}_d$ with~$\card{\mathcal{G}_d} \in \bigo(d^2)$, such that for every~$j$ with $1 \leq j \leq d$, there exists a strategy~$\tau_j$ for Player~$1$ in~$\mathcal{G}_d$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $7 = \mathrm{Cst}(\tau_1) < \mathrm{Cst}(\tau_2) < \cdots < \mathrm{Cst}(\tau_d) = 5(d-1)+7$, and
\item $2 = \card{\tau_1} < \card{\tau_2} < \cdots < \card{\tau_d} = 2^d$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, for every strategy~$\tau'$ with~$\mathrm{Cst}(\tau') \geq \mathrm{Cst}(\tau_j)$, we have~$\card{\tau'} \geq \card{\tau_j}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
For each~$j$ with~$1 \leq j \leq d$, let~$\mathcal{G}'_j$ be the game with~$2j$ odd colors defined in Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p1}.
We construct~$\mathcal{G}_d$ such that it contains a dedicated initial vertex~$v_I$ of color~$0$, from which Player~$1$ may choose to move to the initial vertex of any of the~$\mathcal{G}'_j$.
Once the play~$\rho$ has moved into some~$\mathcal{G}'_j$, it never leaves that part of the arena, i.e., the suffix starting at the second position of~$\rho$ is a play of~$\mathcal{G}'_j$.
For each~$j$, the strategy~$\tau_j$ defined in Theorem~\ref{thm:memory-upper-p1}, augmented by a single move from~$v_I$ to the sub-game~$\mathcal{G}'_j$, satisfies the properties above.
Moreover, as the sub-games~$\mathcal{G}'_j$ are isolated from each other, each strategy~$\tau'$ for Player~$1$ in~$\mathcal{G}_d$ can be trivially transformed into a strategy for him in the subgame~$\mathcal{G}'_j$ that~$\tau'$ chooses at the beginning of~$\mathcal{G}_d$.
Hence, every strategy~$\tau_j$ is of minimal size for the cost that it realizes.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Recently there has been some interest in the problem of assigning probabilities to the outputs of computations which are too expensive to run. For example, \citet{Hennig:2015:Probabilistic} call for the development of probabilistic numerical methods that are uncertain about their calculations; \citet{Hay:2011} study metareasoning procedures for controlling Monte Carlo simulations by estimating which simulations are likely to be effective; and \citet{Rainforth:2015} give methods for estimating probabilistic program variables via Bayesian optimization.
Formal logic is a tool that is particularly well-suited for making claims about computations, such as claims of the form ``this computation will halt and produce a number larger than~7" or ``this computation will use less memory than that computation" or ``this operating system's scheduler will not deadlock" \citep{Owre:1992,Klein:2009}.
When developing methods for handling uncertainty about the results of computations, then, it is natural to approach the problem from the angle of combining logic with probability theory, a topic which has received a lot of attention; see~\citet{Russell:2015b}. Since we are using logic to reason about mathematical facts, as opposed to reasoning about an uncertain external world, the approach taken by \citet{Gaifman:1964}, \citet{Demski:2012a}, \citet{Hutter:2013:unify}, and others is particularly relevant. This approach involves assigning probabilities to logical sentences in a formal theory powerful enough to represent claims about computations, such as Peano Arithmetic (\PA) or Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (\ensuremath{\mathsf{ZFC}}\xspace).
It is standard to study distributions $P$ of this form which are \emph{coherent}, in that they obey some simple logical constraints such as $P(\bot)=0$ and $P(\phi) + P(\lnot \phi) = 1$. Coherence can be thought of as a generalization of the notion of ``consistency" to probability distributions over sentences in logic. However, coherent distributions are uncomputable---they assign probability~1 to all theorems, and thus, they must assign probability~1 to the statement ``computation $f$ outputs $x$" whenever ${f()=x}$. For this reason, coherent probability distributions cannot represent a state of uncertainty about the outputs of computations. Rather, they represent a \emph{final} state of knowledge about logical facts that a reasoner might obtain if they could think forever \citep{Cozic:2006,Halpern:2011a}.
\citet{Demski:2012a} has proposed instead investigating algorithms that \emph{computably approximate} a coherent probability distribution, that is, algorithms that output a series of probabilities for each sentence such that those probabilities converge in the limit, and such that the distribution the approximation converges to is coherent. Unfortunately, coherence in the limit is too weak for our purposes: It does not impose constraints on any individual finite approximation of the coherent distribution. For example, an approximation to a coherent distribution might assign arbitrary probabilities to some theorem $\phi$ right up until it proves it, then assigns probability~1 thereafter. If $\phi$ was a statement about a computation, this means the approximation might only start assigning reasonable probabilities to $\phi$ after actually running the computation, which defeats the purpose. To get approximations of coherent distributions that assign reasonable probabilities to $\phi$ \emph{before} running the computation, we require some notion like coherence that we can impose on \emph{approximations} to the final distribution.
In this paper, we propose one such property, \emph{inductive coherence}, argue that it is a desirable generalization of coherence to approximations of coherent distributions, and show that a an inductively coherent approximation scheme exists. Roughly speaking, inductive coherence demands that, for any pattern in what is provable that can be identified by a Turing machine in polynomial time, the approximation must recognize and exploit that pattern ``not much later" than that Turing machine. We define this more formally in \Sec{icoherence}. In \Sec{prior} we propose a modification of Demski's algorithm~\shortcite{Demski:2012a} and show that it is inductively coherent. We conclude with a discussion of open problems and future work.
\paragraph{Other Related Work}
The study of assigning probabilities to sentences in mathematical logic dates back to \citet{Los:1955,Gaifman:1964}; see \citet{Hailperin:1984} for a more thorough history. Since then, the idea has been extended to, e.g., infinitary logic \citep{Scott:1966}, databases with uncertain data \citep{Suciu:2011}, and higher-order logic \citep{Hutter:2013:unify}. Computing probability assignments for logical statements can be seen as an extension of these approaches to the case where the reasoner's beliefs may be incoherent; see also the work of \citet{Muino:2011,Potyka:2015}, who study methods for measuring and handling inconsistency in knowledge bases.
Another method for unifying logic with probability is inductive logic programming \citep{Muggleton:1994,Nienhuys:1997}. For example, \citet{DeRaedt:2008} have described techniques for learning from proofs and program traces, and \citet{Richardson:2006} propose combining first-order logic and probabilistic graphical models using a method known as ``Markov logic networks." For a review of recent work, refer to \citet{Russell:2015b}.
Methods for reasoning probabilistically about the outputs of computations are a type learning scheme for probabilistic logic programs. For more on this subject, refer to \citet{Ng:1992,Muggleton:1996,Sato:1997,Poole:1997,Ngo:1997,Koller:1997,Lukasiewicz:1998,Kersting:2000}.
\section{Inductive Coherence} \label{sec:icoherence}
In this paper we study probability distributions over sentences of first-order logic, with the goal of describing computable distributions that assign reasonable probabilities to claims about computations that are too expensive to be run. (For example, imagine a reasoner that wants to know whether a particular $O(n^2)$ computation will outperform a particular $O(n \log n)$ computation on a particular dataset, without taking the time to run both computations.) We fix a theory $\T$ that is powerful enough to make claims about computations, such as~\PA. We let $\Lang$ denote the set of sentences is the language of $\T$.
``Coherence" can be seen as the natural generalization of consistency to probability distributions. It demands that theorems be certain, and the probabilities of mutually exclusive sentences add:
\begin{definition}[Coherence]
A probability distribution over sentences in $\Lang$ is a function $P : \mathcal{L}\to[0,1]$ from sentences to probabilities. It is called \emph{coherent} with respect to the $\Lang$-theory~$\T$ if the following three conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\phi$ is a theorem of $\T$, $P(\phi)=1$.
\item If $\neg \left( \phi\wedge\psi \right)$ is a theorem of $\T$, $P(\phi \vee \psi)=P(\phi)+P(\psi)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\noindent It is not hard to see that coherence ensures $P$ obeys other obvious logical constraints, such as $P(\phi) = 1 - P(\lnot \phi)$ and ${P(\phi \to \psi)=1} \implies {P(\psi) \ge P(\phi)}$. We say that coherence is a generalization of consistency because $P$ agrees with $\T$ on all theorems and contradictions, but can assign probabilities to undecidable sentences so long as those probabilities obey logical constraints. \citet{Gaifman:1964} has shown that any coherent $P$ is isomorphic to a measure $\mu$ on complete consistent extensions of $\T$---in other words, a coherent $P$ assigns probability to undecidable sentences in a fashion that corresponds to choosing some weighted mixture of all possible consistent ways to assign truth values to sentences.
Coherence is a \emph{very} strong constraint. For example, if $\T$ is \PA, then $P$ must assign probability~1 to all true statements about the behavior of computations. One way to think of a coherent distribution is that it represents the state of knowledge a reasoner could achieve after thinking \emph{forever}, after proving everything provable, refuting everything refutable, and assigning consistent probabilities to everything undecidable. It seems reasonable to ask that the \emph{limit} of a good reasoner's beliefs about logical statements should be coherent, but no computable distribution can achieve coherence. This motivates the study of computable \emph{approximation schemes} to coherent distributions, that is, algorithms which output a sequence of probabilities for each sentence such that the sequences converge, and the resulting probability assignments are coherent.
\begin{definition}[Approximation Scheme]
An \emph{approximation scheme} is a Turing machine $M$ which takes as input a natural number $n$ and an encoding of a sentence $\phi$, and outputs a rational number $M_n(\phi)\in\mathbb{Q}\cap[0,1]$.
\end{definition}
\noindent We can think of $M$ as a machine that runs for longer and longer as $n$ gets larger, producing better and better estimates of the probability of $\phi$ each iteration. We concern ourselves with approximation schemes that converge to a coherent distribution in the limit.
\begin{definition}[Approximation]
An approximation scheme $M$ \emph{approximates} $P:\Lang\rightarrow[0,1]$ if $$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} M_n(\phi)=P(\phi)$$
for all $\phi$. If there exists an~$M$ which approximates $P$, then we say that $P$ is ``approximable."
\end{definition}
Coherence in the limit does not impose strong constraints on an approximation scheme. Given a sentence $\phi$ describing a claim about a computation, $M$ could simply assign it arbitrary probabilities right up until it can run the computation, and then assign it probability~1 or~0 thereafter. $M$ could then be coherent in the limit, but it would never assign reasonable non-extreme probabilities to claims about computations too expensive to run. To get an $M$ that accurately estimates the results of computations before it can run them, we need to impose stronger constraints on the approximations.
Clearly, we cannot demand that the approximate distributions $M_n$ be completely coherent. We could try weakening coherence by demanding that $M_n$ assign probability~1 to all theorems \emph{that have a proof of length $n$ or less}, and indeed, this is the approach taken by \citet{Demski:2012a}. However, in our setting, this runs into the same problem as above: $M$ could still assign arbitrary probabilities to a decidable $\phi$ right up until it proves $\phi$ one way or the other, and might not have anything reasonable to say about the behavior of computations before running them. We require some other weakening of coherence that ensures $M$ places reasonable probabilities on $\phi$ \emph{before} it can run the computation.
Intuitively, we want $M$ to start noticing \emph{patterns} in computations before it's able to actually run them. For example, consider some computation $f$ that takes an input and either outputs 1, outputs 0, or loops. Let $\phi_n$ be the claim $f(n)=0$ and $\psi_n$ be the claim $f(n)=1$. We want $M$ to start assigning probabilities to $\phi_n$ and $\psi_n$ that sum to at most~1, and we want it to start doing so before it can simply compute $f(n)$.
More generally, we want $M$ to recognize patterns such as ``these claims are mutually exclusive" and ``these claims are equivalent." We formalize this idea as follows. Take any method for quickly (in polynomial time) identifying patterns of this form. A good approximation scheme should eventually be able to recognize and exploit that pattern, and ``not much slower" than the polynomial time method, even if the size of the shortest proof that the pattern holds grows superexponentially.
\begin{definition}[Quickly Computable]
A sequence of sentences $\{\phi_n\}$ is called \emph{quickly computable} if there exists a Turing machine that outputs all the sentences in the sequence in order, and outputs $\phi_n$ by a time polynomial in $n$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}[Inductive Coherence] \label{def:ic}
An approximation scheme $M$ is called \emph{inductively coherent} with respect to \T if it satisfies the following three conditions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} M_n(\bot)=0$
\item $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} M_n(\phi_n)$ converges whenever $\{\phi_n\}$ is quickly computable and $\phi_n\rightarrow \phi_{n+1}$ is provable in \T for all $n$.
\item $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} M_n(\phi_n)+M_n(\psi_n)+M_n(\chi_n)=1$ whenever $\{\phi_n\}$, $\{\psi_n\}$, and $\{\chi_n\}$ are quickly computable, and for all $n$, it is provable in \T that $\{\phi_n,\psi_n,\chi_n\}$ is a partition of truth (meaning exactly one of them is true).
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\noindent To gain an intuition for how \Def{ic} guarantees that an inductively coherent $M$ recognizes patterns in quickly computable sequences ``not much slower" than the Turing machine $q$ that quickly computes them, imagine that $q(n)$ outputs pairs $(\phi_n, \psi_n)$ in time polynomial in $n$ such that each $\phi_n$ is provably equivalent to $\psi_n$, but the shortest proof of equivalence grows superexponentially fast in $n$. We want $M$ to eventually, on some iteration $n$ and thereafter, ``recognize the pattern" and start assigning roughly the same probabilities to $\phi_n$ and $\psi_n$. Note that this is a claim about the iteration $n$ by which $M$ must start recognizing the pattern identified by $q$, not a claim about the runtime of $M_n(\phi)$ on an individual $\phi$, which may be exponential or worse.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:equiv}
If $M$ is inductively coherent, and $\{ \phi_n \}$ and $\{ \psi_n \}$ are quickly computable, and $\phi_n$ is provably equivalent to $\psi_n$ for all $n$, then $$\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} M_n(\phi_n) - M_n(\psi_n) = 0.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} If $\{\phi_n\}$ is quickly computable then so is $\{\lnot \phi_n\}$. The constant sequence $\{\bot\}$ is quickly computable. Apply property $3$ to the sequences $\{\phi_n\}$, $\{\lnot \phi_n\}$, and $\{\bot\}$, and then to $\{\psi_n\}$, $\{\lnot \phi_n\}$, $\{\bot\}$. Subtracting the results, we have $$\lim_{n\to\infty} M_n(\phi_n) + M_n(\lnot \phi_n) - M_n(\psi_n) - M_n(\lnot \phi_n) = 0,$$ because $\lim_{n\to\infty} M_n(\bot)=0$.
\end{proof}
Provable equivalence is only one type of pattern that an inductively coherent $M$ exploits before it can find the associated proofs. As a second example, if there is any quickly computable method for identifying sentences that are provable (even if the proofs are very long), then $M$ must recognize those patterns as well.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:converge}
If $M$ is inductively coherent, for any quickly computable sequence $\{ \phi_n \}$ of theorems of $\T$ we have $$\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} M_n(\phi_n) = 1.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Apply property 3 to the sequences $\{ \phi_n \}$, $\{ \bot \}$, $\{ \bot \}$. Since each $\phi_n$ is provable, we have partitions of truth as desired, and $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} M_n(\bot)=0$.
\end{proof}
\noindent This implies that the criterion of inductive coherence captures some of what it means to reason well about computations that are too expensive to run. Recall that statements making true claims about the output of a computation are theorems, because the statement can be proven by providing an execution trace of the computation. \Thm{converge} implies that if there is a polynomial-time method for generating true statements about computations, then after some number of iterations $n$, $M_n$ incorporates that pattern into its probability assignments.
Property 1 of \Def{ic} is fairly trivial. Property 2 implies that $M_n(\phi_n)$ converges if $\{\phi_n\}$ is quickly computable and all the $\phi_n$ are provably equivalent; the more general form of Property 2 is used in \Thm{exclusive}. Property 3 is the meat of inductive coherence; it ensures $M$ recognizes exclusivity relationships between provable sentences. While \Def{ic} only mentions partitions of truth of size 3, it is strong enough to guarantee $M$ recognizes arbitrarily large partitions of truth.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:converge2}
If $M$ is inductively coherent, for any list of $k$ quickly computable sequences of sentences, $\{ \phi^1_n \}, \ldots \{ \phi^k_n \}$, such that for each $n$, it's provable that $\phi^i_n$ is true for exactly one $i$, we have that $$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \sum_{i=1}^k M_n(\phi^i_n)=1.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The proof works by induction on $k$. For $k=1$, this is Theorem \ref{thm:converge}. For $k=2$, apply property 3 to the sequences $\{ \phi^1_n \}$, $\{ \phi^2_n \}$, $\{ \bot \}$. For $k=3,$ this is exactly property 3.
For $k>3$, consider the list $\{ \phi^1_n \}, \ldots \{ \phi^{k-2}_n \}, \{\phi^{k-1}_n\vee \phi^{k}_n\}$; the list $\{\phi^{k-1}_n\},\{\phi^{k}_n\},\{\neg (\phi^{k-1}_n\vee \phi^{k}_n)\}$; and the list $\{\phi^{k-1}_n\vee \phi^{k}_n\},\{\neg( \phi^{k-1}_n\vee \phi^{k}_n)\}$.
These lists are of length $k-1$, $3$, and $2$ respectively and all satisfy the conditions of this theorem. Apply this theorem to all three lists, add the first two results and subtract the third. This gives $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \sum_{i=1}^k M_n(\phi^i_n)=1+1-1=1.$
\end{proof}
Intuitively, an inductively coherent $M$ is good at identifying any pattern in what is provable that can be expressed using the properties of \Def{ic}. As an example, observe that if $q$ can quickly compute an infinite sequence of provably mutually exclusive sentences, $M$ must eventually start noticing that those sentences are mutually exclusive, not much later than $q$:
\begin{thm} \label{thm:exclusive}
If $M$ is inductively coherent, then for a quickly computable sequence of mutually exclusive sentences, $\{\phi_n \}$, we have $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} M_n(\phi_n) = 0$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Define $\psi_n$ to be the disjunction of all $\phi_{i \leq n}$. Applying property 2 to $\{ \psi_n \}$, we have that $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} M_n(\psi_n)$ converges to some $p$. Applying property 3 to the sequences $\{ \psi_n \}$, $\{ \neg \psi_n \}$, and $\{ \bot \}$, we have that $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} M_n(\lnot \psi_n)$ converges to $1-p$. Therefore, applying property 3 to $\{ \psi_{n-1} \}$, $\{ \phi_n \}$, and $\{ \neg \psi_n \}$ shows that $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} M_n(\phi_n) = 0$ as desired. (Note that $\{ \psi_{n} \}$, $\{ \neg \psi_n \}$, and $\{ \psi_{n-1} \}$ are all quickly computable if $\{ \phi_n \}$ is.)
\end{proof}
\noindent Does an inductively coherent $M$ quickly identify \emph{all} quickly identifiable patterns in claims about computations? Probably not; limitations are discussed in \Sec{discussion}. However, we can show that $M$ will \emph{eventually} identify all patterns in which sentences are provable, by showing that an inductively coherent $M$ is coherent in the limit. This may be surprising at first glance, given that \Def{ic} only mentions convergence for sequences that can be computed in polynomial time. The trick is that any constant sequence $\phi_n \coloneqq \phi$ is ``quickly computable," by the Turing machine that ignores $n$ and always outputs $\phi$.
\begin{thm}
If $M$ is inductively coherent, then $$P(\phi):=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} M_n(\phi)$$ is well-defined, approximable, and coherent.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
That $P(\phi)$ is well-defined follows from property 2 and the fact that the constant sequence $\{ \phi \}$ is quickly computable for any $\phi$. Approximability then follows trivially from the definition of $P(\phi)$. $P(\phi)$ is in $[0,1]$ because $M_n(\phi)$ is in $[0,1]$, and the limit of any sequence in $[0,1]$ is in $[0,1]$. It remains to show that $P$ is coherent.
The first property of coherence follows from properties 1 and 3 with the partition $\{ \phi, \bot, \bot \}$. The second follows with the partition $\{\phi, \psi, \neg \phi \wedge \neg \psi \}$.
\end{proof}
Thus we see that we are justified in saying that an inductively coherent $M$ must both quickly identify some patterns in what is provable, and eventually identify all patterns. This implies an inductively coherent $M$ would assign reasonable probabilities to sentences describing the behavior of computations, even before the computation can be run, because statements about computations are decidable. If there is \emph{any} polynomial-time method for accurately noticing relationships between computations, $M$ will eventually recognize it and distribute its probability mass accordingly.
One way to look at inductive coherence is this: Coherence in the limit requires that each \emph{individual sentence} is eventually assigned a reasonable probability, possibly only after that sentence is decided. Inductive coherence requires that there is some uniform bound past which \emph{all} theorems that can be quickly identified as theorems start to be assigned high probability, as quickly as they can be identified.
\section{An Inductively Coherent Approximation Scheme} \label{sec:prior}
We now turn our attention to providing an inductively coherent approximation scheme $M^*$ which approximates a coherent distribution $P^*$. We do this by defining a variant of the distribution and approximation scheme defined by \citet{Demski:2012a}, and showing that our variant is inductively coherent.
We begin by defining an uncomputable process (which we later show to be approximable) that builds a random complete, consistent extension \TotalT of \T. We define $P^*(\phi)$ to be the probability that $\phi \in \TotalT$ if \TotalT is sampled according to this process. To build \TotalT, we sample random Turing machines according to a simplicity prior, and interpret their outputs as claims about which sentences are true. If the machine makes claims that are consistent with \TotalT so far, we add those claims to \TotalT and repeat. Otherwise we discard that machine and repeat. Continuing indefinitely, \TotalT will (with probability~1) be a complete consistent extension of \T in the limit.
To formalize this idea, fix a universal Turing machine $U$ with an advance-only output tape, with its input tape initialized to a random infinite bitstring~$b$. We can interpret an infinite bitstring as a self-delimiting encoding of a Turing machine followed by a specification of the initial state of that machine's tape. Fix an enumeration of sentences in the language $\Lang$, and interpret the output of $U$ on input tape~$b$ as a sequence of sentences. Write $U(b)$ for the set of sentences output by $U$ on the input~$b$, and write $U_t(b)$ for the finite set of sentences output during the first~$t$ steps of operation. For a finite bitstring $x$, write $U(x)=S$ if $U(b)=S$ for all~$b$ which have~$x$ as a prefix, and similarly for $U_t(x)$. Note that if the length of~$x$ is at least~$t$, then $U_t(x)$ is always well-defined, because $U$ cannot read more than~$t$ input bits in~$t$ steps. The (uncomputable) process converging on \TotalT is then defined by \Alg{Complete}.
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
\KwIn{$b_1$, $b_2$, $\ldots$\,, an infinite list of infinite bitstrings.}
\KwData{$\TotalT \leftarrow T$, the extension of \T under construction.}
\For{$b$ in $b_1$, $b_2$, $\ldots$}{
\If{$\TotalT \cup U(b)$ is consistent}{
$\TotalT \leftarrow \TotalT \cup U(b)$\;
}
}
\caption{A method for constructing a complete, consistent extension of $T$.\label{alg:Complete}}
\end{algorithm}
We define $P^*(\phi)$ to be the probability that $\phi \in \TotalT$ when the $b_i$ are chosen uniformly at random (e.g., by fair coin tosses; recall that a single stream of coin tosses can encode an infinite sequence of infinite bitstrings).
$P^*$ has the desirable property that, for every noncontradictory sentence $\phi$, $P^*(\phi)$ is lower-bounded by the complexity of the Turing machine that outputs only $\phi$. To see this, let $w_\phi$ be the bitstring encoding that machine with respect to $U$; the chance that $b_1$ starts with $w_\phi$ is at least $2^{-|w_\phi|}$.
To see that $P^*(\phi)$ is coherent, note that with probability~1 $\TotalT$ is a complete consistent extension of $\T$, so $P^*$ is isomorphic to a distribution~$\mu$ over complete consistent extensions of $\T$, which means it is coherent~\citep{Gaifman:1964}. $P^*$ is uncomputable, but can be approximated by \Alg{mstar}.
\begin{algorithm}
\SetKwData{Theory}{$\Phi$}
\BlankLine
\Fn{\ClaimsN{$b_1$, $\ldots$\,, $b_{2^n}$}}{
$\Theory \leftarrow \text{the first $n$ axioms of $\T$}$\;
\For{$i$ in $0 \ldots 2^n$}{
$S \leftarrow \text{$U_{2^n}(b_i)$ interpreted as a list of sentences}$\;
\If{\ConN{$\Theory \cup S$}}{
$\Theory \leftarrow \Theory \cup S$\;
}
}
\For{$\phi$ in \Theory}{\Output{$\phi$}}
}
\BlankLine
\Fn{\ConN{\Theory}}{
\If{a proof of length $\le 2^n$ proves $\Theory$ inconsistent}{\KwRet{false}}
\For{$S \subset \Theory$}{
\For{$\phi$ of length $\le 2^n$ such that $S \cap \{\phi, \lnot \phi\}$ is empty}{
\If{$\lnot$\ConN{$S \cup \{\phi\}$} and $\lnot$\ConN{$S \cup \{\lnot \phi\}$}}{
\KwRet{false}
}
}
}
\KwRet{true}
}
\BlankLine
\Fn{$M^*_n(\phi)\,$}{
\KwRet{the probability \ClaimsN{$b_1$, $\ldots$\,, $b_{2^n}$} outputs $\phi$ when the $b_i$ are uniform random bitstrings of length $2^n$.\DontPrintSemicolon\;}
}
\caption{Computable approximation scheme for $P^*$ \label{alg:mstar}}
\end{algorithm}
\noindent Of note is the function \ConN{}, which checks whether a set of sentences $\Phi$ is ``consistent enough" for time $n$. It checks not only whether $\Phi$ can be proven inconsistent with a proof of length $2^n$ or less, but also whether there is a subset $S\subset\Phi$ and sentence $\phi$ such that both $\Phi\cup\{\phi\}$ and $\Phi\cup\{\neg\phi\}$ can be proven inconsistent in length $2^n$. (This implies that $\Phi$ is inconsistent, but the proof may be longer than length $2^n$ unless one of $\phi$ or $\lnot \phi$ is added.) This gives \ConN{} a convenient closure property.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:main}
$M^*$ is an inductively coherent approximation scheme which approximates $P^*$.
\end{thm}
\noindent We show that $M^*$ recognizes quickly computable theorems, which is suggestive. The rest of the proof is in \App{ic}.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:main}
If $\{\phi_n\}$ is a quickly computable sequence of theorems, then $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} M^*_n(\phi_n)=1.$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Write $\Phi_n$ for a random run of $\ClaimsN{$b_1$ \ldots $b_{2^n}$}$ when the $b_i$ are chosen uniformly at random. We want to show that, for $n$ large enough, $\PP(\phi_n \in \Phi_n) > 1 - \varepsilon.$ Since $\{\phi_n\}$ is quickly computable, there exists a finite bitstring $w_\phi$ such that $U(w_{\phi})$ outputs the sentences $\{\phi_n\}$ in order, and for all sufficiently large $n$, $\phi_n\inU_{2^n}(w_{\phi})$.
There exists a $N_0$ such that with probability at least $1-\varepsilon/2$, at least one of $b_1 \ldots b_{2^{N_0}}$ starts with $w_\phi$, and $\phi_n\inU_{2^n}(w_{\phi})$ for all $n\geq N_0$. There also exists a $N_1$ such that with probability $1-\varepsilon/2$, for every subset $S$ of $\{1,\ldots 2^{N_1}\},$ either $\T\cup\bigcup_{i\in S}U(b_i)$ is consistent or $\lnot \ConN[N_1]{$\T\cup\bigcup_{i\in S}U_{2^{N_1}}(b_i)$};$ simply choose $N_1$ large enough that any inconsistencies can be uncovered with sentences output by time $2^{N_1}$ and proofs of length less than $2^{N_1}$. (This is possible because only finitely many proofs of inconsistency are needed.)
Choose $N_1 \ge N_0$. For all $n\geq N_1$, with probability at least $1-\varepsilon/2$, one of the sampled machines (namely $w_\phi$) outputs $\phi_i$ for all $i\leq n$. Then, with probability at least $1-\varepsilon/2$, this implies that this machine will end up contributing to $\Phi_n$ because any machine before $w_\phi$ inconsistent with $w_\phi$ (which outputs only theorems) has been discarded. Therefore, with probability at least $1-\varepsilon$, ${\phi_n\in \Phi_n}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:discussion}
We have proposed \emph{inductive coherence} as a strengthening of coherence in the limit. Inductive coherence requires that computable distributions assign probabilities to claims about computations that are reasonable before they're able to run these computations. Specifically, if there is any polynomial-time method for identifying patterns in what is provable, an inductively coherent $M$ must eventually recognize and exploit that pattern, eventually assigning probabilities that are coherent with respect to that pattern. This implies that inductive coherence captures some of what we mean when we ask for a probability distribution that assigns reasonable probabilities to claims about computations.
However, an inductively coherent $M$ doesn't necessarily recognize all patterns in the behavior of computations. For example, consider: Is the $10^{100}$'th decimal digit of $\pi$ a $7$? It seems that in lieu of additional knowledge and the ability to compute the digit, a reasonable estimator should assign this event 10\% probability. Reasonable predictors of computations should be able to recognize similar patterns, such as ``this computation returns an error one time in ten," and assign probabilities accordingly.
More formally, imagine we have some sequence of deterministic computations that output a one on $\sfrac{1}{10}$ of their inputs. Imagine further that there is no polynomial-time algorithm that has better average squared error, when predicting this sequence, than the algorithm ``\Output{$\sfrac{1}{10}$}." It seems reasonable to ask that a predictor of computations start assigning probability $\sfrac{1}{10}$ to the next element in the sequence eventually, until it has enough resources to compute the actual answer. However, we have no reason to expect that an inductively coherent $M$ would have this property. \citet{Garrabrant:2015:alu} study computable distributions that can do this; it is not yet clear how to reconcile our framework with theirs.
This demonstrates that further constraints on approximation schemes are likely necessary before we can define computable distributions that are able to recognize all the patterns in the behavior of computations that humans can easily recognize. Inductive coherence gives us approximate distributions that have some desirable properties in their predictions about computations, but more work is needed before we can say we understand how to assign reasonable uncertainty to claims about computations in general.
|
\section*{Nomenclature}
{\noindent Index Sets and Indices}
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal N$: the set of buses, indexed by $i,j$
\item $\mathcal G$: the set of generators, indexed by $g$, $G=|\mathcal G|$
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal G_i$: the set of generators located at bus $i$
\end{itemize}
\item $\mathcal E$: the set of transmission lines, $E=|\mathcal E|$
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal E_{.i}$: the set of lines oriented into bus $i$
\item $\mathcal E_{i.}$: the set of lines oriented out of bus $i$
\item $(i,j)$: the head bus $i$ and tail bus $j$ of line $e$
\end{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{C}$: the set of all $N$-$1$-$1$ contingencies, $C=|\mathcal C|$
\begin{itemize}
\item $c:$ contingency index, $c \in \{1,\ldots,C\}$
\item $\boldsymbol c:$ a binary vector that prescribes a contingency
\end{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{T}$: the set of time periods, indexed by $t$, $T=|\mathcal T|$
\end{itemize}
{\noindent Parameters}
\begin{itemize}
\item $B_e$: susceptance of line $e$
\item $\overline {\boldsymbol f}$: vector of line capacity
\item $d_i^{t}$: demand at bus $i$ in period $t$
\item $\boldsymbol d^{t}$: demand vector in period $t$
\item $\underline{p}_g$, $\overline{p}_g$: capacity lower/upper bounds for generator $g$
\item $\underline r_g(\boldsymbol x):$ vector of ramp-down rates given unit commitment vector $\boldsymbol x$
\item $\overline r_g(\boldsymbol x):$ vector of ramp-up rates given unit commitment vector $\boldsymbol x$
\item $c^s(\boldsymbol x):$ start-up and shut-down cost given unit commitment vector $\boldsymbol x$
\item $c^p(\boldsymbol p):$ production cost given generation level vector $\boldsymbol p$
\item $o_e$: allowable line overload factor during secondary contingency periods, $\geq 1$
\item $\varepsilon$: load shedding threshold, $\varepsilon \in [0,1]$
\end{itemize}
{\noindent Decision Variables}
\begin{itemize}
\item $\boldsymbol x \in \{0,1\}^{G\times T}$: unit commitment vector
\item $\boldsymbol x_g \in \{0,1\}^{T}$: generator $g$ unit commitment vector
\item $\boldsymbol p^t, \boldsymbol f^t,\boldsymbol \theta^t$: vectors of generation levels, power flows, and phase angles, respectively, in time period $t$ under the no-contingency (base) scenario
\item $p_g^t,f_e^t,\theta_i^t$: the generation level of unit $g$, the power flow on transmission line $e$, and the phase angle on bus$i$, respectively, in time period $t$ under the no-contingency (base) scenario
\item $\boldsymbol p^{ct}, \boldsymbol f^{ct},\boldsymbol \theta^{ct}, \boldsymbol q^{ct}$: vectors of generation levels, power flows, phase angles, and loss-of-load, respectively, in time period $t$ under the no-contingency (base) scenario
\item $p_g^{ct},f_e^{ct},\theta_i^{ct},q_i^{ct}$: the generation level of unit $g$, the power flow on transmission line $e$, the phase angle on bus $i$, and the loss-of-load at bus $i$, respectively, in time period $t$ under contingency scenario $c$
\end{itemize}
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{he} North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) develops and enforces standards to ensure the reliability of power systems in North America. The NERC Transmission Planning Standard \cite{NERC2011} defines system performance requirements under both normal and various contingency conditions. Among contingency conditions, the loss of a single system component ($N$-$1$) and the near simultaneous loss of multiple system components ($N$-$k$) are well studied.
However, a contingency criterion considering non-simultaneous failures of two components
has not attracted much attention until recently (see \cite{Chatterjee2010,Fan2012}). This contingency criterion, referred to as $N$-$1$-$1$, refers to the consecutive loss of two components with an intervening time period for operator adjustments. In \cite{Chatterjee2010}, the authors performed an $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency analysis of the Midwest ISO's balancing area. More recently \cite{Fan2012} used interdiction methods to study $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency constrained optimal power flows with fixed unit commitment decisions.
Following~\cite{Fan2012}, we assume that an $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency scenario involves the loss of a generating unit or a transmission line, followed by system adjustments (e.g., generator re-dispatch). Following these adjustments, the system experiences a subsequent loss of an additional generator or line. Thus, there are three distinct time periods in a given $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency occurrence. The {\em Base Case} refers to the time periods in which ``the power system is in normal steady-state operation, with all components in service that are expected to be in service". The first loss of a component is referred to as the {\em Primary Contingency/Loss}, while the second loss is referred to as the {\em Secondary Contingency/Loss}.
In this paper, we study the unit commitment (UC) problem under $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency constraints. Unit commitment involves determination of a minimal-cost ``on-off" schedule of generating units and their respective dispatch levels, subject to physical and operational constraints, in order to satisfy forecasted demand in each time period of the subsequent day. The basic UC problem, discounting contingencies, is well-studied; relevant efforts were reviewed by \cite{Hobbs2001} and more recently by \cite{Padhy2004,Zheng2014}.
The UC problem with contingency constraints has received increasing attention from academics and practitioners since the 2003 northeast blackout in North America. More specifically, $N$-$1$ and $N$-$k$ contingency-constrained UC and related grid design problems have been studied by \cite{Hedman2010,O'Neill2010} and \cite{Street2011,Wang2012,Chen2014,Chen2015}, respectively. References \cite{Hedman2010,O'Neill2010} consider $N-1$ contingency constrained UC, and employ line switching to alleviate congestion and yield a more economical dispatch of generation resources. References \cite{Street2011,Wang2012} use robust optimization to find an optimal dispatch schedule under the worst-case $N$-$k$ contingency scenario. Finally, \cite{Chen2014,Chen2015} introduce a new $N$-$k$-$\boldsymbol \varepsilon$ criterion which dictates that at least $(1-\varepsilon^j)$ fraction of the total system demand must be met following the failures of $j$ system components (for $j \in \{,\ldots,k\}$); several decomposition methods were proposed to solve the resulting large-scale optimization model.
In contrast to the above work, we consider $N$-$1$-$1$ contingencies, as defined in \cite{NERC2011}. During the base (no-contingency) case, and during time periods after the primary loss, all thermal limits must be within applicable ratings and loss-of-load is not permitted as a recourse action. During time periods after the secondary loss, controlled load shedding and overloads of transmission lines are allowed for emergency control per NERC standards \cite{NERC2011}. To solve the UC problem with $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency constraints, we introduce a novel decomposition method combining branch-and-cut and a temporal decomposition based on a separation oracle.
The reminder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:model}, we briefly introduce the baseline UC problem and study the impact of imposing $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency constraints. We then formulate the $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency-constrained UC problem as a large-scale mixed-integer linear program (MILP). In Section \ref{sec:solution}, we describe our novel solution strategy. Numerical experiments on several IEEE test systems are considered in Section \ref{sec:experiments}, where we perform a detailed analysis comparing the impacts of the different contingency criteria on UC solutions. Finally, we conclude in Section \ref{sec:conclusions} with a summary of our results.
\section{Unit Commitment Models}\label{sec:model}
We begin by introducing the baseline unit commitment (BUC) problem. The objective of the BUC problem is to determine a minimal-cost on/off schedule and corresponding dispatch levels for a set of thermal generating units under the no-contingency scenario. Building on the BUC problem, we then introduce constraints to support $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency compliance. We refer to the extended problem as the $N$-$1$-$1$ CCUC problem, or for conciseness simply $N$-$1$-$1$.
\subsection{The Baseline Unit Commitment Problem}
\label{sec:buc}
The BUC problem described below is based on the deterministic UC formulations introduced in \cite{Carrion2006} and \cite{Wu2010}. We extend these formulations to include a DC approximation of power flow on the transmission network. The BUC problem is formulated as follows:
\begin{subequations}\label{buc}
\begin{align}
\min_{\boldsymbol {x,f,p,\theta}} \quad & \boldsymbol c^s(\boldsymbol x) +c^p(\boldsymbol p) \label{mod_uc_obj} \\
\text{s.t.} \quad &\boldsymbol x \in \mathcal X \label{mod_uc_consts}\\
& H \boldsymbol p^t + A \boldsymbol f^t = \boldsymbol d^t , \ \forall t \label{buc_bal}\\
& B_{e}(\theta_{i}^{t}-\theta_{j}^{t})- f_{e}^{t}=0,\ \forall e=(i,j), t \label{buc_kirchoff}\\
&|\boldsymbol f^t| \le \overline {\boldsymbol f},\ \forall t\\
&\underline{p}_g x_g^t\leq p_g^{t}\leq \overline{p}_g x_g^t,\ \forall g, t \\
&\underline{r}_g(\boldsymbol x_g) \le p_g^{t} - p_g^{t-1} \leq \overline{r}_g(\boldsymbol x_g),\ \forall g, t \label{buc_ramp}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The objective \eqref{mod_uc_obj} is to minimize the sum of startup and shutdown cost $\boldsymbol c^s(\boldsymbol x)$ and generation cost $c^p(\boldsymbol p)$. With dispatch levels prescribed by $\boldsymbol p$, $c^p (\boldsymbol p)$ is often approximated by a convex quadratic function for thermal generation units. Constraints \eqref{mod_uc_consts} enforce generator minimum uptime/downtime requirements and prescribe startup and shutdown cost as a function of the units committed. The full description of these constraints is provided in Appendix A. Constraints \eqref{buc_bal}-\eqref{buc_ramp} implement economic dispatch under a DC power flow model. They include (in order): power balance at each bus; power flow on a line; capacity limits for transmission lines; generator dispatch lower and upper bounds; and generator ramping limits across two consecutive time periods. By employing piecewise linearization of the quadratic cost function, the BUC problem \eqref{buc} can be reformulated as a MILP.
{\bf Remark 1.} We do not explicitly impose reserve margins in the BUC as $N$-$1$-$1$ compliancy is a stronger reliability requirement; not only does it ensure sufficient generation reserves for all contingency scenarios but additionally considers the placement of these reserves given constraints on transmission availability and capacity (see also \cite{Hedman2010}).
\subsection{$N$-1-1 Contingency Constrained Operations}
\label{sec:N-1-1}
\subsubsection{Set of all $N$-$1$-$1$ contingencies}
An $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency refers to the loss of two system components in different time periods. We assume losses are possible for any generating unit(s) and/or transmission line(s). Considering all pairs of time periods for primary and secondary losses, and the possible loss of any generating unit and / or transmission line, the set $\mathcal C$ of all $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency scenarios is defined as follows:
\begin{subequations}\label{setD}
\begin{align}
\hskip -0.3cm \mathcal{C} = \Bigg \{ & \boldsymbol c \in \{0,1\}^{(G+E)\times T} \\
&\sum_{g \in \mathcal G} c_g^t + \sum_{e \in \mathcal E} c_e^t \le 1, \forall t \in \mathcal T \label{cons_at_most_1}\\
&\sum_{t \in \mathcal T} c_g^t \le 1,\quad \forall g \in \mathcal G \label{cons_g1}\\
&\sum_{t \in \mathcal T} c_e^t \le 1,\quad \forall e \in \mathcal E \label{cons_e1}\\
&\sum_{t \in \mathcal T}\sum_{g \in \mathcal G} c_g^t + \sum_{t \in \mathcal T}\sum_{e \in \mathcal E} c_e^t = 2.
\label{cons_2_exact2} \Bigg \}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
An $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency scenario $\boldsymbol c \in \mathcal C$ specifies the following: (i) two time periods, denoted by $t_1$ and $t_2$, respectively representing the time periods of primary loss and secondary losses and (ii) one failed component in each of the two periods, denoted by $c_e^{t_1} = 1$ or $c_g^{t_1} = 1$ and $c_e^{t_2} = 1$ or $c_g^{t_2} = 1$. Constraints \eqref{cons_at_most_1} dictate that at most one component can fail in any given time period. Constraints \eqref{cons_g1} and \eqref{cons_e1} specify that each component fails at most once. Constraint \eqref{cons_2_exact2} requires that exactly two distinct components fail. Based on \eqref{setD}, there are ${T\choose 2}=\frac{T(T-1)}{2}$ possible pairs of time periods for primary and secondary losses, $G+E$ possible primary losses, and $G+E-1$ possible secondary losses. Thus, the set $\mathcal C$ has cardinality $|\mathcal C| = C =\frac{T(T-1)}{2}(|G|+|E|)(|G|+|E|-1)$. Clearly, even for moderately-sized power systems and small numbers of time periods, solution of the $N$-$1$-$1$ will pose a considerable computational challenge.
\subsubsection{$N$-$1$-$1$ contingency requirements}
As illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig1}, an $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency scenario is composed of three non-overlapping periods, defined as follows:
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\vskip -0.5cm
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth,angle=0]{timeline.pdf}
\end{center}
\vskip -6.7cm
\caption{Three non-overlapping periods of an $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency scenario.}\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Base} $(t \in \{1,\ldots,t_1-1\}).$ The system operates under normal conditions with no failed components. Non-anticipativity is enforced during this state, i.e., the operating state (e.g. generation outputs and power flows) are fixed regardless of the specific impeding contingency scenario.
\item \emph{Primary contingency} $(t \in \{t_1,\ldots,t_2-1\})$. The system operates under a single failed component. At time period $t_1$, the system observes the primary loss and transitions from the nominal operating state (prescribed by $\boldsymbol {p, f, \theta}$) to the contingency $c$ operating state (prescribed by $\boldsymbol p^c, \boldsymbol f^c, \boldsymbol \theta^c$). If the outaged component is a generator $g$, $p_g^{t_1} = 0$. For all other generators $g'\in \mathcal G \setminus g$, $p_{g'}^{t_1}$ is ramp-constrained by the generator's dispatch level in period $t_1-1$.
\item \emph{Secondary contingency} $(t \in \{t_2,\ldots,T\})$. The system operates with two failed components. Per NERC reliability standards, controlled load shedding and line overloads are permissible. Therefore, the line overload factor $o_e$ and allowable load shedding $\varepsilon$ (as a fraction of total demand) can be utilized to alleviate operational infeasibilities.
\end{itemize}
For conciseness, we introduce in the following "in the contingency'' $\boldsymbol w$ indicators and both allowable loss-of-load $\boldsymbol h$ and line overload $\boldsymbol o$ quantities:
\begin{align}\sum_{t = 1}^t c_e^{ct} = w_e^{ct}, \ \forall e, t \text{ and }\sum_{t = t}^t c_g^{ct} = w_g^{ct}, \ \forall g, t
\end{align}
\begin{align}
h_i^{ct} =
\begin{cases}
0, \quad &\forall i, t = 1,\cdots,t_2^c -1\\
d_i^t, \quad &\forall i, t = t_2^c,\cdots,T
\end{cases}\label{uc-cons2}
\end{align}
\begin{align}
o_e^{ct} =
\begin{cases}\label{uc-cons3}
0, \quad &\forall e, t = 1,\cdots,t_2^c -1 \\
o_e, \quad &\forall e, t = t_2^c,\cdots,T
\end{cases}
\end{align}
Constraints \eqref{uc-cons2} and \eqref{uc-cons3} require that during secondary contingency periods, the allowable loss-of-load and overload factor are equal to $d_i^t$ and $o_e$, respectively. These values are zero in all other periods.
Then, $\forall \boldsymbol c \in \mathcal C$, the contingency dispatch operation in periods $t \in \{t_1^c,\ldots, T\}$ is constrained as follows:
\begin{subequations}\label{ccons}
\begin{align}
& H \boldsymbol p^{ct} + A \boldsymbol f^{ct} + \boldsymbol q^{ct} = \boldsymbol d^t, \ \forall t \label{cc_bal}\\
& B_{e}(\theta_{i}^{ct}-\theta_{j}^{ct})(1-w_e^{ct}) - f_{e}^{ct}=0,\ \forall e=(i,j), t \label{cc_vpa}\\
&|f_e^{ct}| \le \overline f_e(1-w_e^{ct})(1+o_e^{ct}),\ \forall e,t \label{cc_line_cap}\\
&\underline{p}_g x_g^t(1-w_g^{ct})\leq p_g^{ct}\leq \overline{p}_g x_g^t(1-w_g^{ct}),\ \forall g, t \label{cc_gen_cap}\\
&\underline{r}_g(\boldsymbol x_g) \le p_g^{ct} - p_g^{c,t-1} \leq \overline{r}_g(\boldsymbol x_g),\ \forall g, t \label{cc_gen_ramp}\\
& \boldsymbol q^{ct} \le \boldsymbol h^{ct}, \ \forall t \label{cc_loss_ub}\\
& \boldsymbol 1^\top \boldsymbol q^{ct} \le \varepsilon \boldsymbol 1^\top \boldsymbol h^{ct}, \ \forall t \label{cc_tot_loss}\\
&p_g^{ct_1^c-1} - {p_g^{t_1^c - 1}}=0, \ \forall g \in \{g | c_g^{t_1^c} = 0\} \label{cc_link}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Contingency constraints include (in order of appearance): power balance at each bus, with unsatisfied demand $\boldsymbol q^{ct}$ \eqref{cc_bal}; power flows on each line \eqref{cc_vpa}; line capacity bounds \eqref{cc_line_cap} with overload factor $o_e$ during secondary contingency periods; generation dispatch bounds \eqref{cc_gen_cap}; generator ramping limits \eqref{cc_gen_ramp}; upper bound on loss-of-load at each bus \eqref{cc_loss_ub}; threshold for total loss-of-load in periods after secondary loss \eqref{cc_tot_loss}; and the non-anticipativity constraint for generators not in the contingency in period $t_1^c$ \eqref{cc_link}.
\subsection{Full Formulation}
The optimization objective in the $N$-$1$-$1$ model is to find a minimum-cost UC and no-contingency scenario economic dispatch such that a feasible recourse power flow exists under each $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency scenario. The full formulation is obtained by combining the BUC model \eqref{buc} with the full set of contingency constraints \eqref{ccons}, one for each contingency scenario $\boldsymbol c \in \mathcal C$. The full formulation of the $N$-$1$-$1$ CCUC model is then given as follows.
\begin{subequations}\label{full_mod}
\begin{align}
\min_{\substack{\boldsymbol{x,f,p,\theta} \\ \boldsymbol f^c, \boldsymbol p^c, \boldsymbol q^c, \boldsymbol \theta^c}}\ &c^s(\boldsymbol x) + c^p(\boldsymbol p) \label{full_mod_obj} \\
\text{s.t.}\quad & \text{Constraints }\text{\eqref{mod_uc_consts} -- \eqref{buc_ramp}} \label{full_mod_uc_cons}\\
&\text{Constraints } \text{\eqref{cc_bal} -- \eqref{cc_link}},\ \forall \boldsymbol c \in\mathcal{C} \label{full_mod_ccons}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Model \eqref{full_mod} is an extremely large-scale MILP due to the full set of DCOPF constraints \eqref{full_mod_ccons}, one for each contingency scenario. The objective \eqref{full_mod_obj} includes only the unit commitment cost and the no-contingency scenario generation cost. However, extension to consider worst-case cost is straightforward. Following established models (\cite{Hedman2010}, \cite{Chen2014}, \cite{Chen2015}), we ignore costs during a contingency state, as the primary concern of system operators during a contingency is to ensure operational feasibility and system stability.
{\bf Remark 2.} In the $N$-$1$-$1$ model, there are $\frac{T(T-1)}{2}(G+E)(G+E-1)$ sets of constraints \eqref{full_mod_ccons}, which collectively ensure that a feasible recourse power flow exists in each contingency scenario. When defining the full set of contingency scenarios \eqref{setD}, we assumed that when a primary contingency component fails, its failure persist for the remainder of the planning horizon. We can relax this assumption through introduction of a new integer parameter $\tau \ge 1$ that prescribes the number of time periods until the primary contingency component is returned to service. Under this assumption we do not need to consider all time period pairs for the primary and secondary contingency. Rather, it then suffices to consider all pairs of time periods whose difference is $\tau$. Then, there are $(T-1)+(T-2)+\cdots+(T-\tau)=\frac{(2T-\tau-1)\tau}{2}$ pairs of primary and secondary failure periods $t_1$ and $t_2$.
\section{Solution Approaches}
\label{sec:solution}
The full MILP model \eqref{full_mod} can be solved using an iterative algorithm like Benders decomposition; direct solution via the extensive form is not practical. In applying BD, we first decompose the full problem into a master problem (MP), defined by \eqref{full_mod_obj}-\eqref{full_mod_uc_cons}, and a set of subproblems (SP), defined by \eqref{full_mod_ccons}, one for each contingency $\boldsymbol c \in \mathcal C$. The MP prescribes the unit commitment vector $\boldsymbol x$ and the no-contingency economic dispatch $(\boldsymbol {f, p, \theta})$. The subproblems SP$(\boldsymbol {x, p, c})$ are based on Constraint \eqref{ccons}, with the following augmentations:
\begin{itemize}
\item Add variables $\boldsymbol s$ to indicate the amount of load shedding above the allowable threshold $\varepsilon$. This ensures relatively complete recourse.
\item Add the trivial objective function $\min \ \boldsymbol 1^\top \boldsymbol s$.
\end{itemize}
The objective of SP is to minimize the amount of demand shed above the allowable threshold. If the objective value of SP$(\boldsymbol {x, p, c})$, given by $z$, is zero then the current solution $\boldsymbol {x, p}$ can survive contingency scenario $\boldsymbol c$. Otherwise, a Benders feasibility cut can be added to the MP to eliminate the infeasible solution $(\boldsymbol {x,p}).$
In state-of-the-art algorithms for contingency-constrained UC problems, BD is typically implemented as a cutting plane algorithm (CPA) (\cite{Chen2014},\cite{Chen2015},\cite{Wu2010},\cite{Street2011},\cite{Yao2007}, and \cite{Yuan2014}).
Although easy to implement, CPA has limited computational tractability because at each iteration of the algorithm an integer program MP must be solved to select a candidate UC decision. We next outline a branch-and-cut algorithm (BCA) that avoids this drawback by only exploring the branch-and-bound tree corresponding to the UC $\boldsymbol x$ once. BCA is a branch-and-bound algorithm in which cutting planes are generated within the branch-and-bound tree.
\subsection{Branch-and-Cut Algorithm}
Recent advances in optimization solver technology, both in commercial (IBM CPLEX \cite{cplex} and Gurobi \cite{gurobi}) and non-commercial (SCIP \cite{scip} and DIPS \cite{dip}) packages, have significantly simplified the implementation of branch-and-cut algorithms by enabling the addition of violated inequalities directly within the branch-and-bound tree, thus avoiding the need to repeatedly explore the branch-and-bound tree defined by the binary UC variables $\boldsymbol x$. In IBM CPLEX, branch-and-cut algorithms can be implemented using IloCplex.Callback functions (e.g., IloCplex.LazyConstraintCallback). In recent years, work on a number of combinatorial problems (e.g., survivable network design \cite{Fortz2009} and the minimum tool booth \cite{Bai2009}) have shown that a significant reduction, often an order of magnitude or better, in computational time can be achieve using a BCA compared to a CPA, with increasing reductions in runtime for harder and larger combinatorial problems. This motivates our development of a branch-and-cut algorithm for $N$-$1$-$1$.
Let the linear programming relaxation of MP, the \emph{relaxed master problem} (RMP), be given as follows:
\begin{subequations}\label{rmp}
\begin{align}
\min_{\boldsymbol {x, f, p, \theta}} \quad &c^s(\boldsymbol x) + c^p(\boldsymbol p) \\
\textmd{s.t.} \quad & \boldsymbol x \in \mathcal X\\
&\boldsymbol 0 \le \boldsymbol x \le \boldsymbol 1.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Let $L$ be the list of nodes of the B\&B tree to explore. Initially, $L$ contains only the root node $o$ with no branching constraints. Before initializing the BCA, a number of valid inequalities are added to the initial RMP to strengthen the root node LP relaxation. We refer to these valid inequalities as the cut pool \emph{P}. We note that in BCA implementations it is important to strengthen the root node adequately to avoid unnecessary exploration of the B\&B tree. Starting with an empty \emph{P} results in very slow pruning because many infeasible nodes will only be pruned late in the search. However, adding too many valid inequalities to \emph{P} slows down the LP relaxation solves at each node. Thus, there is a significant trade-off between strengthening the root node LP relaxation, and thus avoiding unnecessary exploration of the B\&B tree, and overburdening the RMP, and thus increasing LP solve times. This trade-off is more art than science and may be very specific to the application domain. In our BCA implementation, we initialize $P$ with the following valid inequalities.
Let $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ be the capacity of the smallest and the second smallest generators, respectively. Then the following are valid inequalities:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
&\sum_{g \in G} x_g^t \ge 3, \quad \forall t=2,\cdots,T \label{cons_min_gen_on}\\
&\sum_{g \in G} \overline p_g x_g^1 - \lambda_1 \ge \boldsymbol 1^\top \boldsymbol d^1 \label{cons_min_gen_cap1}\\
&\sum_{g \in G} \overline p_g x_g^t - \lambda_2 \ge \boldsymbol 1^\top \boldsymbol d^t, \quad \forall t=2,\cdots,T \label{cons_min_gen_cap2}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Constraints \eqref{cons_min_gen_on} require that at least three generators be on at any given time period after period one, since two generators may fail in consecutive periods. Constraint \eqref{cons_min_gen_cap1} dictates that in period 1 the maximum capacity across all committed generators minus the capacity of smallest generator in the system must be greater than the total demand of period 1. Constraints \eqref{cons_min_gen_cap2} require the total capacity across of committed generators minus the aggregate capacity of the two smallest generators must be larger than the demand, for each period after the first period. We have considered only a simple set of valid inequalities for $P$ and significant ``tuning'' is required to determine the "optimal" valid inequalities to initialize $P$.
Solving the RMP for a node $o$ means solving the RMP with associated branching constrained defined by $o$. Node $o$ prescribes the subset of discrete variables that are fixed at that particular node of the B\&B tree. In a depth-first variant of the BCA, branching is performed until an integer solution is identified. Only when an integer solution is identified are violated inequalities screened for each contingency scenario. At the opposite extreme, violated inequalities for each contingency scenario may be screened after each node solve, resulting in the breath-first variant of the BCA. The former, depth first variant, may result in a large node list $L$ and the later may result in the addition of a large number of violated inequalities. A compromise between these two extremes may be achieved by defining a branching depth parameter to control the trade-off between branching and cut generation.
\subsection{Temporally Decomposed Bilevel Separation Oracle}
Typically, the existence of a feasible DCOPF for each contingency scenario must be verified explicitly. Such explicit enumeration, however, cannot scale as the number of contingencies $C$ is extremely large, even for moderately-size power systems and/or planning horizons. As we demonstrate in our computational experiments, securing the system against a small number of contingency scenarios is empirically sufficient to ensure feasibility against the full set of contingency scenarios $\mathcal C$. So, instead of explicitly checking feasibility across all contingency scenarios, we describe a bilevel separation problem to screen a small number of worst-case contingency scenarios that in aggregate ``covers'' $\mathcal C$.
As noted in \cite{Chen2014} and \cite{Chen2015}, significant computational challenges exist in solving bilevel programs for power system vulnerability analysis. In $N$-$1$-$1$ UC, these challenges are further compounded by the fact that the vulnerability analysis problem spans the $T$ planning periods, resulting in a very large-scale bilevel program with $T\times G\times E$ upper-level binary decision variables. To overcome this computational challenge, we perform a temporal decomposition in which component failures are restricted to a preselected time period pair. We then iterate over all possible time periods pairs, solving a simplified and smaller bilevel separation oracle for each time period pair.
Given a unit commitment schedule $\boldsymbol {x}$, a no-contingency scenario power flow $ {\boldsymbol {\tilde p}}$, and a pair of periods $t_1$ and $t_2$ denoting the times of the primary and the secondary contingency, respectively, the \emph{Power System Inhibition Problem} (PSIP) can be used to determine the worst-case loss-of-load under any two non-simultaneous component failures. In this bilevel program, the upper-level decision vector $\boldsymbol c$ identifies the primary and secondary component losses, and the lower-level decision vectors $(\boldsymbol {f,p,q,s, \theta})$ correspond to recourse DCOPF under the contingency scenario prescribed by $\boldsymbol c$.
The set of valid contingency scenarios given a pair of time periods $(t_1, t_2)$ is given as follows:
\begin{subequations}\label{setD2}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{C}(t_1,t_2) = \Bigg \{ & \ \ \boldsymbol c \in \{0,1\}^{(G+E)\times T}: \\
&\sum_{g \in G} c_g^t + \sum_{e \in \mathcal E} c_e^t =
\begin{cases}\label{D2_two_failures}
1,\ \forall t \in \{t_1, t_2\} & \\
0,\ \text{otherwise},&\\
\end{cases} \\
&c_g^{t_1} + c_g^{t_2} \le 1,\quad \forall g \in \mathcal G, \label{D2_single_failure_g}\\
&c_e^{t_1} + c_e^{t_2} \le 1,\quad \forall e \in \mathcal E \label{D2_single_failure_e} \ \
\Bigg \}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Constraint \eqref{D2_two_failures} dictates that a single component failure occurs in each of time periods $t_1$ and $t_2$. Constraints \eqref{D2_single_failure_g} and \eqref{D2_single_failure_e} require that each component can fail at most once.
In preceding formulations, $\boldsymbol c$ was an input parameter. However, in the PSIP $\boldsymbol c$ is decision vector prescribing the two failed components. For notational convenience, we again define binary variables $\boldsymbol w$ to indicate whether or not a component failed in the current period or a prior period. Then PSIP$(\boldsymbol x, {\boldsymbol {\tilde p}}, t_1, t_2)$ is given as follows:
\begin{subequations}\label{bl_psip}
\begin{align}
\max_{ \substack{ \boldsymbol w\\ \boldsymbol c \in \mathcal C(t_1, t_2) } }\ &\min_{\boldsymbol {f,p,q,s,\theta}} \quad \boldsymbol 1^\top \boldsymbol s \label{bl_psip_obj}\\
\textmd{s.t.}\quad & H \boldsymbol p^t + A \boldsymbol f^t + \boldsymbol q^t= \boldsymbol d^t, \ \forall t\\
&B_{e}(\theta_{i}^{t} - \theta_{j}^{t}) (1-w_e^t) - f_{e}^{t} = 0, \ \forall e,t\\
&|f_e^t| \le \overline f_e^t ( {1-w_e^t})(1-o_e^t), \ \forall e,t\\
&\underline{p}_g x_g^t (1-w_g^t) \le p_g^t \le \overline{p}_g^t x_g^t (1-w_g^t), \ \forall g, t\\
&\underline{r}_g(\boldsymbol x) \le p_g^{t} - p_g^{t-1} \leq \overline{r}_g(\boldsymbol x), \ \forall g, t\\
& \boldsymbol 1^\top \boldsymbol q^t - s^t \le \varepsilon \boldsymbol 1^\top \boldsymbol d^t, \ \forall t \\
&p_g^{{t_1}-1} - { \tilde p_g^{t_1 - 1}}(1-w_g^{t_1})=0, \ \forall g \label{bl_psip_non_anticipativity}\\
&\boldsymbol {p,q,s} \ge \boldsymbol 0
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The optimization objective \eqref{bl_psip_obj} is to maximize the minimum amount of load shed above the allowable threshold given by $\boldsymbol s$. Constraint \eqref{bl_psip_non_anticipativity} enforces non-anticipativity and ramp constraints any generator not in the contingency at time $p_g^{t_1}$ base on its no-contingency scenario output $\tilde p_g^{t_1-1}$.
Model \eqref{bl_psip} is a bilevel program that cannot be solved directly by commercial solvers, but it can be reformulated as a mixed integer linear program (MILP) by dualizing the lower-level linear program, combing the result with the upper maximization problem, and linearizing the resulting bilinear terms in the objective. In the following algorithmic description, the solution of PSIP refers to the solution of the linearized MILP counterpart of \eqref{bl_psip}.
Instead of solving $C$ linear programs \eqref{ccons} at each iteration, we can solve $\frac{1}{2}(T)(T-1)$ mixed-integer linear programs \eqref{bl_psip} for every time period pairs $(t_1,t_2)$. We refer to this variant algorithm as ``Hybrid Branch-and-Cut'' and present the full algorithm as follows:
\begin{algorithm}\label{hbca}
\caption{Hybrid Branch-and-Cut Algorithm (HBC)}
\textbf{Require:} A starting cut pool \emph{P}\;
\textbf{Initialization:} $z^* = +\infty, L= \{o\}$ \tcc*[r]{ {\footnotesize $o$ has no branching constraints}}
\While{L \normalfont{is nonempty}}{
Select a node $ \hat o \in L$\;
{$L \gets L \setminus \{\hat o\}$} {\footnotesize { \tcc*[r]{delete node}}}
Solve \text{RMP} for node $\hat o$. Let $ {(\boldsymbol {x,f,p,\theta})}$ be the optimal solution and $z$ be the optimal cost\;
\If{$ z \ge z^*$}{
\eIf{$ {\boldsymbol x}$ \normalfont{is fractional}}{
Branch, resulting in nodes $o'$ and $o''$, $L \gets L \cup \{o',o''\}$ {\footnotesize { \tcc*[r]{add nodes}}}
}{
\ForEach{$(t_1,t_2)$ \normalfont{pair}}{Solve \textsc{psip}$( {\boldsymbol x}, {\boldsymbol p}, t_1, t_2)$. Let $\omega$ be the optimal objective value\;
\eIf{$ \omega>0$}{
add $f-cut$ to $P$\;
$L \gets L \cup \{\hat o\}$ {\footnotesize { \tcc*[r]{put back node}}}}{
\If{$ z < z^*$}{Define new upper bound $z^* \gets z$ and
update incumbent $\boldsymbol x^* \gets {\boldsymbol x}$ }
}}}}}
\Return $\boldsymbol x^*$
\end{algorithm}
\section{Numerical Experiments and Analysis}
\label{sec:experiments}
We tested our models and the proposed HBC algorithms on the IEEE 6-bus, 9-bus, 14-bus, 24-bus, 30-bus and 39-bus systems \footnote{All test cases can be obtained from http://pserc.cornell.edu/matpower} \cite{Matpower} on a laptop running Mac OSX, with 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7 processor and 8GB of memory. The models and algorithms are implemented in C++ using IBM's Concert Technology Library 2.9 and CPLEX 12.6 MILP solver. For each instance, we considered 12 time periods and load-shedding threshold $\varepsilon$ and line overload factor $o_e$ of 0.15. The peak load factor for each system was estimated using the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) demand data \cite{ERCOT}.
We begin with an analysis of optimal commitment and dispatch decisions for the 6-bus system across the different security criteria. The single-line diagram of the 6-bus system is shown in Figure \ref{fig: 6_bus_data}, in which green text denotes generator data, with minimum and maximum generation limits in parentheses; blue text denotes maximum power flow in the nominal operating state; and red text denotes loads. We added three fast-ramping (and more costly) units $G4$ - $G6$ in close proximity to load buses, to ensure system feasibility across the four security criteria: $N$-$0$ (with the ``1.5 rule'' for reserve margins\footnote{The ``1.5 rule'' is defined as follows: A power system will carry reserves equal to the dispatch level of the largest generator plus one half the dispatch level of the second largest generator. This rule is adopted by several ISOs (e.g., ISO-NE) in the United States}), $N$-$1$, $N$-$1$-$1$, and $N$-$2$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=2in]{6_bus_data.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption{Single-line diagram of the modified IEEE 6-bus test system.}\label{fig: 6_bus_data}
\end{figure}
The optimal commitment and dispatch decisions for the 6-bus system varies across different contingency criteria, as shown in see Figure \ref{fig: 6_bus_gen}. For clarity of exposition, we summarize the optimal commitment decisions for two representative time periods (off-peak and on-peak) in Table \ref{tbl: uc_diff_types}, in order to illustrate the differences between UC decisions under different security criteria. Under the ``1.5 rule'' ($N$-$0$), only slower-ramping and lower-cost units $G1$ - $G3$ are committed in both time periods. Under the $N$-$1$ criterion, unit $G6$ is committed in addition to $G1$ - $G3$ during the peak period. Under the $N$-$1$-$1$ criterion, we additionally commit $G5$ during the off-peak period and switch from $G6$ to $G5$ during the peak period. The switch from $G6$ to $G5$ reflects a trade-off between production cost and start-up cost. Unit $G6$ has a lower start-up cost but higher production cost than $G5$. Consequently, when a generator may be needed for a longer time (e.g., under $N$-$1$-$1$), $G5$ is preferable. Lastly, when the security criterion includes consideration for two (near) simultaneous failures ($N$-$2$) with no intervening time for adjustments, the additional fast-ramping generator $G6$ is committed. These results are consistent with our intuition that fast-ramping units $G4$ - $G6$ are required only if $G1$ - $G3$ are not able to meet the security requirements. Additionally, comparing different security criteria, $N$-$2$ requires more units to be committed than $N$-$1$-$1$ due to the lack of adjustment time between failures, and more units are committed for $N$-$1$-$1$ than $N$-$1$ in order to cover the loss of a second unit in subsequent periods after the primary loss.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{6_bus_gen.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption{Optimal dispatch levels for different contingency criteria (6-bus)}\label{fig: 6_bus_gen}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[ht]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
\caption{UC decisions under different contingent criteria for off-peak and on-peak periods (modified 6-bus system)}
\label{tbl: uc_diff_types}
\centering
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c c c c c c| c c c c c c}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & \multicolumn{6}{c|}{Off-peak ($t = 3$)}&\multicolumn{6}{c}{On-Peak ($t = 9$)} \\
& G1 & G2 &G3 &G4 &G5& G6& G1 & G2 &G3 &G4 &G5& G6\\
\hline
$N-0 $ (``1.5 rule'') &$\surd$ &$\surd$&$\surd$&&& &$\surd$&$\surd$&$\surd$&&\\
$N-1$ & $\surd$&$\surd$&$\surd$&&& & $\surd$&$\surd$&$\surd$&&&$\surd$\\
$N-1-1$ &$\surd$ &$\surd$&$\surd$&&$\surd$& &$\surd$ &$\surd$&$\surd$&&$\surd$&\\
$N-2$ &$\surd$ &$\surd$&$\surd$&&$\surd$&$\surd$ &$\surd$ &$\surd$&$\surd$&&$\surd$&$\surd$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
Next, we compare total costs under different security criteria and test systems, illustrated in Figure \ref{fig: obj_value_6_9}. As expected, we observe that total cost increases monotonically from $N$-$0$ (``1.5 rule''), $N$-$1$, and $N$-$1$-$1$ to $N$-$2$. In all cases, the cost difference under the $N$-$2$ and $N$-$1$-$1$ criteria demonstrate the value of intervening time for system adjustments during a multiple-failure contingency scenario. However, the magnitude of these cost differences are system specific; some test systems (e.g., the 6-bus system) exhibit significant cost differences under the $N$-$1$-$1$ and $N$-$2$ criteria but show little cost difference between $N$-$1$ and $N$-$1$-$1$. In contrast, the 30-bus system shows the opposite trend: little difference under the $N$-$1$-$1$ and $N$-$2$ criterion but significant differences between $N$-$1$ and $N$-$1$-$1$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{obj_value_6_9_14.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption{Total costs across different contingency criteria and test systems}\label{fig: obj_value_6_9}
\end{figure}
In the context of {\bf Remark 2}, we assess the impact of varying $\tau$, the maximum time difference between the first and the second component failures, for all six test systems. Notice that $\tau=0$ under $N$-$1$-$1$ corresponds precisely to $N$-$2$. Results for the 6-bus system are summarized in Figure \ref{fig: tau_obj_val2}. Qualitatively similar results hold for the other test systems. The results indicate that total cost is invariant to changes in $\tau$ greater than zero. We observe that the computational tractability of the $N$-$1$-$1$ problem is strongly dependent on the parameter $\tau$. As $\tau$ increases, the number of time period pairs ($t_1, t_2$) grows exponentially. Our results suggest that solving $N$-$1$-$1$ instances with $\tau=1$, considering only intervening time of a single period, may be a good proxy for the full $N$-$1$-$1$ problem. However, rigorously mathematical proof and/or comprehensive numerical experiments on a variety of test systems are required to validate this numerical observation.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=2in]{tau_obj_value.pdf}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.5cm
\caption{Total cost as a function of $\tau$}
\label{fig: tau_obj_val2}
\end{figure}
Finally, we discuss the efficacy of our HBC algorithm and the implicit search for the worst-case contingency scenario by solving PSIPs, rather than explicitly screening the full set of contingency scenarios for each candidate UC solution. We denote the size of the dynamic contingency list as $M$. The size of the final dynamic contingency list $M$ and the cardinality of the contingency scenario set $C$ are reported in Table \ref{tbl: num_fail}. For each test system, the number of contingency scenarios identified is only a very small fraction of the total possible contingency scenarios, which implies that we only need to generate feasibility cuts using a small set of ``sufficient'' contingency scenarios to ensure $N$-$1$-$1$ compliancy. This observation is consistent with the analogous observation for general $N$-$k$ cases, as reported in \cite{Chen2014} and \cite{Chen2015}.
\begin{table}[!t]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
\caption{Percentage of contingency scenarios identified for the $N$-$1$-$1$ contingency criterion}
\label{tbl: num_fail}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c c| c l l}
\hline
Test systems & $G$ & $E$ & $M$ & $C$ & Ratio\\
\hline
6-bus & 6 & 11 & 5 & 330 & 1.52\% \\
9-bus & 6 & 9 & 8 & 330 & 2.42\% \\
14-bus & 10 & 20 & 3 & 990 & 0.30\% \\
24-bus & 32 & 38 & 3 & 10912 & 0.03\% \\
30-bus & 8 & 41 & 10 & 616 & 1.62\% \\
39-bus & 14 & 46 & 16 & 2002 & 0.80\% \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
We focus on a UC model that considers non-simultaneous component failures with intervening time for system adjustments. The naive formulation of this model is an extremely large-scale MILP, due to the coupling of consecutive time period pairs. To overcome these computational challenges, we introduce an efficient BCA algorithm using a temporally decomposed separation oracle. The model and algorithm are tested on multiple IEEE test systems, through which we observe that (1) the often significant changes in commitment and dispatch decisions for different security criteria; (2) the cost benefit of system adjustment time; (3) the general $N$-$1$-$1$ problem can be well approximated by only considering consecutive failures (i.e., $\tau = 1$); and (4) the number of contingency scenarios identified by our approach represents a very small fraction of the total number.
Allowing for non-simultaneous failures in unit commitment significantly increases the computation burden, relative to other contingency criteria. Although our proposed CPA framework is tractable for small and moderately size test systems, significant computational challenges remain for larger industrial systems and further algorithmic research in required to achieve scalability. A stronger PSIP formulation or an efficient heuristic will be required to cope with the computational challenge posed by large-scale bilevel programs. Finally, a rigorous mathematic proof and/or a comprehensive computational study is needed to support the idea of considering only one single period between successive failures (i.e., $\tau=1$) as a proxy for the fully general $N-1-1$ problem. Aside from computational challenges, from the theoretical point of view the relationship (e.g., the relative magnitude of cost difference) among different contingency criteria is also an interesting area for further research.
\section{Acknowledgements}
Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-program laboratory managed and operated by Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation, for the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000.
\appendices
\section{Full Description of Constraints (\ref{mod_uc_consts})}
The explicit description of Constraints (\ref{mod_uc_consts})\footnote{$T_g^{u0}$/$T_g^{d0}$ denote initial minimal online/offline times; $T_g^{u}$/$T_g^{d}$ denote nominal minimum online/offline times; $C_g^u$/$C_g^d$ denote startup/shutdown costs.} is as follows, which include (in order): initial online and offline requirements for generators; minimum uptime in nominal time periods; minimum uptime for the last $T_g^u$ periods; minimum downtime in nominal time periods; minimum downtime for the last $T_g^u$ periods; startup costs; shutdown costs; non-negativity for startup/shutdown costs; and binary constraints for the on/off status of generators.
\begin{align}
\begin{cases}\label{uc-cons1}
\sum_{t=1}^{T_g^{u0}} (1-x_g^t) = 0,\ \forall g\\
\sum_{t=1}^{T_g^{d0}} x_g^t = 0,\ \forall g\\
\sum_{t'=t}^{t+T_g^u -1} x_g^{t'}\geq T_g^u (x_g^t- x_g^{t-1}),\\
\hskip 0.7cm \forall g, t = T_g^{u0}+1, \cdots, T-T_g^u+1\\
\sum_{t'=t}^T (x_g^{t'}-(x_g^t- x_g^{t-1}))\geq 0, \\
\hskip 0.7cm \forall g, t=T-T_g^u+2, \cdots, T\\
\sum_{t'=t}^{t+T_g^d-1} (1-x_g^{t'})\geq T_g^d (x_g^{t-1} - x_g^t), \\
\hskip 0.7cm \forall g, t=T_g^{d0}+1, \cdots, T-T_g^d+1\\
\sum_{t'=t}^T ((1-x_g^{t'})-(x_g^{t-1} - x_g^t)) \geq 0, \\
\hskip 0.7cm \forall g, t = T-T_g^d+2, \cdots, T\\
c_g^{ut} \geq C_g^u (x_g^t - x_g^{t-1}),\ \forall g,t\\
c_g^{dt} \geq C_g^d (x_g^{t-1} - x_g^{t}),\ \forall g,t\\
c_g^{ut}, c_g^{dt} \geq 0,\ \forall g,t\\
x_g^t \in \{0,1\},\ \forall g,t\\
\end{cases}
\end{align}
\bibliographystyle{nonumber}
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
\label{intro}
Space-based telescopes equipped with coronagraphic imagers can separate light scattered by orbiting planets from that of their primary stars. The detection of light that penetrates deeply into an atmosphere rather than merely skimming its upper layers, as with transit methods, potentially permits more extensive and informative characterization of atmospheric gaseous absorbers as well as cloud and haze layers.
However the interpretation of the scattered light signal will in practice be limited by a multitude of uncertainties beyond the basic limitations of data quality. Among these are the uncertain or unknown planetary radii, masses, and cloud layers. Here, in the first of what we plan to be a series of papers, we present the initial development of an atmospheric retrieval methodology that quantifies the resultant uncertainties
and clarifies the precision with which the planet's gravity, composition, and cloud structure and other parameters can be discerned.
Direct imaging offers the possibility of characterizing planets around nearby stars and at larger orbital distances than is possible for transit observations. Directly imaged planets see less stellar irradiation than traditional transit observation targets and can either be young, warm, and self-luminous, or older and much colder than those studied by transit methods. While a multitude of space coronagraph missions have been studied or proposed over the last two decades, the only mission currently in development by NASA with the capability of imaging cool giant planets in reflected light is {\it WFIRST} \citep{Spergel:2015}.
Current estimates are that a coronagraph-equipped {\it WFIRST} mission will be able to obtain photometry and spectra for at least a dozen known radial velocity (RV) planets as well as search for lower
mass planets \citep{Traub:2016}. An example of the diversity of the known RV planets favorable for direct imaging is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:rv}. This sample was drawn from the Exoplanet Encyclopedia and will likely increase with future discoveries from RV or {\it WFIRST} surveys. In this figure the known $M\sin i$, measured by RV methods, is plotted against estimated blackbody radiating temperature (or effective temperature) in order to illustrate the phase space of atmospheric conditions that might be expected among these most favorable planets. The effective temperatures have been calculated using an evolution model for the range of masses and the age ranges of the stars, accounting for both internal heat sources and the incident flux \citep{Marley:2014}. The planet's inclination ($i$) will be determined from the direct imaging observations, therefore constraining their approximate
masses and, with the aid of the mass-radius relationship, their surface gravities. Vertical color bands show the approximate ranges over which various atmospheric compounds form clouds. While many Jupiter and Saturn-like worlds with ammonia clouds are expected, some planets with water, alkali, and even methane clouds may also be observed.
\begin {figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.9,angle=0]{Marley_fig1.pdf}
\caption{$M\mathrm{sin}(i)$ and ranges of estimated effective temperature ($T_{\mathrm{eff}}$) of a selection of
announced RV planets that are favorable for direct imaging. The orange circle represents Jupiter while the green one hints at Uranus which actually falls below the lower axis. Estimated $T_{\mathrm{eff}}$ computed from planet orbits, Jupiter's Bond albedo, and estimated internal heat flows given available constraints on the ages of the primary stars. Bands show major cloud species expected in various ranges of $T_{\mathrm{eff}}$. The existence of two of the planets shown, Ups And e and Eps Eri b, is controversial. \label{fig:rv}}
\end{figure}
The Coronagraph Instrument onboard {\it WIFRST}, in combination with an Integral Field Spectrometer \citep{Traub:2016}, is currently planned to provide us with images (430--970~nm) and low-resolution (spectral resolution $R\sim 70$) reflected light spectra of gaseous planets around nearby Sun-like stars (600-970~nm). Unlike transit spectroscopy that only probes the top of the atmosphere to $\sim 1$~mbar \citep[e.g., ][]{Kreidberg:2014}, reflected light can probe deep into the atmosphere of these gas giants \citep[e.g., ][]{Marley:2014}, and therefore offers a more comprehensive view of composition and cloud layers.
Most planets in Figure~\ref{fig:rv} have effective temperatures of $\sim 150-350\,\rm K$.
Assuming these worlds are comparable to Solar System gas giants, their $600--970\,\rm nm$ spectra will be dominated by
cloud decks of water or ammonia and gaseous absorption by methane and possibly water. Photochemical
hazes will doubtless be important as well. There is a long and comprehensive history of
interpretation of such spectra of Solar System planets dating back to \citet{Sato:1979} and before. For Jupiter-like atmospheres
the continuum scattered flux level at these wavelengths is set by scattering from the bright clouds while Rayleigh scattering is more important at the bluest wavelengths. The bright continuum is punctuated by
gaseous methane absorption features of varying strengths. The relative strengths of the various methane absorption bands, combined with the continuum flux level set by the clouds, together constrain the cloud properties and methane column abundance. Shortward of 600~nm, the photometric measurements will give us information about the shape of the continuum, dominated by Rayleigh, haze, and cloud scattering. If both CH$_4$ and H$_2$O features are present in the spectra, we can constrain the C/O ratio, value related to the place of planet's formation in the circumstellar disk \citep{Bond:2010,Helling:2014,Oberg:2011}.
Extracting such information from low to moderate spectral resolution data at modest signal-to-noise ratios will be a challenge. Cloud properties and location, absorber abundances, planetary radius (and thus gravity), and the atmospheric thermal profile will all be unknown. While forward modeling techniques, such as \citet{Cahoy:2010}, can give insight into the range of possible spectra, extraction of cloud properties and absorber
abundances will require the application of retrieval methods to the available data.
We aim to develop the necessary theoretical and computational framework to enable such retrievals. As this will be a complex endeavor we approach the problem in steps. Here we present a first step in the development of this framework, focusing on the retrieval of gross cloud properties, surface gravity, and methane mixing ratio. In future papers we will add retrievals for orbital phase, star-planet distance, planet size, additional absorbers and atmospheric thermal profile.
In the remainder of this paper we provide more detailed background on reflected light spectra of giant planets, present the conceptual model and Markov Chain Monte Carlo retrieval method, and the results of this study. The paper is organized as follows: Section~\ref{back} provides more context and background to the problem. Section~\ref{fwd} describes our albedo code and the forward models used in the retrievals; Section~\ref{noise} describes our noise model used to generate the input datasets; Section~\ref{mcmc} contains the Bayesian retrieval scheme, followed by its validation in Section~\ref{results}. Other retrieval results for more realistic spectra of known gas giants are shown in Section~\ref{appl}, and the conclusions are summarized in Section~\ref{sum}.
\begin {figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.4,angle=0]{jupiter_c_compare.pdf}
\caption{Model geometric albedo spectra for three example cases: cloud-free (black), a single optically thick cloud deck (blue), and one cloud deck plus and optically thin haze layer (red). All models assume a CH$_4$ abundance of $10^{-3}$, and a surface gravity of 25 m s$^{-2}$. The cloud deck is at a depth of 1.8 bars in both red and blue examples, and has an albedo of 0.95. The simulated haze layer in the red model has an optical depth of 0.2, an albedo of 0.6, and is occupies the region between 0.2 and 0.5 bar. \label{fig:hd}}
\end{figure}
\section{BACKGROUND}
\label{back}
In this section we provide a brief overview to a few of the key concepts
used throughout the remainder of the paper.
\subsection{Geometric Albedo}
The analysis of extrasolar planet reflection spectra owes much to the
Solar System literature. However this literature also brings its own set
of conventions, not all of which translate smoothly to the exoplanet
context. For expediency we nevertheless choose here to follow these conventions, although we recognize that as exoplanet direct imaging evolves into its own sub-field that this terminology will likely evolve to shed some vestigial structures.
A foremost concept is the geometric albedo, the ratio of light received from a planet when observed at full phase to that which would be measured from a perfectly reflective Lambert disk of the same size as the planet.
Because the angular distribution of light scattered by a real atmosphere differs from that scattered by a Lambert disk, the geometric albedo of even a perfectly scattering atmospheres is not unity. For a conservative, infinitely deep Rayleigh scattering atmosphere the geometric albedo is 0.750. The fractional reflectivity measured at a star-planet-observer angle differing from $180^\circ$ is given by the product of the geometric albedo and the planetary phase function. Theoretical calculations of reflected light spectra for extrasolar giant planets have been preformed to date by \citet{Marley:1999,Burrows:2004,Burrows:2014,Cahoy:2010,Greco:2015}, showing the wide variations determined by metallicity, effective temperature, cloud presence, and orbital phase angle.
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.55,angle=0]{no_cloud_var_fig.pdf}
\caption{Model geometric albedo spectra comparing the effects of increasing methane abundance (left) and surface gravity (right) for a cloud-free planet. In the left plot the surface gravity is kept constant at 25 m s$^{-2}$, while in the right plot the methane abundance is kept constant at 10$^{-3}$. The thermal profile is kept constant in all cases. \label{fig:met0}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.5,angle=0]{one_cloud_var_fig.pdf}
\caption{Model geometric albedo spectra comparing the effects of increasing methane abundance (top left), surface gravity (top right), cloud albedo (bottom left), and cloud top pressure (bottom right) for a planet with a single cloud deck. When not variable, the model parameters are set to $f_{CH4}=10.^{-3}$, $g=25$m s$^{-2}$, $\bar{\omega}=0.95$, and $P=0.8$ bar. The thermal profile is kept constant in all cases.\label{fig:met1}}
\end{figure*}
There are two important reasons why ``geometric albedo spectra" will not
be directly measured for directly imaged exoplanets.
First, while transiting planets can be observed at full phase just before they are eclipsed on the ``far" side of their orbits, directly imaged planets will never be observed even close to full phase because they would lie too close to the primary star to be resolved from the star. Second, the radius of a planet will not be directly measured, rather only the product between the planet's area and its reflectivity as a function of wavelength. Thus it is an oversimplification to discuss ``geometric albedo spectra" for directly imaged extrasolar planets. Nevertheless to simplify the model development for this work, we consider here only the planetary spectrum at full phase, cast as ``geometric albedo spectra". In the second paper of this series (Nayak et al., submitted) we will explore issues arising from the phase dependence of planetary reflectivity (see \citet{Cahoy:2010}) and the unknown planetary radius.
Figure~\ref{fig:hd} shows model geometric albedo spectra we calculated for three typical planet cases following the methods described in this paper. Depending on the temperature and composition of the planet, certain species can condense forming cloud decks (mostly alkalis, methane, ammonia, and water for the RV planets shown in Figure~\ref{fig:rv}). As known from our Solar System (e.g. Jupiter, Titan), a haze layer can also form in the upper layers of the atmosphere under the action of stellar ultraviolet radiation. The figure compares computed geometric albedo spectra with (blue) and without (black) the expected clouds and haze layer (red). Cloudy giant planets are brighter in reflected light at red wavelengths as incoming photons are scattered before they can be absorbed \citep{Marley:1999}.
Figures~\ref{fig:met0} and \ref{fig:met1} present additional model geometric albedo spectra for varying atmospheric parameters, that can be expected given the diversity of extrasolar planets. These plots emphasize the changes that can be expected in the albedo spectra given variations in methane abundance and surface gravity, as well as cloud albedo and depth in the atmosphere when the atmosphere is not clear of clouds. More spectral variations as a function of mass, orbit, metallicity, and phase are described in detail in \citet{Cahoy:2010} and \citet{Sudarsky:2000}. Distinctive differences diagnostic of important atmospheric processes between the spectra of known planets can clearly be expected. This study explores how well an instrument like the coronagraph on {\it WFIRST} would be able to constrain planet atmospheric composition.
\subsection{Retrieval Approaches}
Our atmospheric retrieval procedure involves combining a well-tested planetary albedo code \citep{McKay:1989,Marley:1999,Cahoy:2010} that can take into account multiple absorbers, cloud and Rayleigh scattering, and arbitrary incident and observed angles, with state-of-the-art Bayesian inference tools, namely the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) ensemble sample {\it emcee} \citep{Goodman:2010,Foreman-Mackey:2013} and the multimodal nested sampling algorithm {\it MultiNest} \citep{Feroz:2008,Feroz:2009,Feroz:2013} that can be used interchangeably.
We believe that this is the first time such powerful retrieval techniques have been designed to {\it{simultaneously}} measure molecular abundances and cloud properties and their correlations from scattered light spectra. {\it{NEMESIS}} \citep{Rodgers:2000,Irwin:2008} is the only other existing retrieval method for planetary atmospheres in reflected light that has been applied to exoplanet characterization \citep{Barstow:2014}. By contrast to our Bayesian approach, {\it{NEMESIS}} uses non-linear optimal estimation to derive the best-fit model parameters and their uncertainties, and for exoplanet characterization did not include cloud properties explicitly as free parameters in the retrieval process. Instead, the effect of cloud properties on the retrieval results was investigated separately by calculating the $\chi^2$ goodness-of-fit over a large grid spanning cloud particle size, optical depth, and base pressure \citep{Barstow:2014}. Recently, cloud properties have been introduced in the {\it{NEMESIS}} retrieval scheme to analyze the scattering properties of Uranus \citep{Irwin:2015}. In this new approach the code retrieves the imaginary refractive index spectrum together with a Gamma distribution for particle size, characterized by a mean radius and variance. The extinction cross-section, single scattering albedo and phase function spectra are then calculated using standard Mie theory. Such parameterization allows for a more physical and self-consistent description of cloud and haze layers. Our method goes in the opposite direction, retrieving optical properties (optical depth, scattering albedo, and asymmetry factor) and cloud depth as model parameters, but not linking them to a physical model of cloud composition (such as particle size). As shown later in this paper, the presence of clouds naturally leads to degeneracies between methane abundance, cloud positions, and surface gravity. \citet{Irwin:2015} also highlight this degeneracy and constrain the cloud properties only by using a fixed, previously measured, methane abundance profile.
As shown by \citet{Line:2013,Line:2014a}, the Bayesian inference tools are
better equipped to handle highly non-gaussian posterior distributions that are expected for future exoplanet observations, given the limited data and complex atmospheric models. Moreover, clouds play a significant role in the atmospheres of both gas giants in our Solar System and the exoplanets considered as future observing targets, given their expected effective temperatures. By including simple cloud properties (optical depth, albedo, depth in the atmosphere, etc.) as model parameters alongside molecular abundances, we can fully explore the degeneracies in the atmospheric structure, given the spectrum.
For our initial retrieval tests we constructed two highly idealized cloud models, one with a single cloud deck of arbitrary opacity, and the other with a scattering haze overlying a completely opaque cloud layer. Such atmospheric models are adequate for the types of planets addressed in this paper, and unquestionably can be improved in future work. Our goal is to determine if consistent results for scientifically interesting quantities (abundances, cloud properties) can be obtained using reflected light spectra from a space based coronagraph, given the likely modest signal-to-noise and spectral resolution.
\section{FORWARD MODEL}
\label{fwd}
Our geometric albedo code for giant planets was originally developed by \citet{Marley:1999} and is based on the methods of \citet{McKay:1989}. This code was subsequently modified and improved by \citet{Cahoy:2010}, who investigated the albedo variations as a function of star-planet distance, metallicity, mass, and phase angle. This original albedo code uses as input parameters the exoplanet's gravity and depth-dependent temperature, pressure, composition, and cloud properties
which are in turn computed by a 1-D radiative-convective
equilibrium model \citep{Marley:1999,Cahoy:2010}. The atmosphere is divided in 60 layers, with the bottom pressure marking the point beyond which photon scattering is negligible. This pressure level is taken from the radiative-convective equilibrium model for HD 99492c, and from the measured pressure-temperature profiles for Jupiter and Saturn \citep{Seiff:1998,Tyler:1982}. In all these cases, this pressure level is below the observable cloud decks. In summary, $P_{bottom}$ is 40 bars for HD 99492 c and the cloud free and 1-cloud validation cases, 10 bars for Jupiter and the 2-cloud validation case, and 251 bars for Saturn. In the full forward model the clouds are parametrized by wavelength-dependent optical depth $\tau_{cld}$, single scattering albedo ($\bar{\omega}_{cld}$), and scattering asymmetry factor ($\bar{g}_{cld}$), obtained from a full Mie scattering treatment of particle sizes
predicted by a cloud model \citep{Ackerman:2001}. The single scattering albedo represents the ratio between the amounts of scattering and total particle extinction, and the asymmetry factor, $\bar{g}_{cld}$, is a measure of the degree of forward scattering.
To simulate a spherical planet, we cover the illuminated surface of a sphere with 100 plane--parallel facets \citep{Cahoy:2010}, where each facet may have different incident and observed angles, $\mu_0=\cos \theta_0$ and $\mu_1=\cos \theta_1$, where $\theta_0$ and $\theta_1$ are the angles between the local normal vector and the star and observer, respectively. Although the ability to use different combinations of incident and observed angles allows for arbitrary planet phase angles, we modeled the planet as observed at 0-degree phase angle (face-on), in which case the observer and the source are collinear and $\mu_0=\mu_1$ for every facet. Increasing the number of facets proportionally increases the computing time, and only leads to a modest increase in accuracy. In this case, the albedo code takes about $3\,\rm s$ to run, which is reasonable to use in combination with an MCMC sampler. Although the general case permits $\theta_0 \ne \theta_1$, for the work reported here we set $\theta_0 = \theta_1$ in order
to compute geometric albedo, which by definition is the reflectivity at zero phase angle.
In a future work (Nayak et al, submitted) we will consider observations at arbitrary phase angle.
Following the approach of \citet{Horak:1950} and \citet{Horak:1965}, we use two-dimensional planetary coordinates and Chebyshev-Gauss integration to integrate over the emergent intensities and calculate the albedo spectra. The radiative transfer is performed point by point for each of the points sampling the planetary disk. The scattering source function \citep{Toon:1989,Meador:1980} includes the contributions of both diffuse and direct scattering:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:source}
\begin{aligned}
S(\tau,\mu_1)=\frac{\bar{\omega}}{4\pi}F_0 p(\mu_1,-\mu_0)e^{-\tau/\mu_0}\\
+\int_{-1}^{1} \frac{\bar{\omega}}{2}I(\tau,\mu')p(\mu_1,\mu') d\mu',
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $F_0$ is the Solar flux at to top of the atmosphere, normalized to 1, and $p(\mu_1,\mu_2)$ is the scattering phase function. The two terms on the right-hand side represent the single and multiple scattering components, respectively.
We use a two-stream quadrature \citep{Toon:1989} to solve for the diffuse, angle-independent radiation field. This solution is then used as an approximation to the source function, which is then back-propagated to the top of the atmosphere, while adding the angular dependence given by the scattering phase function. This is a completely scalar approach and does not include any polarization effects.
Based on our experience and the results of \citet{Cahoy:2010}, we expect that the most important model parameters for Jupiter-like exoplanets in reflected light will be the methane abundance, surface gravity, and cloud properties. In a future paper
we will consider other gaseous opacity sources. The code uses the opacity for methane in the visible following \citet{Karkoschka:1994}, and the collision-induced absorption (CIA) for H$_2$-H$_2$, H$_2$-He and H$_2$-CH$_4$ as summarized in \citet{Freedman:2008}.
The total gaseous absorption optical depth is then $\tau_{abs}=\tau_{CH4}+\tau_{CIA}$. In spite of newer methane line lists, difficulties remain in calculating the high-energy transitions of methane and \citet{Karkoschka:1994} is still the best reference for the methane opacity in the visible, and is used to reproduce Solar System measurements. We define $\tau_{total}=\tau_{scat}+\tau_{abs}$, where the total optical depth to scattering is $\tau_{scat}=\tau_{Ray}+\tau_{cloud}$.
Following \citet{Cahoy:2010}, for the direct scattering (or single scattering term in Equation~\ref{eq:source}) we use a two-term Henyey-Greenstein scattering phase function with high forward scattering and moderate backscattering:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:tthg}
p_{TTHG}=\left(1-\frac{\bar{g}^2}{4}\right)p_{HG}(\bar{g},\Theta)+\frac{\bar{g}^2}{4}p_{HG}(-\bar{g}/2,\Theta),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:hg}
p_{HG}(\bar{g},\Theta)=\frac{1}{4\pi}\frac{1-\bar{g}^2}{(1+\bar{g}^2-2\bar{g}\cos\Theta)^{3/2}}
\end{equation}
and $\Theta$ is the scattering angle, related to the planet's phase angle $\alpha$ by $\alpha=\pi - \Theta$, and $\bar{g}$ is the scattering asymmetry factor associated with the scattering by cloud particles, $\bar{g}=\bar{g}_{cld}\times\tau_{cld}/\tau_{scat}$, since Rayleigh scattering is treated separately.
For the multiple scattering term in Equation~\ref{eq:source}, the diffuse scattering phase function is written as a Legendre polynomial expansion, assuming azimuthal independence:
\begin{equation}
p(\mu,\mu')=1+3\bar{g}\mu\mu'+\bar{g}_2(3(\mu\mu')^2-1)/2,
\end{equation}
where $\mu$ and $\mu'$ denote the scattered and incident angle, respectively, and $\bar{g}_2$ contains the Rayleigh scattering contribution $\bar{g}_2=\bar{g}_{Ray}\times\tau_{Ray}/\tau_{scat}$. Here $\mu$ and $\mu'$ are chosen such that the right solution is obtained in the Rayleigh limit. Rayleigh scattering is calculated following \citet{Hansen:1974}, with $\bar{g}_{Ray}=0.5$, and $\bar{\omega}_{Ray}=1$. The total layer single scattering albedo then becomes $(\bar{\omega}_{Ray}\tau_{Ray}+\bar{\omega}_{\rm cld}\tau_{\rm cld})/\tau_{total}$, for every layer in the atmosphere. Further details of the radiative-transfer modeling are described in \citet{Marley:1999,Cahoy:2010}.
For retrieval purposes, we have preserved the radiative transfer and scattering prescription of the original albedo code, but made large simplifications to the input parameters. The simplified model used in the present study has constant molecular abundances throughout the atmosphere, with H$_2$ and He in primordial solar ratio. The pressure-temperature profile $T(P)$ of the atmosphere is kept fixed since we do not expect that our spectral range of interest ($0.4-1$~ $\mu$m) will contain any information for constraining it (see also \citet{Barstow:2014}). The wavelength dependence of the cloud parameters is also ignored (gray assumption for $\tau_{\rm cld}$, $\bar{g}_{\rm cld}$, and $\bar{\omega}_{\rm cld}$). The depth dependence is limited to parametrizing the cloud height and cloud top pressure, as described below.
In actuality of course the temperature-pressure profile will vary with surface gravity and this will primarily affect the atmospheric scale height. Here our variation of atmospheric gravity, $g$, stands in for variations in both $T(P)$ and $g$. As we add complexity to the model we will explore the sensitivity of retrievals to a varying $T(P)$.
\subsection{Cloud Models}
As commonly employed in solar system giant planet atmosphere retrievals \citep[e.g.,][]{Sato:1979}, for the purposes of atmospheric retrieval we consider two different cloud
treatments as illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:cld}. The simpler of the two
models a single cloud layer while the more complex allows for two distinct clouds/hazes.
We describe each model in turn below.
\begin {figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.5,angle=0]{clouds_fig.pdf}
\caption{Visual representation of our 1-cloud (panel A) and 2-cloud (panel B) models. The definitions of model parameters and their use in the albedo code are given in Sections~\ref{1cld} and \ref{2cld}, respectively. \label{fig:cld}}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{1-Cloud Model}
\label{1cld}
The one-cloud model is parameterized as a semi-infinite layer with a cloud top at pressure $P$ in the atmosphere and characterized by the single scattering albedo $\bar{\omega}$, scattering asymmetry factor $\bar{g}$, and the gray optical depth $\tau$ of the
layer where the top cloud is found. For simplicity of notation, we have dropped the subscript `cld' from the quantities $\bar{\omega}_{\rm cld}$, $\bar{g}_{\rm cld}$, $\tau_{\rm cld}$, as defined in the previous section. This structure is shown in panel A of Figure~\ref{fig:cld}.
The pressure of the cloud top is allowed to vary freely. Our typical input pressure-temperature profile has $N=60$ vertical atmospheric layers. We find the model layer in which the cloud top pressure is located, $j_c$ ($1\le j_c \le N$), and scale the cloud optical depth in this layer by the position of the cloud top pressure relative to the pressure at the bottom of the layer. The next deeper layer ($j=j_c+1$) will have cloud optical depth $\tau_j=\tau_{j_c}\times(P_{j+1}/P_j)$, where the layer number $j$ increases with depth in the atmosphere from 0 to $N$ and $P_j$ denotes the pressure at the top of layer $j$. The cloud optical depths in the following layers all the way to the bottom are calculated iteratively as $\tau_{j+1}=\tau_j\times(P_{j+2}/P_{j+1})$. Thus in this model
$\tau$ is essentially a measure of how opaque the cloud top is, and the optical depth per unit mass is constant over the entire vertical extent of the cloud. Large values of $\tau$ imply a rapid transition from cloudless atmosphere to cloud, whereas small values imply a more gradual increase of cloud opacity. Other cloud profile parameterizations are of course possible and we will explore these in future work.
The cloud single scattering albedo $\bar{\omega}$ and scattering asymmetry factor $\bar{g}$ are kept constant as a function of wavelength and depth in the atmosphere, below the layer containing the top of the cloud, e.g. $\bar{\omega}_j=...=\bar{\omega}_N=\bar{\omega}$ for $j\geq j_c$. This model will be referred in what follows as the ``1-cloud model", and is characterized by 6 parameters: $f_{\rm CH4}$, $g$, $P$, $\bar{\omega}$, $\bar{g}$, and $\tau$, where $g$ is the planet's surface gravity, to be distinguished from $\bar{g}$, and $f_{\rm CH4}$ is the methane abundance.
\subsubsection{2-Cloud Model}
\label{2cld}
Increasing complexity, we created a model appropriate for a cloud deck overlain by a haze
layer with a very simple 2 layer structure shown in panel B of Figure~\ref{fig:cld}. Such a model is roughly capable of reproducing the structure observed in Solar System planets, and is a slight modification of the model used in the classic analysis of Jupiter's atmosphere by \citet{Sato:1979}.
The parameters describing the lower cloud are its top pressure $P$ and single scattering albedo ($\bar{\omega}_2$). Following the same approach as in Section~\ref{1cld}, the pressure of the top of the bottom cloud is found in layer $j_c$, the optical depth below this level is scaled in the same way, except now $\tau=1$ in the top cloud layer, and is not variable. Thus this lower cloud has a sharply defined top layer and its total column optical depth is $\gg 1$ in all cases. This ensures that the bottom cloud is always optically thick, and makes it effectively act as a reflective surface, with a reflectivity controlled by $\bar{\omega}_2$, and situated at a variable depth given by $P$.
The position of the upper cloud (or haze layer) relative to the bottom cloud is parametrized by the pressure difference between the top of the lower cloud and the bottom of the upper cloud ({$dP_1$) and the pressure difference between the top and the bottom of the upper cloud ($dP_2$). For computational convenience, these quantities are defined in log space, and are related to the size and location of the top cloud by $\log P_{\rm bottom}=P-dP_1$ and $\log P_{\rm top}=P-dP_1-dP_2$, where $P_{top}$ and $P_{bottom}$ are the pressures at the top and at the bottom of the upper cloud, respectively (see Panel B, Figure~\ref{fig:cld}).
Similar to the 1-cloud approach, we find the layers in which the top and bottom pressure of the upper cloud are located and the corresponding fractions, or locate the cloud in a single layer, if necessary. For all the layers between the top and the bottom, the optical depth of the upper cloud is scaled as $\tau_j=\tau\times(P_{j+1}-P_j)/(P_{\rm bottom}-P_{\rm top})$, where $\tau$ is the input variable and is wavelength-independent. The single-scattering albedo $\bar{\omega}$ and asymmetry factor $\bar{g}$ are again kept constant as a function of wavelength and for all layers between $P_{top}$ and $P_{bottom}$. This model will be referred in what follows as the ``2-cloud model", and is characterized by 9 parameters: $f_{\rm CH4}$, $g$, $P$, $dP_1$, $dP_2$, $\bar{\omega}$, $\bar{g}$, $\tau$, and $\bar{\omega}_2$.
Note that the haze single scattering albedo is treated as a constant with
wavelength. Thus hazes that absorb preferentially in the blue, lowering the albedo in the short-wavelength part of the spectrum,
such as are commonly found in Solar System giant planet atmospheres,
are not taken into account here. These effects become more important below 0.5 $\mu$m, and are unlikely to affect the region of interest for this study ($0.6-1$~$\mu$m). We will address the wavelength dependence of the single scattering albedo in future work, especially when adding photometric points in the blue.
\begin{turnpage}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.45,angle=0]{albedo_plots_corr25_SN5_rc.pdf}
\caption{In each set, the panels are as follows:
(Top left) Expected count rates from all different sources: planet –red, zodi- cyan, speckle-green, detector noise – blue and yellow (too small to see). The total count rate is shown in black.
(Middle left) Total number of counts after calculating the integration time needed to get a SNR of 5. The model counts are solid lines, and the simulated data are stars.
(Top right) Correlated and un-correlated noise contributions. These are added-in when generating the red star data points in the middle-left panel.
(Middle right) Simulated data converted to photon rate, after background subtraction (cyan), compared to the input model (black).
(Bottom left) Simulated data converted back to geometric albedo, after division by the stellar spectrum (cyan), vs actual albedo of Jupiter (red).
(Bottom right) SNR of the simulated data in each wavelength bin. The nominal SNR (5) corresponds to a 10\% band around 550 nm. \label{fig:noise}}
\end{figure*}
\end{turnpage}
\section{SIMULATED DATA}
\label{noise}
To simulate the direct imaging observations, we use a generic prescription for the total signal and associated noise expected in the planet's point spread function (PSF). This model is sufficient for investigating the effect of data quality (as quantified by the signal-to-noise ratio, SNR) on the size of uncertainties associated with the atmospheric parameters and on the significance of methane and cloud detection. We consider this to be a sufficiently general synthetic data model, that will be improved upon as more a detailed instrument simulator for the {\it WFIRST} coronagraph becomes available \citep[e.g.][]{Robinson:2016}. The plots in Figure~\ref{fig:noise} exemplify our simulated data for a Jupiter-like planet around a Sun-like star, at a distance of 25 pc from our Solar System, using the method detailed below.
Let the total number of counts on the detector, within the planet's PSF, be the sum of planet counts $n_{\rm pl}$, raw speckle counts $n_{\rm spec}$, zodiacal light $n_{\rm zodi}$, and the total detector background counts from all other sources. The spectral bins are chosen such that the resolving power $R=70$ is constant across the $0.4-1.0$~$\mu$m bandpass. For each spectral bin, we define
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sn}
\begin{split}
signal (\mathrm{e}^-) & = n_{\rm pl}\times t,\\
noise (\mathrm{e}^-) & = [n_{\rm total}\times t +(f_{pp}\times n_{\rm raw\ speckle}\times t)^2]^{1/2},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
n_{\rm total} (\mathrm{e}^-/\mathrm{s}) &= [n_{\rm pl} + n_{\rm zodi} + n_{\rm raw\ speckle} \\
&+D_c\times m_{\rm pix} + CIC\times m_{\rm pix}/t_{\rm frame} ]\times ENF^2 \\
&+ (N_R/G)^2\times m_{\rm pix}/t_{\rm frame},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
$n_{\rm total}$ is the total number of counts within the planet's PSF, $t$ is the total integration time, and the other quantities characterize the detector background noise, with ``typical values" for an electron multiplying (EM) CCD detector: $m_{\rm pix}=5$~pixels, $D_{C}=0.001$~e$^-$(pixel s)$^{-1}$, $N_{R}=3$~RMS~e$^-$(pixel frame)$^{-1}$, $t_{\rm frame}=300$~s, $CIC=0.001$~e$^-$(pixel frame)$^{-1}$, $ENF=1.414$, $G=1000$, and $t=14000$~s. These estimated count rates are generic values, and will vary with the type of planet and wavelength. However, they are a good starting point for our study in SNR space, to scale the relative contributions of different noise sources. The factor $f_{pp}$ quantifies the speckle reduction efficiency that is expected in post-processing, and can take values roughly between 1/10 and 1/30 \citep{Traub:2016}. We use the generally adopted value $f_{pp}=1/20$ in this paper.
Assuming the stellar spectrum to be a blackbody at 6000~K, and using the model geometric albedo of the planet, we have calculated the expected number of photons in each spectral bin. This number was converted to a count rate, using estimated count rates of $n_{\rm pl}=0.012$~e$^-$/s, $n_{\rm zodi}=0.012$~e$^-$/s, $n_{\rm spec}=0.010$~e$^-$/s, which contain information about the expected quantum efficiency. It should be noted that here we are making the simplest assumptions on the noise model and in general $n_{\rm pl}$ depends on wavelength and planet type. A more sophisticated noise model for the {\it WFIRST} coronagraph instrument has recently been made available \citep{Robinson:2016} and will be used in future work. The number counts coming from all contributions to the total signal are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:noise}, top left panel. The observed spectrum is simulated assuming that the planet and zodi counts have a Poisson distribution (per channel), while the speckle and detector noise counts have a Gaussian distribution (Figure~\ref{fig:noise} center left). In other words, the simulated data points are drawn from their respective distributions.
In addition, we consider the possibility of noise correlations among different spectral regions. Since the speckle positions relative to the central star change with wavelength, we expect that at the position of the planet in the observed image certain wavelengths will be more affected by speckle noise than others. In our model, we assume that this will affect only the Gaussian-distributed counts, which are dominated by speckle counts, and not Poisson-distributed ones, which consist of planet and zodi counts. Therefore, the total noise contribution of the Gaussian-distributed counts (their distribution around the mean) was split into 2 components, one spectrally correlated, and one spectrally uncorrelated. The correlated noise component was generated as a Gaussian random process with a squared-exponential kernel and correlation length scale of either 25 or 100 nm. These length scales are appropriate for our chosen spectral range and expected spatial resolution, and the choice of a random process reflects the existing uncertainty in the exact behavior of the speckle noise correlation. Furthermore, we assumed that both correlated and uncorrelated components have equal contributions to the total scatter in the data points, and therefore their distributions will have mean zero and equal variance. This combination of spectrally correlated and uncorrelated noise is shown in the top right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:noise}.
We define the signal-to-noise reference value (SNR$_0$=signal/noise, from Equation~\ref{eq:sn}) as corresponding to the integrated number of counts in a 6\%-wide bandpass centered at 450~nm. Therefore, the integration time needed to achieve a given SNR$_0$ can be calculated as
\begin{equation}
t (\mathrm{s}) = \frac{SNR_0^2 \times n_{0\rm total}}{n_{0\rm pl}^2-(SNR_0\times f_{pp}\times n_{0\rm raw\ speckle})^2},
\end{equation}
where the index $0$ denotes the fact that these values are calculated for the 550~nm reference bandpass. We calculate the integration time $t_0$ necessary to obtain a SNR$_0$ of 5, 10, or 20, respectively, which is then used to calculate the expected number of counts and scale the signal and noise across the entire bandpass. The final error bars are computed individually for each simulated data point using Equation~\ref{eq:sn}. As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:noise}, the resulting spectrum will have a SNR$<$SNR$_0$ on average, but we will take the SNR$_0$ as the reference value in what follows. The values for SNR$_0$ and speckle noise correlation length as defined above serve as a parametrization of the data space over which we perform our retrievals. The combination of the three SNR values and two possible speckle noise correlation lengths result in 6 simulated datasets for each planet model.
Lacking more detailed information about the instrument, in the above we have assumed that the entire bandpass is observed simultaneously and the quantum efficiency (detector response) is constant across the bandpass. Although these conditions will not be satisfied in a real observation, they amount to assuming that we can achieve the final SNR distribution with wavelength shown in the bottom right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:noise}. This is just one of the many possible realizations of SNR variation over the bandpass, and this is likely to be unique to each dataset, which will likely be a combination of different observing modes. It is to be expected that the best fit parameter values from our retrievals will depend on the noise distribution with wavelength, as well as on the individual random point generation for each simulated dataset. A complete instrument simulator will be needed to estimate the actual science return from a future mission.
\section{ATMOSPHERIC RETRIEVAL SCHEME}
\label{mcmc}
The allowed ranges and best fit values for the forward model parameters, given the data, are determined using two Bayesian posterior sampling algorithms, namely the affine invariant ensemble Markov chain Monte Carlo sampler, $emcee$ \citep{Goodman:2010, Foreman-Mackey:2013}, and the multimodal nested sampling algorithm $MultiNest$ \citep{Feroz:2008,Feroz:2009,Feroz:2013}. These approaches permit efficient sampling of highly correlated, non-gaussian, and high-dimensional parameter spaces, and are very readily scaleable to multi-processor computing.
The different approaches taken by the two algorithms in sampling the posterior parameter space can help us avoid the pitfalls of either one. While $emcee$ starts with a first guess and can become trapped in a local minimum, MultiNest starts with a grid of points covering the entire prior parameter space and proceeds by narrowing down the maximum likelihood regions. On the other hand, $MultiNest$ could favor highly-peaked, multi-modal, Gaussian-like distributions, while $emcee$ is more agnostic to the shape of the posterior and can reveal additional tails and correlations. The total evidence for any given model (the integral over the posterior distribution) is automatically calculated by $MultiNest$ as a part of the algorithm, but requires extra steps and can be tricky to compute for $emcee$. Ideally, the two methods will converge to the same solution.
Overall, we consider the two approaches complementary, and offer greater confidence in avoiding potential biases. Recently, \citet{Allison:2014} have compared in detail these sampling techniques and found that nested sampling is more time-efficient while still providing good accuracy, and the affine-invariant MCMC sampler can be competitive when massively parallelized. They both outperform by far traditional Metropolis-Hastings algorithms. For completeness, we provide a brief description of the two posterior sampling algorithms in the Appendix.
A second component of the retrieval process consists of model comparison, with the purpose of quantifying not only the uncertainties in the model parameters, but also the evidence in support of a chosen model. In this step we can assess whether the 1-cloud or 2-cloud model presented in Section~\ref{1cld} and \ref{2cld} offer a better representation of the data and calculate the significance associated with the cloud or methane detection. The choice between two competing models $\mathcal{M}_X$ and $\mathcal{M}_Y$ then comes down to comparing their probabilities by constructing the {\it Bayes factor}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bdef}
B_{XY}=\frac{\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{M}_X\mid \mathcal{D})}{\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{M}_Y\mid \mathcal{D})}=\frac{\mathcal{Z}_X}{\mathcal{Z}_Y}\frac{\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{M}_X)}{\mathcal{P}(\mathcal{M}_Y)},
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{Z}$ is the Bayesian evidence defined in the Appendix. Usually the last term in Equation~\ref{eq:bdef} is 1 (both models have the same probability). We use the guidelines provided by \citet{Jeffreys:1961,Raftery:1996} for assessing the evidence in support of model $\mathcal{M}_X$ vs $\mathcal{M}_Y$ in terms of Bayes factor:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bf}
\begin{split}
2\log B_{XY} < 0 & \mbox{: Negative (supports }\mathcal{M}_Y),\\
0 < 2\log B_{XY} < 2 & \mbox{: Inconclusive},\\
2 < 2\log B_{XY} < 5 & \mbox{: Positive},\\
5 < 2\log B_{XY} < 10 & \mbox{: Moderate},\\
2\log B_{XY} > 10 & \mbox{: Very Strong (supports }\mathcal{M}_X).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
This ranking system is equally applicable when the evidence supports model $Y$, in which case we simply calculate $B_{YX}$.
Since the posterior distribution in general does not have an analytic form, the difficulty arises when attempting to compute $\mathcal{Z}$ for each model under consideration. In general, the evaluation of Bayesian evidence from an existing MCMC posterior is limited by the poor sampling of regions of low likelihood. This problem can be overcome using thermodynamic integration, at computational costs $10-100\times$ higher than a regular MCMC \citep[e.g. ][]{Trotta:2008,Calderhead:2009}. However, as long as the Bayes factor is found within the ranges in Equation~\ref{eq:bf}, the precise value of $B_{XY}$ is not important. In general, some rough assumptions are made on the functional shape of the prior and posterior distributions to be able to approximate the value of this integral. While these approximations are not very accurate, \citet{Cornish:2007} show that for high signal-to noise data (SNR $\gtrsim 9$) all methods converge toward the same values. In this paper we estimate $\mathcal{Z}$ using three different methods: the Schwarz-Bayes information criterion \citep[BIC, ][]{Schwarz:1978}, the Laplace approximation \citep{Lopes:2004, Cornish:2007}, and the Numerical Lebesgue Algorithm (NLA) described by \citet{Weinberg:2012}. We refer the reader to the Appendix for a summary of these methods and relevant definitions. The scatter among the results given by these three methods are indicative of the reliability of these approximations for various models and SNR regimes. In general, we observe that the values converge when the evidence for a given model is very strong. Further, these results obtained from the MCMC samples are validated by comparison with the evidence values calculated by default with the nested sampling algorithm.
\subsection{Priors}
\label{prio}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lcccccc}
\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
\tablecolumns{8}
\tablecaption{Model parameters and priors for the 1-cloud forward model.\label{tab:param1c}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Planet} & \colhead{$\log(f_{\rm CH4})$} & \colhead{$\log(g)$} & \colhead{$\log(P)$} & \colhead{$\bar{\omega}$} & \colhead{$\bar{g}$} & \colhead{$\log(\tau_{\rm top})$\tablenotemark{a}} \\
& & (m s$^{-2}$) & (bar) & & & }
\startdata
Cloud-free case & [-8.,0.] & [-1.,2.] & [-4.4,1.6] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-10.,2.]\\
1-cloud case & [-8.,0.] & [-1.,2.] & [-4.4,1.6] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-5.,3.]\\
2-cloud case & [-8.,0.] & [0.,2.] & [-4.4,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-5.,3.]\\
HD 99492 c & [-8.,0.] & [-1.,2.] & [-4.4,1.6] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-4.,3.] \\
Jupiter & [-8.,0.] & [0.,2.] & [-4.4,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-5.,3.] \\
Saturn & [-8.,0.] & [0.,3.] & [-5.9,2.39] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-5.,3.]\\
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{For clarity, here the cloud optical depth parameterization is written as $\tau_{\rm top}$, to show the difference between the two forward models (see Sections \ref{1cld} and \ref{2cld}).}
\end{deluxetable*}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lcccccccccc}
\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
\tablecolumns{8}
\tablecaption{Model parameters and priors for the 2-cloud forward model.\label{tab:param2c}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Planet} & \colhead{$\log(f_{\rm CH4})$} & \colhead{$\log(g)$} & \colhead{$\log(P)$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{$dP_1$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{$dP_2$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{$10.^{P-dP_1-dP_2}$\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{$\bar{\omega}$} & \colhead{$\bar{g}$} & \colhead{$\log(\tau_{\rm total})$\tablenotemark{c}} & \colhead{$\bar{\omega}_2$} \\
& & (m s$^{-2}$) & (bar) & & & (bar) & & & & }
\startdata
Cloud-free case & [-8.,0.] & [-1.,2.] & [-4.4,1.6] & $>0$ & $>0$ & 4.e-5 & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-10.,3.]\\
1-cloud case & [-8.,0.] & [-1.,2.] & [-4.4,1.6] & $>0$ & $>0$ & 4.e-5 & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-4.,3.]\\
2-cloud case & [-8.,0.] & [0.,2.] & [-5.3,0.9999] & $>0$ & $>0$ & 4.e-5 & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-3.,2.]\\
HD 99492 c & [-8.,0.] & [-1.,2.] & [-4.4,1.6] & $>0$ & $>0$ & 4.e-5 & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-4.,3.]\\
Jupiter & [-8.,0.] & [0.,3.] & [-5.3,0.9999] & $>0$ & $>0$ & 4.e-5 & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-3.,3.]\\
Saturn & [-8.,0.] & [0.,3.] & [-5.9,2.39] & $>0$ & $>0$ & 1.2e-6 & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [0.01,0.9999] & [-3.,3.]\\
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{For correspondence with $P_{top}$ and $P_{bottom}$ in Figure~\ref{fig:cld}, $P$, $dP_1$ and $dP_2$ are defined such that $\log P_{\rm bottom}=P-dP_1$ and $\log P_{\rm top}=P-dP_1-dP_2$.}
\tablenotetext{b}{Extra prior for the 2-cloud model ensuring that the sum of the layers does not exceed the height of the atmosphere.}
\tablenotetext{c}{For clarity, here the cloud optical depth parameterization is written as $\tau_{\rm total}$, to show the difference between the two forward models (see Sections \ref{1cld} and \ref{2cld}).}
\end{deluxetable*}
The parameters retrieved for each of the cloud models are described in Sections~\ref{1cld} and \ref{2cld}. In addition to the cloud properties, we are retrieving the methane abundance and surface gravity. For each retrieval case, the priors on the parameteres for the 1-cloud and 2-cloud models are shown in Tables~\ref{tab:param1c} and \ref{tab:param2c}, respectively. Water and alkali abundances will be included as model parameters in future work; however, for the applications considered in this paper (e.g. Jupiter, Saturn), methane is the main absorber. We define the atmospheric methane mixing ratio, {\it{fCH4}}, as the volume mixing ratio of methane. Since in a giant planet atmosphere 98\% of the atmospheric constituents are H$_2$ and He, this uniquely defines the atmospheric methane content. Such an approach would not be possible for a terrestrial planet of course.
We allowed gravity to vary because in the realistic case neither the size of the planet nor the planetary mass will be known precisely. We allowed an exceptionally large range of gravities to be tested by the retrievals. In a realistic case the planet mass (for RV planets) will be known to substantially better than a factor two by the orbital astrometry solution. From the mass-radius relationship for gas giant planets and albedo scaling arguments the radius will likely be known to within 50\%, which dominates the gravity uncertainty. Thus for a Jupiter twin the gravity ($g = 25$~m~s$^{-2}$) would plausibly be known to be $<100$~m~s$^{-2}$, not $<1000$~m~s$^{-2}$ as is the constraint placed in most of the results shown here. This turned out to be very important as, all else being equal, a large methane mixing ratio is required at high gravity to produce equivalent
absorption band depths as a lower abundance at lower gravity.
We recognize the degeneracies that will be introduced by the unknown planet radius and phase angle. In an extension of this work (Nayak et al., submitted) we are explicitly separating the mass and radius and introduce the phase angle as a new parameter. In the current work, the stellar flux is normalized to 1, such that the planet radius does not factor in directly. However, in a realistic case the radius of the planet will act as an overall scaling factor, and we expect to see degeneracies between the radius, phase angle, and planet reflectivity (here $\bar{\omega}$ and/or $\bar{\omega}_2$). These correlations will add to the uncertainties, and have to be seen as a caveat in the present work.
The only restriction on the vertical cloud structure ($P$, $dP_1$, and $dP_2$) is that it does not exceed the total vertical extent of the atmosphere. The cloud albedos and asymmetry factor are allowed to take any value between 0 and 1, while the optical depth of the upper cloud varies between $10^{-3}$ and $10^3$. This optical depth is also varied in the 1-cloud model, but the lower cloud in the 2-cloud model is assumed optically thick (see Section~\ref{2cld}).
The pressure-temperature profile of the atmosphere is kept constant, since there is no information in the spectra at these wavelengths ($0.4-1.0$~$\mu$m) to constrain it. We are considering replacing this fixed profile by a parametrized one, to better account for the effect of surface gravity \citep{Line:2013}.
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\hspace*{-0.4cm}\includegraphics*[scale=0.62,angle=0]{tri_spec_val_fig.pdf}
\caption{Simulated data and best fit spectra for the cloud free case in Section~\ref{v0c} (left) and the single cloud case in Section~\ref{v1c} (middle), using the {\bf 1c} forward model, and for the for the 2-cloud case in Section~\ref{v2c} (right), using the {\bf 2c} forward model. The data correspond to SNR=5, 10, 20, from top to bottom and a spectral correlation noise of 25 nm. The results for a correlation length of 100 nm are similar. The solid and semi-transparent red regions represent $1-\sigma$ and $2-\sigma$ intervals, respectively. These intervals represent the standard deviation a set of 500 spectra generated using random samples from the converged MCMC distribution. The blue line represents the median of this set. The retrieval was performed over the $0.4-1.0$ $\mu$m region, as indicated by the green vertical line. \label{fig:vspec}}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Implementation}
\label{comp}
The forward models described in Sections~\ref{1cld} and \ref{2cld} have been coded in Fortran and converted into a Python-callable library using f2py (now part of the NumPy package). The retrieval scheme integrates this library with either emcee or PyMultiNest, alternatively. Both MCMC and nested sampling implementations are easily scalable to run from a laptop to a computer cluster. The Fortran code is also parallelizable, but this does not provide a significant increase in speed as long as the MCMC is parallelized. Our retrievals were run on the {\it NASA} {\it Pleiades} Supercomputer, where we highly optimized the code for the forward models, and took advantage of the parallel nature of the algorithms to run on up to 216 processors at the same time (one 24-core node per model parameter). The MultiNest algorithm is found to converge rapidly even when run on just 1-2 nodes.
We have quantified the methane and cloud detections by calculating the ratios of their respective Bayes factors, as described in Section~\ref{mcmc}. For each case (SNR and spectral correlation length combination), a set of four different forward models was used: the 2-cloud model with 9 parameters (Section~\ref{2cld}), the 1-cloud model with 6 parameters (Section~\ref{1cld}), a model without clouds (the cloud subroutines are turned off in the previous models), and a model without methane (the methane abundance is set to $10^{-20}$ in the previous models). Therefore, for each planet example, we ran a set of 24 retrievals using $emcee$. In addition, we performed the same retrievals using $MultiNest$ for the models with a spectral correlation length of 25~nm mainly to cross-check the Bayesian evidence values calculated from the MCMC chains. In cases of good convergence, $MultiNest$ also provided parameter constraints in agreement with $emcee$ at a lower computational costs.
\section{RETRIEVAL VALIDATION}
\label{results}
In order to validate our retrieval procedure, we generate albedo spectra using the 1-cloud and 2-cloud models presented in Section~\ref{1cld} and \ref{2cld}, respectively. We use the 1-cloud forward model to generate 2 types of spectra: one for an optically thin cloud very deep in the atmosphere, equivalent to a cloud-free atmosphere; and one for an optically thick cloud at moderate height. The third case is generated with the 2-cloud model. The model spectra are then converted to simulated observations using the noise prescription described in Section~\ref{noise}. For each of these three cases we investigate the ability to retrieve the input model parameters, as a function of SNR and noise correlation length. For each of the three cases we ran retrievals using the full 1-cloud and 2-cloud models, a forward model with the clouds turned off (referred to as ``no clouds"; defaults to 0 for all $\bar{g}$, $\bar{\omega}$, and $\tau$'s), and a forward model with negligible methane abundance (referred to as ``no methane", {\it fCH4$=10^{-20}$}). For convenience of notation, we will refer to these four model retrievals as {\bf 1c}, {\bf 2c}, {\bf -c}, and {\bf -m}, where a {\bf 2c-m} notation for example would stand for ``2-cloud forward model without methane". Each SNR and spectral noise correlation length combination was run through the retrieval procedure four times to enable model comparison and assess the significance of methane and cloud detection. Tables~\ref{tab:vres1} and \ref{tab:vres2} summarize the input parameter values for each of the simulated spectra, and the confidence intervals for each parameter obtained after running the retrieval procedure.
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{mcmc_histograms_fake_hd99492c_0c.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{mcmc_intervals_fake_hd99492c_0c.pdf}
\caption{Upper: 1-D marginal likelihood distributions for the six parameters in the 1-cloud model ({\bf 1c}) for the cloud-free case in Section~\ref{v0c}. The SNR values are color-coded, with black, blue, and orange for SNR 5, 10, and 20, respectively. The thin solid histograms show the distributions corresponding to a noise correlation length of 25~nm, and the thick semi-transparent ones for a noise correlation length of 100~nm. Lower: Confidence intervals for the model parameters retrieved using MCMC. The color coding matches the upper panel, the black lines show the $1\sigma$ intervals from the nested sampling retrievals, and the red horizontal line shows the input parameter value in the original albedo model. The two spectral correlation lengths are labeled in the left/right parts of the plots. These values are also summarized in Table~\ref{tab:vres1}. Note that the confidence intervals are calculated from the distribution quantiles, and do not reflect possible upper/lower limits or unconstrained parameters that can be seen in the histograms. \label{fig:c0fit}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.55,angle=0]{0c_triangle_fig.pdf}
\caption{2-D marginal posterior probability distributions for SNR=5, 10 and 20, and spectral noise correlation length of 25 nm, for the cloud free case in Section~\ref{v0c}, using the {\bf 1c} forward model. Since the $\bar g$ and $\bar{\omega}$ parameters are unconstrained in this case, we only plot the remaining ones. The red color map corresponds to distributions obtained using the MCMC algorithm, and the blue contours to nested sampling. The black lines show the real solution. \label{fig:c0dd}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.38,angle=0]{plot_evidence_0c.pdf}
\caption{Bayes factors and associated significance levels, as defined in Section~\ref{evidence}, for the cloud free case in Section~\ref{v0c}. The vertical shading grades follow the intervals defined in Equation~\ref{eq:bf}. The yellow triangles correspond to the ratios $\mathcal{Z}_{1c}/\mathcal{Z}_{1c-m}$, the blue circles to $\mathcal{Z}_{1c}/\mathcal{Z}_{1c-c}$, and the green stars to $\mathcal{Z}_{1c}/\mathcal{Z}_{2c}$. The colored symbols represent the results derived from the MCMC samples, with the solid color corresponding to a noise correlation length of 25~nm, and the semi-transparent to a noise correlation length of 100~nm. For comparison, the black symbols use the evidence values provided by the nested sampling algorithm for the cases with a noise correlation length of 25~nm. The symbols correspond to the same Bayes factors shown in color. The values calculated using nested sampling have associated error bars, but too small in general to see on this plot. \label{fig:cld0ev}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Cloud-free Case}
\label{v0c}
We construct the albedo of a cloud-free planet using the 1-cloud model in Section~\ref{1cld}, where the optical depth $\tau$ is set to $10^{-8}$ and the top pressure of the cloud to 10 bar. The other parameters used to generate the model spectrum are listed in Table~\ref{tab:vres1}. Using the noise prescription in Section~\ref{noise}, we generate simulated datasets for SNR values of 5, 10, and 20, and spectral noise correlation lengths of 25 and 100~nm. The data realizations can be seen in the left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:vspec}. The retrieval is performed over the wavelength range 0.4-1.0~$\mu$m, indicated by the green line in Figure~\ref{fig:vspec}. Figures~\ref{fig:c0fit} and \ref{fig:c0dd} show the retrieval results. The marginal probability distributions for the model parameters are shown in the top panel in Figure~\ref{fig:c0fit}. The associated confidence intervals are bounded by the 16\% and 84\% quantiles of the cumulative probability distributions and are shown in the bottom panel of the same figure. These confidence intervals are also listed in Table~\ref{tab:vres1}.
We find that for a cloud-free planet both the methane abundance {\it fCH4} and surface gravity $g$ are well constrained. The methane abundance is constrained to within a factor of $\sim2.6$ at a SNR of 5 and within a factor of $\sim1.15$ at a SNR of 20. The surface gravity is constrained to within a factor of $\sim4$ at a SNR of 5 and within a factor of $\sim1.2$ at a SNR of 20. As expected, the cloud albedo $\bar{\omega}$ and scattering asymmetry factor $\bar{g}$ are not constrained, since they do not contribute to the observed spectrum.
The 2-dimensional posterior probability distributions shown in Figure~\ref{fig:c0dd} trace the changes in the parameter constraints as the SNR increases from 5 to 20. This is also reflected by the decrease in the size of confidence intervals shown in the bottom panel of Figure~\ref{fig:c0fit}. The distributions clearly become narrower and more peaked as the SNR increases. This projection also shows that the pressure of the top of the cloud deck in the model is partly correlated with the optical depth $\tau$. A larger top cloud pressure (deeper cloud) allows for a larger range of optical depths. This can be intuitively understood since a deep cloud will have little effect on the observed spectrum even when its optical depth is larger. The range of spectra obtained using parameters drawn from the posterior probability distributions are shown by the red contours in Figure~\ref{fig:vspec}. We also note the excellent agreement between the MCMC and nested sampling methods, where the nested sampling results are shown by the blue contours in Figure~\ref{fig:c0dd}, and by the black lines in Figure~\ref{fig:c0fit}.
The posterior constraints on the cloud parameters $P$, $\tau$, $\bar{\omega}$, and $\bar{g}$ already indicate that the spectrum does not support the presence of an observable cloud. This is further confirmed by the Bayesian evidence analysis. We sample the posterior probability distributions for a set of 4 models: {\bf 1c}, {\bf 1c-m}, {\bf 1c-c}, and {\bf 2c}, as defined above. The pairwise Bayes factors for these models are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:cld0ev}. Clearly, methane is detected with a high significance even when the spectral SNR is 5 (yellow triangles).
However, the presence of a cloud is not supported. The models containing 2-clouds, 1-cloud, or no clouds are equally able of describing the data, since even in a multiple cloud model the optical depth of the clouds can be very low, effectively acting as a no-cloud model. No preference for a given cloud model in this case means that the presence of a cloud is not necessary to explain the observed spectrum. In this sense, the Bayesian evidence for all these models should be approximately equal, and the scatter in the Bayes factors in Figure~\ref{fig:cld0ev} shows the poor performance of the evidence approximations when the significance is low. A large scatter in the Bayesian evidence calculations by different methods has also been observed by \citet{Cornish:2007} when SNR$\lesssim 7$. When the support for a certain model is low, we also note a lack of correlation between the model significance and the SNR (e.g. green and blue lines in Figure~\ref{fig:cld0ev}). This shows that the retrieval results in such cases are dominated by the particular noise realization. The black symbols in Figure~\ref{fig:cld0ev} show the Bayes factors obtained using the evidence calculated by the nested sampling algorithm. The agreement is excellent for the high-significance methane detection, but lays within the large scatter for the cloud-model comparison.
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{mcmc_histograms_fake_hd99492c_1c.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{mcmc_intervals_fake_hd99492c_1c.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:c0fit}, for the 1-cloud case in Section~\ref{v1c}. \label{fig:c1fit}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.45,angle=0]{1c_triangle_fig.pdf}
\caption{Sample 2-D marginal posterior probability distributions for SNR=10 and spectral noise correlation length of 25 nm, for the single cloud case in Section~\ref{v1c}, using the {\bf 1c} forward model. The red color map corresponds to distributions obtained using the MCMC algorithm, and the blue contours to nested sampling. The black lines show the real solution. \label{fig:c1dd}}
\end{figure}
\begin {figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.38,angle=0]{plot_evidence_1c.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:cld0ev}, for the 1-cloud case in Section~\ref{v1c}. In this case, there is no ambiguity in model selection with a cloud clearly detected at $\sim 20\sigma$ significance even when the SNR of the input data is only 5. \label{fig:cld1ev}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Single-cloud Case}
\label{v1c}
By raising the optical depth $\tau$ to 1, and the cloud top pressure to 0.2 bar, we can use the 1-cloud model to generate the albedo spectrum of a planet with an observable cloud deck. The simulated observations of such a planet are shown in the middle panel of Figure~\ref{fig:vspec}. The results of this retrieval are shown in Figures~\ref{fig:c1fit} and \ref{fig:c1dd}, and in the bottom half of Table~\ref{tab:vres1}. In this case the methane abundance is still well constrained, although within a wider range than for the no-cloud case, namely within a factor of $\sim 5$ for a SNR of 5 up to within a factor of $\sim 3$ for a SNR of 20. The original abundance value is well within the predicted ranges, where the SNR=10 case with a correlation length of 100~nm seems to be an outlier.
The surface gravity of the planet is no longer constrained in this case, but is found instead to correlate with the cloud top pressure (Figure~\ref{fig:c1dd}). The power of the posterior sampling lays in discovering such correlations between model parameters. Figure~\ref{fig:c1dd} also shows the correlation between the cloud albedo $\bar{\omega}$ and scattering asymmetry factor $\bar{g}$, and between the top cloud pressure and its optical depth. Essentially, an optically thick cloud also constrains the cloud top pressure between $\sim 0.01$ and 1~bar, while an optically thin cloud would require the cloud top pressure to be very close to the top of the atmosphere. Independent constraints on the surface gravity, such as provided by RV measurements would narrow the allowed range for the cloud top pressure, which in turn would constrain the cloud optical depth. Lacking this information, we obtain a lower limit for the optical depth and an upper limit for the cloud top pressure.
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{hist_2c_1.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{hist_2c_2.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{bars_2c_1.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{bars_2c_2.pdf}
\caption{Similar to Figure~\ref{fig:c0fit}, for the 2-cloud case in Section~\ref{v2c}. The parameters correspond the the 2-cloud model ({\bf 2c}) in Section~\ref{2cld}. The $1\sigma$ intervals obtained using nested sampling can be affected by possible bi-modal distributions (see also Figure~\ref{fig:c2dd}). \label{fig:c2fit}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.6,angle=0]{2c_triangle_fig.pdf}
\caption{Sample 2-D marginal posterior probability distributions for SNR=10 and 20, and spectral noise correlation length of 25 nm, for the 2-cloud case in Section~\ref{v2c}, using the {\bf 2c} forward model. The red color map corresponds to distributions obtained using the MCMC algorithm, and the blue contours to nested sampling. The black lines show the real solution. \label{fig:c2dd}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.38,angle=0]{plot_evidence_2c.pdf}
\caption{Similar plot to Figure~\ref{fig:cld0ev}, for the 2-cloud case in Section~\ref{v2c}. The color scheme has been modified to emphasize the case where a 2-cloud structure is assumed as default. The orange triangles correspond to the ratios $\mathcal{Z}_{2c}/\mathcal{Z}_{2c-m}$, the blue circles to $\mathcal{Z}_{2c}/\mathcal{Z}_{2c-c}$, the pink triangles to $\mathcal{Z}_{1c}/\mathcal{Z}_{1c-c}$, and the green stars to $\mathcal{Z}_{2c}/\mathcal{Z}_{1c}$. As in the previous examples, the methane and cloud are clearly detected even with a SNR=5 dataset. \label{fig:cld2ev}}
\end{figure}
The other very well constrained parameter is the cloud albedo $\bar{\omega}$. The confidence intervals on this parameter are only of the order $\pm 5$\% to 2\% depending on the SNR and particular noise realization. The correlation with the scattering asymmetry factor leads to a slight asymmetry in these confidence intervals, but the range of allowed values is still remarkably narrow. On the other hand, the scattering asymmetry factor $\bar{g}$ is virtually unconstrained. Similarly to the no-cloud case, there is excellent agreement between the MCMC and nested sampling results.
The high-significance cloud detection is revealed in the Bayes factor plot in Figure~\ref{fig:cld1ev}. The Bayesian evidence is calculated for the posterior distributions corresponding to the models {\bf 1c}, {\bf 1c-m}, {\bf 1c-c}, and {\bf 2c}. The Bayes factors favor the models with clouds relative to the ones without (blue circles), and the model with methane relative to the one without (yellow triangles). The cloud detection significance is $>10 \sigma$ even when the data have a SNR of 5, showing that the cloud deck is required by the observations. The methane detection significance is similar to that in Section~\ref{v0c}. Similarly, the retrieval cannot distinguish between a 1-cloud or a 2-cloud model (green stars), since a 2-cloud model can be reduced to a 1-cloud model as the gap between the 2 cloud decks becomes small and the optical depth of the top cloud becomes large.
\subsection{Two-cloud Case}
\label{v2c}
The final validation case consists of a spectrum generated using the 2-cloud model in Section~\ref{2cld}. The input parameters for the original spectrum are listed in Table~\ref{tab:vres2}, and the simulated datasets are shown in the right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:vspec}. The retrieved marginal probability distributions and confidence intervals are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:c2fit}. In this case, the uncertainty in the methane abundance does not shrink considerably before the SNR reaches a value of 20. The confidence interval for {\it fCH4} extends over a factor of $\sim 30$ ($\sim 60-70$ for nested sampling) when the SNR is 5-10, but drops to a factor of 2 when the SNR reaches 20. Similarly to the 1-cloud case, the surface gravity is not constrained by the data. The multi-dimensional correlation between {\it fCH4}, {\it P}, and {\it g} seen in Figure~\ref{fig:c2dd} (at SNR=10) shows the benefit in reducing the allowed range in {\it g}, via RV and astrometry measurements, which will then propagate into narrowing the allowed ranges in {\it P} and {\it fCH4}. For a SNR=20 dataset, the uncertainties in {\it fCH4} and {\it P} are simultaneously reduced (Figure~\ref{fig:c2dd}). In this case, the pressure at the top of the bottom cloud ($P$) is also constrained to within a factor of $\sim 3$.
The scattering asymmetry factor $\bar{g}$ of the upper cloud and its albedo $\bar{\omega}$ are both completely unconstrained, while the uncertainty in the albedo of the lower cloud ($\bar{\omega_2}$) is only 1\% even when the data has a SNR of 5. The MCMC algorithm places an upper limit on the optical depth of the upper cloud, which is consistent with the lack of constraints for the other upper cloud parameters, but imposes a very tight constraint on the bottom cloud albedo. Intuitively, as seen in the previous two examples, the parameters of the upper cloud can be constrained as long as this cloud is optically thick, while the properties of the lower cloud (its albedo) can be determined as long as the upper cloud is optically thin. However, especially at lower SNR (see Figure~\ref{fig:c2dd}), the nested sampling algorithm identifies a second set of solutions, with an optically thick upper cloud, associated with a lower methane abundance and a deeper lower cloud. This result suggests that this degeneracy will not be broken unless the scatter in the data points is greatly reduced. Aside from this new mode identified by the nested sampling algorithm, the two Bayesian approaches are again in excellent agreement. The presence of the second mode can be further investigated by starting the MCMC chains in this part of the parameter space.
We have calculated the Bayes factors and compared the models {\bf 2c}, {\bf 1c}, {\bf 2c-c}, and {\bf 2c-m}. Similar to the 1-cloud case, methane and clouds are both detected at very high significance ($\sigma > 4$) even for a dataset with a SNR of 5, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:cld2ev}. In this case we again cannot distinguish between a 1-cloud and a 2-cloud model, since the first is a special-case limit of the second (green stars). However, both the 1-cloud and the 2-cloud models are equally favored with respect to any cloud free model (blue circles, pink triangles).
\subsection{Importance of SNR and Spectral Noise Correlation Length}
We stress that the quoted significance of the detection itself has no other information on the confidence intervals associated with the model parameters. These confidence intervals, as well as possible correlation and multi-modality, are clearly affected by the SNR of the dataset. The change in the confidence intervals with SNR is shown in Figures~\ref{fig:c0fit}, \ref{fig:c1fit}, and \ref{fig:c2fit}. Overall, while the presence of methane is clearly {\it detected} even at a SNR of 5, its {\it abundance} is well constrained (to within factors of 2-3) only at a SNR of 20. At lower SNR, the uncertainty in the methane abundance is mainly related to correlations with other models parameters, such as the surface gravity and the position of the cloud deck ({\it P}). This situation is improved in the case of a clear atmosphere, where the methane abundance and surface gravity are simultaneously constrained. However, the {\it presence} of a cloud deck is easy to confirm even at a SNR of 5 (as shown by the Bayes factor plots). This suggests that when the presence of clouds is indicated by early observations, an attempt to further increase the SNR is justified in order to constrain the methane abundance.
Our results do not indicate any influence of the spectral noise correlation length on the retrieval results. The uncertainties on the model parameters are similar (see Figures~\ref{fig:c0fit}, \ref{fig:c1fit}, and \ref{fig:c2fit}, and Tables~\ref{tab:vres1} and \ref{tab:vres2}). There is a slight bias towards higher values for the retrieved methane abundance in the no-cloud and 1-cloud cases for a spectral noise correlation length of 100~nm, but it is not clear whether this is an effect of the noise correlation length scale or of the particular noise realization in the simulated dataset. Multiple noise realizations for a given correlation length scale would be required to validate this effect.
\begin {figure}
\centering
\hspace*{-0.4cm}\includegraphics*[scale=0.4,angle=0,trim={10 0 0 0},clip]{mcmc_clouds_hd99492c.pdf}
\caption{Cloud structure for gas giant HD 99492 c, as retrieved using the 2-cloud model (left), and the 1-cloud model (right). The semi-transparent regions are associated with the error bars for the cloud top (bottom) pressures, and the labeling follows the convention in Figure~\ref{fig:cld}. In the left panel, the positions of the cloud layers have been offset for clarity, with the gray regions overlapping to emphasize the fact the both $P_{top}$ and $P_{bottom}$ refer to the same cloud deck, while the blue regions correspond to the second cloud deck defined in Figure~\ref{fig:cld}. The theoretical structure is shown in the right panel, with the region occupied by the cloud calculated using the radiative-convective equilibrium code. The pressure-temperature profile calculated by this code and kept fixed in the retrievals is shown in red in all three panels. The theoretical and retrieved CH$_4$ abundance is shown at the top. \label{fig:hd9cld}}
\end{figure}
\section{REALISTIC TEST CASES}
\label{appl}
For the retrieval tests we used two types of input data, Solar System giants and model planets. We used the Solar System albedo spectra for Jupiter and Saturn from \citet{Karkoschka:1994}, and a theoretical radiative-convective equilibrium model for HD 99492 c. All of these objects have methane dominated optical reflection spectra. We have applied our albedo retrieval method to a set of 24 cases, comprising 6 combinations of SNR (5, 10, 20) and correlation lengths (25 and 100 nm), the same as for the validation cases. The Solar System-like planets are assumed to be at 25 pc from the Earth, while the distance to the HD 99492 c system is 18 pc. The retrievals use data between 0.6 and 1~$\mu$m to more closely match the projected bandpass of {\it WFIRST} (unlike the validation cases where we used the 0.4-1.0~$\mu$m bandpass). For each case we run the MCMC ensemble sampler with 24 walkers (see Appendix) per parameter, for a total of 3800 steps, and we select the last 400 steps for determining the posterior probability distributions. We also use the nested sampling algorithm for the spectra with noise correlation length of 25~nm.
\subsection{HD 99492 c}
\label{shd9}
We start by looking at the model planet HD 99492 c, as the real-world example most closely resembling our 1-cloud model. HD 99492 c is thought to be a gas giant with a mass of $0.36\pm0.02$~M$_{Jup}$, and a semimajor axis of $5.4\pm0.1$~AU, orbiting a K2V star. However, its existence has been challenged recently due to high stellar activity \citep{Kane:2016}.
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{hist_hd9_1.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{hist_hd9_2.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{bars_hd9_1.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{bars_hd9_2.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:c2fit}, for the HD 99492 c model in Section~\ref{shd9}. In a realistic scenario, the ``true" parameters values would not be known, and therefore are not shown. \label{fig:hd9fit}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.6,angle=0]{hd9_triangle_fig.pdf}
\caption{ 2-D marginal posterior distributions for HD 99492 c (SNR=20, CL=25~nm), using a 2-cloud model. The full posterior is bi-modal, with a second, low optical depth mode better identified by the nested sampling algorithm (blue contours). For clarity, we plot the two modes separately, the high optical depth on the left, and the low optical depth on the right. The black dashed lines mark the position of the {\it best fit solution} for each mode. \label{fig:hd9tri}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.6,angle=0]{tri_spec_real_fig.pdf}
\caption{Simulated data and best fit spectra for HD 99492 c (left), Jupiter (middle), Saturn (right), using the {\bf 2c} forward model. The data correspond to SNR=5, 10, 20, from top to bottom and a spectral correlation noise of 25 nm. Same conventions as in Figure~\ref{fig:vspec}. The retrieval was performed over the $0.6-1.0$ $\mu$m region, as indicated by the green vertical line. \label{fig:tspec}}
\end{figure*}
We first determined the pressure-temperature profile for HD 99492 c by computing a 1D radiative-convective equilibrium model following the methods of \citep{Cahoy:2010} while accounting for clouds with the treatment of \citep{Ackerman:2001}. This code computes a self-consistent cloud with vertically varying abundances and particle sizes of each condensible species. This theoretical structure is shown in the right-hand panel in Figure~\ref{fig:hd9cld}. We then input the resulting pressure-temperature profile into a fine-grid albedo code to produce an albedo spectrum comparable to the Solar System data. This high resolution spectrum is then converted to simulated data following the prescription in Section~\ref{noise}, for each chosen combination of SNR and noise correlation length.
Figure \ref{fig:hd9fit} shows the summary of the retrieval results for the gas giant HD 99492 c, with the quantiles listed in Table~\ref{tab:hd9}. An example for the posterior probability distributions for the retrieval using the 2-cloud model is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:hd9tri}. In the 2-cloud scenario, the posterior is bimodal, similar to that found in Section~\ref{v2c}, and we show the most important parameters for the two modes separately in the two panels. The notable difference is that for the mode with a {\it low} optical depth for the top cloud ($\tau$), the albedo of the bottom cloud ($\bar{\omega}_2$) is very well constrained, while for the mode with a {\it high} optical depth for the top cloud, the albedo of the top cloud ($\bar{\omega}$) is very well-constrained, to within $\sim 6\%$. This is easily understood, since in the case of low optical depth we can ``see through" the top cloud, and the albedo of the bottom cloud surface is what determines the spectrum, while the opposite is true when the top cloud is optically thick.
\begin {figure*}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.5,angle=0]{hd9_mix_fig.pdf}
\caption{Best-fit spectra and 2-D marginal posterior distributions for HD 99492 c (SNR=20, CL=25~nm), using a 1-cloud model. The 2-cloud best fit parameters for the two modes are indicated in green in Figure~\ref{fig:hd9tri}. The black lines on the left plot show the 1-cloud parameter values that best match the ``theoretical model" on the right panel in Figure~\ref{fig:hd9cld}. \label{fig:hd9trispec}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure}
\centering
\hspace*{-0.3cm}\includegraphics*[scale=0.7,angle=0]{tri_evidence_fig.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:cld2ev}, for the applications in Section~\ref{appl}. The plots correspond to HD 99492 c, Jupiter, and Saturn, from top to bottom. As in the previous examples, the methane and cloud are clearly detected even with a SNR=5 dataset. \label{fig:tev}}
\end{figure}
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{hist_jup_1.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{hist_jup_2.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{bars_jup_1.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{bars_jup_2.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:hd9fit}, for the Jupiter albedo in Section~\ref{sjup}. \label{fig:jupfit}}
\end{figure*}
We also note that an optically thin top cloud favors a lower methane abundance, since now we integrate through the cloud, down to the bottom cloud, and thus see a greater column of atmosphere which can have a lower fractional CH$_4$ abundance. The position of the {\it best fit} parameter values for each mode was marked in green to emphasize that the best fit parameter {\it combination} is different from the set of median values of the marginal distributions, which are listed in Table~\ref{tab:hd9}. The range of spectra generated using random parameter sets from the posterior are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:tspec}.
In Figure~\ref{fig:hd9trispec} we show both the covariance plot for the retrieval using the 1-cloud model, as the more representative for the planet's vertical structure, and the best-fit spectra for the different models and modes. In the covariance plot the black lines show the parameter values that are closest to the theoretical planet structure. We note that this 1-cloud retrieval solution resembles the high-$\tau$ mode of the 2-cloud posterior, only with a tighter correlation between $P$ and $g$. In this case we find a lower bound for the pressure of the cloud surface, but a lack of constraints for $g$. Similar to the validation case, we can see that a tighter prior in $g$ would translate into better limits on $P$ (via correlation), and a narrower allowed range for {\it fCH4}. The best-fit spectra reveal the complete degeneracy of these solutions (red, blue and yellow lines overlapping). The differences between the retrieved and original spectra (black line) are due to a more comprehensive treatment of gas and cloud opacities in the original model. Additional constraints placed by available photometric points shortward of 0.6~$\mu$m will be investigated in future work.
The degeneracy between the best-fit solution given by the 2-cloud and 1-cloud models is also apparent in Figure~\ref{fig:hd9cld}, where the two cloud decks in the left panel overlap, within the error bars, and basically occupy the same vertical regions as the 1-cloud deck in the middle panel. This plot suggests that for a planet like HD 99492 c our simple cloud model can only provide a lower bound on the pressure at the top of the cloud deck (i.e. upper bound to the height above the surface) and a lower bound on the methane abundance (i.e. the methane abundance is inversely correlated to the cloud top pressure, such that the total CH$_4$ column is constant). Independent priors on the top cloud pressure (from equilibrium structure) and surface gravity (from radius and mass measurements) would help mitigate these uncertainties.
Both Figure~\ref{fig:hd9cld} and \ref{fig:hd9trispec} show a retrieved CH$_4$ abundance that is significantly higher than the one used in the theoretical model. This is in contrast to the 1-cloud validation case, where the constraints on {\it fCH4} are much closer to the real value. This difference may be due to the fact that the forward model spectrum exhibits relatively few CH$_4$ bands compared to the previous test cases, with not enough constraints on continuum level, which sets the cloud top, methane absorption and atmospheric scale height determined by gravity. The cloud treatment in the inverse modeling is also very simplified. While the full theoretical model for HD 99492 c does include cloud optical depth variations with wavelength and depth in the atmosphere, these are not taken into account by the forward model in the retrieval. We note a similar bias toward high {\it fCH4} values in the case of Saturn below, which could be due to similar deficiencies in our simplified cloud model and will be investigated in future work.
As before, we show the Bayes factors between different model choices in the top panel of Figure~\ref{fig:tev}. The presence of methane and a cloud deck is confirmed at very high significance. The 2-cloud model is more disfavored relative to the 1-cloud model, likely due to the presence of additional unnecessary parameters.
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.6,angle=0]{jup_triangle_fig.pdf}
\caption{ 2-D marginal posterior distributions for Jupiter (SNR=20, CL=25~nm), using a 2-cloud model (left) and a 1-cloud model (right). For the 2-cloud retrieval, the two posterior sampling methods lock onto different modes, one with low optical depth (MCMC, red colormap), and the other with high optical depth (nested sampling, blue contours). The best-fit solutions for both samplers, as well as for the 1-cloud model, are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:jupspec}. The dashed black lines show the {\it best fit} values, while the solid ones show the parameter values that best match the ``theoretical structure" of Jupiter shown in Figure~\ref{fig:jupcld}: $g=24.79$~m~s$^{-2}$, $f_{CH_4}=1.8\times 10^{-3}$, and $P=0.7$~bars. \label{fig:juptri}}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Jupiter}
\label{sjup}
Arguably, a Jupiter-like planet is the closest real-world case to our 2-cloud forward model. We have simulated data for a Jupiter-like planet at 25 pc from the Sun using the observed Jupiter spectrum from \citet{Karkoschka:1994}. The results of our retrievals are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:jupfit}. This plot shows that the parameters that are best constrained by the data are {\it fCH4}, $P$, and $\bar{\omega}_2$. We note the narrowing of the distributions and therefore the tightening of the constraints for SNR=20 (orange lines), also shown by the size of the confidence intervals in the bottom plot. The derived CH$_4$ abundance is consistent with the generally adopted value of $(2.37\pm 0.57)\times10^{-3}$ (or -2.625 in log) in Jupiter \citep{Wang:2004}. However, the best constraint is only obtained at SNR=20 in our examples (see also Section~\ref{v2c}), suggesting that future observations should aim to achieve this SNR level. Also, the derived single scattering albedo of the lower cloud, $\bar{\omega}_2$, matches the observed value of 0.997 \citep[e.g., ][]{Sato:1979}. The mean values of these parameters are sensitive to the particular noise realization of each simulated dataset. Unconstrained parameters are $g$ and $\bar{g}$, and an upper limit is derived for $\tau$, showing that the upper cloud is likely optically thin, again consistent with Jupiter's observed stratospheric haze properties. The confidence intervals are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:jup}, and the range in spectra allowed by the posterior samples are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:tspec}.
\begin {figure}
\centering
\hspace*{-0.4cm}\includegraphics*[scale=0.35,angle=0]{final_spectra_compare_jupiter.pdf}
\caption{Best-fit spectra for Jupiter (SNR=20, CL=25~nm), retrieved using the 2-cloud and 1-cloud models. The legend indicates that the low optical depth fit is favored by the MCMC method, while the high optical depth fit is favored by nested sampling (see also Figure~\ref{fig:juptri}). The vertical green line indicates that the retrieval is performed only on data between 0.6 and 1~$\mu$m. \label{fig:jupspec}}
\end{figure}
\begin {figure}
\centering
\hspace*{-0.4cm}\includegraphics*[scale=0.4,angle=0,trim={10 0 0 0},clip]{mcmc_clouds_jupiter.pdf}
\caption{Cloud structure for Jupiter, as retrieved using the 2-cloud model (left), and the 1-cloud model (right). The conventions are described in the Figure~\ref{fig:hd9cld} caption. The theoretical structure is shown in the right panel, with the cloud structure closely resembling available literature \citep[e.g.,][]{Simon-Miller:2001,Sato:2013}. The pressure-temperature profile is approximated as purely radiative in the top layers of the atmosphere (dashed red line).\label{fig:jupcld}}
\end{figure}
Although the MCMC algorithm strongly favors a single-mode posterior with an optically thin upper cloud, the nested sampling algorithm identifies two posterior modes, the second one having an optically thick upper cloud. This is reflected by the large confidence intervals shown in Figure~\ref{fig:jupfit} (black). The second, high optical depth mode, becomes favored by the nested sampling algorithm at SNR=20. Figure~\ref{fig:juptri} shows posterior covariance plots for some selected parameters for SNR=20, and noise correlation length 25~nm Jupiter data, using both the 2-cloud and 1-cloud models. The black solid lines indicate the parameter values that correspond to currently adopted values for Jupiter ($fCH_4=2.37\times10^{-3}$ and $g=24.79$~m~s$^{-2}$), while the dashed black lines show the best fit parameter values retrieved using the MCMC algorithm. The retrieved values for {\it fCH4}, top cloud pressure ($P$) and cloud albedo are close to the observed values. The constraints on {\it fCH4} and $P$ can be made even tighter by imposing better priors on surface gravity, following the correlation lines. The spectrum is not sensitive enough to the other model parameters, as shown by the large confidence regions. Therefore our initial guess or theoretical structure can lie far from the final best fit value.
It is apparent that the nested sampling (blue contours) favors a solution that resembles the 1-cloud model, with a deep, optically thick cloud and unphysically low gravity ($\sim 1$~m~s$^2$). Such low gravity solutions are also identified using the 2-cloud model. However, the 2-cloud model is still consistent with more realistic values of $g$, while the 1-cloud model is not. Such arguments can be used to favor one model over the other in the absence of quantitative Bayesian evidence. The correlations at the top of left panel in Figure~\ref{fig:juptri} show that a narrower allowed range in $g$ for known RV planets both constrain the methane abundance to match the real value and strongly disfavor the second, optically thick mode. The spectra corresponding to these best-fit solutions are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:jupspec}. This plot shows that the spectra are degenerate relative to these solutions at wavelengths between 0.6 and 1~$\mu$m, but physical arguments can be used to eliminate certain solutions. We note the need for wavelength-dependent continuum opacity, especially for using photometry data shortward of 0.6~$\mu$m.
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{hist_sat_1.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{hist_sat_2.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{bars_sat_1.pdf}
\includegraphics*[scale=0.3,angle=0]{bars_sat_2.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:hd9fit}, for the Saturn albedo in Section~\ref{ssat}. \label{fig:satfit}}
\end{figure*}
\begin {figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics*[scale=0.53,angle=0]{sat_triangle_fig.pdf}
\caption{2-D marginal posterior distributions for Saturn (SNR=20, CL=25~nm), using a 1-cloud model (left) and a 2-cloud model (middle and right). The posterior for the 2-cloud model is bi-modal, and the two modes are shown separately, for clarity. The dashed black lines mark the position of the {\it best fit solution} for each mode (corresponding to the spectra in Figure~\ref{fig:satspec}), while the black lines on the left plot show the 1-cloud parameter values that best match the ``theoretical model" on the right panel in Figure~\ref{fig:satcld} (e.g. known values for $g$ and {\it fCH4}). \label{fig:sattri}}
\end{figure*}
The Jupiter cloud structure as retrieved by our 2-cloud and 1-cloud models is compared to the theoretical vertical structure for Jupiter in Figure~\ref{fig:jupcld}. The cloud and haze layers shown in the right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:jupcld} approximately match the positions described elsewhere in the literature \citep[e.g.,][]{Simon-Miller:2001,Sato:2013}. The hazes are likely to have a wavelength-dependent continuum opacity, unlike our simple cloud model, and our notation was chosen to emphasize that the upper haze layer is likely absorbing and the lower haze/cloud layer is likely bright (reflective) at the wavelengths relevant in our study. We note that the upper cloud roughly matches the position of a hydrocarbon haze in the upper layers of the atmosphere, and the lower cloud deck overlaps with the bright haze and ammonia/water ice clouds in the deeper atmosphere. This deep cloud is also identified by the 1-cloud model retrieval, but without the opacity contribution of the upper haze/cloud, the retrieved suface gravity of the planet would be unphysically small ($g=1$~m s$^{-2}$, see Figure~\ref{fig:juptri}).
The significance of the cloud and methane detection is shown in the middle panel of Figure~\ref{fig:tev}. The methane is detected at high significance for all SNR, while the cloud detection becomes {\it very strong} only when SNR$>$10. Due to the degeneracy of the solutions (see Figure~\ref{fig:jupspec}), the Bayes factor does not favor the 2-cloud vs.\ the 1-cloud model except at very high signal-to-noise. However, based on the previous arguments related to the surface gravity, it is reasonable to select the 2-cloud model in this case, and we expect a more clear distinction to appear once independent constraints on the surface gravity are provided.
We conclude that the two-layer cloud model is necessary for Jupiter, constraining the methane abundance to within factors of $\sim 20$ at SNR=5 and factors of $\sim 3$ at SNR=20, possibly much better when tighter limits on the surface gravity are available. The single scattering albedo of the lower cloud is constrained within 0.5\% even at the lowest SNR. This gives us an indication for the composition of the lower cloud, since particles with high reflectivity are necessary to explain the large value of $\bar{\omega_2}$.
\subsection{Saturn}
\label{ssat}
Our third and final case study is Saturn, which falls between HD 99492 c and Jupiter in terms of retrieval results. We use again data from \citet{Karkoschka:1994} to generate simulated observations using the method in Section~\ref{noise}. The summary plots for the retrieval results are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:satfit}, with the confidence intervals listed in Table~\ref{tab:sat}. The posterior distribution for the 2-cloud retrieval is now clearly bimodal, with one mode corresponding to a low optical depth for the upper cloud, and the other to an optically thick upper cloud. The large confidence intervals plotted in the bottom panel of Figure~\ref{fig:satfit} are due to this bimodality. The range of the possible spectra with parameters drawn from the posterior are shown in the right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:tspec}.
\begin {figure}
\centering
\hspace*{-0.4cm}\includegraphics*[scale=0.4,angle=0]{final_spectra_compare_saturn.pdf}
\caption{Best-fit spectra for Saturn (SNR=20, CL=25~nm), retrieved using the 2-cloud and 1-cloud models. The 2-cloud posterior is bimodal, with the low optical depth and high optical depth best fit solutions shown separately (see also Figure~\ref{fig:sattri}). \label{fig:satspec}}
\end{figure}
\begin {figure}
\centering
\hspace*{-0.4cm}\includegraphics*[scale=0.4,angle=0,trim={10 0 0 0},clip]{mcmc_clouds_saturn.pdf}
\caption{Cloud structure for Saturn, as retrieved using the 2-cloud model (left), and the 1-cloud model (right). The conventions are described in the Figure~\ref{fig:hd9cld} and ~\ref{fig:jupcld} captions. The theoretical structure is shown in the right panel, with the cloud structure closely resembling available literature \citep[e.g.,][]{Roman:2013}. \label{fig:satcld}}
\end{figure}
For clarity, the two modes have been separated and the covariances of the most relevant parameters shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sattri} (middle and right panels). In the left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:sattri} we show the retrieved posterior distribution for the 1-cloud forward model, with the black lines indicating the parameter values that correspond to the currently adopted properties of Saturn ($fCH_4=4.5\times10^{-3}$ and $g=10.44$~m~s$^{-2}$). The dashed black lines in the middle and right panels show the {\it best fit} solutions for each of the two modes. As seen in the case of HD 99492 c, the mode with low optical depth constrains the albedo of the lower cloud ($\bar{\omega}_2$), while the optically thick mode constrains the albedo of the upper cloud ($\bar{\omega}$). However, in contrast to HD 99492 c, the 1-cloud retrieval mostly resembles the {\it low optical depth} mode of the 2-cloud retrieval. In this case, the reflecting surface ($P$) is found relatively high ($10^{-3}-1$~bar), with a position correlated with the methane abundance and $g$. The 1-cloud model also constrains the optical depth within a relatively narrow range of $\sim 0.1-1$. The surface gravity $g$ is unconstrained by both the 1-cloud and 2-cloud retrievals, but independent constraints would translate into narrower confidence intervals for both $P$ and {\it fCH4}, as in the cases described above, especially considering the low optical depth mode. A more peaked distribution for {\it fCH4} is only obtained for the 2-cloud mode of low optical depth (right panel), while in the other two cases only lower limits can be inferred. The methane abundance is overall consistent with measured values, but biased towards higher values in the high optical depth mode, because the entire cloud structure is then obscuring most of the atmosphere.
Figure~\ref{fig:satspec} shows the complete degeneracy between the 1-cloud retrieved solution and the two modes of the 2-cloud retrieval. Photometry shortward of 0.6~$\mu$m could be helpful for constraining haze properties. Based on these data, we cannot distinguish between the two possible modes, and the presence of the second cloud is not required. The retrieved cloud structure using the 1-cloud and 2-cloud models is presented in Figure~\ref{fig:satcld} and compared with the structure derived from the literature in the right panel \citep[e.g.,][]{Roman:2013}. The lack of evidence for a second cloud is also suggested by the overlap of the 2-cloud structure in the left panel, similar to the situation for HD 99492 c. By contrast, the cloud optical depth is low in this case, and therefore the transition from a clear to a cloudy atmosphere is very gradual. Overall, the retrieved cloud structure strongly overlaps with the theoretical structure, and all solutions are consistent with highly reflective layers present in the atmosphere. This is supported by the Bayes factors in the bottom panel of Figure~\ref{fig:tev}, where both methane and a cloud layer are detected with high significance for all SNR. The evidence for the second cloud is inconclusive, since these solutions are degenerate. We suggest that some evidence is provided by the tighter distribution in Figure~\ref{fig:sattri}, right panel vs. left panel, and a more relevant Bayes factor calculation would be between the 1-cloud model and each of the two modes of the 2-cloud model separately.
\section{SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS}
\label{sum}
We have used a Bayesian retrieval method to quantify the confidence intervals on the atmospheric methane abundance and cloud structures of extrasolar giant planets, using a simple atmospheric model with either 1 or 2 cloud decks. Our results should be viewed in the light of the limitations inherent to space coronagraph observations. Notably, we are trying to reproduce complex atmospheric structures by using simple 1-dimensional model approximations and low signal-to-noise, integrated light data. The $0.4-1~\mu$m and $0.6-1~\mu$m wavelength ranges used in the retrievals have also limited diagnostic power, but may be supplemented by other follow-up observations. Nevertheless we find that reflected light spectra of the quality expected from a space-based direct imaging exoplanet mission is sufficient to place interesting constraints on important planetary atmosphere characteristics, particularly methane mixing ratio and, in some cases, cloud albedo. In particular, the {\it presence} of clouds and/or methane absorption is detected at high significance even for a SNR of 5. However, higher SNRs, additional degeneracy-breaking constraints (e.g. on $g$), and even more sophisticated cloud models will be needed to determine accurate {\it abundances} and extracting useful information about mass-metallicity relationships. The retrieval methods presented are powerful for determining correlations among parameters and identifying which ones are unconstrained by the data, demonstrating the value in the synthetic datasets, even at low signal to noise ratios. We find that using both MCMC and nested sampling algorithms can provide us with better insights on the posterior probability distributions for the model parameters, especially in highly non-gaussian and multi-modal cases.
We found that our retrieval methods could reliably infer methane abundances to within factors of ten of the true value when the models are a good match for the data (such as the validation tests), and can accurately constrain cloud scattering properties in specific cases, thus providing a clue to the cloud composition. Gravity, however, is not well constrained by optical spectra in the presence of clouds. Observing planets with known masses therefore removes an important source of uncertainty and allows much greater precision in the inference of atmospheric abundances. Furthermore, cases in which the cloud model was inadequate are readily apparent in the retrieval output. These limitations are particularly apparent in our realistic test cases, where the posterior probability distribution is ofter bimodal, and only a lower limit is inferred for the methane abundance. This prompted us to calculate the Bayesian evidence for a set of models for each simulated spectrum. This is a method to quantify the significance associated with the methane and cloud detection, and the assumed cloud model (1-cloud vs. 2-cloud) in each case. Although time-consuming, this is a very powerful test that will become a necessity for interpreting future observations, as the complexity of our model atmospheres and understanding of planetary diversity is increasing. Our preliminary applications to realistic planets show that it is worthwhile to investigate different vertical cloud structures, such as the 1-cloud vs. the 2-cloud models. This can help us address degeneracies and identify unnecessary parameters. In summary, our first study on the characterization of extrasolar giant planets in reflected light found that retrieval methods using simple, gray cloud models can be applied to optical spectra of exoplanets to obtain insights on molecular abundances and cloud properties. We found that generally the retrieval results are equally sensitive to the particular noise realization as to the chosen spectral correlation length.
\subsection{Ongoing and Future Work}
For this initial study we made a number of simplifications to the analysis to make our task tractable and obtain a first look at parameter correlations. However future work should address these simplifications and their roles in the fidelity of the retrievals. Foremost among those that should be explored include: planetary radius uncertainty, thermal profile uncertainty, and orbital phase uncertainty. The second paper in this series (Nayak et al., submitted), addresses the radius and phase uncertainties. In addition the retrieval of more atmospheric abundances should be explored, particularly water and alkali gasses. We will also investigate the possibility of adopting a somewhat more general cloud model.
In this work we have focused on retrieving atmospheric parameters of giant planets, nevertheless the methods we are developing--and eventually the experience in applying them to real extrasolar planet spectra--will inform future efforts to characterize the atmospheres of lower mass planets. While detailed investigation of retrieval methods for such planets awaits future studies, we note several general conclusions. Planets with relatively flat spectra or few absorption features are, unsurprisingly, challenging. The methane-dominated spectra we studied here are well suited to retrieval methods as multiple bands of varying strength populate the optical, permitting constraints on both cloud top pressure and abundance when well resolved (e.g., Figure 3). This may not be the case for many potential terrestrial planet atmospheres leading to greater uncertainties in cloud top pressure and absorber column abundances. Furthermore lack of useful constraints on gravity, through mass determination, substantially increases the uncertainty in retrieved atmospheric abundances. Thus giant planets, even cloudless ones with steep Rayleigh scattering slopes, though not the pale blue dots we ultimately seek, do provide useful insights into the methods and limitations of our future characterization of such worlds.
\begin{deluxetable*}{llcccccc}
\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
\tablecolumns{8}
\tablecaption{Retrieval verification results for the 1-cloud model.\label{tab:vres1}}
\tablehead{ \colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{Original} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=5} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=10} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR = 20} \\
\colhead{} & \colhead{Value} & \colhead{CL\tablenotemark{a}=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} }
\startdata
\sidehead{Cloud-free case}
\tableline
$\log(fCH_4)$ & -3.31 & $-3.22_{-0.22}^{+0.19}$ & $-2.92_{-0.24}^{+0.18}$ & $-3.42_{-0.11}^{+0.11}$ & $-3.20_{-0.10}^{+0.09}$ & $-3.27_{-0.03}^{+0.03}$ & $-3.20_{-0.03}^{+0.03}$\\
&& ($-3.21_{-0.20}^{+0.18}$)\tablenotemark{b} & & ($-3.42_{-0.10}^{+0.10}$) & & ($-3.27_{-0.03}^{+0.03}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(g)$ (m s$^{-2}$) & 0.86 & $0.84_{-0.39}^{+0.21}$ & $0.95_{-0.39}^{+0.22}$ & $0.90_{-0.22}^{+0.16}$ & $0.63_{-0.26}^{+0.28}$ & $0.85_{-0.04}^{+0.03}$ & $0.89_{-0.03}^{+0.03}$ \\
&& ($0.82_{-0.42}^{+0.22}$) & & ($0.93_{-0.21}^{+0.11}$) & & ($0.86_{-0.04}^{+0.03}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(P)$ (bar) & 1.00 & $-0.71_{-2.32}^{+1.74}$ & $-0.53_{-2.34}^{+1.61}$ & $-0.67_{-2.47}^{+1.82}$ & $-1.15_{-2.18}^{+1.94}$ & $-0.53_{-2.27}^{+1.55}$ & $-0.46_{-2.08}^{+1.51}$ \\
&& ($-0.60_{-2.32}^{+1.53}$) & & ($-0.83_{-2.41}^{+1.89}$) & & ($-0.45_{-2.14}^{+1.46}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}$ & 0.50 & $0.51_{-0.32}^{+0.33}$ & $0.57_{-0.37}^{+0.31}$ & $0.57_{-0.36}^{+0.34}$ & $0.45_{-0.31}^{+0.34}$ & $0.52_{-0.35}^{+0.36}$ & $0.53_{-0.36}^{+0.35}$ \\
&& ($0.51_{-0.33}^{+0.32}$) & & ($0.57_{-0.37}^{+0.31}$) & & ($0.53_{-0.34}^{+0.32}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{g}$ & 0.50 & $0.49_{-0.35}^{+0.36}$ & $0.47_{-0.31}^{+0.36}$ & $0.41_{-0.30}^{+0.35}$ & $0.59_{-0.37}^{+0.30}$ & $0.48_{-0.31}^{+0.35}$ & $0.50_{-0.34}^{+0.36}$ \\
&& ($0.50_{-0.32}^{+0.33}$) & & ($0.35_{-0.24}^{+0.38}$) & & ($0.50_{-0.32}^{+0.33}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(\tau)$ & -8.00 & $-7.01_{-2.01}^{+2.74}$ & $-6.81_{-2.19}^{+3.24}$ & $-4.81_{-2.73}^{+3.44}$ & $-4.34_{-2.32}^{+2.65}$ & $-7.35_{-1.76}^{+2.53}$ & $-7.64_{-1.69}^{+2.58}$ \\
&& ($-7.04_{-1.93}^{+2.92}$) & & ($-5.58_{-2.49}^{+3.56}$) & & ($-7.51_{-1.64}^{+2.49}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
\tableline
\sidehead{1-Cloud case}
\tableline
$\log(fCH_4)$ & -3.31 & $-3.54_{-0.31}^{+0.38}$ & $-3.47_{-0.32}^{+0.39}$ & $-3.27_{-0.22}^{+0.21}$ & $-1.42_{-0.82}^{+0.88}$ & $-3.31_{-0.22}^{+0.17}$ & $-2.73_{-0.27}^{+0.21}$ \\
& & ($-3.52_{-0.32}^{+0.34}$) & & ($-3.25_{-0.20}^{+0.23}$) & & ($-3.13_{-0.11}^{+0.12}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(g)$ (m s$^{-2}$) & 0.86 & $0.39_{-0.90}^{+0.85}$ & $0.19_{-0.81}^{+0.97}$ & $0.36_{-0.90}^{+0.91}$ & $1.08_{-1.04}^{+0.64}$ & $0.05_{-0.62}^{+0.50}$ & $1.31_{-1.47}^{+0.54}$ \\
& & ($0.38_{-0.82}^{+0.88}$) & & ($0.41_{-0.91}^{+0.90}$) & & ($0.01_{-0.65}^{+0.67}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(P)$ (bar) & -0.70 & $-1.72_{-1.89}^{+1.36}$ & $-1.46_{-1.13}^{+1.14}$ & $-1.79_{-1.52}^{+1.40}$ & $-3.29_{-0.75}^{+1.22}$ & $-2.03_{-1.20}^{+1.02}$ & $-0.85_{-1.42}^{+0.84}$ \\
& & ($-1.80_{-1.73}^{+1.51}$) & & ($-1.82_{-1.54}^{+1.33}$) & & ($-2.63_{-1.01}^{+0.98}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}$ & 0.96 & $0.90_{-0.05}^{+0.04}$ & $0.90_{-0.05}^{+0.03}$ & $0.92_{-0.03}^{+0.03}$ & $0.92_{-0.03}^{+0.03}$ & $0.95_{-0.03}^{+0.02}$ & $0.94_{-0.04}^{+0.02}$ \\
& & ($0.90_{-0.04}^{+0.04}$) & & ($0.91_{-0.03}^{+0.03}$) & & ($0.92_{-0.03}^{+0.03}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{g}$ & 0.85 & $0.27_{-0.19}^{+0.38}$ & $0.35_{-0.24}^{+0.33}$ & $0.29_{-0.20}^{+0.39}$ & $0.27_{-0.19}^{+0.39}$ & $0.69_{-0.33}^{+0.24}$ & $0.52_{-0.35}^{+0.31}$ \\
& & ($0.28_{-0.20}^{+0.38}$) & & ($0.26_{-0.18}^{+0.33}$) & & ($0.33_{-0.23}^{+0.29}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(\tau)$ & 0.00 & $-1.31_{-2.20}^{+2.89}$ & $0.07_{-2.13}^{+1.85}$ & $-0.36_{-2.31}^{+2.36}$ & $-1.18_{-1.23}^{+2.43}$ & $-0.83_{-1.44}^{+2.49}$ & $0.73_{-1.38}^{+1.61}$ \\
& & ($-1.40_{-2.05}^{+3.09}$) & & ($-0.48_{-2.33}^{+2.38}$) & & ($-1.45_{-1.18}^{+0.63}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{CL here is a shorthand notation for the spectral noise correlation length.}
\tablenotetext{b}{Numbers in parentheses show the nested sampling results.}
\end{deluxetable*}
\begin{deluxetable*}{llcccccc}
\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
\tablecolumns{8}
\tablecaption{Retrieval verification results for the 2-cloud model.\label{tab:vres2}}
\tablehead{ \colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{Original} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=5} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=10} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR = 20} \\
\colhead{} & \colhead{Value} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} }
\startdata
$\log(fCH_4)$ & -2.74 & $-1.95_{-0.67}^{+0.88}$ & $-2.54_{-0.53}^{+0.96}$ & $-1.79_{-0.65}^{+0.85}$ & $-1.90_{-0.60}^{+0.86}$ & $-2.66_{-0.19}^{+0.14}$ & $-2.65_{-0.17}^{+0.14}$ \\
& & ($-1.35_{-0.95}^{+0.89}$) & & ($-1.37_{-0.86}^{+0.92}$) & & ($-2.65_{-0.21}^{+0.15}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(g)$ (m s$^{-2}$) & 1.39 & $1.22_{-0.70}^{+0.55}$ & $1.21_{-0.70}^{+0.56}$ & $1.19_{-0.66}^{+0.54}$ & $1.28_{-0.68}^{+0.53}$ & $1.71_{-0.44}^{+0.22}$ & $1.62_{-0.39}^{+0.27}$ \\
& & ($1.12_{-0.72}^{+0.60}$) & & ($1.07_{-0.69}^{+0.63}$) & & ($1.65_{-0.56}^{+0.24}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(P)$ (bar) & -0.15 & $-1.25_{-1.04}^{+0.84}$ & $-0.39_{-0.89}^{+0.54}$ & $-1.25_{-0.86}^{+0.70}$ & $-1.23_{-0.90}^{+0.78}$ & $0.06_{-0.32}^{+0.15}$ & $-0.04_{-0.27}^{+0.20}$ \\
& & ($-0.72_{-1.07}^{+1.12}$) & & ($-0.90_{-0.85}^{+1.08}$) & & ($-0.07_{-0.37}^{+0.20}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$dP_1$ (bar) & 0.54 & $0.82_{-0.60}^{+1.05}$ & $1.21_{-0.85}^{+1.22}$ & $0.83_{-0.60}^{+1.03}$ & $0.87_{-0.63}^{+1.05}$ & $1.45_{-1.05}^{+1.23}$ & $1.44_{-0.99}^{+1.36}$ \\
& & ($0.87_{-0.62}^{+0.97}$) & & ($0.87_{-0.60}^{+0.95}$) & & ($1.04_{-0.74}^{+1.38}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$dP_2$ (bar) & 0.12 & $0.89_{-0.66}^{+1.13}$ & $1.09_{-0.78}^{+1.12}$ & $0.76_{-0.57}^{+1.02}$ & $0.83_{-0.60}^{+0.91}$ & $1.28_{-0.88}^{+1.24}$ & $1.11_{-0.81}^{+1.28}$ \\
& & ($1.04_{-0.75}^{+1.25}$) & & ($0.84_{-0.58}^{+0.94}$) & & ($1.49_{-1.00}^{+1.27}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}$ & 0.85 & $0.56_{-0.39}^{+0.32}$ & $0.62_{-0.42}^{+0.30}$ & $0.56_{-0.38}^{+0.31}$ & $0.54_{-0.37}^{+0.34}$ & $0.68_{-0.38}^{+0.23}$ & $0.69_{-0.35}^{+0.20}$ \\
& & ($0.95_{-0.59}^{+0.03}$) & & ($0.80_{-0.54}^{+0.18}$) & & ($0.46_{-0.30}^{+0.33}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{g}$ & 0.85 & $0.48_{-0.31}^{+0.35}$ & $0.54_{-0.35}^{+0.32}$ & $0.55_{-0.34}^{+0.30}$ & $0.47_{-0.31}^{+0.34}$ & $0.60_{-0.40}^{+0.30}$ & $0.60_{-0.37}^{+0.27}$ \\
& & ($0.39_{-0.27}^{+0.38}$) & & ($0.42_{-0.29}^{+0.37}$) & & ($0.55_{-0.35}^{+0.29}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(\tau)$ & -0.30 & $-1.85_{-0.79}^{+0.82}$ & $-1.67_{-0.88}^{+1.00}$ & $-2.06_{-0.65}^{+0.78}$ & $-1.99_{-0.73}^{+0.81}$ & $-1.02_{-0.70}^{+0.33}$ & $-1.00_{-1.04}^{+0.45}$ \\
& & ($-0.63_{-1.70}^{+2.18}$) & & ($-1.43_{-1.08}^{+2.92}$) & & ($-1.01_{-0.60}^{+0.28}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}_2$ & 0.997 & $0.987_{-0.003}^{+0.004}$ & $0.991_{-0.003}^{+0.005}$ & $0.989_{-0.001}^{+0.002}$ & $0.988_{-0.001}^{+0.003}$ & $0.993_{-0.003}^{+0.003}$ & $0.993_{-0.003}^{+0.005}$ \\
& & ($0.984_{-0.638}^{+0.005}$) & & ($0.989_{-0.564}^{+0.002}$) & & ($0.995_{-0.004}^{+0.003}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lcccccc}
\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
\tablecolumns{7}
\tablecaption{Retrieval results for HD 99492 c.\label{tab:hd9}}
\tablehead{ \colhead{Parameter} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=5} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=10} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR = 20} \\
\colhead{} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} }
\startdata
$\log(fCH_4)$ & $-1.76_{-1.29}^{+1.20}$ & $-1.68_{-1.12}^{+0.98}$ & $-1.37_{-1.00}^{+0.92}$ & $-1.24_{-1.09}^{+0.86}$ & $-1.13_{-0.73}^{+0.69}$ & $-1.25_{-0.80}^{+0.75}$ \\
& ($-1.85_{-1.18}^{+1.18}$) & & ($-1.48_{-0.95}^{+0.96}$) & & ($-1.14_{-0.94}^{+0.72}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(g)$ (m s$^{-2}$) & $0.55_{-1.01}^{+0.92}$ & $0.52_{-0.97}^{+0.99}$ & $0.41_{-0.85}^{+1.05}$ & $0.52_{-0.91}^{+0.93}$ & $0.51_{-0.86}^{+1.02}$ & $0.44_{-0.87}^{+0.93}$ \\
& ($1.51_{-0.95}^{+0.97}$) & & ($1.56_{-1.02}^{+0.95}$) & & ($1.71_{-1.10}^{+0.88}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(P)$ (bar) & $0.02_{-1.42}^{+1.13}$ & $0.08_{-1.42}^{+1.10}$ & $-0.12_{-1.43}^{+1.24}$ & $0.11_{-1.46}^{+1.06}$ & $-0.09_{-1.51}^{+1.13}$ & $-0.09_{-1.50}^{+1.26}$ \\
& ($0.00_{-1.22}^{+1.05}$) & & ($-0.38_{-1.22}^{+1.28}$) & & ($-0.41_{-1.18}^{+1.24}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$dP_1$ (bar) & $1.30_{-0.98}^{+1.35}$ & $1.26_{-0.94}^{+1.44}$ & $1.38_{-0.98}^{+1.33}$ & $1.58_{-1.19}^{+1.52}$ & $1.60_{-1.07}^{+1.26}$ & $1.59_{-1.17}^{+1.54}$ \\
& ($1.03_{-0.72}^{+1.19}$) & & ($1.02_{-0.71}^{+1.12}$) & & ($1.15_{-0.80}^{+1.20}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$dP_2$ (bar) & $1.24_{-0.93}^{+1.25}$ & $1.33_{-0.95}^{+1.43}$ & $0.79_{-0.56}^{+0.96}$ & $0.79_{-0.53}^{+0.83}$ & $0.63_{-0.44}^{+0.88}$ & $0.58_{-0.41}^{+0.64}$ \\
& ($1.28_{-0.89}^{+1.47}$) & & ($0.91_{-0.62}^{+1.08}$) & & ($0.83_{-0.55}^{+0.85}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}$ & $0.91_{-0.04}^{+0.04}$ & $0.91_{-0.04}^{+0.04}$ & $0.91_{-0.04}^{+0.03}$ & $0.90_{-0.04}^{+0.03}$ & $0.92_{-0.03}^{+0.02}$ & $0.92_{-0.03}^{+0.02}$ \\
& ($0.89_{-0.49}^{+0.05}$) & & ($0.88_{-0.50}^{+0.05}$) & & ($0.87_{-0.46}^{+0.06}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{g}$ & $0.31_{-0.23}^{+0.40}$ & $0.35_{-0.25}^{+0.41}$ & $0.30_{-0.23}^{+0.36}$ & $0.35_{-0.24}^{+0.35}$ & $0.46_{-0.25}^{+0.27}$ & $0.42_{-0.22}^{+0.29}$ \\
& ($0.36_{-0.25}^{+0.37}$) & & ($0.38_{-0.26}^{+0.36}$) & & ($0.38_{-0.26}^{+0.33}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(\tau)$ & $1.49_{-1.02}^{+0.95}$ & $1.27_{-1.14}^{+1.10}$ & $2.00_{-0.88}^{+0.70}$ & $1.98_{-0.95}^{+0.75}$ & $2.18_{-0.89}^{+0.59}$ & $2.14_{-0.90}^{+0.60}$ \\
& ($0.77_{-3.59}^{+1.38}$) & & ($0.77_{-3.75}^{+1.56}$) & & ($1.10_{-4.19}^{+1.35}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}_2$ & $0.592_{-0.382}^{+0.354}$ & $0.644_{-0.441}^{+0.307}$ & $0.558_{-0.391}^{+0.348}$ & $0.562_{-0.358}^{+0.313}$ & $0.596_{-0.386}^{+0.293}$ & $0.542_{-0.382}^{+0.343}$ \\
& ($0.880_{-0.580}^{+0.083}$) & & ($0.956_{-0.623}^{+0.006}$) & & ($0.878_{-0.559}^{+0.078}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lcccccc}
\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
\tablecolumns{7}
\tablecaption{Retrieval results for Jupiter.\label{tab:jup}}
\tablehead{ \colhead{Parameter} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=5} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=10} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR = 20} \\
\colhead{} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} }
\startdata
$\log(fCH_4)$ & $-1.15_{-0.87}^{+0.74}$ & $-1.91_{-0.91}^{+1.13}$ & $-1.95_{-0.83}^{+1.14}$ & $-1.70_{-0.81}^{+0.88}$ & $-2.80_{-0.35}^{+0.48}$ & $-2.60_{-0.52}^{+0.61}$ \\
& ($-1.10_{-0.89}^{+0.72}$) & & ($-1.42_{-1.13}^{+0.96}$) & & ($-3.25_{-0.11}^{+0.14}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(g)$ (m s$^{-2}$) & $1.63_{-1.04}^{+0.86}$ & $1.62_{-1.01}^{+0.88}$ & $1.74_{-1.08}^{+0.87}$ & $1.83_{-1.19}^{+0.79}$ & $0.76_{-0.62}^{+0.90}$ & $1.00_{-0.78}^{+1.19}$ \\
& ($1.26_{-0.87}^{+1.07}$) & & ($1.01_{-0.70}^{+1.03}$) & & ($0.09_{-0.06}^{+0.13}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(P)$ (bar) & $-0.71_{-0.86}^{+0.67}$ & $-0.52_{-0.92}^{+0.56}$ & $-0.67_{-0.86}^{+0.62}$ & $-0.74_{-0.83}^{+0.71}$ & $-0.79_{-0.30}^{+0.53}$ & $-0.78_{-0.31}^{+0.70}$ \\
& ($-0.37_{-0.93}^{+0.76}$) & & ($0.19_{-0.94}^{+0.59}$) & & ($0.35_{-0.18}^{+0.24}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$dP_1$ (bar) & $1.06_{-0.77}^{+1.23}$ & $1.13_{-0.82}^{+1.32}$ & $0.95_{-0.65}^{+1.15}$ & $1.01_{-0.72}^{+1.16}$ & $0.62_{-0.46}^{+0.99}$ & $1.00_{-0.75}^{+1.20}$ \\
& ($0.87_{-0.63}^{+1.04}$) & & ($0.67_{-0.48}^{+0.86}$) & & ($0.90_{-0.24}^{+0.25}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$dP_2$ (bar) & $0.93_{-0.67}^{+1.09}$ & $0.88_{-0.66}^{+1.30}$ & $1.00_{-0.70}^{+1.23}$ & $1.05_{-0.77}^{+1.07}$ & $0.43_{-0.27}^{+0.71}$ & $0.83_{-0.57}^{+1.13}$ \\
& ($1.11_{-0.78}^{+1.31}$) & & ($2.55_{-1.43}^{+1.14}$) & & ($0.28_{-0.17}^{+0.31}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}$ & $0.60_{-0.39}^{+0.29}$ & $0.55_{-0.36}^{+0.32}$ & $0.67_{-0.43}^{+0.26}$ & $0.58_{-0.35}^{+0.30}$ & $0.84_{-0.33}^{+0.11}$ & $0.61_{-0.27}^{+0.29}$ \\
& ($0.79_{-0.51}^{+0.21}$) & & ($0.99_{-0.15}^{+0.00}$) & & ($1.00_{-0.00}^{+0.00}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{g}$ & $0.52_{-0.36}^{+0.34}$ & $0.50_{-0.36}^{+0.33}$ & $0.53_{-0.37}^{+0.35}$ & $0.49_{-0.33}^{+0.34}$ & $0.88_{-0.48}^{+0.11}$ & $0.56_{-0.33}^{+0.33}$ \\
& ($0.46_{-0.32}^{+0.34}$) & & ($0.32_{-0.23}^{+0.37}$) & & ($0.26_{-0.18}^{+0.29}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(\tau)$ & $-2.04_{-0.64}^{+0.81}$ & $-2.12_{-0.60}^{+0.78}$ & $-1.59_{-0.93}^{+1.08}$ & $-2.08_{-0.63}^{+0.75}$ & $-1.12_{-0.95}^{+0.62}$ & $-1.83_{-0.72}^{+0.78}$ \\
& ($-1.48_{-1.05}^{+3.22}$) & & ($1.16_{-2.11}^{+0.81}$) & & ($0.71_{-0.11}^{+0.18}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}_2$ & $0.997_{-0.002}^{+0.002}$ & $0.995_{-0.002}^{+0.002}$ & $0.993_{-0.002}^{+0.004}$ & $0.995_{-0.001}^{+0.002}$ & $0.995_{-0.001}^{+0.001}$ & $0.993_{-0.001}^{+0.002}$ \\
& ($0.996_{-0.494}^{+0.002}$) & & ($0.645_{-0.435}^{+0.348}$) & & ($0.379_{-0.254}^{+0.313}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lcccccc}
\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
\tablecolumns{7}
\tablecaption{Retrieval results for Saturn.\label{tab:sat}}
\tablehead{ \colhead{Parameter} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=5} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR=10} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SNR = 20} \\
\colhead{} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} & \colhead{CL=25nm} & \colhead{CL=100nm} }
\startdata
$\log(fCH_4)$ & $-1.15_{-0.99}^{+0.83}$ & $-1.20_{-1.00}^{+0.85}$ & $-1.14_{-0.76}^{+0.77}$ & $-1.10_{-0.86}^{+0.69}$ & $-1.29_{-0.63}^{+0.73}$ & $-1.37_{-0.83}^{+0.83}$ \\
& ($-1.26_{-0.90}^{+0.81}$) & & ($-1.13_{-0.77}^{+0.72}$) & & ($-1.08_{-0.77}^{+0.70}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(g)$ (m s$^{-2}$) & $1.24_{-0.86}^{+1.18}$ & $1.13_{-0.82}^{+1.11}$ & $1.43_{-0.98}^{+1.00}$ & $1.07_{-0.72}^{+1.14}$ & $1.18_{-0.80}^{+1.14}$ & $1.14_{-0.84}^{+1.23}$ \\
& ($1.33_{-0.90}^{+1.09}$) & & ($1.34_{-0.88}^{+1.01}$) & & ($1.27_{-0.83}^{+1.04}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(P)$ (bar) & $0.12_{-1.70}^{+1.51}$ & $0.19_{-1.86}^{+1.53}$ & $-0.32_{-1.37}^{+2.03}$ & $0.60_{-1.90}^{+1.23}$ & $-0.37_{-1.21}^{+2.11}$ & $-0.19_{-1.49}^{+1.75}$ \\
& ($-0.34_{-1.35}^{+2.00}$) & & ($0.63_{-2.07}^{+1.20}$) & & ($-0.81_{-1.26}^{+2.31}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$dP_1$ (bar) & $1.20_{-0.85}^{+1.32}$ & $1.22_{-0.88}^{+1.23}$ & $1.18_{-0.81}^{+1.28}$ & $1.31_{-0.97}^{+1.16}$ & $1.21_{-0.90}^{+1.24}$ & $1.22_{-0.85}^{+1.23}$ \\
& ($1.27_{-0.88}^{+1.31}$) & & ($1.21_{-0.80}^{+1.19}$) & & ($1.25_{-0.82}^{+1.17}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$dP_2$ (bar) & $0.99_{-0.68}^{+1.43}$ & $1.22_{-0.90}^{+1.68}$ & $2.08_{-1.46}^{+1.85}$ & $1.47_{-0.98}^{+1.60}$ & $1.75_{-0.91}^{+0.96}$ & $1.32_{-0.70}^{+0.94}$ \\
& ($1.47_{-1.00}^{+1.78}$) & & ($2.79_{-1.79}^{+1.96}$) & & ($1.82_{-1.13}^{+0.96}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}$ & $1.00_{-0.36}^{+0.00}$ & $0.99_{-0.25}^{+0.01}$ & $1.00_{-0.25}^{+0.00}$ & $1.00_{-0.06}^{+0.00}$ & $1.00_{-0.05}^{+0.00}$ & $1.00_{-0.08}^{+0.00}$ \\
& ($0.97_{-0.59}^{+0.03}$) & & ($1.00_{-0.41}^{+0.00}$) & & ($0.92_{-0.54}^{+0.08}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{g}$ & $0.39_{-0.27}^{+0.36}$ & $0.39_{-0.27}^{+0.34}$ & $0.55_{-0.38}^{+0.30}$ & $0.46_{-0.31}^{+0.35}$ & $0.67_{-0.41}^{+0.25}$ & $0.67_{-0.46}^{+0.22}$ \\
& ($0.45_{-0.30}^{+0.32}$) & & ($0.41_{-0.27}^{+0.32}$) & & ($0.48_{-0.30}^{+0.29}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\log(\tau)$ & $1.49_{-3.77}^{+1.01}$ & $1.28_{-3.41}^{+1.30}$ & $1.20_{-3.33}^{+1.09}$ & $1.80_{-3.38}^{+0.88}$ & $1.28_{-2.83}^{+1.05}$ & $1.42_{-3.56}^{+1.04}$ \\
& ($-0.94_{-1.50}^{+3.28}$) & & ($1.46_{-3.35}^{+0.89}$) & & ($-1.08_{-1.14}^{+3.31}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
$\bar{\omega}_2$ & $0.812_{-0.552}^{+0.186}$ & $0.806_{-0.507}^{+0.188}$ & $0.946_{-0.593}^{+0.052}$ & $0.610_{-0.405}^{+0.386}$ & $0.968_{-0.598}^{+0.029}$ & $0.949_{-0.449}^{+0.048}$ \\
& ($0.996_{-0.658}^{+0.003}$) & & ($0.712_{-0.500}^{+0.285}$) & & ($0.996_{-0.608}^{+0.001}$) & \\
\\[-0.08in]
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction}
A solar flare is characterized by increased radiation across a large domain of the electromagnetic spectrum, which
has been observed for a few decades with generations of instrumentation.
Based on these observations, the general picture is agreed upon that flare plasmas, whether
in the corona or in the lower-atmosphere, are heated on relatively short timescales.
As is commonly accepted, energy release in flares is governed by magnetic reconnection
in the corona on Alfv\'enic timescales of order a few seconds \citep{Priest2002}.
Although the debate exists regarding where exactly in the Sun's atmosphere
particles or plasmas are energized primarily, what is the form of heating, and how energy is transferred between different layers of the atmosphere,
the impulsive rise of flare emission in many wavelengths, including hard X-ray, microwave, optical, and UV
bands, is considered to reflect short timescales of flare energy release and also heating \citep{Fletcher2011}.
The flare plasmas in the corona then cool down by conduction and radiation \citep{Culhane1970, Antiochos1978,
Cargill1995}. Hydrodynamic flows also play a crucial role in heating or cooling the corona by means of enthalpy flows in different phases of the flare evolution, typically chromospheric evaporation in the early
heating phase \citep{Fisher85_6, Fisher87, Longcope2014} that both fills and heats the corona, and coronal condensation in
the cooling phase \citep{Bradshaw2010a, Bradshaw2010b}, and these processes take place on acoustic timescales
or shorter.
Observations have shown that soft X-ray and EUV emissions in many
flares appear to evolve and decay more slowly than cooling timescales, if
only a one-time impulsive heating is introduced in the rise phase of the flare.
It is therefore considered that the gradual or decay phase of a flare, after the impulsive rise of its emission,
cannot be solely governed by cooling, but additional heating has to be invoked. With observations
obtained by missions from as early as {\em Skylab} to the more recent {\it Reuven Ramaty
High Energy Solar Spectroscopic Imager} \citep[{\it RHESSI};][]{Lin2002}, the {\it Atmospheric Imaging Assembly}
\citep[{\it AIA};][]{Lemen2012}, and {\it Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment} \citep[EVE;][]{Woods2012},
it has been noted that, for large flares, a significant amount of heating energy could be provided
during the decay phase, sometimes more than during the rise phase \citep{Withbroe1978, Dere1979,
Jiang2006, Sun2013, Ryan2013}. \citet{Dere1979}, observing the movement of X-ray emission source,
put forward that the continuous heating into the decay phase is in the form of ``sequential heating of
new loops in the flare region". The same insight was given by \citet{Antiochos1980} studying cooling
of flare plasmas theoretically. This scenario is firmly supported by modern observations with high spatial resolutions, such as the {\it Transition Region and Coronal Explorer} \citep[{\it TRACE};][]{Handy1999},
revealing that a flare comprises a multitude of plasma loops formed and heated independently
at different times during its evolution \citep{Aschwanden2001, Aschwanden2001a}.
With this idea, \citet{Hori1997} applied a 1d hydrodynamic loop model to a
stack of loops heated successively with a prescribed heating rate
to simulate flare soft X-ray emission. Following their effort, a few studies modeling successive heating of flare loops have been attempted in order to reproduce elongated flare emission
\citep{Reeves2002, Warren2006, Longcope2010, Hock2012, Qiu2012, Liu2013}.
These multi-loop models have approached the problem along different avenues, using different
methods and forms of initial inputs, yet all with the common final goal to match the
synthetic and observed soft X-ray and/or EUV light curves. \citet{Reeves2002} modeled the
post-flare arcade of the Bastille-day flare on 2000 July 14 by launching 500 loops, each
starting 4~s after the previous loop. Instead of modeling the heating process, a scaling law
was used to evolve plasma temperature and density from given initial values, which were
adjusted to best fit the soft X-ray and EUV 195\AA\ light curves observed by Soft X-ray Telescope \citep[SXT; ][]{Tsuneta1991}
and TRACE, respectively. \citet{Warren2006} ran a 1d hydrodynamic simulation to model the Masuda flare on 1992 January 13 \citep{Masuda1994}.
In this model, 50 loops were introduced with a 40~s interval and 200~s heating duration, and the amount
of heating energy in each loop was different and determined from the observed GOES soft X-ray flux. The model
synthetic light curves compared favorably with soft X-ray observations by SXT and the {\it Bragg Crystal Spectrometer} \citep[BCS; ][]{Culhane1991}.
\citet{Longcope2010} developed a model of flare heating by reconnection and compression, and used
observationally inferred reconnection flux in successively formed flare loops
to derive post-reconnection plasma properties and synthesize the super-hot loop-top source of an X-class flare
on 2004 February 26 observed by RHESSI. Very recently, \citet{Liu2013} used spatially resolved UV
1600\AA\ lightcurves of a flare on 2005 May 13 observed by TRACE to identify foot-points of successively heated
flare loops and infer heating profiles in over five thousand loops assumed to be anchored at these UV brightened
pixels. A 0d loop model \citep{Klimchuk2008} was then used to calculate mean plasma properties in these
loops and synthesize the flare soft X-ray spectrum and light curves observed by RHESSI and GOES.
These multi-loop studies have exclusively synthesized flare X-ray emission at relatively high
temperatures. In the era of the {\em Solar Dynamic Observatory}(SDO), \citet{Hock2012} and \citet{Qiu2012}
were able to synthesize EUV light curves observed by AIA,
characterizing plasma temperatures from 10~MK down to 1~MK, and therefore also addressing cooling of
successively heated multiple loops to the very late stage of the flare evolution.
Essential to all these models, heating of a flare loop is introduced as a short pulse with
a timescale of no more than a few minutes, echoing the prevailing belief that flare heating is primarily
impulsive. The long duration of the total flare emission has been believed to result from superposition of
multiple loops successively heated throughout the flare evolution. Whereas earlier studies used prescribed heating rates to model and match flare light curves, the most recent endeavors by \citet{Longcope2010, Qiu2012, Liu2013}
have attempted to identify individual {\em impulsive} heating events from observations of flare foot-points, and confirmed that
reconnection and heating proceed into the decay phase of the flare. However, these studies still
cannot produce enough emission, raising the question whether the method has missed weak heating events or unresolved
sub-structures, or the loop modeling is faulty, or the heating profile in these loops is
different from what we have thought.
This paper tests each of the three scenarios above to shed light on
the invisible yet critical heating process of flare loops. We find that,
hydrodynamic models using a modified heating profile with an
impulsive pulse followed by a gradual low-rate tail to
heat each of multiple {\em threads} in a single {\em loop} may
reconscile with observed flare emission signatures.\footnote{For clarity and consistency, in this paper, we
use the word {\em loops} to indicate loop like structures observed
in EUV images or inferred from foot-point
emission in UV images, whereas the word {\em threads}
refers to presumed substructures within a loop that are not resolved in images.
A {\em heating event} refers to heating in a loop or a thread, depending on the context.}
In the following text, we demonstrate these experiments applied to a
long duration C-class two-ribbon flare observed by AIA, starting with a
method developed by \citet{Qiu2012} and \citet{Liu2013} to
identify heating events during the flare. The method uses spatially
resolved UV emission, which is assumed to be from the feet
of flare loops, to infer heating rates in these loops, and
is hereafter called the UV Footpoint Calorimeter (UFC) method.
The flare exhibits an arcade of loops formed sequentially along
the magnetic polarity inversion line and evolving slowly from 10 - 1 MK, as described in Section 2. Section 3
shows that analysis and modeling with the standard UFC method can reproduce the global evolution pattern of
the flare EUV emission in the arcade but with large discrepancies in evolution of single loop pixels. In Section 4,
modified UFC method and 0d modeling are applied treating a single-loop as a
cluster of unresolved sub-structures or threads, and different modulations of heating rates are attempted in
these threads in order to resolve discrepancies with observations. In Section 5, simulation with a 1d hydrodynamic code
is performed to compare with the results by the 0d model. Conclusions and discussions
are presented in the last section.
\section{Long Duration Flare Emission}
\subsection{Overview of the Flare}
A small C-class two-ribbon flare occurred at 22 UT on 2011 September 13 in the active region
AR11289. The active region is characterized by a bipolar magnetic configuration consisting of plage of positive
polarity and a sunspot of negative polarity. The flare is associated with a coronal mass ejection,
and is a long duration event with prolonged thermal emission lasting more than four hours.
The flare took place near the disk center and was observed by AIA onboard SDO.
Figure~\ref{overview} shows time evolution of the total counts within an area including all flare loops
from six AIA EUV bands at 131, 94, 335, 211, 193, and 171 \AA, illustrating
thermal emission at characteristic plasma temperatures from 10 to 1~MK.
Also shown is the total count light curve in AIA UV 1600 band, which
captures enhanced C{\sc iv} emission at 100,000~K during the flare, as well as nearby continuum.
The flare first exhibits enhanced UV 1600 emission at locations of the feet of flare loops (see images in the lower panels). The UV emission is then followed by coronal temperature
emissions, 10 MK in 131\AA, 6 MK in 94\AA, 3~MK in 335\AA, and finally 1-2 MK in 211/193/171\AA.
Such a sequence corroborates the standard flare model, depicting that energy deposition into the lower atmosphere
drives plasmas into newly formed coronal loops (chromopsheric evaporation) and heated to at least 10 MK, and these loops then cool down to a few million degrees giving rise to EUV emissions at subsequently lower temperatures.
The figure also shows images of the flare in a few bands, confirming the above-mentioned scenario of flare
evolution. In UV 1600 band, two patches are brightened simultaneously in positive and
negative magnetic fields, respectively, making conjugate foot-points of an
arcade of flare loops that are brightened afterwards. Notably in this event, the UV
brightening most evident in one ribbon spreads slowly from northeast to
southwest along the ribbon, nearly parallel to the magnetic polarity inversion
line (PIL), at roughly $v\simeq 15$ km s$^{-1}$, as outlined in Figure~\ref{overview}.
This ribbon elongation is followed by the same slow, orderly progression of loop brightenings,
first in 131 images characteristic of higher temperatures, and then in
subsequently lower temperatures in 94, 335, and then 211/193/171 bands.
It is hence evident from these observations that reconnection and formation of
flare loops take place sequentially in a generally organized manner.
RHESSI observed the flare from its rise to peak in 3 - 12 keV.
Light curves of the flare at these photon energies exhibit a rather gradual
evolution.
From these observations, it is likely that thick-target non-thermal
emission is insignificant in this flare.
Spatially unresolved soft X-ray and EUV emissions
are also obtained by GOES and EVE, respectively. However, another flare close to the
eastern limb 800\arcsec\ away took place during the peak of the target flare. Since
it is difficult to separate different emission components by the two flares, observations
by these instruments (RHESSI, GOES, and EVE) are not analyzed in this study.
\subsection{Evolution of Sequentially Formed Flare Loops}
The overall organization shown in this flare provides a good opportunity to
study the formation of flare loops, and heating and cooling of these loops.
We proceed by assuming that each UV-brightened pixel is the footpoint of a heated flare loop which subsequently
cools into the various EUV passbands. The foot-point UV emission, which is enhanced within
seconds of energy deposition, allows us to track the sequence of reconnection energy release. The evolution
of post-flare loops observed in different wavelengths provides data on the cooling process.
To capture the sequence of these loops, we define nine artificial slits each running parallel
to the PIL. Three of these slits are shown in the top right panel of Figure~\ref{intensitygram}.
Adjacent slits are separated by $10\arcsec$ NS, and are labeled S1 -- S9 from the positive legs
to the loop tops and then the negative legs. EUV intensity, in units of counts per second per pixel, is read off the pixels along a slit, and assembled into a time-distance
stack plot, shown in Figure~\ref{intensitygram}. This is done for each of the 6 Fe-sensitive wavelengths of AIA,
for each of the nine artificial slits. The loop footpoints are captured in UV 1600, for which we use a different,
thicker slit, parallel to the other nine. This slit, 50 AIA pixels ($31\arcsec$) wide, is shown as a rectangular box
in the middle top panel of Figure \ref{intensitygram}. The UV counts along this slit are averaged over its width.
To construct the stack plots in the transformed coordinates as along and perpendicular to the slits, we interpolate
observed data counts in a refined grid of 0.325\arcsec\ per pixel.
The time cadence of the data used in the analyses is 24~s for UV 1600\AA\ observation and 1~min for EUV observations.
Figure~\ref{intensitygram} shows the time-distance stack plot of the UV ribbon (top left panel), as well as
stack plots of EUV emissions along three of the nine slits for four bandpasses at 131, 94, 335,
and 171\AA. Because of the similarity in morphology and evolution of EUV emissions observed in 211, 193, and 171 bands,
we only present analyses of the 171 data. In these stack plots, time is measured from 22UT of 2011
September 13, and distance is measured in arcseconds along the slit from its northeast end.
The dashed guideline, indicating a speed of $v \approx 15$ km s$^{-1}$, in the top left panel tracks the front of UV brightening along the ribbon,
which is then superimposed in the stack plots of EUV loop emission in the panels below. Note that post-flare
loops have varying amounts of shear: loops formed later (further south) appear to be more sheared than earlier-formed loops.
As a result, the arcade extends further south than does the ribbon. This means that a given spatial coordinate in
different slits may correspond to different loops
The time-distance stack plots in Fig.\ \ref{intensitygram} corroborate the general pattern of the ribbon and arcade evolution,
consistently confirming the sequence of energy release along the PIL and subsequent heating and cooling
of flare loops. Each stack plot shows one or two bands of emission with a slope similar to that of the ribbon.
The vertical separation between an EUV front and the UV front (i.e.\ the dashed line) roughly measures the time lag between
energy release, immediately after which foot-point UV emission is produced, and loop emission in that EUV passband.
This time lag is a measure of the time taken for the plasma to cool to the characteristic temperature of that particular EUV
bandpass. It appears that flare loops are quickly heated to emit in 131\AA\ band
at 10~MK. It then cools down to emit at 6~MK (94\AA\ ) in about
20 minutes, at 3~MK (335~\AA\ ) within an hour, and then at 1~MK (171~\AA\ ) in about 1.5 hours. EUV emission along different slits exhibits varying distribution along the
loops, yet reserves the same evolution sequence along the PIL.
\subsection{Timescales of EUV Emissions in Flare Loops}
The stack plots can be further analyzed to find temporal and spatial scales of individual flare loops.
The UV 1600 stack plots show spatial structure of scales comparable with the instrument resolution
\citep[~1-2\arcsec, ][]{Boerner2012}. UV emission is rapidly enhanced
within a few minutes, presumably reflecting the short durations of the energy release episode in a given loop.
In marked contrast to this, the EUV bands show variations over larger scales in both space and time.
This contrast is even more obvious in horizontal and vertical slices of the stack-plots such as those shown in the
top panels of Figure~\ref{stat} (Figure~\ref{stat}a). The first two panels are horizontal slices sampling the entirety of slit S5
during the peak of the flare (left), and during the decay of the flare (middle). The 1600\AA\ and 171\AA\ bands
exhibit distinct narrow spatial structures indicative of individual loops. In 171 \AA, the apparent loop
width (FWHM) is typically of order a few arcseconds, the sharpest structure being 3 arcseconds. The
other bandpasses, formed at higher temperatures, are more diffuse with scales of several tens of arcseconds. %
Later on in the decay phase (top middle panel of the figure), loops
stand out in the 131 channel as much sharper structures with much
of the wide envelop diminished. These loops
are the same (cool) loops observed in the 171 band; they become visible in the 131 band because of the pronounced
response at 0.4 MK (Fe {\sc viii}) in this bandpass \citep{Odwyer2010}.
It is not clear what produces the wide envelop in high-temperature EUV emission in the early phase. We will further discuss
this phenomenon in the next section.
Vertical slices of the stack plot, such as the top right panel of Figure~\ref{stat}, show the
time profiles from a single loop pixel. These can be used to estimate the duration of emission
at a given bandpass as well as the cooling time between different bands. This particular panel shows
time profiles of the UV emission at one location on the ribbon as well as EUV emissions at one
location along S5. Here the UV emission in bright kernels typically exhibits a rapid rise in a few minutes,
followed by a gradual decay of tens of minutes. EUV emissions in 131, 94, 335, and 171 bands rise, peak, and decay subsequently.
The EUV time profiles of each pixel along each of the nine slits are analyzed to find timescales and delays. The time of peak emission at each bandpass is
found for a given spatial location along a given slit.
The second row of Figure\ \ref{stat} (Figure~\ref{stat}b) shows four panels corresponding to the peak times of the four passbands,
131, 94, 335 and 171\AA, respectively. In each panel the peak times are plotted against slit position in a different color or line
style for each of the 9 slits. The red solid line shows the peak times along the central slit S5, and orange,
green, blue, and violet solid (dotted) lines show the peak times along the
slits to the left (right) of S5 toward
the feet of the arcade, respectively.
The upward trends of these lines are further corroboration of the southward motion of
the reconnection and arcade emission. This trend is less clear for the two slits plotted in red and orange (S8 and S9)
in the 171\AA\ panel. We henceforth focus attention on the other 7 slits in which complete evolution is observed in every wavelength.\footnote{The cadence of the EUV data we have processed and analyzed is one minute. To suppress spurious fluctuations, we also
smooth the EUV time profile of each pixel with a 4-min box car; therefore, the timing accuracy in the following analyses
is limited by these procedures to be no better than 4 minutes. This should not impact the analysis of observed evolution timescales,
since these timescales are usually much longer than 4 minutes, as will be shown in the following.}
For further analyses, we select pixels at the distance between
100\arcsec\ and 180\arcsec\ along slits S1--S7, for times between 22~UT on 2011 September 13
and 2~UT on 2011 September 14. A total number of 1750 pixels of 0.325\arcsec\ by 0.325\arcsec\ in size are analyzed; seen in Figure~\ref{intensitygram},
these pixels make the central part of the arcade with relatively strong emissions.
For EUV emission at each pixel in each band, the duration is defined as the difference between the times of
60\% of the peak emission in the rise and decay phase. Histograms of the duration for all the analyzed
loop pixels in different bands are presented in the third row of Figure~\ref{stat} (Figure~\ref{stat}c)
and listed in Table 1 as well: on average, emission in 131, 94, and 335 bands each lasts for nearly an hour, and
for only 10 minutes in 171 band. The median duration in these four bands is 66 $\pm$ 53, 74 $\pm$ 18, 60 $\pm$ 22,
and 12 $\pm$ 44 min, respectively, the uncertainties being the standard deviation. We note that the duration in
171\AA\ band could be shorter than measured here, because of the smoothing window of 4-min we have applied to the
light curves. We finish by noting that many of the pixels exhibit multiple peaks in the 171 band, from which our routine selects
the brightest peak for analysis; the other peaks typically have comparable durations.
We also measure the cooling time, defined as the time lag between peak emissions in two adjacent passbands,
namely, the 131-94, 94-335, and 335-171 pairs. Histograms of the cooling time
are shown along the bottom row of panels in Figure~\ref{stat} (Figure~\ref{stat}d). The median cooling time estimated this way
is $27\pm 26, 58\pm 14$, and $18 \pm 19$~min between 131-94, 94-335, and 335-171 pairs, respectively. We also note
that, in general, there is no significant difference (within 1$\sigma$) between histograms constructed along different
slits, suggesting that loops evolve rather coherently.
Note that the figures only present positive values of this time lag, or the ``cooling" time. In a small number of pixels
(5 - 20\% of the total, depending on the bandpass pairs), the time lag is negative between certain pairs. We consider the negative time lag
as due to uncertainties in identifying the peak emission in a very broad time profile or a time
profile with multiple peaks. These negative time lags are not indications of the ``heating" time, because no single
pixel exhibits negative lags in all three pairs.
The evolution through the highest temperatures is notably slow in this flare, as
reflected in the long durations in 131, 94 and 335\AA\ (66, 74 and 60 mins, respectively) and the long
delay between successive pairs (27 and 58 mins). Whereas the broad temperature responses of these AIA EUV bands may contribute to this,
it is also probable that multiple loops cross the line-of-sight of any single pixel, and their convolved evolution will produce
longer apparent duration.
Overlapping loops are, however, rooted at distinct footpoints in the lower-atmosphere that brighten in UV emission, which can
be distinguished or resolved to an extent limited by instrument's spatial resolution.
In the following sections, we take the advantage of spatially resolved UV observations to identify loop
heating events, from which we compute the total emission by these loops to compare with the observed
loop emissions and their properties. This method (UFC) assumes that each of
the ribbon pixels is the foot-point of a single flare loop subject to a reconnection-related heating event, whose time
profile and amplitude can be determined from the impulsive brightening at the footpoint observed in UV 1600.
Furthermore, it is likely that such a ``single" {\em loop} consists of unresolved sub-structure, called
{\em threads} \citep{Aschwanden2001,Warren2006}, which are heated at different times and with different amplitudes.
In this case, we consider that the total energy deposited into all threads composing a single loop is constrained
by the UV 1600 light curve at the foot of the loop, and conduct a few experiments modulating the frequency
and amplitude of thread-heating events. Through these experiments, we find that the best match to observed coronal
emission properties is provided by using a few threads, but each having a heating profile with a long, low-intensity tail.
These experiments are described below.
\section{Zero-dimensional Modeling of 12,500 Loops}
We attempt to understand evolution of flare loops using the UFC method. The basics of this
method were presented by \citet{Qiu2012, Liu2013}.
The standard UFC method
assumes that a single flare {\em loop} is rooted at a ribbon pixel brightened in UV 1600 bandpass, and this ribbon pixel
is hereafter called the foot-point of the flare loop. We identify these loop footpoints from the $0.325\arcsec$
pixels in the 325\arcsec\ (along the slit) by 31\arcsec\ (across the slit) rectangular box enclosing the positive flare ribbon
(see Figure\ \ref{intensitygram}. We dismiss UV data from the negative ribbon because of the lower signal-to-noise ratio there).
A single pixel is identified as a loop foot-point if its emission increases to at least twice the pre-flare level for more than 5 minutes.
A total of 12,500 pixels (about 13\% of all pixels in the box), and therefore 12,500 single flare {\em loops}, are thus
identified at different times during the 4 hours of observation.
The plasma evolution of a single loop is computed using the zero-dimensional (0d) EBTEL model of
\citet{Klimchuk2008}. All loops are given a half-length $L = 57.3$~Mm, which is $\pi/2$ times
the mean distance between the positive and negative UV ribbons. The initial rise of the pixel's UV 1600
curve is fit to a half-Gaussian to determine its peak time, $t_0$, peak intensity $I_0$, and rise time $\tau_0$.
The EBTEL model is run with an asymmetric heating profile based on these values,
\begin{equation}
H(t) = \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} \lambda I_0\,{\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t-t_0)^2}{2\tau_0^2}\right]}
&~~,~~& t < t_0 \\[12pt]
\lambda I_0\,{\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t-t_0)^2}{8\tau_0^2}\right]} &~~,~~& t > t_0 ~~. \end{array} \right.
\label{Qt}
\end{equation}
The volumetric heating rate used in EBTEL is given by $Q(t) = H(t)/L$. This asymmetric profile differs from
the symmetric form used by \citet{Qiu2012} and \citet{Liu2013}, owing to its long decay time.
This long decay is partly due to gradual cooling of a flare loop leading to elongated transition-region
emission at the flare foot-points \citep{Qiu2013}, but continuous heating may also contribute to it.
Here we empirically take the heating timescale after the peak $t_0$ to be twice the rise time $\tau_0$.
The free parameter $\lambda$ converts the observed count rate of UV light curve, in DN per second
per pixel, to a heating rate in units of erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$. This parameter is the same for all half loops, and is found by
matching high temperature emission in AIA 131 channel between the model and the observations.
In the EBTEL model we adopt the prescribed parameters that scale the mean temperature of the loop and
temperature at the base of the loop to the peak temperature \citep{Klimchuk2008}. Conduction flux is calculated
with classical Spitzer-H\"arm conductivity. The 0d results with these prescribed parameters have been bench-marked with
the 1d hydrodynamic simulations \citep{Klimchuk2008}, and variation of these numbers has rather insignificant impact
on the model synthetic results for thousands of loops \citep{Liu2013}. We also use another free parameter to
characterize the loss term through the transition region. Instead of computing this loss term using an equilibrium
solution \citep{Cargill2012a}, we scale this term as being proportional to the mean coronal pressure $\langle P\rangle$ by a scaling
constant $\eta$. Such proportionality is observed in the decay phase of solar and stellar flares as
well as predicted in coronal heating models \citep[][ and references therein]{Hawley1992, Qiu2013}. We set $\eta$ by matching
low-temperature emission in AIA 171 channel between model and observation. Experiments have
shown that the synthetic plasma emissions at high and low temperatures are independently sensitive to
the two parameters, $\lambda$ and $\eta$, respectively \citep{Qiu2012}.
\subsection{Global Evolution Pattern}
Figure~\ref{obsmdl} shows the total synthetic emission (red) from all 12,500 full loops (found by doubling the emission from
the half loops) in six AIA EUV bandpasses. These are plotted atop the total counts rate from observations (black) with no
scaling or normalization applied. It is seen that the overall timescale and emission levels are reproduced rather satisfactorily by
the UFC method. The agreement in all six bands is achieved through the adjustment of only two free parameters ($\lambda$ and $\eta$)
with reference to only two bands, as described above. Notable discrepancies include the dip in the total synthetic
emission in 131 and 94 bands around the flare peak time at 0~UT, not present in the observations, and the
insufficient emission levels (a deficit by a factor of 1.5) in 335 and 211 bands after 1 UT.
The dip in the synthetic 131 emission is coincident with a drop in the observed total UV 1600 emission
(see Figure~\ref{overview}, and bottom left panel of Figure~\ref{obsmdl}),
indicating a gap of heating events around this time. Nevertheless, the decrease in the UV emission is rather mild compared with the synthetic 131 emission,
which is only one third of the observed emission. It is likely that our model does not provide
enough heating during the 30 min between 11:30 and 0:00~UT. Heating of each of these loops might proceed for a longer time
to generate more total emission toward 0:00~UT. This will be further discussed in the next section.
For further comparison, the summed emissions from three of the artificial slits,
S3, S5, and S7, are plotted in each figure after multiplication by an arbitrary factor.
These plots show that the 0d model produces total light curves whose temporal profile
generally agrees with those from different portions of the actual loops.
The lower left panel shows the UV count rate summed over all 12,500 flaring pixels (thick black),
in comparison with the overplotted UV light curve of the entire active region (thin black),
the latter being multiplied by a factor of 0.5. These plots show that UV emission from the
narrow positive ribbon accounts for over 50\% of enhanced total UV emission in the active region,
and the two light curves exhibit similar trend.
It would therefore seem that our analysis captured most of the heating events, provided that they produce enhanced
UV emission at the flare foot-points.
The amplitudes of the individual heating events, $\lambda I_0$, are plotted as black dots in the bottom
right panel. The peak amplitude is 5.1$\times 10^{8}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$, and the median is
$\lambda I_0=1.8\times 10^8$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$. The integral of $H(t)$ for all loops gives the total
heating rate plotted in the solid line. This flare is powered by heating $\simeq 4.0\times 10^{26}$ erg s$^{-1}$, delivering a modest total energy
$4.3\times 10^{30}$ ergs over about four hours. Of this total, the model predicts that 1.1$\times 10^{30}$ ergs
are radiated from the corona. For comparison, the total radiative loss derived from the GOES two-channel diagnostics
using the standard SSWIDL package is 1.6$\times 10^{30}$ ergs (not shown here) -- note that this value is an over-estimate
of coronal radiation for the studied event since the GOES emission is contaminated by the other flare occurring at the same time.
For a more revealing model-to-data comparison, we synthesize time-distance stack plots like those shown in the three left columns of
Figure~\ref{intensitygram}. A synthetic stack plot is produced by summing all synthetic emission from loops whose
UV pixels fall within the same slit-position. There are on average 12 such loops in a slit position, but the central
region 100\arcsec\ -- 180\arcsec\ has more. These synthetic stack plots are arranged along the right column of
Figure\ \ref{intensitygram}, beside the three observed stack plots from the same bandpass.
Since EBTEL is not spatially-resolved, it produces only one stack plot for each bandpass.
The synthetic stack plots share some characteristics with the observed versions in that the general
tempo-spatial sequence of energy release, heating, and cooling along the PIL is reproduced. However, large
discrepancies are also present. The
synthetic emission exhibits a much narrower and nearly bi-modal distribution, in contrast to the observed
smooth and broad emission pattern. For example, the synthetic plots show enhanced brightness in 131 emission at
around 160\arcsec - 170\arcsec along the slit and no heating beyond, whereas the observed emission extends further and more
smoothly. One source of such discrepancy lies in the assumption that the spatial coordinate
of the UV footpoints matches the coordinate where the loop crosses a slit. Observations show that loops formed later
are more sheared than earlier-formed loops; as a result, the observed arcade extends further south than does the ribbon and,
therefore, the synthetic arcade emission constructed using the ribbon position. The discrepancy in the
temporal distribution is harder to explain. Even in the earlier phase when the ribbon
positions nearly match the loop positions, at each slit position, individual loop pixels remain bright much longer in reality
than they do in the model. This leads to the deficit of the total synthetic emission seen in the light curves
in Figure~\ref{obsmdl}.
\subsection{Single Loop Statistics}
The nature of the discrepancy between model and observation can be further explored using the
statistics of individual loop pixels. The peak times of synthetic EUV emission, shown with black dots in
Figure~\ref{stat}b, fall mostly within the range of the observed peaks (colored curves).
Model-observation agreement is best in the high temperature 131~\AA\ band. This agreement suggests that the tempo-spatial
distribution of heating events is reasonably captured by the model. The durations and delays of
these peaks, whose histograms are plotted in red in Figure~\ref{stat}c and d, show a more pronounced
discrepancy with observation (black). Model loops have substantially shorter duration in the hotter
bands (131 and 94) than observed; the deficit is about 30 min.\ (see Table 1 for values). This
failing leads to the narrower bands noted in the stack plots of Figure~\ref{intensitygram}.
This duration discrepancy is absent in the cooler bands. The inter-band delays (bottom rows) show a similar pattern:
hotter bands cool more slowly in observations while the cooler bands appear to agree.
One possible explanation of the discrepancy is that our UV-enhancement criteria captures only the strongest heating events,
and may miss a significant contribution from weaker events. To test this hypothesis, we
plot, with dashes in Figure~\ref{stat}, histograms from the subset of the 15\% brightest pixels (based on 131\AA\ emission).
There is no evident difference in the distributions of the very brightest pixels and the entire sample. This is equally
true of the model (red) and the observations (black).
Another expanation is that an observed loop pixel at a slit position does not exactly match the foot-point pixels
of the ribbon at the same slit position as said before, and also loops may expand and entangle in the corona. For these reasons,
emission at a loop pixel is possibly contributed from a few heating events at different times.
Figure~\ref{onepixel} explores this possibility with an example of the observed and synthetic
emission from one location along the slits. More than a dozen heating events, found in UV pixels,
were assigned to this one slit location. Plotted in the top left panel are the heating flux of these events
spread in 3 hours. Emission measure (EM) as well as the EM-weighed temperature of the resulting model
loops are plotted in the bottom left panel. The synthetic emission at one slit pixel is then integrated along
the line of sight and presented in the other panels in comparison to the observed AIA emission. The model curves are
plotted in DN per second per pixel with no scaling or normalization.
It is evident that the introduction of multiple heating events spread over 3 hours produces synthetic
emission for as long as the observed examples. It does not, however, produce in the synthetic emission
the wide envelop (long duration) actually observed in the high temperature emission --- particularly the 131 emission.
\subsection{Lessons from the UFC}
The standard UFC model, applied above, leads us to the following understanding:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the UFC method with the 0d multiple loop model is able to reproduce the observed global
evolution pattern to the first order (Figures 2, 3b, 4);
\item superposition of multiple heating events also produces the overall evolution timescale
of EUV emission at some pixels, consistent with observations (Figure 5);
\item however, the majority of individual loop pixels tend to evolve more slowly from 10 - 3~MK, and the duration of
emission in 131 is much longer (by 30 minutes) than model results (Figure 3c, 3d, Figure 5);
\item on the other hand, these same pixels are observed to evolve very quickly at the low temperature below 3MK;
in particular, 171 emission exhibits multiple bursts each having a duration of 5-10 min.
Modeled and observed duration of the 171 emission is in good agreement (Figure 3c);
\item the foot-point UV light curve exhibits a long decay time of 10 - 60 minutes,
maybe indicative of a long continuous heating at individual ribbon pixels as can be resolved by AIA ($~$1-2\arcsec) (Figure 3d);
\end{enumerate}
\section{Modified UFC modeling}
The agreement with global evolution patterns and discrepancies with individual
loop pixels indicate that the former is primarily determined by the temporal distribution of heating events, and
is apparently captured by the UFC method. The single-pixel discrepancy in duration
of the hotter bands may be attributed to unresolved threads anchored to the same footpoint pixel,
heated independently at different times throughout the duration of the UV brightening. To test this hypothesis,
we explore several extensions of the UFC model to account for a single {\em loop} comprising multiple {\em threads}.
We illustrate the different extensions using a single loop whose
footpoint pixel exhibits a UV rise time $\tau_0 = 7$ min, and peak heating rate
$H_0=\lambda I_0 = 3\times 10^8\ {\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$. We call this loop the reference loop.
The integral of heating profile eq.\ (\ref{Qt}) yields a total heating of $4.7\times 10^{11}\ {\rm erg\ cm^{-2}}$
delivered to this reference loop. We retain all of these
observationally-determined parameters, $H_0$, $\tau_0$, and $t_0$, in all of our multi-thread (MT) experiments, and results
of the experiments will be compared with those of the single or one loop model (OL model hereafter).
\subsection{Multi-thread heating with amplitude modulation -- AM model}
In the first MT experiment, we assume new threads are introduced at a
constant frequency, but energized to different amplitudes. We call this model the Amplitude Modulation (AM) model hereafter.
The heating profile of an individual thread is given a double Gaussian profile with a short time scale, $\tau_i$,
allowed to vary from 10 to 150 seconds,
\begin{equation}
H_i(t) = \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} H_{i0}\,{\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t- t_{i0})^2}{2\tau_i^2}\right]}
&~~,~~& t < t_{i0} \\[12pt]
H_{i0}\,{\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t- t_{i0})^2}{8\tau_i^2}\right]} &~~,~~& t > t_{i0} ~~, \end{array} \right.
\label{AMI}
\end{equation}
where $t_{i0}$ is the peak time for the $i^{\rm th}$ thread. These impulsive pulses are spaced at
regular intervals of $\Delta t_i \equiv t_{(i+1)0}-t_{i0} = k \tau_i$, which is $k$ times the pulse width $\tau_i$.
The peak amplitudes follow a two-Gaussian envelope same as the one-loop heating profile (Eq.~\ref{Qt}):
\begin{equation}
H_{i0} = \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} H_m\,{\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t_{i0}-t_0)^2}{2\tau_0^2}\right]}
&~~,~~& t_{i0} < t_0 \\[12pt]
H_m\,{\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t_{i0}-t_0)^2}{8\tau_0^2}\right]} &~~,~~& t_{i0} > t_0 ~~, \end{array} \right.
\label{AM0}
\end{equation}
where the width of the envelope, $\tau_0$, is fixed by the rise-time of the UV light curve of the footpoint.
The maximum peak is scaled to the observed peak, $H_m = fH_0$, by a factor $f$ chosen to be in
the range from 1 to 30. A time integral of the composite heating function for the MT experiment is
\begin{equation}
\int\, dt\, \sum_i H_i(t) ~=~ 1.5 \sqrt{2\pi}\,\sum_i \tau_i H_{i0}
~\simeq~ \frac{(1.5\sqrt{2\pi})^2}{k}\, f\tau_0H_0 ~~.
\label{Hit}
\end{equation}
The OL heating rate, given by Eq.\ (\ref{Qt}), has an integral of $1.5\sqrt{2\pi}\tau_0\,H_0$. These integrals must be
multiplied by the corresponding cross-sectional area to obtain the total heating energy. Each thread presumably has a cross-sectional area
smaller than the cross-sectional area of the reference loop by some factor $\zeta$. If we set $\zeta = k/(f1.5\sqrt{2\pi})$,
then the total energy delivered to the MT model will match that delivered to the OL model, for
any choice of the frequency parameter $k$ and the heating rate parameter $f$. We may therefore consider
$k$ to be an entirely free parameter, related to the ratio of cross sectional areas $\zeta$. Whereas this
uncertainty cannot be fixed by current observations, the cross-sectional area itself does not
have any impact on a 0d or 1d hydrodynamic model. On the other hand, the energy flux per unit area,
as modulated by the other free parameter $f$, is critical to the model calculated properties
and the resultant synthetic loop emission.
The mean temperature $\langle T\rangle$ and electron density $\langle n_e\rangle$ of each thread computed with the 0d model are then
used to calculate the synthetic EUV emission at different AIA bandpasses, measured in units of DN per
second per pixel. Since we assume that these threads comprise the reference loop, they all cross
the same one AIA pixel on the reference loop, and the total synthetic emission by all threads
at this AIA pixel is computed.
An example of the AM experiment is shown in Figure~\ref{constnum}. In this example we have taken $f=8$
and $\tau_i = \Delta t_i = 60$~s (i.e., $k = 1$) to give the peak heating rate $H_m = 2.4\times 10^9\ {\rm erg \ s^{-1} \ cm^2}$.
In the time period of $9\tau_0$, from $t_0 -3\tau_0$ to $t_0 + 6\tau_0$, a total of $N = 9\tau_0/(k\tau_i) = 63$
threads were introduced. The heating rates $H_i(t)$ of these threads, and their total heating rate $\sum_i H_i(t)$
are plotted against the heating rate $H_0(t)$ of the reference loop in the top panel.
To match the total energy of the 63 threads with the energy in the reference loop, we
find $\zeta = 0.03$, or the diameter of each thread is about 17\% that of a loop. Obviously with a longer interval of threads, or
$k = \Delta t /\tau_i > 1$, the cross-sectional area of the thread will be greater.
The bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{constnum} shows the synthetic AIA emission at different bandpasses by the multi-thread AM model, compared
with the OL model. With this specific parameter set $f = 8$ and $\tau_i = 60$~s, the synthetic AIA emission in 131 bandpass is comparable with
the OL model, the peak 131 emission being about 86\% of that by the OL model. The ratios of the peak emissions in other bandpasses
relative to the peak 131 emission are quoted in the bottom panel of the figure, for the AM model and OL model, respectively.
Again, for this set of parameters, EUV emissions in various AIA bandpasses by the AM model are comparable with those by the OL model.
However, the duration of the synthetic 131 emission by the AM model is not longer compared with the OL model,
and the cooling times between different bands as derived from the AM model are actually shorter than from the OL model.
The AM experiment has been conducted with many sets of $f$ (ranging from 1 to 30) and $\tau_i$ (from 10 to 150~s).
These experiments show that duration of the synthetic 131 emission is nearly determined by the timescale of the total heating $\Sigma H_i(t)$,
and is rather insensitive to properties of the threads such as $\tau_i$ and $H_{i0}$. The OL model produces longer cooling
times between different bandpasses than any of the AM experiment, suggesting that persistent heating in a loop or thread
is indeed important for the long cooling time.
\subsection{Multi-thread heating with frequency modulation -- FM model}
In the second MT experiment, threads are heated with identical profiles and
amplitude but new threads are introduced at a rate varied to reproduce the observed UV light curve.
This is the Frequency Modulation (FM) model. The thread production rate is given a double Gaussian
profile resembling the $H_0$ profile
\begin{equation}
{dN\over dt} = \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} \dot{N}_m \,{\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t_{i0}-t_0)^2}{2\tau_0^2}\right]}
&~~,~~& t_{i0} < t_0 \\[12pt]
\dot{N}_m\,{\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t_{i0}-t_0)^2}{8\tau_0^2}\right]} &~~,~~& t_{i0} > t_0 ~~, \end{array} \right.
\label{dNdt}
\end{equation}
where $\dot{N}_m$ is the peak rate of the thread, and $\tau_0$ is the same rise time used above.
The individual heating profiles are given by eq.\ (\ref{AMI}) with a constant peak rate, $H_{i0} = fH_0$ and
time scale $\tau_i$ for each thread. We perform experiments in which $\tau_i$ is set to the values 10, 30, 60, 150~s,
and where $f$ ranges from 1 to 30, respectively.
Again, to match the total energy of the threads to that in the reference loop, the cross-sectional
area of each thread as some fraction $\zeta$ of the area of the reference loop is given by
$\zeta = 1/(1.5 \sqrt{2\pi} f\dot{N}_m\tau_i)$. Figure~\ref{constrat} shows an example
of FM heating with $f = 8$, or $H_{i0} = 2.3\times 10^9\ {\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$,
and $\tau_i = 60$s. We populate the threads with the peak rate $\dot{N}_m=2.4$~ per min, which again
introduces 63 threads during the period from $t_0 - 3\tau_0$ to $t_0 + 6\tau_0$.
The top panel displays heating profiles of the threads and their total heating rate
in comparison with the OL heating profile. To match the total energy to the reference loop,
$\zeta \sim 0.014$, or the thread diameter is 12\% of the loop diameter. Again, $\dot{N}_m$ and therefore $\zeta$ are free parameters
that can be re-adjusted, with no impact on the 0d and 1d model.
The synthetic AIA emissions at different bandpasses are calculated and displayed in the middle panel. For
reference, the synthetic AIA emission by one thread is also displayed in the lower panel. In this example
of 63 threads, the peak 131 emission from the FM model is about 90\% that from the OL model, if both use the
same amount of heating energy. Compared with the first experiment (AM), the constant amplitude model (FM) is
capable of producing 131 emission of long duration. This is primarily due to strong heating events in
the early rise phase as well as the decay phase. The superposition of these early and late threads gives
rise to longer duration of the 131 emission. Shown in the bottom panel, the duration of the 131 emission by a single thread is
rather short, so a reasonable number of threads would be needed to produce the smooth 131 emission in the loop
as observed.
The FM experiment fails, however, to reproduce the long cooling delays. It seems the strong
impulsive heating raises the density of the plasma quickly, leading to enhanced radiative cooling and therefore
a much shorter cooling time from 131 through 94, 335, and 171 passbands, than found in the OL model.
In addition, we also note that, as shown in the bottom panel of the figure, the durations of the synthetic
131 and 171 emissions by a single thread are nearly comparable; therefore, whereas superposition of emissions by many threads could
produce the long-duration and smooth emission in the 131 bandpass, it may also lead to long-duration 171 emission, which is not observed.
The OL model, with persistent yet attenuated heating, produces the longest cooling timescales from 10 - 3~MK as well as
the short duration of 171 emission comparable to observed timescales.
While none of the foregoing experiments in UFC modeling is completely successful, they do provide insight into
the ingredients required to successfully reproduce observations. First of all, strong impulsive heating in the early as well as
decay phase is necessary to produce the long duration 131 emission at 10~MK observed in the SOL2011-09-13T22 flare.
On the other hand, matching the long cooling delays requires continuous, lower-amplitude heating following the impulsive
phase in the same thread. This low-amplitude heating nearly balances the radiative and conductive
losses and therefore maintains the same (high) density of the thread; as the thread gradually cools to below 2~MK, radiative
cooling increases rapidly and the timescale becomes very short generating the short duration
emission at 1-2 MK. We use this approximate balance to estimate the amplitude of the continuous heating required
in the gradual phase, and
propose that the heating profile in a thread must start with an intensive impulsive heating pulse, followed by a persistent heating
at the rate one to two orders of magnitude lower, which is gradually attenuated to maintain the observed timescales
of emission in the temperature above 3~MK.
\subsection{Single thread with impulsive head and slow tail - ST model}
Based on these analyses, we design the third experiment for a single thread, which is heated impulsively
at the rate of $H_{im} = 10^{9-10} {\rm erg\ cm^{-2}\ s^{-1}}$ for timescale $\tau_{im} = 10 - 150$ s, followed
by a persistent low-rate heating starting at the maximum rate of $H_{sl} = 0.01 - 10\times 10^8\ {\rm erg\ cm^{-2}\ s^{-1}}$
for a timescale of $\tau_{sl} = 5 - 30$~min. The model is called the ST (Slow Tail) model.
The heating profile of this model is composed of several Gaussian components
\begin{equation}
H(t) ~=~ \left\{ \begin{array}{lcl} H_{im}\, {\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t-t_0)^2}{2\tau_{im}^2}\right]}
&~~,~~& t < t_0 \\[12pt]
H_{im}\, {\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t-t_0)^2}{2(2\tau_{im})^2}\right]}
&~~,~~& t_0 < t < t_1 \\[12pt]
H_{sl}\, {\rm exp}{\displaystyle \left[\frac{-(t-t_1)^2}{2\tau_{sl}^2}\right]} &~~,~~& t > t_1 ~~,
\end{array} \right.
\label{eq:Ht-tail}
\end{equation}
where $t_1 = t_0 + \tau_{im}\sqrt{8\ln(H_{im}/H_{sl})}$, in order that the profile be continuous.
For each set of parameters, the EBTEL model is run, synthetic
AIA emission by this single thread is computed, and the durations and cooling times are compared with the results
of the one-loop heating model as well as the case of a single thread with only impulsive heating ($H_{sl} = 0$).
Figure~\ref{slowheating} shows the heating profile and the synthetic AIA emissions for one set of parameters
in comparison with the OL model. The heating profile of the thread is plotted in the top panel, in comparison
with the OL model. The peak impulsive heating rate is $H_{im} = 1.4\times 10^9\
{\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$ and timescale $\tau_{im} = 60s$, and the peak slow heating rate is
$H_{sl} = 3\times 10^8\ {\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$ and timescale $\tau_{sl} = 20$~min.
If the thread has the same cross-sectional area as the reference loop, then the total energy in the thread
is 1.6 times that in the reference loop. Again, we may match the total energy of the threads with that of
the reference loop by adjusting the area of a thread relative to the reference loop area and the number (or frequency)
of threads in a loop.
The middle and bottom panels show synthetic AIA emissions with the OL and ST models, respectively.
It is evident that the single thread in this example can produce a long duration (20 min) 131 emission,
a short duration (4 min) 171 emission, as well as the long cooling time (80 min) between 131 and 171 peaks.
Importantly, the duration of emission in 131, 94, and 335 bands, as well as the cooling times through these passbands, are substantially longer than
those in the case of a single thread with only impulsive heating (see the bottom panel of Figure~\ref{constrat}),
and are also longer than the OL model. On the other hand, duration of the low-temperature emission (211, 193, and 171)
is rather short and comparable with observed timescales.
With the timescales generated in the ST model, if several such threads spread out
with a time interval of 15-20 min, it may produce a smooth 131 emission with the
duration comparable to the observed timescale of 60 min, as well as multiple, well-separated,
and short-duration 171 emission peaks at one loop pixel as indicated by observations.
We also note that, the total AIA emission in 131 band by such a thread is about 1.5 times that
by the OL model, if both using the same amount of heating energy. The ratios of the total emission in other
bandpasses relative to the total emission in 131 band are quoted in the middle and bottom panels.
These ratios vary by within a factor of 2 if we compare the ST model with the OL model, suggesting
that redistributing heating energy as specified by the new heating profile will not significantly change
the total EUV emissions from all loops. This heating energy redistribution, however, does signicantly change the timescales of the EUV emissions
in a single loop as described above.
To explore the range of slow-heating parameters that are able to produce the observed timescales,
Figure~\ref{slowstat} shows the durations in 131 and 171 bands and cooling time between 131 and 171 emissions
computed with varying parameters of $H_{sl}$ and $\tau_{sl}$. The top panels show the case with an impulsive heating
rate $H_{im} = 1.4 \times 10^9\ {\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$ and duration $\tau_{im} = 60$~s, and the bottom panels
show a case with $H_{im} = 8.6 \times 10^9\ {\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$ and duration $\tau_{im} = 10$~s.
Comparison between the two cases suggests that the duration and cooling time variations of the synthetic AIA emissions
are generally not sensitive to parameters of the impulsive heating, as long as the total energy in the pulse
is comparable; instead, they much depend on parameters of the slow heating. The figures suggest that slow
heating with the rate $H_{sl} = 2 - 6 \times 10^8\ {\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$ and timescale $\tau_{sl} \ge 20$ min is
in favor of producing long duration 131 emission ($>$ 20 min), short duration 171 emission ($<$ 8 min), as well as long cooling
time ($>$ 80 min) between 131 and 171 bands.
Figure~\ref{slowtrend} further examines durations and cooling times of AIA emissions in multiple bands as functions
of the 131 duration for 1,400 runs (black symbols) covering a large parameter space: $H_{im} = 1 - 9\times 10^{9}\ {\rm s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$,
$\tau_{im} = 10 - 150$~s, $H_{sl} = 0.05 - 1\times 10^{9}\ {\rm s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$, and $\tau_{sl} = 15 - 35\ {\rm min}$.
It is seen that, in general, when duration of the synthetic 131 emission increases, the duration of 94 emission,
and cooling time from 131 to 94 bands, and then from 94 to 335 bands, also increase. These trends are favorable
to match with observations. On the other hand, the duration of low-temperature emissions at 335 and 171 bands and
the cooling time between 335 and 171 bands do not grow with increased 131 duration, which is again favorable to
explain the observed timescales in these bands. Therefore, the experiments show that, by adding a persistent low-rate
heating component following the intense impulsive heating in the thread, the observed long duration high-temperature
emissions as well as the long cooling time can be possibly reproduced. In comparison, the data points in red mark the
cases with only an impulsive heating component; and these heating events produce emissions in all bands for very short durations and
with very short cooling times as well.
Finally, data points marked in orange denote the ``good" cases with desired long duration
131 emission ($>20$ min), short duration 171 emission ($<$ 8 min), long cooling time between 131 and 171 bands
($>$ 80 min), and a reasonable ratio of the total 171 emission to the total 131 emission.
This subset of events selected out of the total of 1,400 runs have a slow-heating rate $H_{sl} =
2 - 4\times 10^8\ {\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$, and timescale $\tau_{sl} = 20 - 30$ min.
In these events, the energy in the slow-heating phase is 2-3 times that in the impulsive-heating phase. The
total heating energy per unit area ranges between 0.4 to 1.0$\times 10^{12}\ {\rm erg\ cm^{-2}}$, which is about 0.8 to 2.2
times the total heating energy used in the OL model. The total emission in 131 passband increases almost linearly with
the total heating energy; such linear scaling allows for adjustment of multi-thread parameters, such as the frequency
and cross-sectional area of the thread, to match with the observed amount of total emission. The frequency of the threads
at each loop pixel may be inferred from the multiple 171 peaks, leaving only the cross-section area of the thread
as a free parameter for the modified global modeling. When the modified heating rates
are applied to model all flare loops, refinement of other model parameters including $\lambda$ and $\eta$ may
also be necessary to match with the observed total emission by the flare. We expect that the adjustment would be minor,
and defer such modified global modeling to future work to limit the scope of this paper.
\section{One-dimensional Modeling}
The foregoing has used the zero-dimensional EBTEL model to deduce a heating profile which produces light curves sharing
the properties inferred from observation. We explore its more general applicability by using the same time-profile
in a one-dimensional loop-dynamics model.
The one-dimensional run begins with a loop in equilibrium of total coronal length $L=114.6$ Mm. The equilibrium is maintained by
uniform coronal heating, $Q_{bk}=10^{-4}\,{\rm erg\,s^{-1}\,cm^{-3}}$, which maintains its apex at $T_{\rm 0,max}=1.3$ MK. The
minimum coronal density turns out to be $n_e=3.3\times10^{8}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$. We append to each end of the loop, simple isothermal
chromospheres of $T_{\rm 0,min}=10,000$ K, 4 Mm deep. These include almost eight full scale heights of gravitational stratification,
over which the electron density rises from $4\times10^{10}\, {\rm cm}^{-3}$, at the top, to $10^{14}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ at the lower
boundary. The chromospheres are intended only as mass-reservoirs, and are treated using coronal dynamics, assuming full ionization
\citep{Longcope2015,Longcope2014}
The dynamical evolution of the one-dimensional loop is solved using the PREFT code \citep[standing for Post-Reconnection Evolution of a Flux Tube, ][]
{Longcope2015}. While it is designed to model retracting loops, we run it here with a loop fixed and straight. PREFT includes optically
thin radiative losses taken from CHIANTI 7.0 \citep{Dere1997, Landi2012}, classical Spitzer-Ha\"rm thermal conductivity, and shear viscosity.
The initial equilibrium is subjected to an {\em ad hoc} heating source with a tent-profile in space, centered at the apex and extending
over the central half of the loop. The temporal profile is taken from eq.\ (\ref{eq:Ht-tail}) with
$t_0=120$~s, $\tau_{im} = 60$~s, $\tau_{sl}=1200$ sec, $H_{im}=1.4\times10^{9}\,{\rm erg\,s^{-1}\,cm^{-2}}$, and
$H_{sl}=0.3\times10^{9}\,{\rm erg\,s^{-1}\,cm^{-2}}$.
The heating drives the apex temperature to a maximum value of $T=19.6$ MK by $t=115$~s, just before the heating peaks at
$t=t_0=120$ s (see eq.\ [\ref{eq:Ht-tail}]).
The heat is conducted to the chromosphere where it drives upward evaporation as well as downward {\em chromospheric condensation}.
The condensation takes the form of a front propagating downward with flow speeds starting at $\pm 70$ km s$^{-1}$, but falling
steadily to $5$ km s$^{-1}$ by $t=125$~s. At the same time, evaporation flows at $v\simeq\pm 500$ km s$^{-1}$, form isothermal
shocks of Mach number about 1.8. These shocks collide at the loop top around $t=125$ s, creating a reflection which returns
to the chromosphere at $t=280$ s. After the reflected waves have returned to the chromosphere, the pressure throughout
the corona has become uniform to within $\sim5$ \% ($P =25\pm1\,{\rm erg\ cm^{-3}}$). Subsequent evolution consists of
quasi-static cooling with very small flows and pressure gradients.
The coronal density first rises at the evaporative shocks, by nearly an order of magnitude to
$n_e\simeq2\times10^{9}\,{\rm cm^{-3}}$. Upon their reflection the apex density rises steadily at a rate $\dot{n}_e\simeq10^{7}\,
{\rm cm^{-3} s^{-1}}$ until peaking at $n_e=7\times10^{9} \ {\rm cm^{-3}} $ at $t=370$ s. At this point, the corona has reached an equilibrium with
uniform pressure; equilibrium density is $n_e\simeq10^{10} \ {\rm cm^{-3}} $ at the top of the chromosphere.
Once the one-dimensional model has reached a mechanical equilibrium, at about $t\simeq400$~s, we expect its evolution to be well
represented by a zero-dimensional model such as EBTEL. It is during the earlier phase, in which density is enhanced through
supersonic evaporation, that the two methodologies may depart most significantly. It is during this phase that the total mass of
evaporated material, upon subsequent evolution critically depends, is set.
To make direct comparisons with the 0d runs we follow the definitions used in the formulation of EBTEL. The corona is defined as the
region bounded by the points of maximum and minimum conductive heat flux. This region contracts to $L\simeq40$ Mm during the
evaporation phase, as competing upflows steepen the downward heat flux gradients. During the reflection of the evaporation shocks
the corona expands back to $L\simeq 120$ Mm. The coronal pressure and density are found by averaging over the coronal region, so defined.
The mean density remains above the apex value by 1--3$\times 10^{9}\,{\rm cm^{-3}}$, peaking at
$\langle n_e \rangle =9\times10^{9}\,{\rm cm^{-3}}$ at $t=463$ s. The 0d temperature (from a ratio of mean pressure to mean density) remains
below the apex value by 0.5--3 MK, and peaks at the same time as the apex temperature at $t=115$ s, but 1 MK lower, $\langle T \rangle =18.6$ MK.
Synthetic light curves are the most significant point of comparison between one-dimensional and zero-dimensional loop models. Figure~\ref{onedloops}
compares the AIA-observed light curves synthesized from one-dimensional PREFT runs and zero-dimensional EBTEL runs, both with the same heating profiles.
Apart from the first few minutes, light curves from the two models show comparable trends of evolution, namely the long duration
emission in 131, 94, and 335 bands, short duration emission in 211, 193, and 171 bands, and significant delays between high-temperature
and low-temperature passbands. These features cannot be produced, in either 0d or 1d model, with only an impulsive heating pulse.
The 1d model therefore qualitatively confirms the general results from the 0d experiments, that the prolonged,
low-rate heating is able to produce observed timescales of plasma evolution.
The PREFT run does, however, exhibit some notable differences from EBTEL runs with similar heating. The conduction-driven
evaporation of PREFT delivers less material to the corona than does the EBTEL. Since
the conductive cooling time scales positively with coronal density, the PREFT run cools earlier than the EBTEL run.
In the 0d EBTEL model, evaporation (as well as coronal condensation later on) is computed as the difference
between conduction from corona and radiation loss in the transition region, the latter term being set to
be proportional to coronal pressure with a scaling constant $\eta$ in this study (see Section 3). In this sense,
evaporation in the EBTEL model is parameterized. Furthermore, \citet{Qiu2012} have shown that, in the decay
phase when impulsive heating has finished, plasma evolution is sensitive to this scaling constant $\eta$ that
can be adjusted to produce the appropriate timescale as well as the amount of low-temperature emissions.
Physical mechanisms, likely related to the lower-atmosphere dynamics, justifying selection of this parameter
should be further explored in the ensuing study to improve modeling of flare evolution.
As superior to the 0d model, the 1d model illustrates more accurately plasma evolution in the initial impulsive heating phase when
plasmas are far from equilibrium -- such equilibrium has always been assumed in the 0d model. The 1d model also
generates along-the-loop plasma properties. These allow comparison with multi-spectral observations
along individual flare loops, which will be reported in the next study.
\section{Conclusions and Discussions}
\subsection{Summary of Results}
In this study, we analyze a long duration flare composed of an arcade of flare loops formed sequentially
along the magnetic polarity inversion line. Using the UFC method \citep{Qiu2012, Liu2013}, we infer heating rates
of thousands of flare loops from the UV light curves at the flare foot-points, and model the flare total
emission with the 0d EBTEL code. It is shown that the 0d multi-loop model can reproduce the global evolution pattern
of the total EUV emissions, suggesting that the UFC method appropriately captures the distribution of heating events
throughout the flare. However, observations at single loop pixels show long duration EUV emission at high
temperatures of 6 -- 10 MK, long cooling time from 10 to 3 MK, and very short duration of EUV emission at 1 --
2 MK more than an hour later; all of these signatures at one pixel cannot be produced simultaneously by the model.
We have then explored the popular thinking that each {\em loop}, assumed to anchor at a UV pixel, is composed of
unresolved sub-structure, or multiple {\em threads}, heated at different times. Multi-thread models with either
frequency or amplitude modulation of {\em impulsive} heating events, however, fail to produce the
observed timescales in loop pixels. Instead, we have found that a heating profile consisting of two parts, an intense
impulsive heating followed by a persistent low-rate heating, can produce long duration emission at 131 and 94
passbands, long cooling times, as well as short duration 171 emission. It is estimated that, for each observed loop pixel
in this flare, superposition of a few such heating events (or {\em threads}) with an interval of 10 - 20 min may produce the
observed timescales at one loop pixel; each of these threads can be heated impulsively at the rate of order $10^{9-10}\
{\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$ and timescale $10 - 60$~s, and then gradually with the rate of a few times
$10^8\ {\rm erg\ s^{-1}\ cm^{-2}}$ that is attenuated in 20 -- 30 min.
\subsection{Discussions}
\subsubsection{Can we see the slow-heating?}
Our experiments have demonstrated that a heating profile consisting of an impulsive component followed by a gradual component
is capable of producing the observed timescales at single loop pixels. However, the observed UV light curves at flare
ribbons, from which we infer heating rates, do not exhibit the profile similar to the heating profile given in
Figure~\ref{slowheating}. Can we, therefore, justify the practice of inferring heating rates from the
foot-point UV light curves? We consider that the observed smooth and long duration UV light curve,
which does not show the transition between the spiky signature indicative of the impulsive heating
component and the gradual slow-heating phase, may be caused by the AIA not resolving the threads at
sub-arcsecond scales. Furthermore, the impulsive heating rapidly raises the coronal pressure
within the acoustic timescale, which is a few minutes in this event; afterwards, UV emission
from the transition region could be governed by the pressure-gauge \citep{Qiu2013}, and
therefore shields the slow-heating component that continuously heats the foot-point but at a low-rate.
To discern these heating events, it is crucial to explore optically-thin
UV observations with much higher spatial resolution, such as those provided by the recently
launched Interface Region Imaging Spectrograph \citep[IRIS; ][]{Depontieu2014}. Side by side with observational effort,
1d modeling is also necessary to comprehensively and coherently address both the corona and
transition region physics in both the impulsive and gradual phases.
\subsubsection{What causes slow-heating?}
The modified heating profile suggests a scenario that energy release in a flare loop takes place
in two phases, an intense impulsive heating phase and a gradual gentle heating phase. From the single pixel
statistics, the gradual heating may be present in the majority of flare loops. Flare loops are
formed by magnetic reconnection governed by Alfv\'enic timescales of order a few seconds, which is
consistent with the timescale of the impulsive heating. Then what mechanism produces the ubiquitous
gradual gentle heating? A few plausible scenarios deserve further consideration.
First, post-reconnection magnetic fields might not be relaxed to the lowest energy state within the Alfv\'en timescales, and post-flare
loops may still carry electric current with gradual Joule heating in the loops like
described by \citet{Parker1983, Schrijver2004}. This current dissipation scenario is equivalent to {\em slow reconnection}
operating with the classical resistivity, and the timescale of energy release is a few orders of magnitude
longer than {\em fast reconnection}. If {\em fast reconnection} occurs on timescales of $\sim$10$^0$~s, the timescale
of the current dissipation may take place over a few tens of minutes to release comparable
amount of energy. Second, post-reconnection loops retract, or shrink \citep{Forbes1996},
under the magnetic tension force, and in this course releases energy.
However, newly formed loops do not retract in vacuum and receive resistance from earlier formed low-lying loops,
generating slow-shocks \citep{Cargill1982, Cargill1983} with possibly elongated timescale of energy release.
In addition, the dynamic process during the flare may also trigger many magnetosonic waves \citep[see review by ][]{Aschwanden2006}.
It is likely that the slow-heating process is governed by wave damping. The required slow-heating duration
of 20 - 30 min in the studied event is roughly comparable with damping timescales of different
kinds of waves inside post-flare loops \citep[e.g. ][]{Wang2011}.
\subsubsection{Limitation of the model}
The present study relies on a 0d model, which has enormous advantage to study a
large number of loops or threads statistically \citep{Cargill2012b}, as has been done here. Questions can be raised
regarding the fidelity of using the mean property approach to describe dynamically evolving flare plasmas.
Admittedly this approach is not consistent with non-equilibirum physics during the
impulsive heating phase \citep[such as the discussion in ][]{Qiu2013}, but the gradual phase of
the long timescale appears to be governed by an approximate equilibrium,
validating the 0d approach. Plasma evolution in this gradual phase could be much less dependent on the details of the impulsive heating, as
demonstrated by numerous 1d models \citep[e.g. ][]{Winebarger2004} including the one employed here.
There is certainly ample room for improvement. The datasets of this flare are also optimal to
study plasma properties along the loops, which will constrain 1d models to help understand
the physics of heating. To calculate the synthetic loop emission, an ionization
equillibrium is assumed. This is not necessarily true \citep[e.g. ][]{Shen2013}.
It has also been discussed that turbulence in flare loops may suppress thermal
conduction \citep[][ and references therein]{Jiang2006, Wang2015}.
The impact of these effects on flare modeling can be examined in the future study.
Finally, we also note that any of the above-mentioned mechanisms, if
responsible for the
gradual heating, can be a natural consequence of dynamic plasma as well as
magnetic evolution of flare loops upon impulsive energy release, and therefore,
may be addressed in a magnetohydrodynamic model beyond the 1d framework.
\acknowledgments We thank the referee for the careful review and insightful comments that help improve the paper.
We acknowledge the SDO mission for providing quality observations. This work is supported by the NASA grant NNX14AC06G.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}
Since the discovery of the first strong gravitational lens system
Q0957+561 \citep{1979Natur}, strong lensing has developed into an
important astrophysical tool suitable for investigating both background
cosmology \citep{Zhu00a,Zhu00b,Cha03, Cha04, Mit05, Zhu08a, Zhu08b}
and the structure and evolution of galaxies \citep{Zhu97,MS98,Jin00,Kee01,KW01,Ofek03,Treu06a}.
A well-defined sample of strong lensing systems with accurately
measured image separations and known redshifts of the lens
and of the source could be useful to test cosmological parameters
such as the present-day matter density $\Omega_m$, cosmic
equation of state etc. \citep{Cha03,Mit05} as well as the
statistical properties of lensing galaxies e.g. stellar velocity
dispersion function or galaxy evolution \citep{CM03,Ofek03}.
Concerning cosmological applications, the first method used for this
purpose was of statistical nature. Essentially, the idea was to
apply the velocity dispersion function (VDF) of early-type galaxies
derived from the SDSS Data Release 5 \citep{Sheth03} in
order to analyze the distribution of observed image separations in
the sample of gravitationally lensed systems taken from Cosmic Lens
All-Sky Survey (CLASS) \citep{Mit05,Zhu08a,Cao11a}, in combination
with semi-analytical modeling of galaxy formation and evolution
\citep{CM03}. Next, the idea of using Einstein radius measurements
of strong lensing systems combined with spectroscopic data (stellar
velocity dispersions) provides another interesting possibility to
set limits on cosmological parameters including the cosmic equation
of state \citep{Biesiada06,Grillo08,Biesiada10,Biesiada11,Cao15}.
In the usual formulation of strong gravitational
lensing, one often approximates the actual lens by an idealized model with
a definite radial mass density profile. Most of lensing galaxies
are massive early-type ellipticals as they dominate the lensing
cross-sections due to their large masses.
Spherically symmetric mass distribution leading to a circularly
symmetric surface mass density and having analytical properties, has
always been assumed in statistical studies of strong lensing systems.
Such classical lens models include singular isothermal sphere (SIS)
and Navarro, Frenk and White (NFW) profile
\citep{Bartelmann96,Navarro96}. In particular, the SIS model with
homologous profile ($\rho_{tot}\sim 1/r^2$) for the total
(luminous+dark) density distribution, was extensively used in the
previous lensing-based cosmological studies
\citep{Fukugita92,Kochanek96,Helbig99}. This simple but well-tested mass model
is strongly supported by recent observations of early-type galaxies
both in the inner regions i.e. within the Einstein radii
\citep{Lagattuta10,Ruff11} and at larger distances of $\sim 50-300
~h^{-1}$ kpc \citep{she04,man06}.
By assuming the isothermal mass-density profile in elliptical
galaxies acting as lenses, the study of \citet{Grillo08} reported
the value for the present-day matter density lying between 0.2 and
0.3 at 99\% confidence level. This early result is consistent with
most of the current data: precision measurements of Type Ia
supernovae \citep{Amanullah10}, BAO cosmological distance ratios
from SDSS galaxy sample \citep{Padmanabhan12}, and the anisotropies
in the cosmic microwave background radiation
\citep{Hinshaw12,Planck1}. Currently, there is no strong and
convincing evidence for deviations from the concordance $\Lambda$CDM
model which invokes cosmological constant playing the role of an
exotic component called dark energy responsible for more than 70\%
of the total energy of the universe. Latest exploration of the
properties of dark energy with different astrophysical probes
carried out by
\citet{Cao11c,Cao12a,Cao12b,Cao12c,Cao12d,Cao13,Cao14} gave the
results in agreement with $\Lambda$CDM. In light of phenomenological
success of the concordance cosmological model, we may use
gravitational lenses for a different purpose: to study the structure
of galaxies (their total mass and luminosity profiles) safely
assuming that the cosmological model based on current
precise observations is reliable.
The deflection of light due to gravitational lensing is sensitive to
the total mass of structures in the universe, independent of their
nature or dynamical state. Therefore, strong gravitational lensing
provides a valuable tool for measuring the mass distribution of
early-type galaxies. As it is known from the gravitational lensing
theory, once the critical density of the system is determined by
cosmology, mass enclosed inside the Einstein radius can be directly
obtained from the measurement of Einstein radius. On the other hand,
by spectroscopically measuring the central stellar velocity
dispersion and assuming some functional form of the mass density
profile of elliptical galaxies, this mass can also be obtained
through a model-dependent dynamical analysis.
Considering a more general power law model for the total mass
density profile of lensing galaxies ($\rho_{tot}\sim 1/r^\gamma$),
\citet{Grillo08} presented a joint gravitational lensing and
stellar-dynamical analysis of 11 early-type galaxies taken from the
Sloan Lens ACS Survey (SLACS), and found that the total density
profile of the lenses (ellipticals) is indeed well approximated by
an isothermal distribution ($\gamma \sim 2$), independent of the
cosmological model adopted. Using newly measured redshifts and
stellar velocity dispersions from Keck spectroscopy, \citet{Ruff11}
analyzed 11 early-type galaxies (median lens redshift $z_l=0.5$)
from Strong Lenses in the Legacy Survey (SL2S). For a fixed
cosmological model ($\Lambda$CDM), they derived the total mass
density slope inside the Einstein radius for each lens, with an
average total density slope $\gamma=2.16\pm0.09$ for their sample.
Using a combined set of SL2S, SLACS, and the Lenses Structure and
Dynamics (LSD) survey data, a mild trend of the cosmic evolution of
$\alpha$ was also detected, with magnitude $\partial \gamma/
\partial z_l=-0.25^{+0.10}_{-0.12}$.
Similar analyses aimed at establishing the evolution of mass-density
profile have also been attempted in the past with negative results.
For example, \citet{Koopmans06a} using the joint SLACS/LSD sample of
massive lens galaxies (with velocity dispersions $\sigma_{ap}>200$
km/s), concluded that there was no significant evolution of the
total density slope inside one effective radius ($\partial \gamma/
\partial z_l=0.23\pm0.16$). More recently, however
\citet{Bolton12} presented an analysis of a combined sample of SLACS
and BELLS lenses with the conclusion that galaxies at lower
redshifts tend to have steeper mass profiles at a later cosmic times
($\partial \gamma/
\partial z_l=-0.60\pm0.15$). This is consistent with the newest results obtained
by \citet{Sonnenfeld13} from enlarged sample observed by SL2S
combined with SLACS ($\partial \gamma/
\partial z_l=-0.31\pm0.10$).
Given the previous literature listed above
\citep{Koopmans06a,Grillo08,Ruff11,Bolton12,Sonnenfeld13}, the
primary motivation of this work is to develop a reliable
phenomenological model of early-type lensing galaxies suitable for
further cosmological studies. It is only quite recently when
reasonable catalogs of strong lenses: containing more than 100
lenses, with spectroscopic as well as astrometric data, obtained
with well defined selection criteria are becoming available. The
purpose of this work is to use the new sample of 118 lenses
\citep{Cao15} compiled from SLACS, BELLS, LSD, and SL2S to provide
independent constraints on the mass distribution of early-type
galaxies. We consider a general power-law mass density profile
allowing the power-law index to evolve with redshift. Moreover, we
also relax the rigid assumption that the stellar luminosity and
total mass distributions follow the same power-law. In Section 2 we
briefly describe the methodology of subsequent analysis, the sample
and its construction. The results obtained with the full sample and
on several sub-samples are presented in Section 3. The main
conclusions are summarized in Section 4. Throughout this paper we
assume flat $\Lambda$CDM cosmology based on the recent Planck
observations, with $\Omega_m=0.315$ and $h=0.673$ \citep{Planck1}.
\section{Method and data}\label{sec:data}
From the theory of gravitational lensing it follows that, for a
specific strong lensing system, multiple images can only form close
to the so-called Einstein ring $\theta_E$ \citep{Schneider92}.
In the case of circularly symmetric mass distribution, the
mass $M_E$ enclosed within a cylinder of a radius equal to the
Einstein radius is also directly related to the geometry of the
Universe (through angular-diameter distances):
\begin{equation}
\theta_E = \left(\frac{4G M_E}{c^2} \frac{D_{ls}}{D_s D_l}
\right)^{1/2} ~~~.
\end{equation}
Here, $D_s$ is the angular-diameter distance to the source, $D_l$ is
the distance to the lens, and $D_{ls}$ is the distance between the
lens and the source. Throughout this paper we will use angular-diameter distances, unless stated otherwise.
Rearranging terms using $R_E = D_l \theta_E$
($R$ is the cylindrical radius perpendicular to the
line of sight, $\mathcal{Z}$-axis), we obtain a useful formula
\begin{equation}
\frac{G M_E}{R_E} = \frac{c^2}{4}
\frac{D_s}{D_{ls}} \theta_E~~~, \label{eq:einrad}
\end{equation}
which indicates that only mass inside the Einstein radius has
net effect on the deflection of light, regardless of the full lens mass distribution.
On the other hand, the measurement of
central velocity dispersion $\sigma$ can provide a
model-dependent dynamical estimate of this mass
based on the assumption of the power-law mass density profile $\rho$,
and luminosity density of stars $\nu$ \citep{Koopmans06}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:rhopl}
\rho(r) &=& \rho_0 \left(\frac{r}{r_0}\right)^{-\alpha} \\
\nu(r) &=& \nu_0 \left(\frac{r}{r_0}\right)^{-\delta}
\label{eq:nupl}
\end{eqnarray}
Here $r$ is the spherical radial coordinate from the lens center and
it is related to the projected radial coordinate $R$ and the coordinate along the line of sight $\mathcal{Z}$ by:
$r^2 = R^2 + \mathcal{Z}^2$. In order to
characterize the anisotropic distribution of three-dimensional
velocity dispersion, an anisotropy parameter $\beta$
is also introduced:
\begin{equation}
\beta(r) = 1 - {\sigma^2_t} / {\sigma^2_r} \label{eq:beta}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_t$ and $\sigma_r$ are the tangential and radial
velocity dispersions, respectively. It has almost always been
assumed to be independent of $r$ \citep{Bolton06,Koopmans06}. In our
analysis we will consider two cases: isotropic distribution
$\beta=0$ and anisotropic distribution $\beta = const. \neq 0$. We
emphasize here that the power-law model adopted by us for the
luminosity profile is simply a convenient and flexible parameterized
mathematical model for early-type galaxies. In the previous work by
\citet{Bolton12}, it was verified that the results of mass-density
profile evolution do not depend significantly on the choice of the
specific form of parameterized luminosity-profile. Taking the Nuker
profile \citep{Lauer95}, a broken power-law profile including a
transition of variable softness between inner and outer regions, as
the reference model they found that differences between constraints
obtained with the Nuker and de Vaucouleurs \citep{Vaucouleurs48}
profiles were insignificant. However, in order to better describe
the distribution of luminous tracers in galaxies, more
data-orientated luminosity profiles like de Vaucouleurs, Hernquist,
Jaffe or Nuker profiles (see e.g.
\citet{Koopmans06a,Bolton12,Sonnenfeld13}) should be taken into
consideration in our next-step works.
Following the well-known spherical Jeans equation \citep{Binney80},
radial velocity dispersion of luminous matter $\sigma^2(r)$
of the early-type galaxies can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\sigma^2_r(r) = \frac{G\int_r^\infty dr' \ \nu(r') M(r') (r')^{2
\beta - 2} }{r^{2\beta} \nu(r)}~~~, \label{eq:binney}
\end{equation}
where $\beta$ is the above mentioned anisotropy parameter. Using
the mass density profile from Eq.~(\ref{eq:rhopl}), one can obtain the
relation between $M_E$ and the mass enclosed within a spherical radius $r$:
\begin{equation}
M(r) = \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi} \lambda(\alpha)}
\left(\frac{r}{R_E}\right)^{3 - \alpha} M_E ~~~,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda(x) =
\Gamma \left(\tfrac{x-1}{2}\right) / \Gamma
\left(\tfrac{x}{2}\right)$ denotes the ratio of Euler's gamma functions.
Using the notation $\xi = \delta + \alpha - 2$, after
\citet{Koopmans06}, we obtain a convenient form for the radial
velocity dispersion by scaling the dynamical mass to the Einstein
radius:
\begin{equation}
\sigma^2_r(r) = \left[\frac{G M_E}{R_E} \right]
\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}\left(\xi- 2 \beta \right) \lambda(\alpha)}
\left(\frac{r}{R_E}\right)^{2 - \alpha}
\end{equation}
A key ingredient in all measurements concerning strong lensing systems is the {\em
observed} velocity dispersion, which is a projected, luminosity
weighted average of the radially-dependent velocity dispersion
profile of the lensing galaxy. In order to predict this value based
on a set of galaxy parameters, we start with Eq.~(\ref{eq:binney}). Note that this equation is valid when
the relationship between stellar number
density and stellar luminosity density is spatially constant, an
assumption unlikely to be violated appreciably within the effective
radius of the early-type lens galaxies under consideration.
Furthermore, the actual observed velocity dispersion is
measured over the spectrometer aperture $\theta_{\rm ap}$ blurred with
atmospheric seeing
In our analysis, we will apply the aperture weighting
function provided by \citet{Schwab10}
\begin{equation}
w(R) \approx e^{-R^2/2 \tilde{\sigma}_{\rm atm}^2} ~~~,
\label{eq:wofr}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\sigma}_{\rm atm} \approx \sigma_{\rm atm} \sqrt{1 + \chi^2 /
4 + \chi^4 / 40}
\end{equation}
$\chi = \theta_{\rm ap} / \sigma_{\rm atm}$ and $\sigma_{\rm atm}$ is the seeing recorded
by the spectroscopic guide cameras during survey observations.
Considering the effects of aperture with atmospheric blurring and
luminosity-weighted averaging (see \citet{Schwab10} for details),
the observed velocity dispersion can be expressed as
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \bar {\sigma}_*^2 &=& \left[\frac{c^2}{4}
\frac{D_s}{D_{ls}} \theta_E \right] \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}}
\frac{(2 \tilde{\sigma}_{\rm atm}^2/\theta_E^2)^{1-\alpha/2}}{ (\xi - 2\beta)} \\
&&\times\left[\frac{\lambda(\xi) - \beta \lambda(\xi+2)}
{\lambda(\alpha)\lambda(\delta)}\right] \frac{
\Gamma(\tfrac{3-\xi}{2}) }{\Gamma(\tfrac{3 - \delta}{2}) } ~~~.
\label{eq:plsig}
\end{eqnarray}
The observed stellar velocity dispersion is a luminosity-weighted
average dispersion inside the fiber aperture. Spectroscopic data
obtained in different surveys comprise luminosity averaged
line-of-sight velocity dispersions $\sigma_{ap}$ measured inside
different apertures. According to \citet{Cao15}, whose
compilation of lenses is used in this paper, SLACS and BELLS source
papers reported effective circular apertures, while for the SL2S and
LSD surveys they have been assessed from the sizes of the slit
reported in source papers. In our analysis, we take for
$\sigma_{atm}$ the median value recorded by the spectroscopic guide
cameras during survey observations. More specifically, we have added
$1''.4$ seeing for the SLACS spectroscopic observations according to
\citet{Bolton08} and $1''.8$ seeing for the BOSS spectroscopic
observations according to \citet{Bolton12, Shu15}. For the SL2S sample the seeing
for each individual lens was taken after \citet{Sonnenfeld13}. In the case of
LSD systems: CFRS03-1077, HST14176 and HST15433 the seeing data were taken from
\citet{Treu04}. Since they reported two seeing values per lens, we have taken the
median. For Q0047-281 we took the seeing value after \citet{Koopmans02}, but for MG2016+112 we assumed $0''.8$ seeing
because there was no seeing reported in the source paper.
From the above equation, one can immediately observe that there are
degeneracies among $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\delta$. More importantly,
if we accurately knew the distance ratio $D_{s}/D_{ls}$, we could
get more stringent constraints on the parameters $\alpha$ and
$\delta$ describing the mass distribution of lensing galaxies. In
our analysis, the angular diameter distance $D_{12}(z)$ between
redshifts $z_1$ and $z_2$ (expressed in Mpc and assuming flat FRW
metric) is calculated as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{inted} D_{12}=\frac{c}{H_0 (1+z_2)}\int_{z_1}^{z_2}
\frac{dz'}{E(z';\Omega_m)}
\end{eqnarray}
where $E(z; \Omega_m)= \sqrt{\Omega_m(1+z)^3+(1-\Omega_m)}$ is the
dimensionless Hubble function in flat $\Lambda$CDM model. We use the
best-fitted
matter density parameter $\Omega_m$
given by Planck Collaboration:
$\Omega_m=0.315$
\citep{Planck1}. Because our expressions involve only distance
ratios $D_{ls}/D_s$, the Hubble constant cancels and we do not have
to use its value, which according to Planck ($H_0 = 67.3 \;\; km \;
s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}$) was somewhat discrepant with alternative
estimates.
In order to determine $(\alpha, \delta)$ parameters of lensing
galaxies, we used Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method to
sample their probability density distributions based on the
likelihood ${\cal L} \sim \exp{(- \chi^2 / 2)}$, where
\begin{equation}
\chi^2 = \sum_{i=1}^{118} \left( \frac{ \bar
{\sigma}_{*,i}(z_{l,i},z_{s,i},\theta_{E,i}, \theta_{ap,i},
\sigma_{atm}; \alpha, \beta, \delta) - {\sigma}_{ap,i}}{\Delta \bar
{\sigma}_{*,i}} \right)^2
\end{equation}
was calculated using the measured values of
velocity dispersion $\sigma_{ap}$, Einstein radius $\theta_E$, and
aperture radius $\theta_{ap}$. Following the SLACS
team we took the fractional uncertainty of the Einstein radius at
the level of $5\%$, redshift measurements were assumed to be accurate.
The uncertainties of
$\sigma_{ap}$ and $\theta_E$ were propagated to the final uncertainty $\Delta \bar {\sigma}_{*}$ of
$\bar {\sigma}_{*}$. However, the
statistical error on Einstein radius was relatively small in
comparison to the velocity dispersion error.
In this paper, we used a comprehensive compilation of 118 strong
lensing systems observed by four surveys: SLACS, BELLS, LSD and
SL2S, which is also the largest gravitational lens sample (suitable
for the purpose of this study) published in our recent work
\citep{Cao15}. The SLACS data comprise 57 strong lenses presented
in \citet{Bolton08,Auger09}, the BELLS data comprise 25
lenses taken from \citet{Brownstein12}, then 5 most reliable lenses
from the LSD survey were taken after
\citet{Koopmans02,Treu02,Treu04}, and the SL2S data for a total of
31 lenses were taken from \citet{Sonnenfeld13a,Sonnenfeld13}.
Scatter plot showing the distribution of lenses from
different surveys in the redshift-velocity dispersion space can be
seen in Fig.~1 of \citet{Cao15}, from which one can see a fair
coverage of redshifts in the combined sample. We remind the readers
to refer to Table 1 of \citet{Cao15} for the full information about
all the 118 lenses. Because our list includes lensing galaxies
corresponding to different velocity dispersions at different
redshifts, so besides the full combined sample we also considered
six sub-samples separately. Within a singular isothermal
sphere model, the dynamical mass is related to the velocity
dispersion through the relation $M\propto\sigma^2$
\citep{Longair98}. Therefore, we considered three sub-samples defined by the velocity
dispersions of lenses \footnote{As a rough criterion, elliptical
galaxies with velocity dispersion smaller than 200 km/s are
classified as relatively low-mass galaxies, while those with
velocity dispersion larger than 300 km/s are treated as relatively
high-mass galaxies.}: $\sigma_{ap} \leq 200$ km/s ($n=25$ lenses),
$200$ km/s $< \sigma_{ap} \leq 300$ km/s ($n=80$ lenses), and
$\sigma_{ap} > 300$ km/s ($n=13$ lenses). Another set of three
sub-samples was defined by restriction to three redshift ranges
\footnote{In the full sample of 118 strong lenses, the highest lens
redshift of $z_l=1.00$ was recorded for the system MG2016. Therefore,
we set the breakpoints at 1/2 and 1/5 of the highest redshift, that is
at $z_l=0.50$ and $z_l=0.20$ respectively. We remark here that such an approach
does not represent any physical aspects of galaxy distribution in redshift, but
it guarantees that there are enough data points in
each sub-sample.}: $z\leq 0.20$ ($n=25$ lenses), $0.20<z\leq 0.50$
($n=65$ lenses), and $z>0.5$ ($n=28$ lenses).
\begin{table*}
\caption{\label{tab:result} Summary of constraints on the
galaxy structure parameters obtained with the full sample and six
sub-samples of strong lensing systems (see text for definitions).}
\begin{center
\begin{tabular}{|l||llllllll}\hline\hline
Sample (Model) & Galaxy structure parameters \{$\gamma$, $\alpha$, $\delta$\} \\
\hline
Full sample ($\alpha=\delta=\gamma$) & $\gamma_0= 2.132\pm 0.055$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\gamma_1= -0.067\pm 0.119$ (1$\sigma$) \\
Full sample ($\alpha \neq \delta$) & $\alpha_0= 2.070\pm0.031$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\alpha_1= -0.121\pm0.078$ (1$\sigma$), \\
& $\delta= 2.710\pm0.143$ (1$\sigma$) \\
Full sample ($\alpha \neq \delta$) & $\alpha= 2.035\pm0.013$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\delta= 2.681\pm0.164$ (1$\sigma$) \\
\hline
Sub-sample ($z\leq 0.2$) ($\alpha=\delta=\gamma$) & $\gamma_0= 2.175^{+0.105}_{-0.218}$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\gamma_1= -0.495^{+1.345}_{-0.565}$ (1$\sigma$)\\
Sub-sample ($0.2<z\leq 0.5$) ($\alpha=\delta=\gamma$) & $\gamma_0= 2.093\pm 0.114$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\gamma_1= 0.063\pm 0.307$ (1$\sigma$) \\
Sub-sample ($z>0.5$) ($\alpha=\delta=\gamma$) & $\gamma_0= 2.275\pm 0.269$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\gamma_1= -0.288\pm 0.394$ (1$\sigma$) \\
\hline
Sub-sample ($\sigma_{ap} \leq 200$ km/s) ($\alpha=\delta=\gamma$) & $\gamma_0= 2.135\pm 0.087$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\gamma_1= 0.012\pm 0.204$ (1$\sigma$) \\
Sub-sample ($200$ km/s $< \sigma_{ap} \leq 300$ km/s) ($\alpha=\delta=\gamma$) & $\gamma_0= 2.115\pm 0.072$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\gamma_1= -0.091\pm 0.154$ (1$\sigma$) \\
Sub-sample ($ \sigma_{ap} > 300$ km/s) ($\alpha=\delta=\gamma$) & $\gamma_0= 1.982\pm 0.154$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\gamma_1= -0.047\pm 0.350$ (1$\sigma$) \\
\hline
Sub-sample ($z\leq 0.2$) ($\alpha \neq \delta$) & $\alpha= 2.067^{+0.077}_{-0.140}$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\delta= 2.410^{+0.410}_{-0.242}$ (1$\sigma$)\\
Sub-sample ($0.2<z\leq 0.5$) ($\alpha \neq \delta$) &$\alpha= 2.029\pm0.018$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\delta= 2.700\pm0.180$ (1$\sigma$) \\
Sub-sample ($z>0.5$) ($\alpha \neq \delta$) & $\alpha= 1.982\pm0.044$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\delta= 2.731\pm0.216$ (1$\sigma$) \\
\hline
Sub-sample ($\sigma_{ap} \leq 200$ km/s) ($\alpha \neq \delta$) & $\alpha= 1.754\pm0.179$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\delta= 2.660\pm 0.120$ (1$\sigma$) \\
Sub-sample ($200$ km/s $< \sigma_{ap} \leq 300$ km/s) ($\alpha \neq \delta$) & $\alpha= 2.004\pm0.065$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\delta=2.539\pm0.279$ (1$\sigma$) \\
Sub-sample ($ \sigma_{ap} > 300$ km/s) ($\alpha \neq \delta$) & $\alpha= 1.829\pm 0.190$ (1$\sigma$), \ $\delta= 2.101\pm 0.149$ (1$\sigma$) \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\section{Results and discussions}\label{sec:results}
In this paper, we focused on constraining the parameters ($\alpha$,
$\delta$) characterizing the structure of elliptical galaxies using
different samples of strong lensing systems, i.e. the full $n=118$
sample as well as six sub-samples defined with different selection
criteria. These parameters are assumed to be the same for all
lenses, and we used MCMC method based on the publicly
available CosmoMC package \citep{Lewis02} to sample their
probability density distributions. To be specific, we generated
eight chains and stopped sampling when the worst e-value [the
variance(mean)/ mean(variance) of 1 / 2 chains] $R-1$ is of the
order 0.01.
\subsection{The case with $\alpha=\delta=\gamma$}
In the first case analysed, we assume that the radial profile of the
luminosity density ($\nu$) follows that of the total mass density
($\rho$), i.e., $\alpha=\delta=\gamma$, and both of them evolve as a
function of redshift:
\begin{equation}
\gamma(z) =\gamma_{0}+\gamma_1z,
\end{equation}
where $\gamma_{0}$ is the present-day value and $\gamma_{1}$
characterizes the evolution of $\gamma$ with redshit. In order to
make comparison with the previous results, we assume that stellar
velocity anisotropy vanishes $\beta=0$. Using the full data-set, we
obtain the following best-fit values and corresponding 1$\sigma$
uncertainties
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \gamma_0= 2.132\pm 0.055, \nonumber\\
&& \gamma_1= -0.067\pm 0.119. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Marginalized 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ contours for each parameter are
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}. The results reveal compatibility between
our full lens sample and a smaller combined sample from SLACS, SL2S
and LSD used previously by \citet{Ruff11,Sonnenfeld13}. Our results
suggest that the total density profile of early-type galaxies has
become slightly steeper over cosmic time ($z\sim 1$), which might
indicate the effect of dissipative processes in the growth of
massive galaxies. It is interesting to see the difference in the final results
obtained with and without seeing taken into account.
Therefore, Fig.~\ref{fig1} also shows the the limits in the plane of $\gamma_0$
and $\gamma_1$ based on the full sample of lenses without accounting for seeing
(see \citet{Koopmans06} for details).
In such a case, we have $\gamma_0= 2.066\pm
0.057$ and $\gamma_0= -0.077\pm 0.126$, which is consistent with the singular isothermal sphere ($\gamma_0=2$,
$\gamma_1=0$) model within $1\sigma$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\hsize]{fig1.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Constraints on the total-mass density parameter obtained
from the full sample of strong lensing systems (Solid line). Limits
in the plane of $\gamma_0$ and $\gamma_1$ without using the seeing
observations are also shown for comparison (Dashed
line).\label{fig1}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\hsize]{fig2.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Constraints on the total-mass density parameter obtained
from sub-sample of strong lenses defined by three different redshift bins.
\label{fig2}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\hsize]{fig3.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Constraints on the total-mass density parameter obtained
from three sub-samples of strong lenses selected according to their velocity dispersions.
\label{fig3}}
\end{figure}
In Table 1 and Fig.~\ref{fig2}-\ref{fig3}, we also show the results
for $\gamma_0$ and $\gamma_1$ obtained on six sub-samples described
in Section~\ref{sec:data}. Concerning the sub-samples with different
lens redshift bins, we find that constraints coming from the three
sub-samples are in perfect agreement with each other. It is good to
recall \citep{Cao15} the median values of the lens redshifts for
different surveys: SLACS -- $z_l = 0.215$, BELLS -- $z_l = 0.517$,
LSD -- $z_l = 0.81$ and SL2S -- $ z_l = 0.456$. Note that SL2S
survey would be particularly promising in the future since it has
already reached the maximum lens redshift of $z_l = 0.80$. For other
three sub-samples of lenses differing by velocity dispersions (which
is directly related to the masses of galaxies, $M\propto \sigma^2$),
we note that the ranges of $\gamma$ parameters for relatively
low-mass galaxies ($\gamma_0=2.135\pm 0.087$, $\gamma_1=0.012\pm
0.204$) are close to estimates obtained for intermediate-mass
elliptical galaxies ($\gamma_0=2.115\pm 0.072$, $\gamma_1=-0.091\pm
0.154$). The best-fit values of $\gamma_0$ and $\gamma_1$ for
massive galaxies ($\gamma_0= 1.982\pm 0.154$, $\gamma_1= -0.047\pm
0.350$) are significantly different from the corresponding
quantities of low-mass and intermediate-mass elliptical galaxies. On
the other hand, the singular isothermal sphere model (SIS) is only
consistent with results obtained in massive (high velocity
dispersion) galaxies. The SIS value of $\gamma=2$ is indeed very
close to the central fit values. Consequently, our results imply
that the mass-density profile is different in low, intermediate and
high-mass elliptical galaxies. This implies the need of treating
these classes of galaxies separately.
\subsection{The case with $\alpha \neq \delta$}
In the second case, we allow the luminosity density profile to be
different from the total-mass density profile, i.e., $\alpha \neq
\delta$, and the stellar velocity anisotropy exits, i.e., $\beta
\neq 0$. Moreover, we characterize anisotropy $\beta$ by a Gaussian
distribution, $\beta=0.18\pm0.13$, based on the well-studied sample
of nearby elliptical galaxies from \citet{Gerhard01}. The above
cited uncertainty $\sigma_{\beta} = 0.13$ represents the intrinsic spread of
this quantity \citep{Bolton06,Schwab10}. In order to
alleviate the degeneracy between luminosity density and total-mass
density profiles, which might yield more meaningful results, we
firstly include the redshift evolution of the mass-density slope
$\alpha=\alpha_0+\alpha_1z$ where $\alpha$ is not equal to $\delta$
(the luminosity-density slope). Performing fits on the full
data-set, the 68\% confidence level uncertainties on the three model
parameters are
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \alpha_0= 2.070\pm0.031, \nonumber\\
&& \alpha_1= -0.121\pm0.078, \nonumber\\
&& \delta= 2.710\pm0.143. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Fig.~\ref{fig4} shows these constraints in the parameter space of
$\alpha_0$, $\alpha_1$ and $\delta$. It is interesting to note that
the values of mass-density exponents are inconsistent with the
values obtained in the case of $\alpha = \delta$. This implies that
from the point of view of stellar dynamics, the effective
description of mass distribution in lensing galaxies can be much
different when $\alpha \neq \delta$. Moreover, the obtained value of
$\delta$ is consistent with that of \citet{Schwab10}, which fit the
PSF convolved two-dimensional power-law ellipsoid images of 53 SLACS
lenses to their corresponding HST F814W imaging data within a circle
of radius \citep{Bolton06}. However, we also notice that all of these
three parameters have relatively large uncertainties. In order to
obtain more stringent results, we will further ignore the redshift
evolution of the mass-density slope $\alpha_1=0$.
Performing fits on the full data-set, we obtain the following
best-fit values and corresponding 68\% confidence level
uncertainties
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \alpha= 2.035\pm0.013, \nonumber\\
&& \delta= 2.681\pm0.164. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
From the results displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig5}, one can see that the
power-law exponent $\delta$, which describes the luminosity density
profile of elliptical galaxies, takes values from the range which is
different from the range of mass-density exponent $\alpha$. Our
result is also in good agreement with a recent analysis of lensing
statistics by \citet{Schwab10}, which reported mean value of
$\avg{\delta} = 2.40$ and a standard deviation $\sigma_\delta =
0.11$. The different range of $(\alpha, \delta)$ parameters reveals
differences in mass density distributions of dark matter and
luminous baryons in early-type galaxies. A model in which mass
traces light ($\alpha=\delta$) is rejected at $>95\%$ confidence and
our analysis robustly indicates the presence of dark matter in the
form of a mass component that is differently spatially distributed
than stars.
From the results obtained on six sub-samples shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig6}-\ref{fig7}, one can see again the consistency
between three sub-samples defined according to the lens redshift
bins. Concerning the sub-samples differing by velocity dispersion
(i.e. by mass as well) both the total-mass and luminosity
distributions exhibit different density profiles across sub-samples.
The constraint results on $\alpha$ parameter are particularly
interesting. Namely, one can see that samples of elliptical galaxies
differing by mass have different power-law profiles of total-mass
density distribution: $\alpha= 1.754\pm0.179$ for $\sigma_{ap} \leq
200$ km/s, $\alpha= 2.004\pm0.065$ for $200$ km/s $< \sigma_{ap}
\leq 300$ km/s, and $\alpha= 1.829\pm 0.190$ for $\sigma_{ap} > 300$
km/s. Substantial distinction between $\alpha$ and $\delta$
parameters exists for all three sub-populations within $1\sigma$. It
is of interest to note that the intermediate-mass elliptical
galaxies are consistent with the singular isothermal sphere within
$1\sigma$ region. Taking the luminosity profile of elliptical
galaxies into consideration, the obtained value of $\delta$ from our
sub-sample with intermediate velocity dispersion ($200$ km/s $<
\sigma_{ap} \leq 300$ km/s), whose confidence contours in $(\alpha,
\delta)$ parameter plane differ the other two remaining samples, is
in perfect agreement with the previous results from smaller SLACS
sample \citep{Schwab10}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\hsize]{fig4.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{ Constraints on the total-mass and luminosity
density parameters obtained from the full sample of strong lensing
systems. Redshift evolution of the mass-density slope is
parameterized as $\alpha=\alpha_0+\alpha_1z$. \label{fig4} }
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\hsize]{fig5.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Constraints on the total-mass and luminosity density
parameters obtained from the full sample of strong lensing systems.
\label{fig5}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\hsize]{fig6.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Constraints on the total-mass and luminosity density
parameters obtained from sub-samples of strong lensing systems
defined by three different redshift bins. \label{fig6}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\hsize]{fig7.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Constraints on the total-mass and luminosity density
parameters obtained from three sub-samples of strong lensing systems
with different velocity dispersions. \label{fig7}}
\end{figure}
Previously, some researchers \citep{Auger10, Sonnenfeld13,
Dutton2014} have considered the problem of how does the mass
weighted slope within the effective radius correlate with other
properties of strong lenses like their stellar density or the
velocity dispersion. In particular \citet{Dutton2014} compared the
observed trends with calculated expectations based on different
evolutionary scenarios for early type galaxies, such like adiabatic
halo contraction, mild or no contraction or halo expansion. The
trends of slope factors with the velocity dispersion found in our
study (Table~1), in the case of $\alpha=\delta$ are in rough
agreement with the adiabatic contraction scenario. We stress,
however that the uncertainties in estimated parameters do not allow
us to discriminate between alternative behaviors. In the case of
$\alpha \neq \delta$ we found no trend in central fit values --
slope steepens between low-mass and intermediate-mass galaxies and
then again becomes more shallow for massive galaxies. This
observation should be taken with caution. First because these fits
agree with each other within $1\sigma$ uncertainty. Second, because
this case is hard to compare quickly against the results obtained by
the others who adopted Sersic or de Vaucouleurs profiles for the
light.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we explored 118 strong gravitational lenses observed
by SLACS, BELLS, LSD and SL2S surveys to constrain the total
mass-profile and light-profile shapes of elliptical galaxies since
redshift $z \sim 1$. Our method of statistical analysis is the same
as in Cao et al.(2015). However, we used as a prior the best-fitted
$\Lambda$CDM cosmology from Planck and assumed power-law density
profiles for the total mass density, $\rho=
\rho_0(r/r_0)^{-\alpha}$, and luminosity density, $\nu=
\nu_0(r/r_0)^{-\delta}$. Allowing for the evolution we also
investigated the total mass density profile exponent and its first
derivative with respect to the redshift in the form of
$\alpha=\alpha_0+\alpha_1z$. First, we assumed, as it was done
previously by the others, that light tracers and total mass follow
the same profile $\alpha=\delta=\gamma$. Then, using the full
sample, we obtained $\gamma_0= 2.132\pm 0.055$ and a mild trend
$\gamma_1= -0.067\pm 0.119$, suggesting that the total density
profile of massive galaxies has become slightly steeper over cosmic
time. Furthermore, we divided the full sample into six different
sub-samples according to the lens redshifts and their velocity
dispersions respectively. It turned out that there are no
significant differences between lenses from different redshift bins.
It is perhaps due to fact that the redshift range covered by lenses
is not big enough to display any noticeable differences. However,
the division according to velocity dispersion (i.e. effectively
according to mass) turned out to be more discriminative. Low and
intermediate mass galaxies show similar profiles ($\gamma_0=2.135\pm
0.087$, $\gamma_1=0.012\pm 0.204$ and $\gamma_0=2.115\pm 0.072$,
$\gamma_1=-0.091\pm 0.154$, respectively), while the best-fit values
of $\gamma_0$ and $\gamma_1$ for massive galaxies ($\gamma_0=
1.982\pm 0.154$, $\gamma_1= -0.047\pm 0.350$) are significantly
different from the corresponding quantities of other two
sub-samples. The singular isothermal sphere model (SIS) is only
consistent with results obtained in massive (high velocity
dispersion) galaxies. Consequently, our results imply that the total
mass density profiles of intermediate-mass and high-mass elliptical
galaxies are different.
Then, we set $\delta$ as a free parameter and allow the luminosity
density profile to be different from the total-mass density profile,
i.e., $\alpha \neq \delta$. Performing fits on the full data and
considering the redshift evolution of $\alpha=\alpha_0+\alpha_1z$,
we obtained $\alpha_0= 2.070\pm0.031$, $\alpha_1= -0.121\pm0.078$,
and $\delta= 2.710\pm0.143$. This value is also in good agreement
with a recent analysis by \citep{Schwab10} obtained on a much
smaller sample. A model in which mass traces light (i.e.
$\alpha=\delta$) is rejected at $>95\%$ confidence and our analysis
robustly indicates the presence of dark matter in the form of a mass
component distributed differently from the light. Fits performed on
six sub-samples lead to the similar conclusion as in previous case.
In particular, the substantial distinction between $\alpha$ and
$\delta$ admissible ranges exists in all sub-samples. It is
interesting to note that only intermediate-mass elliptical galaxies
are consistent with the singular isothermal sphere within $1\sigma$,
i.e, $\alpha= 2.004\pm0.065$. Taking the luminosity profile of
elliptical galaxies into consideration, the obtained value of
$\delta$ from our sub-sample with intermediate velocity dispersion
is in perfect agreement with the previous results from smaller SLACS
sample \citep{Schwab10}.
As a final remark, we point out that the sample discussed in this
paper is based on strong lensing systems discovered in different
surveys. Our analysis potentially may suffer from systematics
stemming from this inhomogeneity. If the best fitted values
of $\alpha$ and $\delta$ power-law exponents are robustly confirmed
in future larger samples, they can be used to elaborate a
more accurate phenomenological model of elliptical galaxies. Such a
model going beyond the SIS, would serve as a more realistic prior
assumption in cosmological tests based on distance ratios.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We are grateful to the referee for very constructive discussion and
useful comments that allowed us to improve the paper considerably.
This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology
National Basic Science Program (Project 973) under Grants Nos.
2012CB821804 and 2014CB845806, the Strategic Priority Research
Program ``The Emergence of Cosmological Structure" of the Chinese
Academy of Sciences (No. XDB09000000), the National Natural Science
Foundation of China under Grants Nos. 11503001, 11373014 and
11073005, the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central
Universities and Scientific Research Foundation of Beijing Normal
University, China Postdoctoral Science Foundation under grant No.
2015T80052, and the Opening Project of Key Laboratory of
Computational Astrophysics, National Astronomical Observatories,
Chinese Academy of Sciences. Part of the research was conducted
within the scope of the HECOLS International Associated Laboratory,
supported in part by the Polish NCN grant DEC-2013/08/M/ST9/00664 -
M.B. gratefully acknowledges this support. This research was also
partly supported by the Poland-China Scientific \& Technological
Cooperation Committee Project No. 35-4. M.B. obtained approval of
foreign talent introducing project in China and gained special fund
support of foreign knowledge introducing project.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec-intro}
The HOMFLYPT homology was introduced by Khovanov and Rozansky in \cite{KR2}. In the current paper, we study its Hilbert polynomial. In the following, we use the $\fH_0$ normalization of the HOMFLYPT homology in \cite{Wu-triple-trans}, which is slightly more symmetric than the original normalization in \cite{KR2}. We will review $\fH_0$ in Section \ref{sec-H-0} below.
$\fH_0$ has three $\zed$-gradings:
\begin{itemize}
\item the homological grading with degree function $\deg_h$,
\item the $a$-grading with degree function $\deg_a$,
\item the $x$-grading with degree function $\deg_x$.
\end{itemize}
$\fH_0$ also has a $\zed_2$-grading. But this $\zed_2$-grading is always equal to the parity of the $a$-grading. Denote by $\fH_0^{i,j,k}$ the homogeneous component of $\fH_0$ with homological grading $i$, $a$-grading $j$ and $x$-grading $k$. From the definition, we know that $\fH_0^{i,j,k}=0$ unless $j+k$ is even. We call the sum of the $a$-grading and $x$-grading the polynomial grading of $\fH_0$. Its degree function is $\deg_a+\deg_x$. The homogeneous component of $\fH_0$ with homological grading $i$, $a$-grading $j$ and polynomial grading $T$ is $\fH_0^{i,j,T-j}$, which is zero unless $T$ is even. The following lemma is a special case of Hilbert's Syzygy Theorem (Theorem \ref{thm-syzygy} below.)
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma-def-Hilbert-H-0}
For a closed braid $B$ and a pair $(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed$, there is a polynomial $P_{B,i,j}(T) \in \Q[T]$ such that $\dim_\Q \fH_0^{i,j,2T-j}(B) = P_{B,i,j}(T)$ for all large positive integer $T$. In other words, $P_{B,i,j}(T)$ is the Hilbert polynomial of the direct sum $\bigoplus_{T\in\zed} \fH_0^{i,j,2T-j}(B)$ with respect to the polynomial grading.
Since the homological and $a$-gradings of $\fH_0(B)$ are both bounded, $P_{B,i,j}(T)$ is the zero polynomial for all but finitely many pairs of $i$ and $j$. Thus, the Hilbert polynomial of $\fH_0(B)$ is the sum $P_B(T)=\sum_{(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed}P_{B,i,j}(T)$.
\end{lemma}
The following is the main result of this paper.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm-Hilbert-degree}
Let $B$ be a closed braid with $l$ components. Then $P_B(T)$ is a polynomial of degree $l-1$.
\end{theorem}
There are two main ingredients in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm-Hilbert-degree}. First, an argument by Rasmussen in \cite{Ras-2-bridge} shows that $\fH_0(B)$ is a finitely generated module over the polynomial ring generated by the components of $B$. This implies that the degree of $P_B(T)$ is at most $l-1$. Second, the computation tree argument by Franks and Williams in \cite{FW} can be used to show that the degree of $P_B(T)$ is at least $l-1$.
For knots, we have the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor-Hilbert-knot}
Let $K$ be a knot. Then there are non-negative integers $D_{i,j}$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $D_{i,j}=0$ for all but finitely many pairs of integers $i$ and $j$,
\item $\dim_\Q \fH_0^{i,j,2T-j}(K) = D_{i,j}$ for large $T$,
\item $\sum_{(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed} D_{i,j}$ is an odd number.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[
\xymatrix{
\input{B+} && \input{B-} && \input{B0}
}
\]
\caption{}\label{fig-skein}
\end{figure}
Let $F_B(\alpha,\xi)$ be the decategorification of $\fH_0(B)$. That is,
\begin{equation}\label{eq-def-HOMFLYPT}
F_B(\alpha,\xi)=\sum_{(i,j,k)\in \zed^3} (-1)^i \alpha^j\xi^k\dim_\Q \fH_0^{i,j,k}(B)\in\Q[\alpha^{-1},\alpha,\xi^{-1}][[\xi]].
\end{equation}
This is the HOMFLYPT polynomial with the normalization:
\begin{equation}\label{eq-HOMFLYPT-normalization}
\begin{cases}
F_B(\alpha,\xi) \text{ is invariant under transverse Markov moves,} \\
\alpha^{-1} F_{B_+}(\alpha,\xi) - \alpha F_{B_-}(\alpha,\xi) = (\xi^{-1}-\xi)F_{B_0}(\alpha,\xi), \\
F_{B'}(\alpha,\xi)=-\alpha^{-1}\xi^{-1}F_B(\alpha,\xi), \\
F_U(\alpha,\xi) = \frac{\alpha^{-1}}{\xi^{-1}-\xi},
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{itemize}
\item transverse Markov moves are reviewed in Subsection \ref{subsec-trans} below,
\item $B_+$, $B_-$ and $B_0$ are closed braids identical outside the part shown in Figure \ref{fig-skein},
\item $B'$ is obtained from the closed braid $B$ by a negative stabilization,
\item $U$ is the unknot with no crossings.
\end{itemize}
Consider the polynomial $F_B(\alpha\xi,\xi)$. The power of $\xi$ in this polynomial corresponds to the polynomial grading of $\fH_0(B)$ and is, therefore, always even. Thus, we can expand $F_B(\alpha\xi,\xi)$ as
\begin{equation}\label{eq-c-T}
F_B(\alpha\xi,\xi) = \sum_{T\in \zed} c_{B,T}(\alpha) \xi^{2T},
\end{equation}
where $c_{B,T}(\alpha) \in \zed[\alpha^{-1},\alpha]$ and $c_{B,T}(\alpha)=0$ if $T\ll -1$. A byproduct of our work is that, for $T\gg1$, $c_{B,T}(\alpha)$ is a polynomial of $\alpha$ and $T$.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop-hidden-polynomial}
Define $Q_B(\alpha,T)\in\Q[\alpha,\alpha^{-1},T]$ by $Q_B(\alpha,T):= \sum_{(i,j)\in \zed\times\zed} (-1)^i\alpha^j P_{B,i,j}(T)$. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $T\gg1$, $Q_B(\alpha,T)=c_{B,T}(\alpha)$.
\item $Q_B(\alpha,T)$ is invariant under transverse Markov moves.
\item $Q_B(\alpha,T)$ satisfies the skein relation:
\[
\begin{cases}
\alpha^{-1} Q_{B_+}(\alpha, T+1) - \alpha Q_{B_-}(\alpha, T) = Q_{B_0}(\alpha, T+1)- Q_{B_0}(\alpha, T),\\
Q_{B'}(\alpha, T) = -\alpha^{-1} Q_{B}(\alpha, T+1), \\
Q_{U}(\alpha, T) = \alpha^{-1}, \\
\end{cases}
\]
where
\begin{itemize}
\item $B_+$, $B_-$ and $B_0$ are closed braids identical outside the part shown in Figure \ref{fig-skein},
\item $B'$ is obtained from the closed braid $B$ by a negative stabilization,
\item $U$ is the unknot with no crossings.
\end{itemize}
\item Using (2) and (3), $Q_B(\alpha,T)$ can be computed by any transverse computation tree\footnote{See Definition \ref{def-computation-tree} and Theorem \ref{thm-computation-tree-exists} below.} for $B$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
From the proof of Theorem \ref{thm-Hilbert-degree}, we also have the following simple corollary.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor-degree-hidden-polynomial}
Let $B$ be a closed braid with $l$ components. Then $\deg_T Q_B(\alpha,T) = l-1$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{example}\label{example-2-braids}
For $k\geq 0$, define $B_k$ to be the closed braid of two strands with $k$ positive crossings. For $k<0$, define $B_k$ to be the closed braid of two strands with $-k$ negative crossings. Then, for all $k \in \zed$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq-2-braids-even} Q_{B_{2k}}(a,T) & = & \alpha^{2k-1}(1+\alpha^{-1})(T-k), \\
\label{eq-2-braids-odd} Q_{B_{2k+1}}(a,T) & = & k\alpha^{2k} +(k+1)\alpha^{2k-1}.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $\deg_T Q_{B_{2k}}(a,T) =1$ and $\deg_T Q_{B_{2k-1}}(a,T) =0$, which are what we expect from Corollary \ref{cor-degree-hidden-polynomial}.
\end{example}
\begin{question}
For a given closed braid $B$, what is the smallest $T_0 \in \zed$ such that $Q_B(\alpha,T)=c_{B,T}(\alpha)$ for all $T \geq T_0$?
\end{question}
The rest of this paper is organized as following:
\begin{itemize}
\item In Section \ref{sec-Hilbert}, we recall the definition of the Hilbert polynomial.
\item In Section \ref{sec-H-0}, we review the $\fH_0$ normalization of the HOMFLYPT homology and use Rasmussen's argument to show that the degree of the Hilbert polynomial of $\fH_0(B)$ is at most $l-1$.
\item In Section \ref{sec-computation-tree}, we use Franks and Williams' computation tree argument to show that the degree of the Hilbert polynomial of $\fH_0(B)$ is at least $l-1$. Theorem \ref{thm-Hilbert-degree} through Example \ref{example-2-braids} above are all proved in this section.
\end{itemize}
\begin{acknowledgments}
I would like to thank the referee for carefully reading a previous draft of this manuscript, providing many valuable comments and finding quite a few mistakes and typos.
\end{acknowledgments}
\section{The Hilbert polynomial}\label{sec-Hilbert}
In this section, we recall the definition of the Hilbert polynomial. For the convenience of use later on, we adopt the slightly unusual grading convention introduced by Khovanov and Rozansky in our formulation.
\begin{definition}\label{def-graded-module}
Let $R$ be the polynomial ring $R=\Q[x_1,\dots,x_l]$ graded so that each $x_i$ is homogeneous of degree $2$.
\begin{itemize}
\item A graded module $M$ over $R$ is an $R$-module $M$ with a grading $M=\bigoplus_{n\in \zed} M_n$ such that $x_i\cdot M_n \subset M_{n+2}$.
\item We say the grading of $M$ is even if $M_n=0$ whenever $n$ is odd.
\item For an integer $k$, $M\{k\}$ is $M$ with grading shifted by $k$. That is, $M_n = M\{k\}_{n+k}$, where $M\{k\}_{n+k}$ is the homogeneous component of $M\{k\}$ of degree $n+k$.
\item A finitely generated free graded module over $R$ is a finitely generated graded module over $R$ that is free and admits a homogeneous $R$-basis, in other words, a graded module over $R$ that is isomorphic to a direct sum $\bigoplus_{j=1}^m R\{k_j\}$, where $k_j\in \zed$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
Hilbert's Syzygy Theorem is key to the existence of the Hilbert polynomial.
\begin{theorem}[Hilbert's Syzygy Theorem]\label{thm-syzygy}
Let $R$ be the polynomial ring $R=\Q[x_1,\dots,x_l]$ graded as in Definition \ref{def-graded-module}. Assume that $M=\oplus_{n\in \zed} M_{2n}$ is a finitely generated graded $R$-module whose grading is even. Then there is an exact sequence of graded $R$ modules $0 \rightarrow F_l \rightarrow F_{l-1} \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow F_1 \rightarrow F_0 \rightarrow M \rightarrow 0$, in which,
\begin{itemize}
\item each $F_j$ is a finitely generated free graded module over $R$ whose grading is even,
\item each arrow is a homogeneous map of graded $R$-modules preserving the grading.
\end{itemize}
As a standard consequence, there is a polynomial $P(T)\in \Q[T]$ of degree at most $l-1$ such that $\dim_\Q M_{2T} = P(T)$ for $T\gg1$. This $P(T)$ is called the Hilbert polynomial of $M$.
\end{theorem}
The existence of the free resolution in Theorem \ref{thm-syzygy} is the traditional content of Hilbert's Syzygy Theorem, a detailed elementary proof of which can be found in for example \cite[Theorem 4.3]{Arrondo-notes}. The existence of the Hilbert polynomial in Theorem \ref{thm-syzygy} is a standard consequence of Hilbert's Syzygy Theorem. For a simple proof of this, see for example \cite[Corollary 4.4]{Arrondo-notes}.
\section{The $\fH_0$ normalization of the HOMFLYPT homology}\label{sec-H-0}
Next, we review the HOMFLYPT homology with the $\fH_0$ normalization. Roughly speaking, to each MOY graph, we associate a $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization. Each closed braid diagram $B$ is resolved into a collection of MOY graphs. Using the crossing information of $B$, we assemble the matrix factorizations of the MOY resolutions of $B$ into a chain complex $\fC_0(B)$ of matrix factorizations. The HOMFLYPT homology $\fH_0(B)$ is then defined from $\fC_0(B)$.
\subsection{$\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorizations}
Let $R$ be the polynomial ring $R=\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_n]$. We define a $\zed^{2}$-grading on $R$ so that $a,x_1,\dots,x_n$ are homogeneous with $\deg a = (2,0)$ and $\deg x_i =(0,2)$ for $i=1,\dots, n$. A $\zed^{2}$-graded $R$-module $M$ is a $R$-module $M$ equipped with a $\zed^{2}$-grading such that, for any homogeneous element $m$ of $M$, $\deg (am) = \deg m + (2,0)$ and $\deg (x_i m) = \deg m +(0,2)$ for $i=1,\dots, k$. We call the first component of this $\zed^{2}$-grading of $M$ the $a$-grading and denote its degree function by $\deg_a$. We call the second component of this $\zed^{2}$-grading of $M$ the $x$-grading and denote its degree function by $\deg_x$.
For a $\zed^{2}$-graded $R$-module $M$, we denote by $M\{j,k\}$ the $\zed^{2}$-graded $R$-module obtained by shifting the $\zed^{2}$-grading of $M$ by $(j,k)$. That is, for any homogeneous element $m$ of $M$, $\deg_{M\{j,k\}} m = \deg_M m + (j,k)$.
\begin{definition}\label{def-mf}
Let $w$ be a homogeneous element of $R=\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_n]$ with degree $(2,2)$. A $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization $M$ of $w$ over $R$ is a collection of two $\zed^{2}$-graded free $R$-modules $M_0$, $M_1$ and two homogeneous $R$-module maps $d_0:M_0\rightarrow M_1$, $d_1:M_1\rightarrow M_0$ of degree $(1,1)$, called differential maps, such that
\[
d_1 \circ d_0=w\cdot\id_{M_0}, \hspace{1cm} d_0 \circ d_1=w\cdot\id_{M_1}.
\]
We usually write $M$ as $M_0 \xrightarrow{d_0} M_1 \xrightarrow{d_1} M_0$.
The $\zed_2$-grading of $M$ takes value $\ve$ on $M_\ve$. The $a$- and $x$-gradings of $M$ are the $a$- and $x$-gradings of the underlying $\zed^{2}$-graded $R$-module $M_0 \oplus M_1$.
Following \cite{KR1}, we denote by $M\left\langle 1\right\rangle$ the matrix factorization $M_1 \xrightarrow{d_1} M_0 \xrightarrow{d_0} M_1$
\end{definition}
Note that:
\begin{itemize}
\item For any $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization $M$ of $w$ over $R$ and $j,k \in \zed$, $M\{j,k\}$ is naturally a $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization of $w$ over $R$.
\item For any two $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorizations $M$ and $M'$ of $w$ over $R$, $M\oplus M'$ is naturally a $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization of $w$ over $R$.
\item Let $w$ and $w'$ be two homogeneous elements of $R$ with degree $(2,2)$. For $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorizations $M$ of $w$ and $M'$ of $w'$ over $R$, the tensor product $M\otimes_R M'$ is the $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization of $w+w'$ over $R$ such that:
\begin{itemize}
\item $(M\otimes M')_0 = (M_0\otimes M'_0)\oplus (M_1\otimes M'_1)$, $(M\otimes M')_1 = (M_1\otimes M'_0)\oplus (M_1\otimes M'_0)$,
\item The differential is given by the signed Leibniz rule. That is, for $m\in M_\ve$ and $m'\in M'$, $d(m\otimes m')=(d_M m)\otimes m' + (-1)^\ve m \otimes (d_{M'} m')$.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\begin{definition}\label{def-morph-mf}
Let $w$ be a homogeneous element of $R$ with degree $(2,2)$, and $M$, $M'$ any two $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorizations of $w$ over $R$. A homogeneous morphism from $M$ to $M'$ of degree $(j,k)$ is a homogeneous homomorphism of $\zed^2$-graded $R$-modules $f:M\rightarrow M'$ of degree $(j,k)$ preserving the $\zed_2$-grading and satisfying $d_{M'}f=fd_{M}$.
Two homogeneous morphisms $f,g:M\rightarrow M'$ of degree $(j,k)$ of $\zed_2\oplus\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorizations are called homotopic if there is an $R$-module homomorphism $h:M\rightarrow M'\left\langle 1\right\rangle$ of degree $(j-1,k-1)$ preserving the $\zed_2$-grading such that $f-g = d_{M'}h+hd_M$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{def-koszul-mf}
If $a_0,a_1\in R$ are homogeneous elements with $\deg a_0 +\deg a_1=(2,2)$, then denote by $(a_0,a_1)_R$ the $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization $R \xrightarrow{a_0} R\{1-\deg_a a_0,~1-\deg_x{a_0}\} \xrightarrow{a_1} R$ of $a_0a_1$ over $R$. More generally, if $a_{1,0},a_{1,1},\dots,a_{l,0},a_{l,1}\in R$ are homogeneous with $\deg a_{j,0} +\deg a_{j,1}=(2,2)$, then denote by
\[
\left
\begin{array}{cc}
a_{1,0}, & a_{1,1} \\
a_{2,0}, & a_{2,1} \\
\dots & \dots \\
a_{l,0}, & a_{l,1}
\end{array
\right)_R
\]
the tensor product $(a_{1,0},a_{1,1})_R \otimes_R (a_{2,0},a_{2,1})_R \otimes_R \cdots \otimes_R (a_{l,0},a_{l,1})_R$. This is a $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization of $\sum_{j=1}^l a_{j,0} a_{j,1}$ over $R$, and is call the Koszul matrix factorization associated to the above matrix.
\end{definition}
Note that Koszul matrix factorizations are finitely generated over $R$. The following are several lemmas about Koszul matrix factorizations that will be useful later on.
\begin{lemma}\cite[Proposition 2]{KR1}\label{entries-null-homotopic}
Let $a_{1,0},a_{1,1},\dots,a_{l,0},a_{l,1}$ be as in Definition \ref{def-koszul-mf} and
\[
M = \left
\begin{array}{ll}
a_{1,0}, & a_{1,1} \\
a_{2,0}, & a_{2,1} \\
\dots & \dots \\
a_{l,0}, & a_{l,1}
\end{array
\right)_R.
\]
If $r$ is an element of the ideal $(a_{1,0}, a_{1,1}, \dots, a_{l,0}, a_{l,1})$ of $R$, then the multiplication by $r$, as an endomorphism of $M$, is homotopic to $0$.
\end{lemma}
Lemma \ref{lemma-contraction-weak} below is essentially \cite[Proposition 9]{KR1}. For a proof of this lemma, see for example \cite[Proposition 2.17]{Wu-triple-trans}.
\begin{lemma}\cite[Proposition 9]{KR1}\label{lemma-contraction-weak}
Let $I$ be an ideal of $R$ generated by homogeneous elements. Assume $w$, $a_0$ and $a_1$ are homogeneous elements of $R$ such that $\deg w=\deg a_0 +\deg a_1 = (2,2)$ and $w+a_0a_1 \in I$. Then $w \in I+(a_0)$.
Let $M$ be a $\zed_2\oplus\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization of $w$ over $R$, and $\widetilde{M}=M \otimes_R (a_0,a_1)_R$. Then ${\widetilde{M}/I\widetilde{M}}$ and ${M/(I+(a_0))M}$are both $\zed_2 \oplus\zed^{2}$-graded chain complexes of $R$-modules.
If $a_0$ is not a zero-divisor in $R/I$, then there is an $R$-linear quasi-isomorphism
\[
f:{\widetilde{M}/I\widetilde{M}} \rightarrow {(M/(I+(a_0))M)\left\langle 1\right\rangle \{1-\deg_a a_0, 1-\deg_x a_0 \}}
\]
that preserves the $\zed_2\oplus\zed^{2}$-grading.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Matrix factorization of MOY graphs}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[
\xymatrix{
\input{vertex}
}
\]
\caption{}\label{fig-MOY-vertex}
\end{figure}
\begin{definition}\label{def-MOY}
An MOY graph $\Gamma$ is an embedding of a directed $4$-valent graph in the plane so that each vertex of $\Gamma$ looks like the one in Figure \ref{fig-MOY-vertex}.
A marking of an MOY graph $\Gamma$ consists of
\begin{itemize}
\item a finite collection of marked points in the interiors of the edges of $\Gamma$ such that each edge of $\Gamma$ contains at least one marked point,
\item an assignment that assigns to each marked point a distinct variable.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
Fix an MOY graph $\Gamma$ and a marking of $\Gamma$. Assume that $x_1,\dots,x_n$ are the variables assigned to marked points in $\Gamma$. Let $R=\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_n]$ with the $\zed^2$-grading so that $a,x_1,\dots,x_n$ are homogeneous and $\deg a =(2,0)$, $\deg x_1=\cdots=\deg x_n =(0,2)$. Cut $\Gamma$ at all of its marked points. We get a collection of pieces $\Gamma_1,\dots,\Gamma_m$, each of which is of one of the two types in Figure \ref{fig-MOY-pieces}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\[
\xymatrix{
\input{arc_marked} && \input{wide-edge_marked}
}
\]
\caption{}\label{fig-MOY-pieces}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\Gamma_q = \Gamma_{i;s}$ in Figure \ref{fig-MOY-pieces}, then $R_q = \Q[a,x_i,x_s]$ and $\fC_0(\Gamma_q) = (a,x_s-x_i)_{R_q}$.
\item If $\Gamma_q = \Gamma_{i,j;s,t}$ in Figure \ref{fig-MOY-pieces}, then $R_q = \Q[a,x_i,x_j,x_s,x_t]$ and
\[
\fC_0(\Gamma_q) = \left
\begin{array}{cc}
a, & x_s+x_t-x_i-x_j \\
0, & x_sx_t-x_ix_j
\end{array
\right)_{R_q}\{0,-1\}.
\]
\end{itemize}
\begin{definition}\label{def-mf-MOY}
\[
\fC_0(\Gamma) = \bigotimes_{q=1}^m (\fC_0(\Gamma_q) \otimes_{R_q} R),
\]
where the big tensor product ``$\bigotimes_{q=1}^m$" is taken over the ring $R=\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_n]$.
Note that $\fC_0(\Gamma)$ is a $\zed_2\times\zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorization of $0$.
\end{definition}
\begin{figure}[ht]
$
\xymatrix{
\input{crossing-1-1-res-0} \ar@<8ex>[rr]^{\chi^0} && \input{crossing-1-1-res-1} \ar@<-6ex>[ll]^{\chi^1}
}
$
\caption{}\label{def-chi-fig}
\end{figure}
The following lemma is established by Khovanov and Rozansky in \cite{KR2}. For a detailed proof in the present normalization, see \cite[Lemma 3.15]{Wu-triple-trans}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma-def-chi}
Let $\Gamma_0$ and $\Gamma_1$ be the graphs marked at their endpoints in Figure \ref{def-chi-fig}. Then there exist homogeneous morphisms of $\zed_2 \times \zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorizations $\fC_0(\Gamma_0) \xrightarrow{\chi^0} \fC_0(\Gamma_1)$ and $\fC_0(\Gamma_1) \xrightarrow{\chi^1} \fC_0(\Gamma_0)$ of degree $(0,1)$ satisfying:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\chi^0$ and $\chi^1$ are homotopically non-trivial,
\item $\chi^1 \circ \chi^0 \simeq (x_j-x_s)\id_{\fC_0(\Gamma_0)}$ and $\chi^0 \circ \chi^1 \simeq (x_j-x_s)\id_{\fC_0(\Gamma_1)}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Chain complex of closed braid diagrams}
\begin{definition}\label{def-marking-braid}
For a closed braid $B$, an arc of $B$ is a part of $B$ that starts and ends at crossings and contains no crossing in its interior. A marking of $B$ consists of
\begin{itemize}
\item a finite collection of marked points in the interiors of the arcs of $B$ such that each arc of $B$ contains at least one marked point,
\item an assignment that assigns to each marked point a distinct variable.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
Let $B$ be a closed braid with a marking. Assume $x_1,\dots,x_n$ are all the variables assigned to marked points in $B$. The ring $R:=\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_n]$ is graded so that $\deg a = (2,0)$ and $\deg x_j =(0,2)$ for $j=1,\dots,n$.
Cut $B$ at all of its marked points. This cuts $B$ into a collection $\{T_1,\dots,T_m\}$ of simple tangles, each of which is of one of the three types in Figure \ref{tangle-pieces-fig} and is marked only at its end points.
\begin{figure}[ht]
$
\xymatrix{
\input{arc} && \input{crossing+} && \input{crossing-}
}
$
\caption{}\label{tangle-pieces-fig}
\end{figure}
If $T_q=A$, then $R_q =\Q[a,x_i,x_s]$ and $\fC_0(T_q)$ is the chain complex
\begin{equation}\label{eq-def-chain-arc}
\fC_0(A)= 0 \rightarrow \underbrace{\fC_0(A)}_{0} \rightarrow 0,
\end{equation}
where the $\fC_0(A)$ on the right hand side is the matrix factorization associated to the MOY graph $A$, and the under-brace indicates the homological grading.
\begin{figure}[ht]
$
\xymatrix{
&& \input{crossing+} \ar@<-12ex>[lld]_{0}\ar@<12ex>[rrd]^{+1} && \\
\input{crossing-1-1-res-0}&&&& \input{crossing-1-1-res-1} \\
&& \input{crossing-} \ar[llu]_{0} \ar[rru]^{-1} &&
}
$
\caption{}\label{crossing-res-fig}
\end{figure}
If $T_q=C_\pm$, then $R_q = \Q[a,x_i,x_j,x_s,x_t]$ and $\fC_0(T_q)$ is the chain complex
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq-def-chain-crossing+} \fC_0(C_+) & = & 0 \rightarrow \underbrace{\fC_0(\Gamma_1)\left\langle 1\right\rangle\{1,0\}}_{-1} \xrightarrow{\chi^1} \underbrace{\fC_0(\Gamma_0)\left\langle 1\right\rangle\{1,-1\}}_{0} \rightarrow 0, \\
\label{eq-def-chain-crossing-} \fC_0(C_-) & = & 0 \rightarrow \underbrace{\fC_0(\Gamma_0)\left\langle 1\right\rangle\{-1,1\}}_{0} \xrightarrow{\chi^0} \underbrace{\fC_0(\Gamma_1)\left\langle 1\right\rangle\{-1,0\}}_{1} \rightarrow 0,
\end{eqnarray}
where the morphisms $\chi^0$ and $\chi^1$ are defined in Lemma \ref{lemma-def-chi} and, again, the under-braces indicate the homological gradings, which is also indicated by the labels on the arrows in Figure \ref{crossing-res-fig}.
\begin{definition}\label{def-homology-braid}
We define the chain complex $\fC_0(B)$ associated to $B$ to be
\[
\fC_0(B) := \bigotimes_{q=1}^{m} (\fC_0(T_q)\otimes_{R_q} R),
\]
where the big tensor product ``$\bigotimes_{q=1}^{m}$" is taken over $R$.
$\fC_0(B)$ is a chain complex of $\zed_2\times \zed^{2}$-graded matrix factorizations of $0$. It has two differentials: a differential $d_{mf}$ from its underlying matrix factorization structure and a differential $d_\chi$ from the local chain complexes \eqref{eq-def-chain-arc}-\eqref{eq-def-chain-crossing-}. These two differentials commute.
The HOMFLYPT homology $\fH_0(B)$ is defined to be $\fH_0(B):= H(H(\fC_0(B),d_{mf}),d_\chi)$. Since $d_{mf}$ and $d_\chi$ are both homogeneous with respect to the $\zed_2\times \zed^{3}$-grading of $\fC_0(B)$, $\fH_0(B)$ inherits this $\zed_2\times \zed^{3}$-grading. We call the three $\zed$-gradings the homological grading, the $a$-grading and the $x$-grading.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\cite{KR2}\label{cor-homology-inv}
Up to isomorphism of $\zed_2\times \zed^{3}$-graded $\Q$-spaces, $\fH_0(B)$ is independent of the marking of $B$ and invariant under transverse Markov moves\footnote{Transverse Markov moves will be reviewed in Subsection \ref{subsec-trans} below.}.
If $B'$ is obtained from $B$ by a negative stabilization, then $\fH_0(B') \cong \fH_0(B)\|1\| \{-1,-1\}$, where $\|s\|$ means shifting the homological grading up by $s$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}\label{remark-poly-grading-even}
Note that, for $\fC_0(B)$, the parity of its $a$-grading $=$ the parity of its $x$-grading $=$ its $\zed_2$-grading. The polynomial grading of $\fC_0(B)$ is the sum of the $a$-grading and the $x$-grading. So the polynomial grading of $\fC_0(B)$ is always even. Moreover, with the polynomial grading, $\fC_0(B)$ is a graded $R=\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_n]$-module, whose grading is even. Since $d_{mf}$ and $d_\chi$ are both homogeneous $R$-modules homomorphisms, $\fH_0(B)$ is also a graded $R=\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_n]$-module, whose polynomial grading is even.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Upper bound of the degree of the Hilbert polynomial of $\fH_0(B)$}
We are now ready to show that the degree of the Hilbert polynomial of $\fH_0(B)$ is at most $l-1$, where $l$ is the number of components of $B$. Our proof is based on \cite[Lemma 3.4]{Ras-2-bridge} by Rasmussen. For the convenience of the reader, we include the proof of this lemma for $\fH_0$ below.
\begin{lemma}\cite[Lemma 3.4]{Ras-2-bridge}\label{lemma-ras-components}
Let $B$ be a closed braid with a marking. If $x$ and $y$ are variables assigned to marked points on the same component of $B$, then multiplications by $x$ and $y$ induce the same endomorphism of $\fH_0(B)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} (Following \cite[Lemma 3.4]{Ras-2-bridge}.)
Assume $x_1,\dots,x_n$ are all the variables assigned to marked points in $B$. Let $R=\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_n]$.
Cut $B$ at all of its marked points. This cuts $B$ into a collection $\{T_1,\dots,T_m\}$ of simple tangles, each of which is of one of the three types in Figure \ref{tangle-pieces-fig} and is marked only at its end points. It is easy to see that, to prove the lemma, we only need to prove it for the case when $x$ and $y$ are variables assigned to endpoints of the same component of a particular $T_q$. Without loss of generality, we assume that $x$ and $y$ are variables both assigned to endpoints $T_1$.
If $T_1=A$ in Figure \ref{tangle-pieces-fig}, then the lemma follows easily from Lemma \ref{entries-null-homotopic}.
Next assume $T_1$ is a crossing. The proofs for positive and negative crossings are very similar. We only give the proof for a positive crossing.
Assume $T_1=C_+$ in Figure \ref{tangle-pieces-fig}. Denote by $\hat{d}_\chi$ the differential of the chain complex of matrix factorizations $\fC:=\bigotimes_{q=2}^{m} (\fC_0(T_q)\otimes_{R_q} R)$, where the big tensor product ``$\bigotimes_{q=2}^{m}$" is taken over $R$. According to chain complex \eqref{eq-def-chain-crossing+} of $C_+$,
\begin{itemize}
\item $\fC_0(B)= \fC' \oplus\fC''$, where $\fC'$ and $\fC''$ are chain complexes of matrix factorizations of $0$ given by
\begin{itemize}
\item $\fC' = \fC_0(\Gamma_1)\otimes_{R_1}\fC \left\langle 1\right\rangle\{1,0\}\|-1\|$,
\item $\fC'' = \fC_0(\Gamma_0)\otimes_{R_1}\fC \left\langle 1\right\rangle\{1,-1\}$,
\end{itemize}
\item the differential $d_\chi$ of $\fC_0(B)$ is of the form $d\chi = d_{-1} + d_{-1,0} + d_0$, where $d_{-1},~d_{-1,0},~ d_0$ are chain maps given by
\begin{itemize}
\item $d_{-1} = -\id_{\fC_0(\Gamma_1)}\otimes \hat{d}_\chi:\fC' \rightarrow \fC'$,
\item $d_{-1,0} = \chi^1 \otimes \id_{\fC}: \fC' \rightarrow \fC''$,
\item $d_0 = \id_{\fC_0(\Gamma_0)}\otimes \hat{d}_\chi: \fC'' \rightarrow \fC''$.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
Define $d_{0,-1}$ to be the homomorphism $d_{0,-1} = \chi^0 \otimes \id_{\fC}: \fC'' \rightarrow \fC'$. Then $d_{0,-1} \circ d_0 = \chi^0 \otimes \hat{d}_\chi = - d_{-1} \circ d_{0,-1}$.
Now assume $\Lambda \in H(\fC_0(B),d_{mf})$ satisfies $d_\chi(\Lambda) =0$. Write $\Lambda = \Lambda' + \Lambda''$, where $\Lambda' \in H(\fC',d_{mf})$ and $\Lambda'' \in H(\fC'',d_{mf})$. Then $d_{-1} (\Lambda') = 0$ and $d_{-1,0} (\Lambda') + d_0 (\Lambda'')=0$. Now consider $d_{0,-1}(\Lambda'') \in H(\fC',d_{mf})$. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
d\chi(d_{0,-1}(\Lambda'')) & = & d_{-1}(d_{0,-1}(\Lambda'')) + d_{-1,0}(d_{0,-1}(\Lambda'')) =-d_{0,-1} ( d_0(\Lambda'')) + d_{-1,0}(d_{0,-1}(\Lambda'')) \\
& = & d_{0,-1} ( d_{-1,0}(\Lambda')) + d_{-1,0}(d_{0,-1}(\Lambda'')).
\end{eqnarray*}
By Lemma \ref{lemma-def-chi}, $d_{0,-1} \circ d_{-1,0} = (x_j-x_s) \id_{\fC'}$ and $d_{-1,0}\circ d_{0,-1} = (x_j-x_s) \id_{\fC''}$. So
\[
d\chi(d_{0,-1}(\Lambda'')) = (x_j-x_s) (\Lambda' + \Lambda'') = (x_j-x_s) \Lambda.
\]
This shows that the multiplication by $x_j-x_s$ on $\fH_0(B) = H(H(\fC_0(B),d_{mf}),d_\chi)$ is the zero endomorphism, which proves the lemma for the case $x=x_s$ and $y=x_j$. By Lemma \ref{entries-null-homotopic}, multiplication by $x_s+x_t-x_i-x_j$ is the zero endomorphism on $H(\fC_0(B),d_{mf})$. Thus follows the case when $x=x_t$ and $y=x_i$. This completes the proof of the lemma for $T_1=C_+$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor-Hilbert-at-most-l-1}
Let $B$ be a closed braid with $l$ components. Then the degree of the Hilbert polynomial $P_B(T)$ of $\fH_0(B)$ is at most $l-1$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Fix a marking of $B$. Assume $x_1,\dots,x_n$ are all the variables assigned to marked points in $B$. Let $R:=\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_n]$. Consider the ideal $I=(\{a\}\cup\{x_i-x_j~|~x_i,~x_j$ are assigned to the same component of $B.\})$ By Lemmas \ref{entries-null-homotopic} and \ref{lemma-ras-components}, multiplication by any element of $I$ is the zero endomorphism of $\fH_0(B)$. Fix a single marking $x_{i_k}$ on the $k$-th component of $B$. Then the $R$-action on $\fH_0(B)$ factors through the quotient ring $R/I \cong \Q[x_{i_1},\dots,x_{i_l}]$. Moreover, since $\fC_0(B)$ is finitely generated over $R$ and $R$ is Noetherian, $\fH_0(B)$ is a finitely generated $R$-module. Thus, $\fH_0(B)$ is a finitely generated $\Q[x_{i_1},\dots,x_{i_l}]$-module. Clearly, with the polynomial grading, $\fH_0(B)$ is a graded $\Q[x_{i_1},\dots,x_{i_l}]$-module, whose grading is even. By Hilbert's Syzygy Theorem (Theorem \ref{thm-syzygy}), the degree of $P_B(T)$ is at most $l-1$.
\end{proof}
\section{The Computation Tree Argument}\label{sec-computation-tree}
In this section, we use Franks and Williams' computation tree argument to show that the degree of the Hilbert polynomial of $\fH_0(B)$ is at least $l-1$, where $l$ is the number of components of $B$. This will complete the proof of Theorem \ref{thm-Hilbert-degree}.
\subsection{Transverse computation trees}\label{subsec-trans}
First, we recall the concept of transverse computation tree, which is defined in \cite{FW} and called ``invariant computation tree" there.
Recall that two closed braids represent the same smooth link if and only if one of them can be changed into the other by a finite sequence of Markov moves, which are:
\begin{itemize}
\item Braid group relations generated by
\begin{itemize}
\item $\sigma_i\sigma_i^{-1}=\sigma_i^{-1}\sigma_i=\emptyset$,
\item $\sigma_i\sigma_j=\sigma_j\sigma_i$, when $|i-j|>1$,
\item $\sigma_i\sigma_{i+1}\sigma_i=\sigma_{i+1}\sigma_i\sigma_{i+1}$.
\end{itemize}
\item Conjugations: $\mu\leftrightsquigarrow\eta^{-1}\mu\eta$,
where $\mu,~\eta\in \mathbf{B}_m$.
\item Stabilizations and destabilizations:
\begin{itemize}
\item positive: $\mu~(\in \mathbf{B}_m)\leftrightsquigarrow \mu\sigma_m~(\in \mathbf{B}_{m+1})$,
\item negative: $\mu~(\in \mathbf{B}_m)\leftrightsquigarrow \mu\sigma_m^{-1}~(\in \mathbf{B}_{m+1})$.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
In the above, $\mathbf{B}_m$ is the braid group on $m$ strands.
The standard contact structure $\xi_{st}$ on $\mathbb{R}^3$ is the kernel of the contact form $\alpha_{st} = dz-ydx+xdy=dz+r^2d\theta$. An oriented smooth link $L$ in $\mathbb{R}^3$ is transverse if $\alpha_{st}|_L>0$. Two transverse links are said to be transversely isotopic if there is an isotopy from one to the other through transverse links. It is known that:
\begin{itemize}
\item Every transverse link is transverse isotopic to a counterclockwise transverse closed braid around the $z$-axis. (See \cite{Ben}.)
\item Any smooth counterclockwise closed braid around the $z$-axis can be smoothly isotoped into a counterclockwise transverse closed braid around the $z$-axis without changing the braid word. (A simple observation.)
\end{itemize}
The following theorem by Orevkov, Shevchishin \cite{OSh} and Wrinkle \cite{Wr} describes when two transverse closed braids are transversely isotopic.
\begin{theorem}\cite{OSh,Wr}\label{transversal-markov}
Two counterclockwise transverse closed braids around the $z$-axis are transversely isotopic if and only if the braid word of one of them can be changed into that of the other by a finite sequence of braid group relations, conjugations and positive stabilizations and destabilizations.
\end{theorem}
We call braid group relations, conjugations and positive stabilizations/destabilizations the transverse Markov moves.
\begin{figure}[ht]
$
\xymatrix{
\input{Conway+} &&& \input{Conway-}
}
$
\caption{}\label{fig-Conway}
\end{figure}
Following \cite{FW}, a Conway splitting of a closed braid at a crossing consists of two choices of local changes to the braid, encoded diagrammatically as in Figure \ref{fig-Conway}, where
\begin{itemize}
\item $B_+$, $B_-$ and $B_0$ are closed braids identical outside the part shown in Figure \ref{fig-skein},
\item the crossing of $B_+$/$B_-$ shown in Figure \ref{fig-skein} is the crossing where the Conway splitting is performed at.
\end{itemize}
\begin{definition}\cite{FW}\label{def-computation-tree}
A transverse computation tree $\Upsilon$ is a connected, rooted, oriented binary tree, with each node labeled by a closed braid satisfying:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If a non-terminal node $N$ of $\Upsilon$ is labeled by a closed braid $B$, then its two child nodes $N_0$ and $N_1$ are labeled by closed braids $B_0$ and $B_1$ obtained from $B$ by
\begin{itemize}
\item first performing a finite sequence of transverse Markov moves on $B$ to get a closed braid $\hat{B}$,
\item then performing a Conway splitting at a crossing of $\hat{B}$ to get $B_0$ and $B_1$.
\end{itemize}
\item If $N$ is a terminal node of $\Upsilon$, then $N$ is labeled by a closed braid with no crossings.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\cite[Theorem 1.7]{FW}\label{thm-computation-tree-exists}
For any closed braid $B$, there is a transverse computation tree whose root is labeled by $B$.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Decategorification of $\fH_0(B)$}
Now, let us quickly explain the normalization of the decategorification of $\fH_0(B)$. Recall that the decategorification $F_B(\alpha,\xi)$ of $\fH_0(B)$ is defined in \eqref{eq-def-HOMFLYPT}. By Theorem \ref{cor-homology-inv}, we know that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $F_B(\alpha,\xi)$ is invariant under transverse Markov moves.
\item[(b)] If $B'$ is obtained from $B$ by a negative stabilization, then $F_{B'}(\alpha,\xi)= -\alpha^{-1}\xi^{-1}F_B(\alpha,\xi)$.
\end{itemize}
From the definition of $\fH_0(B)$, especially the local chain complexes \eqref{eq-def-chain-crossing+} and \eqref{eq-def-chain-crossing-}, we know that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(c)] $\alpha^{-1} F_{B_+}(\alpha,\xi) - \alpha F_{B_-}(\alpha,\xi) = (\xi^{-1}-\xi)F_{B_0}(\alpha,\xi)$, where $B_+$, $B_-$ and $B_0$ are closed braids identical outside the part shown in Figure \ref{fig-skein}.
\end{itemize}
Finally, for the unknot $U$ without any crossings, $\fH_0(U)$ is the homology of the Koszul matrix factorization $(a,0)_{\Q[x]}$. It is straightforward to check that $\fH_0(U) \cong \Q[x]\{-1,1\}$. Recall that $\deg x =(0,2)$. This implies that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(d)] $F_U(\alpha, \xi) = \alpha^{-1}\xi\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\xi^{2n} = \frac{\alpha^{-1}}{\xi^{-1}-\xi}$.
\end{itemize}
Of course, by (a-d) above, we know that $F_B(\alpha,\xi)$ satisfies normalization \eqref{eq-HOMFLYPT-normalization}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma-unlink}
Denote by $U^{\sqcup l}$ the $l$-strand closed braid with no crossings. Then
\[
F_{U^{\sqcup l}}(\alpha, \xi) =\alpha^{-1}\xi(1+\alpha^{-1}\xi)^{l-1}\sum_{T=0}^\infty \bn{T}{l-1} \xi^{2T}.
\]
In particular, $F_{U^{\sqcup l}}(\alpha\xi, \xi) = \alpha^{-1}(1+\alpha^{-1})^{l-1}\sum_{T=0}^\infty \bn{T}{l-1} \xi^{2T}$ and $Q_{U^{\sqcup l}}(\alpha, T) = \alpha^{-1}(1+\alpha^{-1})^{l-1} \bn{T}{l-1}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
$\fH_0(U^{\sqcup l})$ is the homology of the Koszul matrix factorization
\[
\fC_0(U^{\sqcup l}) = \left
\begin{array}{ll}
a, & 0\\
a, & 0\\
\dots & \dots \\
a, & 0
\end{array
\right)_{\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_l]},
\]
where there are $l$-rows. In Lemma \ref{lemma-contraction-weak}, let $I=0$, $a_0=a$, $a_1=0$ and $\widetilde{M}=\fC_0(U^{\sqcup l})$. Then $\fH_0(U^{\sqcup l})$ is isomorphic to underlying $\zed_2\times\zed^3$-graded $\Q[a,x_1,\dots,x_l]$-module of the Koszul matrix factorization
\[
\left
\begin{array}{ll}
0, & 0\\
\dots & \dots \\
0, & 0
\end{array
\right)_{\Q[x_1,\dots,x_l]} \left\langle 1\right\rangle \{-1, 1\},
\]
where there are $l-1$ rows, and $a$ acts on $\Q[x_1,\dots,x_l]$ as $0$.
From this, we have $F_{U^{\sqcup l}}(\alpha, \xi) = \alpha^{-1}\xi(1+\alpha^{-1}\xi)^{l-1}\sum_{T=0}^\infty \bn{T}{l-1} \xi^{2T}$ and $Q_{U^{\sqcup l}}(\alpha, T) = \alpha^{-1}(1+\alpha^{-1})^{l-1} \bn{T}{l-1}$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Skein relation for $Q_B(\alpha,T)$}
In this subsection, we prove Proposition \ref{prop-hidden-polynomial}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop-hidden-polynomial}]
Recall that $F_B(\alpha,\xi)=\sum_{(i,j,k)\in \zed^3} (-1)^i \alpha^j\xi^k\dim_\Q \fH_0^{i,j,k}(B)$. So
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_B(\alpha\xi,\xi) & = &\sum_{(i,j,k)\in \zed^3} (-1)^i \alpha^j\xi^{j+k}\dim_\Q \fH_0^{i,j,k}(B) \\
& = & \sum_{(i,j,T)\in \zed^3} (-1)^i \alpha^j\xi^{2T}\dim_\Q \fH_0^{i,j,2T-j}(B) \\
& = & \sum_{T\in \zed}(\sum_{(i,j)\in \zed^2} (-1)^i \alpha^j\dim_\Q \fH_0^{i,j,2T-j}(B))\xi^{2T}
\end{eqnarray*}
where, in the second step, we used the fact that the polynomial grading of $\fH_0(B)$ is even, that is, \linebreak $\fH_0^{i,j,2T+1-j}(B) \cong 0$ $\forall ~(i,j,T)\in \zed^3$. This shows that
\[
c_{B,T}(\alpha) = \sum_{(i,j)\in \zed^2} (-1)^i \alpha^j\dim_\Q \fH_0^{i,j,2T-j}(B) ~\forall ~T\in \zed.
\]
But $\dim_\Q \fH_0^{i,j,2T-j}(B) = P_{B,i,j}(T)$ for all large positive integer $T$ by Lemma \ref{lemma-def-Hilbert-H-0}. And $\bigoplus_{T\in \zed}\fH_0^{i,j,2T-j}(B)\cong 0$ for all but finitely many $(i,j)\in \zed^2$. This implies that, for $T\gg1$,
\[
c_{B,T}(\alpha)=\sum_{(i,j)\in \zed\times\zed} (-1)^i\alpha^j P_{B,i,j}(T)=Q_B(\alpha,T),
\]
which is part (1) of the proposition.
For part (2) of the proposition, note that, by normalization \eqref{eq-HOMFLYPT-normalization}, $F_B(\alpha,\xi)$ is invariant under transverse Markov moves. So, $c_{B,T}(\alpha)$ is invariant under these moves. By part (1), for $T\gg1$, $Q_B(\alpha,T)$ is invariant under these moves. But $Q_B(\alpha,T)\in\Q[\alpha,\alpha^{-1},T]$ is a polynomial. This implies that $Q_B(\alpha,T)$ is invariant under transverse Markov moves.
Using the normalization \eqref{eq-HOMFLYPT-normalization} of $F_B(\alpha,\xi)$, one can check that $c_{B,T}(\alpha)$ satisfies the skein relations in part (3) of the proposition. By part (1), for $T\gg1$, $Q_B(\alpha,T)$ satisfies the skein relations in part (3) of the proposition. But, again, $Q_B(\alpha,T)$ is a polynomial. So $Q_B(\alpha,T)$ satisfies the skein relations in part (3) of the proposition for all $T$.
Finally, we prove part (4) of the proposition. For a polynomial $g(\alpha,T)\in \Q[\alpha,\alpha^{-1},T]$, defined two operators $S_\alpha$ and $\Delta_\alpha$ by $S_\alpha(g)(\alpha,T)=\alpha^{-2}g(\alpha,T+1)$ and $\Delta_\alpha(g)(\alpha,T)=\alpha(g(\alpha,T)-g(\alpha,T-1))$. Note that:
\begin{itemize}
\item $S_\alpha(g),~\Delta_\alpha(g) \in \Q[\alpha,\alpha^{-1},T]$.
\item $S_\alpha$ is invertible and $S_\alpha^{-1} (g)(\alpha,T) = \alpha^{2}g(\alpha,T-1)$.
\item $S_\alpha$ and $\Delta_\alpha$ commute with each other.
\end{itemize}
According to the skein relation of $Q_B(\alpha,T)$ from part (3), we know that
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq-Q-skein-alpha+} Q_{B_+}(\alpha,T) & = & S_\alpha^{-1} (Q_{B_-})(\alpha,T) + \Delta_\alpha(Q_{B_0})(\alpha,T), \\
\label{eq-Q-skein-alpha-} Q_{B_-}(\alpha,T) & = & S_\alpha (Q_{B_+})(\alpha,T) - S_\alpha(\Delta_\alpha(Q_{B_0}))(\alpha,T),
\end{eqnarray}
where $B_+$, $B_-$ and $B_0$ are closed braids identical outside the part shown in Figure \ref{fig-skein}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
$
\xymatrix{
\input{Conway+-labeled} &&& \input{Conway--labeled}
}
$
\caption{}\label{fig-Conway-labeled}
\end{figure}
Now assume that $\Upsilon$ is a transverse computation tree with its root labeled by the closed braid $B$. We label each edge of $\Upsilon$ according to the Conway splitting performed as in Figure \ref{fig-Conway-labeled}. Note that, in Figure \ref{fig-Conway-labeled}, the operations labeling the edges apply to the two children in a Conway splitting.
Recall that
\begin{itemize}
\item each terminal node $N$ in $\Upsilon$ in labeled by a closed braid $B_N$ with no crossings,
\item there is a unique path from the root to each terminal node $N$ in $\Upsilon$.
\end{itemize}
Denote by $\Psi_N$ the composition, from left to right, of all the operators labeling the edges in the path from the root to the terminal node $N$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq-tree-computation-Q}
Q_{B}(\alpha, T) = \sum_{N\text{ is a terminal node of }\Upsilon} \Psi_N(Q_{B_N})(\alpha, T).
\end{equation}
This shows that $Q_{B}(\alpha, T)$ can be computed from $\Upsilon$.
\end{proof}
Now, it is straightforward to adapt the proof of \cite[Proposition 1.11]{FW} to prove that the degree of the Hilbert polynomial of the HOMFLYPT homology $\fH_0(B)$ of a closed braid $B$ is at least $l-1$, where $l$ is the number of components of $B$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma-degree-Hilbert-lower-bound}
Let $B$ be a closed braid with $l$ components. Then $\deg_T Q_{B}(1, T) = l-1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}(Adapted from the proof of \cite[Proposition 1.11]{FW}.)
Defined two operators $S=S_\alpha|_{\alpha=1}$ and $\Delta=\Delta_\alpha|_{\alpha=1}$. That is, for a polynomial $g(T)\in \Q[T]$, $S(g)(T)=g(T+1)$ and $\Delta(g)(T)=g(T)-g(T-1)$. Note that:
\begin{itemize}
\item $S(g),~\Delta(g) \in \Q[T]$, and:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\deg_T S(g) = \deg_T g$, $\deg_T \Delta(g) = \deg_T g -1$;
\item If $\deg_T g =n$ and the coefficient of $T^{n}$ in $g$ is $c$, then the coefficient of $T^{n}$ in $S(g)$ is $c$ and the coefficient of $T^{n -1 }$ in $\Delta(g)$ is $nc$.
\end{itemize}
\item $S$ is invertible and $S^{-1} (g)(T) = g(T-1)$.
\item $S$ and $\Delta$ commute with each other.
\end{itemize}
From equations \eqref{eq-Q-skein-alpha+} and \eqref{eq-Q-skein-alpha-}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq-Q-skein-alpha+spec} Q_{B_+}(1,T) & = & S^{-1} (Q_{B_-})(1,T) + \Delta(Q_{B_0})(1,T), \\
\label{eq-Q-skein-alpha-spec} Q_{B_-}(1,T) & = & S (Q_{B_+})(1,T) - S(\Delta_\alpha(Q_{B_0}))(1,T),
\end{eqnarray}
where $B_+$, $B_-$ and $B_0$ are closed braids identical outside the part shown in Figure \ref{fig-skein}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
$
\xymatrix{
\input{Conway+-labeled-spec} &&& \input{Conway--labeled-spec}
}
$
\caption{}\label{fig-Conway-labeled-spec}
\end{figure}
Let $\Upsilon$ be any transverse computation tree with root labeled by $B$. We label each edge of $\Upsilon$ according to the Conway splitting performed as in Figure \ref{fig-Conway-labeled-spec}. Again, operations labeling edges apply to children in Conway splittings. By equation \eqref{eq-tree-computation-Q}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq-tree-computation-Q-spec}
Q_{B}(1, T) = \sum_{N\text{ is a terminal node of }\Upsilon} \Phi_N(Q_{B_N})(1, T),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{itemize}
\item $B_N$ is the closed braid with no crossings labeling $N$,
\item $\Phi_N$ is the composition, from left to right, of all the operators labeling the edges in the path from the root to the terminal node $N$.
\end{itemize}
Since $S$ and $\Delta$ commute with each other, for any terminal node $N$ of $\Upsilon$, $\Phi_N$ is of the form $\Phi_N = \pm S^{p_N}\circ \Delta^{q_N}$, where $p_N,q_N \in \zed$ and $q_N\geq0$. There is a unique terminal node $N_0$ of $\Upsilon$ such that $q_{N_0}=0$, which is obtained by always choosing the branch $B_{\pm} \leadsto B_{\mp}$ in each Conway splitting. Note that:
\begin{itemize}
\item The change $B_{\pm} \leadsto B_{\mp}$ in a Conway splitting does not change the number of components in the closed braid.
\item The change $B_{0} \leadsto B_{\pm}$ in a Conway splitting either increase the number of components by $1$ or decrease the number of components by $1$.
\end{itemize}
Denote by $l_N$ the number of components of the closed braid $B_N$ with no crossings. Then $l_{N_0} = l$ and $l_N-q_N \leq l$ for any terminal node $N$ of $\Upsilon$.
By Lemma \ref{lemma-unlink}, $Q_{B_N}(1,T) = 2^{l_N-1}\bn{T}{l_N-1}$ for any terminal node $N$ of $\Upsilon$. From the labeling of edges of $\Upsilon$ in Figure \ref{fig-Conway-labeled-spec}, we know that $\Phi_{N_0}=S^{p_{N_0}}$ since the negative sign only appears in the change $B_- \leadsto B_0$. Thus, we know that:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $\deg_T \Phi_{N_0}(Q_{B_{N_0}}) = l-1$ and the coefficient of $T^{l-1}$ in $\Phi_{N_0}(Q_{B_{N_0}})$ is $\frac{2^{l-1}}{(l-1)!}$.
\end{itemize}
One can also see that:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(b)] For any terminal node $N$ of $\Upsilon$, $\deg_T \Phi_{N}(Q_{B_{N}}) = l_N-1-q_N \leq l-1$.
\end{itemize}
Now assume $N$ is a terminal node $N$ of $\Upsilon$ such that $N \neq N_0$ and $\deg_T \Phi_{N}(Q_{B_{N}}) = l-1$. Then $l_N-q_N = l$, $q_N>0$ and $l_N = l+q_N \geq l+1$. The coefficient of $T^{l-1}$ in $\Phi_{N}(Q_{B_{N}})$ is
\[
\pm\frac{2^{l_N-1}}{(l_N-1)!}\cdot (l_N-1)\cdot (l_N-2)\cdots (l_N-q_N)=\pm\frac{2^{l_N-1}}{(l_N-q_N-1)!} = \pm\frac{2^{l_N-1}}{(l-1)!}.
\]
This shows that:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(c)] If $N$ is a terminal node $N$ of $\Upsilon$ such that $N \neq N_0$ and $\deg_T \Phi_{N}(Q_{B_{N}}) = l-1$, then the coefficient of $T^{l-1}$ in $\Phi_{N}(Q_{B_{N}})$ is $\pm\frac{2^{l_N-1}}{(l-1)!}$, where $l_N-1 \geq l$.
\end{itemize}
Combining equation \eqref{eq-tree-computation-Q-spec} and conclusions (a)-(c) above, we know that $\deg_T Q_{B}(1, T) \leq l-1$ and that the coefficient of $T^{l-1}$ in $Q_{B}(1, T)$ is of the form $\frac{k}{(l-1)!}$, where $k$ is an integer satisfying $k \equiv 2^{l-1} \mod 2^l$. In particular, $k \neq 0$. Thus, $\deg_T Q_{B}(1, T) = l-1$.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to prove Theorem \ref{thm-Hilbert-degree}, Corollaries \ref{cor-Hilbert-knot}, \ref{cor-degree-hidden-polynomial} and example \ref{example-2-braids}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm-Hilbert-degree}]
By Corollary \ref{cor-Hilbert-at-most-l-1}, $\deg_T P_B(T)\leq l-1$. Recall that $P_B(T) =\sum_{(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed}P_{B,i,j}(T)$ and $Q_B(T) =\sum_{(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed}(-1)^{i}P_{B,i,j}(T)$. The leading coefficient of $P_{B,i,j}(T)$ is non-negative since $P_{B,i,j}(T)$ is the Hilbert polynomial of $\bigoplus_{T\in\zed} \fH_0^{i,j,2T-j}(B)$. This shows that $\deg_T P_B(T) = \max \{\deg_T P_{B,i,j}(T)~|~(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed\}$. But, by Lemma \ref{lemma-degree-Hilbert-lower-bound}, $\deg_T Q_{B}(1, T) = l-1$. This implies that $\deg_T P_{B,i,j}(T) \geq l-1$ for some $(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed$. So $\deg_T P_B(T)\geq l-1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary \ref{cor-Hilbert-knot}]
Corollary \ref{cor-Hilbert-knot} follows from Theorem \ref{thm-Hilbert-degree} except for the statement that $\sum_{(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed} D_{i,j}$ is an odd number. But $Q_K(1,T)=\sum_{(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed} (-1)^{i} D_{i,j}$. According to the last paragraph of the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma-degree-Hilbert-lower-bound}, $\sum_{(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed} (-1)^{i} D_{i,j} \equiv 2^0 \mod 2^1$. This implies that $\sum_{(i,j) \in \zed\times\zed} D_{i,j}$ is an odd number.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary \ref{cor-degree-hidden-polynomial}]
Note that $\deg P_{B,i,j}(T) \leq \deg P_B(T) = l-1$ for all $(i,j) \in \zed\times \zed$. Since $Q_B(\alpha,T):= \sum_{(i,j)\in \zed\times\zed} (-1)^i\alpha^j P_{B,i,j}(T)$, this implies that $\deg_T Q_B(\alpha,T) \leq l-1$. But, by Lemma \ref{lemma-degree-Hilbert-lower-bound} $\deg_T Q_{B}(1, T) = l-1$. This implies that $\deg_T Q_B(\alpha,T) \geq l-1$. Thus, $\deg_T Q_B(\alpha,T) = l-1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Example \ref{example-2-braids}]
We only prove equations \eqref{eq-2-braids-even} and \eqref{eq-2-braids-odd} for $k \geq 0$. The proof for $k<0$ is very similar and left to the reader.
Note that $B_0$ is the $2$-strand closed braid with no crossings and $B_1$ is the positive stabilization of the $1$-strand closed braid. So, by Lemma \ref{lemma-unlink}, we have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
Q_{B_0}(\alpha,T) & = & \alpha^{-1}(1+\alpha^{-1})T,\\
Q_{B_1}(\alpha,T) & = & \alpha^{-1}.
\end{eqnarray*}
This shows that equations \eqref{eq-2-braids-even} and \eqref{eq-2-braids-odd} are true for $k=0$.
Now assume that \eqref{eq-2-braids-even} and \eqref{eq-2-braids-odd} are true for a given $k\geq 0$. For $B_n$ with $n>0$, applying the skein relation of $Q_B(\alpha, T)$ at a positive crossing of $B_n$, one gets
\begin{equation}\label{eq-2-braid-skein}
Q_{B_n}(\alpha, T) = \alpha^2 Q_{B_{n-2}}(\alpha, T-1) + \alpha (Q_{B_{n-1}}(\alpha, T) - Q_{B_{n-1}}(\alpha, T-1)).
\end{equation}
For $n=2k+2$, by the induction hypothesis, equation \eqref{eq-2-braid-skein} gives that
\begin{eqnarray*}
Q_{B_{2k+2}}(\alpha, T) & = & \alpha^2 Q_{B_{2k}}(\alpha, T-1) + \alpha (Q_{B_{2k+1}}(\alpha, T) - Q_{B_{2k+1}}(\alpha, T-1)) \\
& = & \alpha^2 Q_{B_{2k}}(\alpha, T-1) = \alpha^{2k+1}(1+\alpha^{-1})(T-k-1).
\end{eqnarray*}
This proves equation \eqref{eq-2-braids-even} for $k+1$. For $n=2k+3$, by the induction hypothesis and the above computation of $Q_{B_{2k+2}}(\alpha, T)$, equation \eqref{eq-2-braid-skein} gives that
\begin{eqnarray*}
Q_{B_{2k+3}}(\alpha, T) & = & \alpha^2 Q_{B_{2k+1}}(\alpha, T-1) + \alpha (Q_{B_{2k+2}}(\alpha, T) - Q_{B_{2k+2}}(\alpha, T-1)) \\
& = & \alpha^2(k\alpha^{2k} +(k+1)\alpha^{2k-1}) + \alpha \cdot \alpha^{2k+1}(1+\alpha^{-1}) \\
& = & (k+1)\alpha^{2k+2} + (k+2)\alpha^{2k+1}.
\end{eqnarray*}
This proves equation \eqref{eq-2-braids-odd} for $k+1$. Hence, equations \eqref{eq-2-braids-even} and \eqref{eq-2-braids-odd} are true for all $k\geq 0$.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
Consider a situation in which there are countably many robots (or perhaps ants, beetles, vehicles etc.), indexed by the integers $\mathbb{Z}$, which at each time $t\ge0$ occupy the respective positions $x_k(t)$, $k\in\mathbb{Z}$, in the complex plane. Suppose moreover that, for each $k\in\mathbb{Z}$ and each time $t\ge0$, robot $k$ moves in the direction of robot $k-1$ with speed equal to their separation, so that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rob_sys}
\dot{x}_k(t)=x_{k-1}(t)-x_k(t),\quad k\in\mathbb{Z},\;t\ge0.
\end{equation}
We propose to investigate whether all of the
robots necessarily converge to a mutual meeting, or \emph{rendezvous}, point as $t\to\infty$, that is to say whether there exists $c\in \mathbb{C}$ such that $x_k(t)\to c$ as $t\to\infty $ uniformly in $k\in\mathbb{Z}$.
The problem is a natural extension of the corresponding question for finitely many robots, and in the finite case it is a simple matter to show that all robots converge exponentially fast to the centroid of their initial positions. However, since the actual rate of exponential convergence tends to zero as the size of the system grows this leaves open the question whether in the infinite case one should expect any rate of convergence, or even convergence for all initial constellations. Indeed, it was shown in \cite{FeiFra12,FeiFra12b} that in the infinite setting there exist initial configurations of the robots which do not lead to convergence. The aim of this note is to revisit and extend a recent result due to the authors \cite{PauSei15} giving a complete and simple characterisation of which initial configurations do and which do not lead to convergence.
Loosely speaking, we show
that the robots converge to the centroid of their initial positions whenever this is well-defined in a suitable sense, and do not converge otherwise.
In addition, we present a
detailed description of the rates of convergence of the robots. Thus our paper serves to further elucidate the similarities and differences between large finite systems and infinite systems. For further discussion of the relation between finite and infinite systems of the general kind considered here, see for instance \cite{CuIfZwa09}.
Our approach is based on the asymptotic theory of $C_0$-semigroups and elements of ergodic theory, and the paper is organised as follows. Our first main result, giving a characterisation of those initial configurations leading to convergent solutions of the robot rendezvous problem, is presented in Section~\ref{sec:good}. In Section~\ref{sec:quant} we present a new proof of a quantified result from \cite{PauSei15}, which provides an optimal estimate of the rate of convergence for initial configurations satisfying a certain condition, and in Section~\ref{sec:symm} we show how similar techniques lead to a new quantified result in a natural two-sided variant of the robot rendezvous problem considered in \cite{FeiFra12}. We conclude in Section~\ref{sec:ext} by describing a more realistic model which is representative of the general framework studied in depth in \cite{PauSei15}.
\section{Chararterising `good' initial constellations}\label{sec:good}
We begin by introducing some preliminary notions. Let $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$ denote the space of doubly infinite sequences $(x_k)$ satisfying $\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}|x_k|<\infty$, endowed with the supremum norm
$$\|(x_k)\|=\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}|x_k|,\quad (x_k)\in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z}).$$
Since we are interested in convergence of the solution $x(t)=(x_k(t))$, $t\ge0$, with respect to the norm of $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$, it is natural to assume that the initial constellation $x_0=(x_k(0))$ is an element of $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$, and we make this assumption throughout. We let $S$ denote the right-shift operator on $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$, so that $S(x_k)=(x_{k-1})$ for all $(x_k)\in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$.
We say that an initial constellation $x_0$ in the robot rendezvous problem is \emph{good} if there exist $c_k\in\mathbb{C}$, $k\in\mathbb{Z}$, such that the solution $x(t)$, $t\ge0$, of \eqref{eq:rob_sys} satisfies
$$\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}|x_k(t)-c_k|\to0,\quad t\to\infty.$$
In the finite case all initial constellations are good, and the robots all converge to the centroid of their initial positions. The following result shows that in the infinite robot rendezvous problem an initial constellation $x_0$ is good if and only if the translates $S^kx_0$, $k\ge1$, under the right-shift operator $S$ are Ces\`{a}ro summable with respect to the norm of $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$, and that in this case the solution $x(t)$ of \eqref{eq:rob_sys} converges to this Ces\`aro limit, which is necessarily a constant sequence, as $t\to\infty$. The result was originally obtained in \cite[Theorem~6.1]{PauSei15} as a consequence of a more general result with a lengthy proof. Here we give a short and direct proof combining the main result of Feintuch and Francis with elementary facts from ergodic theory.
\begin{thm}\label{robot_thm}
In the robot rendezvous problem \eqref{eq:rob_sys}, an initial constellation $x_0=(x_k(0))$ is good if and only if there exists $c\in \mathbb{C}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{Cesaro}
\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}\bigg|\frac{1}{n}\sum_{j=1}^nx_{k-j}(0)-c\bigg|\to0,\quad n\to\infty,
\end{equation}
and if this is the case then
\begin{equation}\label{limit}
\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}|x_k(t)-c|\to0,\quad t\to\infty.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $T$ denote the $C_0$-semigroup generated by $S-I$, so that $T(t)=\exp(t(S-I))$ for $t\ge0$. Then the operators $T(t)$, $t\ge0$, are uniformly bounded in operator norm and the solution of \eqref{eq:rob_sys} is given by $x(t)=T(t)x_0$, $t\ge0$. It follows from \cite[Theorem~3]{FeiFra12} that for initial constellations $x_0$ which lie in the range of $S-I$ we have $|x_k(t)|\to0$ as $t\to\infty$ uniformly in $k\in\mathbb{Z}$. Since the semigroup $T$ is uniformly bounded, the same conclusion holds for all initial constellations in the closure $Y$ of this range. Next observe that the kernel $Z$ of $S-I$ consists precisely of all constant sequences, and that such sequences are fixed by the semigroup. Let $X$ denote the space of all initial constellations in $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$ which can be written (uniquely) as the sum of an element of $Y$ and an element of $Z$. Then by the above observations all elements of $X$ are good. By \cite[Proposition~4.3.1]{ABHN11} the elements of $X$ are also precisely those initial constellations $x_0$ for which the Ces\`aro means $$\frac1t\int_0^t T(s)x_0\,\mathrm{d} s,\quad t>0,$$
converge in the norm of $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$ to a limit as $t\to\infty$. Since this is the case for any good initial constellation, $X$ in fact coincides with the set of all good constellations. Moreover, it is clear that if $x_0=y+z\in X$ with $y\in Y$ and $z\in Z$ being the constant sequence with entry $c\in\mathbb{C}$, then \eqref{limit} holds. To finish the proof it suffices to observe that by \cite[Section~2.1, Theorem~1.3]{Kre85} the set $X$ also coincides with the set of all initial constellations $x_0$ for which \eqref{Cesaro} is satisfied.
\end{proof}
It may be shown that condition \eqref{Cesaro} is satisfied for a wide range of initial constellations $x_0=(x_k(0))$, for instance whenever $x_k(0)=c+y_k$, $k\in\mathbb{Z}$, where $|y_k|\to0$ as $k\to\pm\infty$. In particular, the set of good initial constellation is stable under perturbations by sequences which converge to zero. Thus Theorem~\ref{robot_thm} strengthens \cite[Lemma~2]{FeiFra12}. The result furthermore reveals the underlying reason for why the construction given in \cite[Section~3.5]{FeiFra12} leads to an initial constellation $x_0$ which is not good and in particular gives a simple way of constructing other examples, for instance by taking $x_0=(x_k)$ to have entries $x_k=0$ for $k\ge0$ and, for $k<0$, alternating blocks of zeros and ones having lengths which increase at suitable rates. Perhaps the most important contribution of Theorem~\ref{robot_thm} to the theory developed in \cite{FeiFra12} is the observation that the correct topology in which Ces\`aro convergence of translates needs to be studied is not the topology of convergence in each entry but the norm topology of $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$.
We observe in passing that, even though it is argued in \cite{FeiFra12,FeiFra12b} that the above setting for the robot rendezvous is the most realistic, the problem can also be studied with initial constellations lying in $\ell^p(\mathbb{Z})$, $1\le p<\infty$; see \cite[Theorem~6.1]{PauSei15}. The upshot is that for $1\le p<\infty$ the only possible rendezvous point is the origin, and that all initial constellations are good if $1<p<\infty$ but not when $p=1$. The latter statement is an immediate consequence of the well-known fact that the right-shift operator $S$ is mean ergodic on $\ell^p(\mathbb{Z})$ if and only if $1<p<\infty$.
\section{A quantified result}\label{sec:quant}
The following result is a quantified refinement of Theorem~\ref{robot_thm} and gives an estimate on the \emph{rate} of convergence for initial constellations $x_0$ which satisfy a slightly stronger condition than \eqref{Cesaro}. The result was originally obtained in \cite[Theorem~6.1]{PauSei15}. However, whereas the proof given in \cite{PauSei15} relies on direct estimates involving Stirling's formula, we present here a new and more elegant proof. In what follows, given two sequences $(a_n)_{n\ge1}$ and $(b_n)_{n\ge1}$ of non-negative numbers, we write $a_n=O(b_n)$ as $n\to\infty$ if there exists a constant $C>0$ such that $a_n\le Cb_n$ for all sufficiently large $n\ge1$, and we use a similar notation for functions of a real variable.
\begin{thm}\label{robot_quant}
In the robot rendezvous problem \eqref{eq:rob_sys}, if $x_0=(x_k(0))$ is a good initial constellation such that
\begin{equation}\label{quant}
\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}\bigg|\frac{1}{n}\sum_{j=1}^nx_{k-j}(0)-c\bigg|=O\big(n^{-1}\big),\quad n\to\infty,
\end{equation}
for some $c\in\mathbb{C}$, then
$$\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}|x_k(t)-c|=O\big(t^{-1/2}\big),\quad t\to\infty.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
As in the proof of Theorem~\ref{robot_thm}, let $T$ denote the $C_0$-semigroup generated by $S-I$, and recall that the set of good constellations consists precisely of those initial constellations which can be written (uniquely) as the sum of a constant sequence and an element of the closure of the range of $S-I$. It follows from \cite[Theorem~5]{LinSine83} that condition \eqref{quant} in fact characterises those initial constellations $x_0$ which can be written as the sum of a constant sequence and an element of the \emph{range}, as opposed to the closure of the range, of $S-I$. Since constant sequences lie in the kernel of $S-I$ and consequently are fixed by the semigroup $T$, the result will follow if we can establish that $\|T(t)(S-I)\|=O(t^{-1/2})$ as $t\to\infty$. Note first that, given $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$, this property holds for $S-I$ and $T$ if and only if it holds for $\varepsilon(S-I)$ and the $C_0$-semigroup $T_\varepsilon$ generated by this operator. It is shown in \cite[Theorem~1.2]{Dun08} that for the latter pair the required property is satisfied if and only if there exist $\beta\in(0,1)$ such that the operator
$$Q_{\beta,\varepsilon}=\frac{\varepsilon(S-I)+1-\beta}{1-\beta}$$
is power-bounded. Since $Q_{1/2,1/2}=S$ is a contraction, and in particular power-bounded, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
Examples of initial constellations $x_0=(x_k(0))$ satisfying condition~\eqref{quant} include sequences with $x_k(0)=c+y_k$, $k\in\mathbb{Z}$, where $\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}|y_k|<\infty$. In particular, the set of initial constellations satisfying condition~\eqref{quant} is stable under perturbations by sequences which are absolutely summable. Furthermore, it follows from the results in \cite{PauSei15} not only that there cannot be a rate of convergence which holds for \emph{all} initial constellations $x_0$ but also that the rate $t^{-1/2}$ is optimal for those initial constellations $x_0$ which satisfy \eqref{quant}. This is in stark contrast to the case of finitely many robots, where all initial constellations lead to exponentially fast convergence to the centroid of the initial positions, albeit at decreasing exponential rates as the number of robots grows. As pointed out in the context of Theorem~\ref{robot_thm}, Theorem~\ref{robot_quant} also carries over to the $\ell^p$-case with $1\le p<\infty$; see \cite[Theorem~6.1]{PauSei15} for details.
\section{The symmetric case}\label{sec:symm}
A natural variant of the robot rendezvous problem considered so far is the symmetric case in which each robot's motion is influenced by \emph{both} of its neighbours according to the ordinary differential equations
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rob_symm}
\dot{x}_k(t)=\frac{1}{2}\big(x_{k-1}(t)+x_{k+1}(t)\big)-x_k(t),\quad k\in\mathbb{Z},\;t\ge0.
\end{equation}
As before, we follow \cite{FeiFra12} and consider this problem for initial constellations $x_0$ lying in $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$. It was shown in \cite[Theorem~4]{FeiFra12} that the solution of \eqref{eq:rob_symm} satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nonquant}
\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}|x_k(t)|\to0,\quad t\to\infty,
\end{equation}
whenever the vector $x_0$ lies in the range of $\frac12(S+S^{-1})-I$. Here $S^{-1}$, the inverse operator of $S$, is the left-shift operator on $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z})$ given by $S^{-1}(x_k)=(x_{k+1})$.
The following theorem presents an extended and quantified version
of~\cite[Theorem~4]{FeiFra12}.
The result is an analogue of Theorems~\ref{robot_thm} and \ref{robot_quant}, giving also a characterisation of good initial constellations for the symmetric problem.
\begin{thm}\label{sym_thm}
In the symmetric robot rendezvous problem \eqref{eq:rob_symm}, an initial constellation $x_0=(x_k(0))$ is good if and only if there exists $c\in \mathbb{C}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{Cesaro_sym}
\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}\bigg|\frac{1}{n}\sum_{j=1}^n\frac{1}{2^j}\sum_{\ell=0}^j\binom{j}{\ell}x_{k-j+2\ell}(0)-c\bigg|\to0,\quad n\to\infty,
\end{equation}
and if this is the case then
\begin{equation}\label{conv_sym}
\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}|x_k(t)-c|\to0,\quad t\to\infty.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, if the convergence in \eqref{Cesaro_sym} is like $O(n^{-1})$ as $n\to\infty$, then the convergence in \eqref{conv_sym} is like $O(t^{-1})$ as $t\to\infty$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The natural operator to consider is now $\frac12(S+S^{-1})-I$ rather than $S-I$. Straightforward resolvent estimates show that this operator generates a bounded analytic $C_0$-semigroup, and it then follows from \cite[Theorem~3.7.19]{ABHN11} and the fact that the solution of \eqref{eq:rob_symm} is precisely the orbit of this semigroup that
$$\sup_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}|x_k(t)|=O\big(t^{-1}\big),\quad t\to\infty,$$
whenever the initial constellation $x_0$ lies in the range of $\frac12(S+S^{-1})-I$. By an analogous argument to the one given in the proof of Theorem~\ref{robot_quant} together with a straightforward computation, decay in \eqref{Cesaro_sym} like $O(n^{-1})$ as $n\to\infty$ characterises those initial constellations $x_0$ which can be written (uniquely) as the sum of an element of this range and the constant sequence with entry $c$, which is fixed by the semigroup. The result now follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Further extensions}\label{sec:ext}
We mention in closing that Theorems~\ref{robot_thm} and \ref{robot_quant} are in fact special cases of a much more general theoretical apparatus developed in \cite{PauSei15}. As an example of the more realistic models that the general framework allows, suppose that each robot, or vehicle, $k\in\mathbb{Z}$ has associated with it not only a position $x_k$ but also a velocity $v_k$ and an acceleration $a_k$. We suppose that we can control the acceleration of each vehicle by means of a direct feedback control taking the form
$$\dot{a}_k(t)=c_1y_k(t)+c_2v_k(t)+c_3a_k(t),\quad k\in\mathbb{Z},\;t\ge0,$$
where $y_k=x_k-x_{k-1}$ denotes the separation of vehicle $k$ from vehicle $k-1$ and where $c_1, c_2, c_3\in\mathbb{C}$ are control parameters we are free to choose. It is natural to ask whether we can choose the control parameters in such a way that, as $t\to\infty$, all vehicles come to rest at a mutual meeting point. More generally, one might ask whether it is possible to steer the vehicles towards pre-specified target separations from one another, and questions of this kind have been studied in the control-theory literature for various types of vehicle platoons; see for instance \cite{CurIft09,JovBam05,ZwaFir13}.
As is shown in \cite[Theorem~5.1]{PauSei15}, it is possible once again to characterise the good initial constellations in terms of a Ces\`aro condition (which, surprisingly, involves only the vehicles' initial deviations from the target separations, not their initial velocities or accelerations) and also to give a quantified result of the form of Theorem~\ref{robot_quant}. This time, however, the estimates are less straightforward and moreover \cite[Theorem~5.1]{PauSei15} involves a logarithmic term in the estimate for the rate of convergence which was conjectured in \cite[Remark~5.2(a)]{PauSei15} to be unnecessary. It is shown in our recent paper \cite{PauSei16} how the argument outlined in the proof of Theorem~\ref{robot_quant} above can be extended to the more general setting of \cite{PauSei15}, thus in particular removing the logarithm in the platoon model.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:Intro}
It is well-established that non-perturbative worldsheet instanton corrections of string compactifications on Calabi--Yau manifolds are captured in terms of the quantum cohomology ring \cite{Witten:1988xj,MR1366548,MR1286255,MR1604364}, which arises from a deformation of the classical intersection product. From the string worldsheet point of view the quantum cohomology ring is identified with the chiral--anti-chiral ring of the two-dimensional $N=(2,2)$ conformal field theory \cite{Lerche:1989uy,Cecotti:1989gv}. In this work we study the quantum cohomology of Calabi--Yau fourfolds \cite{Greene:1993vm,Mayr:1996sh} --- in particular with a single K\"ahler modulus. Due to $N=2$ special geometry \cite{Strominger:1990pd,Ceresole:1992su,Bershadsky:1993cx} for Calabi--Yau threefolds the number of generators of the quantum cohomology ring is essentially determined by the dimension of the K\"ahler moduli space, which corresponds to the number of marginal chiral--anti-chiral operators of the two-dimensional worldsheet theory. For Calabi--Yau fourfolds, however, the ring structure of the quantum cohomology ring is less constrained by target space symmetries. As a consequence, the number of generators of their quantum cohomology ring is generically only given by the number of both marginal and certain irrelevant chiral--anti-chiral operators. That is to say the number of generators cannot simply be deduced from the dimensionality of the K\"ahler moduli space.
This basic observation has an interesting immediate consequence on the level of quantum periods, which describe quantum corrected volumes of even-dimensional cycles in Calabi--Yau manifolds. Namely, we find that while the classical K\"ahler volume of certain quantum cycles vanishes their respective quantum volume can nevertheless be non-zero. As a consequence, in the large volume regime there are non-vanishing integral quantum periods of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:InstPer}
\Pi(J) \,=\, \mathcal{O}(e^{2\pi \int J} ) \,\ne\,0 \ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of the K\"ahler form $J$ in flat coordinates. Such quantum periods can never occur in Calabi--Yau threefolds as all even-dimensional quantum cycles are governed by the generators of their K\"ahler moduli spaces. Similarly, as a consequence of the Jurkiewicz--Danilov theorem and the quantum Lefschetz hyperplane theorem~\cite{MR1719555,MR1839288,MR2276766}, this phenomenon seems difficult to realize in smooth complete intersection Calabi--Yau fourfolds in compact toric varieties \cite{MR1328251,Hosono:1994ax,Hosono:1995bm,Klemm:1996ts} --- at least not within the toric part of the moduli space and not for the quantum periods describable in terms of the ambient compact toric varieties. However, for generic Calabi--Yau fourfolds the structure of the even-degree cohomology is not entirely determined by the dimensionality of the K\"ahler moduli space anymore. Therefore, the appearance of integral quantum periods purely generated by instanton numbers may not come as a surprise. Indeed, such examples have already appeared for complete intersection Calabi--Yau fourfolds in ambient complex Grassmannians \cite{Honma:2013hma},\footnote{The Pl\"ucker map embeds complex Grassmannians into projective spaces as non-complete intersections. Thus these Calabi--Yau fourfolds are projective varieties of the non-complete intersection type. As consequence the Jurkiewicz--Danilov theorem and the quantum Lefschetz hyperplane theorems are not applicable.} and are in general expected for non-complete intersections Calabi--Yau fourfolds in toric varieties, as recently also observed in ref.~\cite{Gerhardus:2015sla}.
We determine the quantum periods of Calabi--Yau fourfolds as solutions to Picard--Fuchs differential equations. With the help of gauge theory techniques \cite{Benini:2012ui,Doroud:2012xw,Jockers:2012dk,Gerchkovitz:2014gta,Gomis:2012wy}, we extract these Picard--Fuchs differential equations of non-complete intersection Calabi--Yau fourfolds with a single K\"ahler modulus for examples with a purely instanton-generated quantum period~\eqref{eq:InstPer}. A characteristic feature of such Calabi--Yau fourfolds are non-factorizable Picard--Fuchs operators of order six (or higher). Furthermore, due to the additional quantum period the regular singular point of the large volume phase does not have maximally unipotent monodromy with respect to the Picard--Fuchs operator. Hence, computing the integral quantum periods becomes more challenging, because the integration constants are not entirely determined by the perturbative asymptotic behavior, as --- for instance --- computed by the Gamma class of the Calabi--Yau fourfold \cite{Libgober:1999aaa,Iritani:2007aaa,MR2553377,MR2483750,Halverson:2013qca,Hori:2013ika}. In addition, we use the regular singular point in K\"ahler moduli space, where the quantum volume of the 8-brane vanishes.\footnote{The existence of such a singularity is predicted by the Strominger--Yau--Zaslow mirror symmetry conjecture \cite{Strominger:1996it}.} Here, the monodromy behavior of the integral quantum periods is determined by a Thomas--Seidel twist \cite{MR1831820}. We demonstrate that for the analyzed examples the knowledge of these two monodromies combined with numerical analytic continuation techniques is actually sufficient to unambiguously calculate the integral quantum periods. As a non-trivial check we establish --- again with numerical analytic continuation techniques --- that the monodromy matrices at the remaining regular singular points in K\"ahler moduli space are indeed integral as well.\footnote{Combining numerical analytic continuation techniques with the requirement of integral monodromy matrices has for instance been used extensively before in the context of the moduli spaces of Calabi--Yau threefolds \cite{Hofmann:2013PhDThesis}. For Calabi--Yau geometries associated to hypergeometric functions a systematic treatment towards analytic continuation has recently been given in refs.~\cite{Knapp:2016rec,Scheidegger:2016ysn}. Generalizing further the methods of ref.~\cite{Puhlfuerst:2015zqw} to resonant periods arising in Calabi--Yau geometries would offer a powerful framework to study analytic continuations systematically.}
With the integral quantum periods at hand, we explicitly extract the instanton corrections entering the quantum cohomology rings, which geometrically amounts to extracting genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants. Using global properties of the quantum periods in the vicinity of singular points in quantum K\"ahler moduli space, we determine the generalized topological index of the $N=(2,2)$ superconformal worldsheet theory \cite{Bershadsky:1993ta,Bershadsky:1993cx}. The genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants also define recursively the Klemm--Pandharipande meeting invariants of Calabi--Yau fourfolds, which then allow us to enumerate genus one BPS invariants of the examined Calabi--Yau fourfolds \cite{Klemm:2007in}. The intricate integrality property of these genus one invariants furnishes yet another non-trivial check on the proposed integral quantum periods.
To further check our enumerative results, we present intersection theory techniques that allow us to directly enumerate lines with a marked point on complete intersection Calabi--Yau fourfolds embedded in Grassmannians. While these intersection calculations are developed for complete intersection Calabi--Yau fourfolds in Grassmannians, our results easily generalize to enumerate lines on other complete intersection varieties embedded in Grassmannians.
Finally, let us briefly remark that our findings may have phenomenological applications as well. The study of global properties of quantum periods --- in particular the analysis of their monodromy behavior around singular divisors in moduli space --- exhibits many characteristic features of monodromy inflation in string cosmology \cite{Silverstein:2008sg}. In the context of Calabi--Yau fourfold compactifications of type~IIA strings to two dimensions, the quantum periods~\eqref{eq:InstPer} give rise to flux-induced superpotentials of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:FluxW}
W_\text{flux}(t) \,=\, \sum_i a_i t^i + b + W_{inst}(t) \ , \qquad W_{inst}(t)\,=\, \mathcal{O}(e^{2\pi t^i \int \omega_i}) \,\ne\, 0 \ .
\end{equation}
Here the K\"ahler form $J=\sum_i t^i \omega_i$ is expanded in a basis of harmonic two forms $\omega_i$. Depending on the details of the chosen background fluxes all of the constants $a_i$ and $b$ can either be chosen to vanish or some of them not to vanish. Assuming further that the mirror Calabi--Yau fourfold of the analyzed fourfold has a suitable elliptic fibration, the superpotentials~\eqref{eq:FluxW} can also be interpreted in four space-time dimensions. Then the superpotential arises from four-form fluxes in F-theory on the elliptically-fibered mirror Calabi--Yau fourfold, where the chiral fields $t^i$ parametrize the mirror complex structure moduli space in the vicinity of a large complex structure point. Such large complex structure points in F-theory have been considered recently in the context of string cosmology in refs.~\cite{Hebecker:2014kva},\footnote{More generally, inflationary models in string cosmology arising from F-term axion monodromies have been introduced in refs.~\cite{Marchesano:2014mla,Hebecker:2014eua}.} where the hierarchy between polynomial and exponential suppressed terms is explored.
The outline of this work is as follows: In Section~\ref{sec:metho} we introduce the necessary ingredients and establish the computational techniques to derive the integral quantum periods for the class of studied Calabi--Yau fourfolds. Moreover, we recall some properties of enumerative invariants in Calabi--Yau fourfolds relevant for this work. In Section~\ref{sec:Examples} we exemplify in detail how to compute integral quantum periods and how to extract Gromov--Witten invariants. We tabulate our results for all the studied Calabi--Yau fourfold examples in Appendix~\ref{app:tables}. To further confirm our results, in Appendix~\ref{app:InterTheory} we calculate genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants for Calabi--Yau fourfolds directly using intersection theory methods. Our conclusions are presented in Section~\ref{sec:con}.
\section{Methodology} \label{sec:metho}
The aim of this section is to establish the computational tools that are necessary to analyze the quantum periods of the Calabi--Yau fourfolds studied in Section~\ref{sec:Examples}. We review certain aspects of the quantum cohomology ring of Calabi--Yau fourfolds. Then we recall gauged linear sigma model techniques to determine the Picard--Fuchs differential equations for the quantum periods. Next we construct the asymptotic behavior of the quantum integral periods --- corresponding to B-brane central charges --- in the vicinity of the large volume point and the singular locus, where the 8-brane becomes massless. Finally, we describe the numerical analytic continuation techniques that allow us to determine integral quantum periods from their global structure and their asymptotic behavior at certain singular points in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space.
\subsection{Quantum cohomology of Calabi--Yau fourfolds}
\label{sec:QuantumCohomology}
The chiral--anti-chiral ring of $N=(2,2)$ worldsheet theories of the Calabi--Yau manifold~$X$ is given by its quantum cohomology ring, i.e., the even-dimensional cohomology group $\bigoplus_k H^{k,k}(X)$ together with the cup product deformed by genus zero worldsheet instanton corrections \cite{Witten:1988xj,Lerche:1989uy,Cecotti:1989gv,MR1366548,MR1286255,MR1604364}.
Marginal operators of the chiral--anti-chiral ring correspond to cohomology elements of $H^{1,1}(X)$. For worldsheet theories associated to Calabi--Yau threefolds all chiral--anti-chiral ring elements are generated from such marginal deformations. This is a consequence of the underlying $N=2$ special geometry \cite{Strominger:1990pd,Ceresole:1992su,Bershadsky:1993cx}. However, for Calabi--Yau manifolds of complex dimension four or greater the chiral--anti-chiral ring need not be generated just by marginal chiral--anti-chiral ring elements anymore, but may require additional generators from the higher dimensional cohomology groups $H^{k,k}(X)$ for $k>1$ \cite{Greene:1993vm,Mayr:1996sh}. We study this phenomenon of quantum cohomology rings in the context of Calabi--Yau fourfolds.
A standard technique to study the quantum cohomology rings of a compact Calabi--Yau manifold~$X$ uses a quantum version of the Lefschetz hyperplane theorem~\cite{MR1719555,MR1839288,MR2276766}. That is to say, the information about the quantum cohomology ring of the Calabi--Yau manifold~$X$ is inferred from the quantum cohomology of some ambient space.
Mirror symmetry furnishes another very powerful --- but yet indirect method --- to deduce the quantum cohomology~\cite{Candelas:1990rm,Witten:1991zz,Aspinwall:1993rj,Morrison:1994fr,Hori:2000kt}. For compact complete intersection Calabi--Yau manifolds in toric varieties the Batyrev--Borisov mirror construction relates K\"ahler moduli induced from the ambient space to polynomial complex structure deformations given in terms of the defining complete intersection equations \cite{MR1328251,Batyrev:1994pg,Morrison:1995yh,Hori:2000kt}. That is to say, the structure of the quantum cohomology ring is again inferred via mirror symmetry from the cohomology elements induced from some ambient toric variety.
As a consequence, for Calabi--Yau manifolds~$X$ embedded in toric ambient spaces $X_\Sigma$ of complete fans~$\Sigma$, one typically studies the quantum cohomlogy ring of those cohomology elements in $\bigoplus_k H^{k,k}(X)$ that are induced via pullback from the cohomology ring~$H^*(X_\Sigma)$ of the toric ambient space $X_\Sigma$. The Jurkiewicz--Danilov theorem for complete compact toric varieties $X_\Sigma$ guarantees that the entire cohomology ring~$H^*(X_\Sigma)$ is generated by $H^{1,1}(X_\Sigma)$. As a result (the part of) the quantum cohomology ring of $\bigoplus_k H^{k,k}(X)$ induced from the embedding of $X$ into $X_\Sigma$ is also generated by $H^{1,1}(X)$. Hence for compact smooth Calabi--Yau fourfolds $X$ embedded as complete intersections in toric varieties the part of the quantum cohomology induced from the toric ambient space is always generated by marginal operators of the chiral--anti-chiral ring.
To study the more general --- and actually generic --- structure of the quantum cohomology ring with additional generators apart from marginal operators, we focus on Calabi--Yau fourfolds~$X$ embedded as complete intersections in compact complex ambient spaces~$Y$, whose even-dimensional cohomology ring is not just generated by $H^{1,1}(Y)$. This happens for instance for non-toric GIT quotients $Y$, which in the physics literature arise from two-dimensional $N=(2,2)$ non-Abelian gauged linear sigma models \cite{Witten:1993yc,Witten:1993xi,Lerche:2001vj,Hori:2006dk,Donagi:2007hi,Hori:2011pd,Jockers:2012zr,Sharpe:2012ji,Hori:2013gga,Gerhardus:2015sla,Sharpe:2015vza}. The simplest examples of this kind arise from complete intersection Calabi--Yau fourfolds $X$ embedded in complex Grassmannians $Y$ \cite{Honma:2013hma}. Namely, for Grassmannians $Y=\operatorname{Gr}(k,n)$ with $k>2$, the cohomology group $H^{1,1}(Y)$ is generated by the Schubert cycle $\sigma_1$, while the cohomology group $H^{2,2}(Y)$ is generated by the two Schubert cycles $\sigma_{1,1}$ and $\sigma_2$, related to $\sigma_1$ via the relation $\sigma_1^2 = \sigma_{1,1} +\sigma_2$. Thus $\sigma_1$ alone does not generate $H^{2,2}(Y)$; an additional generator is required. From the gauged linear sigma model point of view, such GIT quotients are obtained from two-dimensional non-Abelian gauge theories based on the gauge group $U(k)$ \cite{Witten:1993xi,Lerche:2001vj,Hori:2006dk,Hori:2011pd,Sharpe:2015vza}.
In this note we focus on Calabi--Yau fourfolds $X$ with $\dim H^{1,1}(X) = 1$ --- that is to say with a single K\"ahler modulus --- and with one additional non-trivial generator in $H^{2,2}(X)$ induced from the embedding ambient space~$Y$, i.e., $\dim H^{2,2}(Y) = 2$. As mentioned before such scenarios occur for instance for Calabi--Yau fourfolds embedded as complete intersections in Grassmannian ambient spaces or flag manifolds. From a gauged linear sigma model point of view, such examples can be constructed from gauge groups $U(1) \times G$ (or discrete quotients thereof) with the semi-simple Lie group factor~$G$. Here, the Fayet--Iliopoulos term of the Abelian gauge group factor~$U(1)$ realizes the single K\"ahler modulus \cite{Witten:1993yc}, while the non-Abelian gauge group factor~$G$ can give rise to additional operators, geometrically corresponding to elements of the ambient space cohomology group $H^{2,2}(Y)$ \cite{Closset:2015rna}. An example of a Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X$ of this more general kind has been constructed in ref.~\cite{Gerhardus:2015sla}.
Thus we determine a chiral--anti-chiral ring of a Calabi--Yau fourfold $X$ with the ring elements $\phi_1$ generating $H^{1,1}(X)$ and the ring elements $\phi_{2,(1)}$ and $\phi_{2,(2)}$ furnishing two independent generators of $H^{2,2}(X)$.\footnote{Strictly speaking, we are considering a subring of the entire chiral--anti-chiral ring. This subring is generated by the ring elements induced from the embedding space $Y$.} The general structure of the quantum product then yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq:QuantumProduct}
\phi_1 * \phi_1 \,=\, C^{(1)}(q)\, \phi_{2,(1)} + C^{(2)}(q) \,\phi_{2,(2)} \ ,
\end{equation}
where the coefficient functions are given in terms of the worldsheet instanton action $q=e^{2\pi i t}$ with the flat coordinate $t$ as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:MCg0}
C^{(a)}(q) \,=\, c^{(a)} + \sum_{d=1}^{\infty} n_{0,d}^{(a)} \frac{d^2\,q^d}{1-q^d} \ , \qquad a=1,2 \ .
\end{equation}
Here the classical ring structure constants are defined by the cup product $\phi_1 \cup \phi_1 = \sum_a c^{(a)} \phi_{2,(a)}$. The integral genus zero worldsheet instanton numbers of degree $d$ are denote by $n_{0,d}^{(a)}$, where the superscript refers to a single marked point constrained to lie on the algebraic cycle class $\phi_{2,(a)}$.
These genus zero worldsheet instanton numbers recursively define the symmetric Klemm--Pandharipande meeting invariants $m_{d_1,d_2}\equiv m_{d_2,d_1}$ according to \cite{Klemm:2007in} \footnote{Note the genus zero invariants $n_{0,d}(\phi_{2,(a)})$ of ref.~\cite{Klemm:2007in} relate to the genus zero invariants $n_{0,d}^{(a)}$ defined here with the identity $n_{0,d}(\phi_{2,(a)}) = \int_X\phi_{2,(a)}\cup \left(\sum_b n_{0,d}^{(b)} \phi_{2,(b)}\right)$.}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:MeetingInvariants}
\begin{aligned}
m_{d_1,d_2} \,&=\,0 \ \text{ for } d_1\le 0 \text{ or } d_2 \le 0 \ , \\
m_{d_1,d_2} \,&=\,\sum_{a,b}g_{ab} n_{0,d}^{(a)} n_{0,d}^{(b)} + m_{d_1,d_2-d_1} + m_{d_1-d_2,d_2} \ \text{ for } d_1 \ne d_2 \ , \\
m_{d,d} \,&=\, \sum_{a,b} g_{ab} c_2^{(a)} n_{0,d}^{(b)} + \sum_{a,b} g_{ab} n_{0,d}^{(a)} n_{0,d}^{(b)} - \sum_{k=1}^{d-1} m_{k,d-k}\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Here $g_{ab}$ is the intersection pairing $g_{ab} \,=\, \int_X \phi_{2,(a)} \cup \phi_{2,(b)}$, and $c_{2}^{(a)}$ are the expansion coefficient of the second Chern class of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X$, i.e., $c_2(X) = \sum_a c_2^{(a)} \phi_{2,(a)}$ viewed as a cohomology element of $H^{2,2}(X)$. The genus zero invariants $n_{0,d}^{(a)}$ together with the meeting invariants $m_{d_1,d_2}$ are essential to extract the integral genus one invariants $n_{1,d}$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X$, as all of them appear non-trivially in the multi-covering formula for the rational genus one invariants $N_{1,d}$ given by \cite{Klemm:2007in}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:MCg1}
\sum_d N_{1,d} q^d \,=\, \sum_{d,\ell} n_{1,d} \frac{\sigma_1(\ell)}\ell q^{d\ell}
+\frac1{24}\left( \sum_{d,a,b} g_{ab}c_{2}^{(a)} n_{0,d}^{(b)} - \sum_{d,k} m_{k,d-k} \right) \log(1-q^d) \ .
\end{equation}
Here $\sigma_1(\ell) = \sum_{i|\ell} i$ is the divisor function such that the integers $n_{1,d}$ enumerate elliptic curves rather than BPS states; cf., with the discussion in refs.~\cite{Bershadsky:1993ta,Katz:1999xq,Klemm:2007in}.
The genus one invariants $n_{1,d}$ appear in the topological limit $F_1^\text{top}$ of the generalized topological index of the $N=(2,2)$ superconformal worldsheet theory \cite{Bershadsky:1993ta,Bershadsky:1993cx}, which for Calabi--Yau fourfolds with $h^{2,1}=0$ takes the form \cite{Cecotti:1992vy,Bershadsky:1993ta,Bershadsky:1993cx,Klemm:2007in}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:F1}
F_1^\text{top} \,=\, \left( \frac{\chi}{24} - h^{1,1} - 2 \right) \log \Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}
+\log\det \left(\frac1{2\pi i} \frac{\partial z}{\partial t} \right) + \sum_\alpha b_\alpha \log \Delta_\alpha \ .
\end{equation}
Here, $\chi$ is the Euler characteristic and $\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}(z)$ denotes the fundamental quantum period with respect to the large volume point of the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X$. Furthermore, the (vector-valued) function $z(t)$ is the mirror map of the algebraic coordinates $z$ to the flat coordinates $t$. It is the inverse of the (vector-valued) function
\begin{equation}
t(z)= \frac{1}{2\pi i} \frac{\Pi_{\vec{\mathcal{C}}}}{\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}} \ ,
\end{equation}
with a basis of 2-branes $\vec{\mathcal{C}}$ representing the Mori cone of the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X$. Finally, $\Delta_\alpha$ are the factors of the discriminant locus of the quantum K\"ahler moduli space with rational coefficients (including the large volume divisor). The coefficients $b_\alpha$ reflect the holomorphic ambiguity of $F_1^\text{top}$ \cite{Bershadsky:1993ta,Bershadsky:1993cx}, and they need to be determined by the boundary conditions in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space. Namely, in the vicinity of the large volume point $t\to\infty$ the index $F_1^\text{top}$ for Calabi--Yau fourfolds takes the asymptotic form \cite{Bershadsky:1993ta,Bershadsky:1993cx}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:F1LV}
F_1^\text{top} \,=\, - \frac1{24} \int_X c_3(X) \cup J + \text{(regular)} \ .
\end{equation}
Here, $c_3(X)$ and $J$ are the third Chern class and the K\"ahler form of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X$, respectively. Another boundary condition yields the vicinity of the divisor in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space, where the volume of the 8-brane $\mathcal{O}_X$ vanishes. There one expects the universal asymptotic behavior \cite{Klemm:2007in}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:F1Coni}
F_1^\text{top} \,=\, -\frac{1}{24} \log \Delta_{\mathcal{O}_X} + \text{(regular)} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\Delta_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ is the factor of the discriminant locus that vanishes at this divisor.
If the above boundary conditions are not sufficient to fix all coefficients $b_\alpha$, we employ the additional boundary conditions from further singular loci in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space characterized by vanishing quantum volumes of other branes, which exhibit the same universal asymptotic property~\eqref{eq:F1Coni}. Employing these boundary conditions, we observe for all our examined examples that the genus one invariants at degree one and two vanish, i.e., $n_{1,1}=n_{1,2}=0$.
For the examples studied in this note, we will explicitly extract the above described integral invariants for low degrees. Due to the intricate multicovering formulas \eqref{eq:MCg0} and \eqref{eq:MCg1} the confirmed integrality of the invariants $n_{0,d}^{(a)}$ and $n_{1,d}$ yields non-trivial consistency checks on our findings. Note that for Calabi--Yau fourfolds with a single K\"ahler modulus there are at each degree as many genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants as there are non-trivial chiral--anti-chiral quantum cohomology ring elements in $H^{2,2}(X)$. However, independently of the quantum cohomology ring structure there is just a single genus one BPS invariant $n_{1,d}$ because these invariants do not depend on a marked point.
\subsection{Picard--Fuchs operators via gauged linear sigma models}
\label{sec:GaugeTheories}
Our approach to extract the quantum cohomology ring is to first determine the Picard--Fuchs differential equation that governs the quantum periods of the examined Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X$.
Using variation of Hodge structure techniques of the holomorphic four-form $\Omega$ of the mirror Calabi--Yau geometry furnishes a standard technique to derive the Picard--Fuchs operators for the quantum periods. However, this approach requires a construction of the mirror Calabi--Yau fourfold, which for non-toric ambient spaces or non-complete intersection Calabi--Yau fourfolds in toric ambient spaces --- as studied in this note --- can be rather cumbersome or is even unknown.\footnote{Using the Pl\"ucker embedding of Grassmannians in projective spaces, the work of ref.~\cite{MR1619529} reduces the problem of constructing a mirror Calabi--Yau fourfold to the Baytrev--Borisov mirror recipe for complete intersections in toric varieties, which is further generalized to complete intersections in flag manifolds in ref.~\cite{MR1756568}. A mirror proposal has also been presented for certain non-complete intersection Calabi--Yau manifolds in toric varieties in ref.~\cite{Boehm:2011rr}.}
Here we follow a different approach that allows us to determine the Picard--Fuchs operators directly from the sphere or hemisphere partition function of the gauged linear sigma models, which describe the Calabi--Yau fourfolds under consideration as a geometric target space phase. The sphere partition function $Z_{S^2}$ computes the exponentiated sign-reversed K\"ahler potential of the Calabi--Yau variety \cite{Jockers:2012dk}, while the hemisphere partition function $Z_{D^2,\partial D^2}$ directly gives rise to quantum periods for appropriate boundary conditions of the gauged linear sigma model at $\partial D^2$ \cite{Hori:2013ika}. Both quantities are annihilated by the Picard--Fuchs operators $\mathcal{L}_i$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_i(z_a,\theta_a) Z_{S^2}(z_a) \,=\,0 \ , \quad
\mathcal{L}_i(z_a,\theta_a) Z_{D^2,\partial D^2}(z_a) \,=\,0 \ , \qquad
\theta_a\,=\,z_a \frac{\partial}{\partial z_a} \ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of the algebraic coordinates $z_a$ with $a=1,\ldots,h^{1,1}(X)$. Thus the Picard--Fuchs operators $\mathcal{L}_i$ can be determined by the requirement to annihilate $Z_{S^2}(z_a)$ and $Z_{D^2,\partial D^2}(z_a)$. This approach has also been employed for instance in refs.~\cite{Honma:2013hma,Gerhardus:2015sla}.
As we focus on Calabi--Yau geometries with a single K\"ahler modulus, there is just a single Picard--Fuchs operators $\mathcal{L}(z,\theta)$ depending on a single algebraic coordinate~$z$. While for Calabi--Yau threefolds such a Picard--Fuchs operator is always of order four (due to the aforementioned ring structure of the quantum cohomology ring), for Calabi--Yau fourfolds the order of the Picard--Fuchs operator is given by\footnote{The highest power of the logarithmic derivative $\theta$ is the order of the differential operator $\mathcal{L}(\theta,z)$.}
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{ord} \mathcal{L}(z,\theta) \,=\, 4 + \#(\phi_2) \ .
\end{equation}
Here $\#(\phi_2)$ denotes the number of chiral--anti-chiral ring generators associated to $H^{2,2}(X)$ that non-trivially participate in the quantum product $\phi_1 * \phi_1$. Thus the order of the Picard--Fuchs operator $\mathcal{L}(z,\theta)$ is at least five or higher. For the particular quantum products~\eqref{eq:QuantumProduct} studied in this work we obtain Picard--Fuchs operators of order six.
Note that --- from the A-variation of Hodge structure point of view (see for instance refs.~\cite{MR1442525,Iritani:2007aaa}) --- a large volume point in quantum K\"ahler moduli space of a Calabi--Yau $n$-fold $X_n$ is always of unipotent monodromy of index $n$. For one-dimensional quantum K\"ahler moduli spaces and from a mirror symmetry perspective this is a consequence of the Landman monodromy theorem \cite{MR0344248} applied to the middle dimensional cohomology of the mirror Calabi--Yau $n$-fold $\widehat X$. It states that the monodromy transformation $M$ acting on $H^n(\widehat X)$ about a singular point in the mirror complex structure moduli space is quasi-unipotent with index of at most $n$, i.e., $(M^k - \operatorname{id})^{n+1} = 0$ for some integer $k$. In particular, a large complex structure point in the complex structure moduli space of $\widehat X_n$ --- which is mirror to a large volume point in quantum K\"ahler moduli space of $X_n$ --- is unipotent with the maximal index $n$, i.e, $(M - \operatorname{id})^{n+1}=0$ but $(M -\operatorname{id})^{n} \ne 0$. This implies that the Picard--Fuchs differential equation associated to $X_n$ is always of unipotency of index $n$ at large volume --- independently of the order of the Picard--Fuchs operator.
In particular, large volume points of Calabi--Yau fourfolds are always points of unipotency of index four. Hence they furnish regular singular points of maximally unipotent monodromy of the differential equation only for Picard--Fuchs operators of order five. This is, for instance, the case for those complete intersection Calabi--Yau fourfolds in toric varieties with a single K\"ahler modulus studied in refs.~\cite{MR1328251,Klemm:1996ts,MR1442525,Klemm:2007in,Bizet:2014uua}. For the examples of order six Picard--Fuchs operators appearing in ref.~\cite{Honma:2013hma} and studied here, the large volume points in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space are not of maximally unipotent monodromy anymore. It is this property of the order six Picard--Fuchs operators, which yields the interesting structure of the quantum cohomology ring discussed in Section~\ref{sec:QuantumCohomology}. In the following we also refer to such examples as Calabi--Yau fourfolds with Picard--Fuchs operators of non-minimal order.
\subsection{B-branes, quantum periods and monodromies}
\label{sec:Bbranes}
In a compact Calabi--Yau manifold~$X$ of complex dimension $d$ the topological B-branes $\mathcal{E}^\bullet$ on $X$ are represented by the objects in the derived category of bounded complexes of coherent sheaves $D^b(X)$ \cite{Sharpe:1999qz,Diaconescu:2001ze,Douglas:2000gi}. Furthermore, to each B-brane $\mathcal{E}^\bullet$ we assign a quantum period $\Pi_{\mathcal{E}^\bullet}(J)$, which is a function of the (complexified) K\"ahler class $J = \sum_a t^a D_a$ in terms of the K\"ahler moduli $t^a$ with $a=1,\ldots, h^{1,1}(X)$ and the generators of the K\"ahler cone given in terms of divisors $D_a$.\footnote{For simplicity we assume here that the K\"ahler cone is generated by $h^{1,1}(X)$ divisors.} For stable BPS branes~$\mathcal{E}^\bullet$ the quantum periods enjoy the interpretation of a (K\"ahler moduli dependent) central charge, whose magnitude is its BPS mass that enjoys also the interpretation of a calibrated quantum volume. For further details on B-branes and their notion of stability, we refer the reader for instance to the review~\cite{Aspinwall:2004jr}.
The quantum periods depend only on the B-brane charges, which are captured by elements of the algebraic K-group $K^0_\text{alg}(X)$ \cite{Witten:1998cd}. In this note we want to construct a basis of (torsion free) integral quantum periods for B-branes, which corresponds to integral generators of the torsion-free part of the algebraic K-theory group $K^0_\text{alg}(X)$. The asymptotic behavior of quantum periods~$\Pi_{\mathcal{E}^\bullet}^{\text{asy}}$ in the large volume regime of the Calabi--Yau manifold~$X$ constrains --- and for large volume points with maximally unipotent mondromy unambiguously determines --- the integration constants of the integral quantum periods $\Pi_{\mathcal{E}^\bullet}(J)$ as solutions to the associated system of Picard--Fuchs differential equations. In terms of the flat K\"ahler coordinates the large volume asymptotics reads \cite{Halverson:2013qca}
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{\mathcal{E}^\bullet}^{\text{asy}}(J) \,=\, \int_X e^J \, \Gamma_\mathbb{C}(X) \, \operatorname{ch} \mathcal{E}^{\bullet\,\lor} \ .
\end{equation}
Here $\Gamma_\mathbb{C}(X)$ is the (multiplicative) characteristic Gamma class, which for Calabi--Yau manifolds with $c_1=0$ enjoys the expansion\footnote{The gamma class~$\Gamma_\mathbb{C}(X)$ is based upon the series $\Gamma_\mathbb{C}(z) \,=\, e^\frac{z}{4} \, \Gamma(1-\tfrac{z}{2\pi i} )$.}
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_\mathbb{C}(X)\,=\,1+\frac{1}{24}c_2+\frac{i \zeta (3)}{8 \pi ^3}c_3+\frac{1}{5\,760}(7 c_2^2-4 c_4) + \ldots \ ,
\end{equation}
where $c_k\equiv c_k(X)$ are the Chern classes of $X$.
For the Calabi--Yau manifold $X$ (of real dimension $2d$) there are some universal B-branes that always correspond to integral generators of the K-theory group $K^0_\text{alg}(X)$:
\begin{itemize}
\item The $2d$-brane of the structure sheaf~$\mathcal{O}_X$ --- with the trivial Chern character $\operatorname{ch} \mathcal{O}_X=1$ --- readily yields the asymptotic quantum period
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_X}^{\text{asy}}(J) \,=\, \int_X e^J \, \Gamma_\mathbb{C}(X) \ .
\end{equation}
\item A collection of $2(d-1)$-branes $\mathcal{E}_a^\bullet$ associated to the K\"ahler cone divisors $D_a$ are given by the complexes
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}_a^\bullet: \quad 0 \longrightarrow \mathcal{O}_X(-D_a) \longrightarrow \mathcal{O}_X \longrightarrow 0 \ .
\end{equation}
Their asymptotic periods read
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{\mathcal{E}_\alpha^\bullet}^{\text{asy}}(J) \,=\, \int_X e^J \, \Gamma_\mathbb{C}(X) \, \left(1 - \operatorname{ch}\,\mathcal{O}_X(D_\alpha) \right) \ .
\end{equation}
\item We construct a collection of $2$-branes $\mathcal{C}^\bullet_a$ as follows: Given the embedded Mori cone curves $\iota: \mathcal{C}_a\hookrightarrow X$ dual to the K\"ahler cone divisors $D_a$, we consider their structure sheaf $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_a}(K_{\mathcal{C}_a}^{1/2})$ twisted by a spin structure $K_{\mathcal{C}_a}^{1/2}$ of $\mathcal{C}_a$. Then the $2$-branes $\mathcal{C}^\bullet_\alpha$ are given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}^\bullet_a = \iota_! \mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_a}(K_{\mathcal{C}_a}^{1/2}) \ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of the K-theoretic push-forwards $\iota_!: K^0(\mathcal{C}_a) \to K^0(X)$. The Chern character of $\mathcal{C}^\bullet_a$ is computed by the Grothendieck--Riemann--Roch formula
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{ch}\,\mathcal{C}^\bullet_a \,=\,
\frac{\iota_* \left(\operatorname{ch}K_{\mathcal{C}_a}^{1/2}\,\operatorname{Td}(\mathcal{C}_a)\right)}{\operatorname{Td}(X)}
\,=\, [ \mathcal{C}_a ] \ ,
\end{equation}
because $\operatorname{ch}K_{\mathcal{C}_a}^{1/2}\operatorname{Td}(\mathcal{C}_a)=(1+\frac12 K_{\mathcal{C}_a})(1 - \frac12 K_{\mathcal{C}_a})=1$ and for Calabi--Yau manifolds $\operatorname{Td}_1(X) = \frac{1}{2} c_1 = 0$. Here $ [ \mathcal{C}_a ] $ denotes the Poincar\'e dual cohomology class of the curve $\mathcal{C}_a$, such that its asymptotic quantum period becomes
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{\mathcal{C}_a^\bullet}^{\text{asy}}(J) \,=\, (-1)^{d-1} \int_X e^J \, [ \mathcal{C}_a ] \,=\, (-1)^{d-1} t^a \ .
\end{equation}
\item Finally, we consider the skyscraper sheaf $\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}$ for $0$-brane located at a point $\iota: \text{pt} \hookrightarrow X$ in the Calabi--Yau manifold $X$. Employing again the Grothendieck--Riemann--Roch theorem for the Chern character of the K-theoretic push-forward $\operatorname{ch}\iota_! \text{pt}$ we find the asymptotic period
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}^{\text{asy}}(J) \,=\, (-1)^d \int_X e^J \, [ \text{pt} ] \,=\, (-1)^d \ .
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
For Calabi--Yau threefolds the above described integral quantum periods generate all central charges associated to the torsion-free elements in $K^0_\text{alg}(X)$. However, for higher-dimensional Calabi--Yau manifolds we also need to construct algebraic cycles representing $p$-branes of even dimension $p=4,\ldots, 2(d-2)$. In particular, for Calabi--Yau fourfolds we determine the quantum periods of algebraic cycles of 4-branes for cohomology elements in $H^{2,2}(X) \cap H^4(X,\mathbb{Z})$. As such algebraic cycles depend on the details of the Calabi--Yau manifold $X$, we construct them for the explicit examples studied in Section~\ref{sec:Examples}.
For Calabi--Yau fourfolds with Picard--Fuchs operators of non-minimal order the large volume asymptotics of integral quantum periods does not determine all integration constants of their solutions to the Picard--Fuchs differential equations. As a consequence there are (integral linear combination) of quantum periods with vanishing classical terms in the large volume regime. Such quantum periods are purely instanton generated as described in formula~\eqref{eq:InstPer}. Then the integration constants must be further constrained by monodromies around other singularities in moduli space. They are deduced from the monodromies of the associated B-branes about singularities in moduli space, which are described by Fourier--Mukai transformations acting upon the derived category of bounded complexes of coherent sheaves $D^b(X)$ \cite{Aspinwall:2001dz,Distler:2002ym,Jockers:2006sm,Brunner:2008fa}. This allows us to derive the monodromy behavior of the integral quantum periods.
The Strominger--Yau--Zaslow picture of mirror symmetry for Calabi--Yau $d$-folds~$X$ conjectures a singular point $t_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space, where the $2d$-brane --- represented by the structure sheaf $\mathcal{O}_X$ --- becomes massless \cite{Strominger:1996it}.\footnote{In order for the $2d$-brane to become massless a suitable path from the large volume point to the singularity $t_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ must be specified.} The Seidel--Thomas twist captures the monodromy at the singular point $t_{\mathcal{O}_X}$, which is represented by the Fourier--Mukai kernel \cite{Kontsevich:1994dn,MR1831820}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{K}_{\mathcal{O}_X} \,=\, \operatorname{Cone}\left( \eta: \mathcal{E}^{\bullet\,\lor} \boxtimes \mathcal{E}^\bullet \to \mathcal{O}_\Delta \right) \ .
\end{equation}
The Seidel--Thomas twist is interpreted as the formation of bound states between the brane $\mathcal{E}^\bullet$ --- adiabatically encircling the singularity $t_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ --- and the (massless) brane~$\mathcal{O}_X$, while the index $\chi(\mathcal{E}^\bullet,\mathcal{O}_X)$ of the open strings stretching between the branes $\mathcal{E}^\bullet$ and $\mathcal{O}_X$ becomes the index for the (relative) number of formed bound states \cite{Brunner:2001eg,Jockers:2006sm}. Therefore, on the level of quantum periods the Seidel--Thomas twist induces the monodromy transformation
\begin{equation} \label{eq:STtwist}
M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}: \
\Pi_{\mathcal{E}^\bullet} \mapsto \Pi_{\mathcal{E}^\bullet} - \chi(\mathcal{E}^\bullet,\mathcal{O}_X) \, \Pi_{\mathcal{O}_X} \ .
\end{equation}
Here $\Pi_{\mathcal{E}^\bullet}$ and $ \Pi_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ are the quantum periods of the branes $\mathcal{E}^\bullet$ and $\mathcal{O}_X$, respectively, whereas the index of open strings is computed by the Hirzebruch--Riemann--Roch pairing \cite{Witten:1998cd,Brunner:1999jq}
\begin{equation}
\chi(\mathcal{E}^\bullet,\mathcal{F}^\bullet) \,=\, \int_X \operatorname{Td}(X) \operatorname{ch}(\mathcal{E}^{\bullet\,\lor}) \operatorname{ch}(\mathcal{F}^{\bullet}) \ .
\end{equation}
We observe that the open-string index $\chi(\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X)$ simplifies to the arithmetic genus of the Calabi--Yau manifold~$X$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\chi(\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X) \,=\, \int_X \operatorname{Td}(X) \,=\, \sum_{p} (-1)^p\, h^{0,p}(X) \ .
\end{equation}
Thus for Calabi--Yau threefolds with $SU(3)$ holonomy and not a subgroup thereof, we have $\chi(\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X)=0$ for the open-string index between two 6-branes $\mathcal{O}_X$. Furthermore, the open-string index between a 0-brane $\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}$ and a 6-brane $\mathcal{O}_X$ computes to $\chi(\mathcal{O}_\text{pt},\mathcal{O}_X)=1$. Hence, for the dual pair of quantum periods $(\Pi_\text{pt},\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_X})$ of Calabi--Yau threefolds, the Seidel--Thomas twist yields the characteristic monodromy
\begin{equation} \label{eq:STCY3}
M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}: \
\begin{pmatrix} \Pi_\text{pt}\\ \Pi_{\mathcal{O}_X} \end{pmatrix} \mapsto
\begin{pmatrix} 1 & -1 \\ 0 & 1\end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} \Pi_\text{pt}\\ \Pi_{\mathcal{O}_X} \end{pmatrix} \ ,
\end{equation}
which --- in the four-dimensional $N=2$ effective theory of type~II strings on Calabi--Yau threefolds --- is due to additional massless BPS blackhole states at the singularity~$t_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ \cite{Strominger:1995cz,Greene:1995hu}.
For Calabi--Yau fourfolds with $SU(4)$ holonomy and not a subgroup thereof, the arithmetic genus yields the open-string index~
$\chi(\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X)=2$. Hence the monodromy~\eqref{eq:STtwist} of $t_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ maps the quantum period of the 8-brane $\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ to $-\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_X}$. As result we find that, applying the monodromy transformation~\eqref{eq:STtwist} twice, maps any quantum period back to itself. That is to say we find that\footnote{More generally, $1+(-1)^d$ is the arithmetic genus of any Calabi--Yau $d$-fold with $SU(d)$ holonomy of dimension $d>0$. Hence, at the singularity $t_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ we find the monodromy behavior~\eqref{eq:STCY3} for odd and \eqref{eq:STCY4} for even dimensional Calabi--Yau manifolds, respectively.}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:STCY4}
M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}^2 \,=\, \operatorname{id} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}$ generates a $\mathbb{Z}_2$~group action on the set of all quantum periods. The $\mathbb{Z}_2$~monodromy around the singularity $t_{\mathcal{O}_X}$ in Calabi--Yau fourfolds has previously been studied in ref.~\cite{Grimm:2009ef,Bizet:2014uua}.
\subsection{Numerical analytical continuation}
\label{sec:Continuation}
Starting from the Picard--Fuchs operator $\mathcal{L}(z,\theta)$ for the periods in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space --- for instance to be determined by gauged linear sigma model methods described in Section~\ref{sec:GaugeTheories} --- we now describe the use of numerical analytic continuation techniques to establish the global structure of quantum periods. In particular this allows us to determine linear combinations of solutions to the Picard--Fuchs differential equations corresponding to integral quantum periods.
In a local patch $U_\alpha$ on the quantum K\"ahler moduli space in the vicinity of the origin of the algebraic coordinate $z_\alpha$ the Picard--Fuchs operator takes the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:PFGeneral}
\mathcal{L}_\alpha(z_\alpha,\theta_\alpha)\,=\, \sum_{k=0}^n h^{(k)}_\alpha(z_\alpha)\, \theta_{\alpha}^k\ ,
\qquad \theta_{\alpha}\,=\,z_\alpha \frac{\partial}{\partial z_\alpha}\ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of some polynomials $h^{(k)}_\alpha(z_\alpha)$. The integer $n$ is the order of the Picard--Fuchs operator, which --- as discussed --- for Calabi--Yau fourfolds is at least five but can be greater. Note that the operator $\mathcal{L}_\alpha(z_\alpha,\theta_\alpha)$ is also well-defined in the vicinity of the origin of the algebraic coordinate $z_\beta = z_\alpha- z'$ with $z'\neq \infty$, which allows us to rewrite the Picard--Fuchs operator in the local patch $U_\beta$ associated to the new algebraic coordinate $z_\beta$ according to
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_\beta(z_\beta,\theta_\beta)\,=\, z_\beta^n \cdot \mathcal{L}_\alpha\left(z_\beta+z',(1+\tfrac{z'}{z_\beta})\theta_\beta\right) \ .
\end{equation}
Note that the prefactor $z_\beta^n$ renders the new coefficient functions $h^{(k)}_\beta(z_\beta)$ to be polynomial. Similarly, for $z'= \infty$ we set $z_\beta= z_\alpha^{-1}$ and have
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_\beta(z_\beta,\theta_\beta)\,=\, z_\beta^m \cdot \mathcal{L}_\alpha\left(z_\beta^{-1},-\theta_\beta\right)\ ,
\end{equation}
where $m$ is the maximal degree of the polynomials $h^{(k)}_\alpha$ in eq.~\eqref{eq:PFGeneral}.
For any operator~$\mathcal{L}_\alpha(z_\alpha,\theta_\alpha)$ there are $n$ linearly independent solutions $\Pi^{(k)}_\alpha(z_\alpha)$ to the Picard--Fuchs differential equation, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_\alpha(z_\alpha,\theta_\alpha)\, \Pi^{(k)}_\alpha(z_\alpha) = 0 \ ,
\end{equation}
which can be determined by the Frobenius method as an infinite series expansion in the local coordinates~$z_\alpha$. As illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:ConvAreas}, these solutions are valid within a radius of convergence around the origin of the coordinate $z_\alpha$ that is given by the distance to the closest regular singular point. To be precise, in particular we determine solutions in the vicinity of regular singular points. This means that we allow for a pole at or a branch cute emanating from the origin within the radius of convergence. In the following we denote by the patch $U_\alpha$ the disk of convergence for the solutions to the Picard--Fuchs operator around the origin of the local coordinate $z_\alpha$.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{ConvAreas_Cut_2}
\caption{\label{fig:ConvAreas} Partwise illustration of a K\"ahler moduli space, which shows three regular singular points, $z_1$, $z_2$ and $z_3$. The solutions $\Pi^{(k)}_{\alpha}$ for $\alpha=1,2,3$ converge within circles around $z_\alpha$ whose radii are given by the distance to the closest other $z_\alpha$. On the overlaps of convergence areas --- such as the intersecting region of the circles around $z_1$ and $z_2$ --- there is a $\operatorname{GL}(n,\mathbb{C})$ transformation relating the respective solutions $\Pi^{(k)}_{\alpha}$.}
\end{figure}
Regular singular points of the Picard--Fuchs differential equations are points in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space that exhibit non-trivial monodromy behavior. Let $z_\alpha$ be a regular singular point. In terms of the period vector $\vec\Pi_\alpha \,=\, ( \Pi^{(1)}_\alpha,\ldots,\Pi^{(n)}_\alpha)^T$ the monodromy matrix $M_{\alpha}$ is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Mono}
\vec{\Pi}_\alpha\big(z_\alpha \,e^{2\pi i}\big) = M^T_{\alpha} \cdot \vec{\Pi}_\alpha(z_\alpha) \ ,
\end{equation}
deviating from the identity matrix. A necessary condition for $z_\alpha$ to be a regular singular point is that
\begin{equation}
z_\alpha = 0 \quad \text{or} \quad z_\alpha = \infty \quad \text{or} \quad h^{(n)}_\alpha(z_\alpha) = 0 \ .
\end{equation}
Note, however, that the converse is not true in general.\footnote{For the general theory of ordinary differential equations with regular singular points, see for instance ref.~\cite{Forsyth:1959}.}
Since the Picard--Fuchs operator is defined globally, the quantum periods as their solutions can be analytically continued over the entire quantum K\"ahler moduli space. Therefore, as long as the disks $U_\alpha$ and $U_\beta$ overlap, there exists a transformation matrix~$A_{\alpha\beta}$ in $\operatorname{GL}(n,\mathbb{C})$ that relates their solutions on the overlap $U_\alpha\cap U_\beta$ as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:MatchingPeriods}
\vec{\Pi}_\alpha(z_\alpha)\,=\, A_{\alpha\beta} \cdot \vec{\Pi}_\beta(z_\beta(z_\alpha)) \ ,
\end{equation}
where we express the local coordinate $z_\beta$ in terms of $z_\alpha$ in the overlap $U_\alpha\cap U_\beta$.
By repeating this analytic continuation successively from patch to patch, we see that a set of quantum periods $\vec\Pi$ can be analytically continued along any path (avoiding the regular singular points) in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space. From the analytic continuation along suitable paths we then deduce the monodromy behavior of a basis of quantum periods around regular singular points $z_\alpha$ according to eq.~\eqref{eq:Mono}. As the quantum periods describe central charges of B-branes, the monodromy matrix $M_{z_\alpha}$ (and its inverse) for the regular singular point $z_\alpha=0$ must actually be integral for a generating basis of integral quantum periods \cite{Brunner:1999jq,Diaconescu:1999vp,Scheidegger:1999ed,Diaconescu:2000ec,Mayr:2000as}, i.e.,\footnote{In the context of Calabi--Yau threefolds, $N=2$ special geometry restricts the monodromy action on integral quantum periods to integral symplectic transformations \cite{Strominger:1990pd,Ceresole:1992su,Bershadsky:1993cx}. For Calabi--Yau fourfolds algebraic relations among quantum periods put similar but yet less restrictive constraints on the possible integral monodromy transformation matrices $M_{z_\alpha}$ \cite{Hosono:1993qy,Alim:2011rp,Bizet:2014uua}. It would be interesting to study the properties of these algebraic constraints systematically, so as to further develop the notion of $N=1$ special geometry \cite{Lerche:2002yw,Lerche:2002ck}.}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:IntM}
M_{z_\alpha} \,\in\, \operatorname{GL}(n,\mathbb{Z}) \quad \text{for $z_\alpha=0$ a regular singular point} \ .
\end{equation}
Our goal is now to find a generating set of integral quantum periods together with their integral monodromy matrices $M_{z_\alpha}$ around regular singular points $z_\alpha$ by combining the methods of Section~\ref{sec:Bbranes} with the strong integrality constraint \eqref{eq:IntM}. Then the integral quantum periods in turn allow us to extract the quantum cohomology rings and Gromov--Witten invariants discussed in Section~\ref{sec:QuantumCohomology}.
In practice we perform the analytic continuations numerically. This is done by inserting $n^2$ different points for $z$ --- chosen from the overlap and according to the prescription to be given in the next paragraph --- in eq.~\eqref{eq:MatchingPeriods}, which gives a set of $n^2$ linear equations for the $n^2$ entries of $A_{\alpha\beta}$. If the period vectors $\vec{\Pi}_\alpha$ and $\vec{\Pi}_\beta$ could be evaluated at a given point exactly, the results would not depend on the particular choice of the points~$z$. However, since we approximate their value up to a certain fixed expansion order in the respective variables $z_\alpha$ and $z_\beta$ only, the resulting values of the periods are approximations themselves. In order to get an estimate of the error, we choose the $n^2$ values for $z$ randomly several times and check, how much the results fluctuate. Moreover, we perform the continuation in both directions and check, to what precision the products $A_{\alpha \beta} \cdot A_{\beta \alpha}$ and $A_{\beta \alpha} \cdot A_{\alpha \beta}$ agree with the unit matrix. A final check of the numerical precision is, whether the appropriately ordered product of all monodromy matrices --- representing a contractible path of analytic continutation with respect to a fixed basis of periods --- indeed equals unity.
As mentioned before the periods at a regular singular point necessarily involve functions with a branch cut, such as roots and logarithms. When choosing values for $z$ as described in the previous paragraph, one has to ensure that they are always on a definite side of these branch cuts with respect to a chosen path of analytic continuation. In the vicinity of a particular regular singular point we work with implementations of $\sqrt[k]{z}$ and $\operatorname{ln}z$, which have their branch cuts on the negative real axis. Since all regular singular points turn out to be located on the real axis (in terms of the algebraic coordinate $z_{\text{LV}}$ of the regular singular point associated to the large volume limit), all branch cuts are then located on the real axis.\footnote{Note that the negative real axis is mapped to itself under $f:z \mapsto z^{-1}$. Hence, the branch cuts of periods in the vicinity of $z_{\text{LV}}=\infty$ are also located on the negative real axis.} Our convention is to choose all values for $z$ above the real axis of with respect to the coordinate $z_{\text{LV}}$.
Let us close this section with a practical remark: The area of convergence associated to a regular singular point always intersects with that of another regular singular point. It is thus in principle possible to analytically continue the periods at these two points directly to each other. If, however, the overlap of convergence areas is close to the border of converge for one of the points, the corresponding periods will convergence very slowly. For a high numerical precision one would hence have to expand these periods to very high orders, which is computationally expensive. In these situations it can be better, to perform the continuation in several steps via appropriately chosen regular points in between the two singular points.
\section{Examples} \label{sec:Examples}
In this section we discuss in detail two examples of Calabi--Yau fourfolds with a single K\"ahler modulus, whose Picard--Fuchs operators are of order six. We explicitly construct a basis of integral periods on the entire quantum K\"ahler moduli space and determine the monodromy matrices in this basis. Furthermore, for these examples we work out the quantum cohomology ring and determine the genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants. Due to the non-maximally unipotent monodromy property at large volume arising from the Picard--Fuchs operators of order six there are two independent genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants at each degree. Using the recursive definition of the Klemm--Pandharipande meeting invariants we deduce the genus one BPS invariants as well. Their non-trivial integrality properties furnish a consistency check on our calculations. Our results for these and further Calabi--Yau fourfold examples are tabulated in Appendix~\ref{app:tables}.
\subsection{Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,4}\subset\operatorname{Gr}(2,5)$}
\label{sec:Example1}
We describe the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,4}$ as a complete intersection of codimension two in the complex six-dimensional Grassmannian $\operatorname{Gr}(2,5)$. The Schubert classes $\sigma_k$ and $\sigma_{k-a,a}$ with $1\le a \le \lfloor\frac{k}2\rfloor$ generate the individual cohomology groups $H^{2k}(\operatorname{Gr}(2,5),\mathbb{Z})$ (while the cohomology ring $H^*(\operatorname{Gr}(2,5),\mathbb{Q})$ is generated by $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$). We realize the family of Calabi--Yau fourfolds $\iota: X_{1,4} \hookrightarrow \operatorname{Gr}(2,5)$ as the zero locus of sections of the rank two bundle $\mathcal{O}(\sigma_1)\oplus\mathcal{O}(4\sigma_1)$, such that $[X_{1,4}]=4\sigma_1^2$ is the class of the Calabi--Yau fourfold in $\operatorname{Gr}(2,5)$. Using standard Schubert calculus techniques --- see, e.g., ref.~\cite{MR1288523} --- together with intersection formula
\begin{equation}
\int_{X_{1,4}} \iota^* \alpha \,=\, 4\int_{\operatorname{Gr}(2,5)} \sigma_1^2 \cup\alpha \ ,
\end{equation}
we determine the intersection numbers of the Schubert cycles on the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X_{1,4}$ to be\footnote{For ease of notation we denote the pullbacks $\iota^*\sigma_k$ and $\iota^*\sigma_{k_1,k_2}$ also by $\sigma_k$ and $\sigma_{k_1,k_2}$, respectively.}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:SomeIntegralsX14}
\begin{aligned}
&\int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \sigma_1^4 = 20 \ ,\ &&\int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \sigma_1^2\cup \sigma_{1,1} = 8 \ , \
&&\int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \sigma_1^2\cup \sigma_2 = 12 \ , \ &&\int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \sigma_1 \cup \sigma_3 = 4\ ,\\
&\int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \sigma_{1,1}^2 = 4 \ , \quad &&\int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \sigma_{1,1}\cup \sigma_2 = 4 \ ,\
&&\int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \sigma_{2}^2 = 8 \ , \ &&\int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \sigma_{2,2} = 4 \ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Combining the Lefschetz hyperplane theorem together with Poincar\'e duality we further deduce the relations $2\sigma_3 \sim \sigma_{2,1}$ and $\sigma_{3,1}\sim\sigma_{2,2}$ among Schubert classes on the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,4}$ as well as the cohomology generators
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
H^0(X_{1,4},\mathbb{Z}) &=\langle\!\langle 1 \rangle\!\rangle \ , \
&H^2(X_{1,4},\mathbb{Z})&=\langle\!\langle \sigma_{1} \rangle\!\rangle \ , \
&H^4(X_{1,4},\mathbb{Z})&\supset \langle\!\langle \sigma_{1,1},\sigma_{2} \rangle\!\rangle\ , \\[0.2em]
H^6(X_{1,4},\mathbb{Z}) &=\langle\!\langle \tfrac14\sigma_{3} \rangle\!\rangle \ , \
&H^8(X_{1,4},\mathbb{Z})&=\langle\!\langle \tfrac14\sigma_{2,2} \rangle \!\rangle \ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
For the middle dimensional cohomology group $H^4(X_{1,4},\mathbb{Z})$ the Lefschetz hyperplane theorem only states that the pullback $\iota^*$ acts injectively. This implies that the classes $\sigma_2$ and $\sigma_{1,1}$ are linearly independent in $H^4(X_{1,4},\mathbb{Z})$. However, these classes are not necessarily integral generators of $H^4(X_{1,4},\mathbb{Z})$. Finally, by adjunction the total Chern class of $X_{1,4}$ reads
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
c(X_{1,4}) \,&=\, \frac{c(\operatorname{Gr}(2,5))}{(1+\sigma_1)(1+4\sigma_1)} \,=\, 1 + (8 \sigma_{1,1} + 7 \sigma_2) -440 \frac{\sigma _3}{4} + 1\,848 \frac{\sigma _{2,2}}4 \ ,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
which in particular shows that the first Chern class vanishes and determines the Euler characteristic $\chi=1\,848$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,4}$.
The K\"ahler class of the ambient Grassmannian space reads $J = t \sigma_1$, and it canonically induces the K\"ahler class $J$ on the Calabi--Yau complete intersection $X_{1,4}$. This allows us to determine the asymptotic periods according to
\begin{equation} \label{eq:PerX14}
\Pi_{\mathcal{E}^\bullet}^{\text{asy}}(t) \,=\, \int_{X_{1,4}} e^{t \sigma_1} \, \Gamma_\mathbb{C}(X_{1,4}) \, \operatorname{ch} \mathcal{E}^{\bullet\,\lor} \ .
\end{equation}
In addition to the described canonical B-branes we find additional B-branes arising from algebraic four cycles. There is the algebraic four cycle $\mathcal{S}_1$ of the zero section of $\mathcal{O}(\sigma_1)\oplus\mathcal{O}(\sigma_1)$ intersected with $X_{1,4}$ and there is the algberaic four cycle $\mathcal{S}_2$ of the zero section of the rank two universal subbundle $\mathcal{U}$ of $\operatorname{Gr}(2,5)$ intersected with $X_{1,4}$. The associated $4$-brane $\mathcal{S}^\bullet_\ell$ are the push-forwards $\iota_! \mathcal{S}_\ell$ for $\ell=1,2$. Their Chern characters are computed by the Grothendieck--Riemann--Roch theorem and read
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ChSiX14}
\operatorname{ch}\,\mathcal{S}^\bullet_1 \,=\, (\sigma_{1,1} + \sigma_2) - 5 \sigma_3 + \frac{35}{12} \sigma_{2,2} \ , \quad
\operatorname{ch}\,\mathcal{S}^\bullet_2 \,=\, \sigma_{1,1} + \frac12 \sigma_{2,1} + \frac14 \sigma_{2,2} \ .
\end{equation}
For the tuple of B-branes
\begin{equation}
{\vec{\mathcal{E}}}^\bullet \,=\, \left( \mathcal{E}^\bullet_k \right)_{k=0,\ldots,5} \,=\,
\left(
\mathcal{O}_\text{pt},\,
\mathcal{C}^\bullet[1],\,
\mathcal{S}^\bullet_1,\,
\mathcal{S}^\bullet_2,\,
\mathcal{E}^\bullet,\,
\mathcal{O}_X \right) \ ,
\end{equation}
given in terms of the canonical B-branes together with the $4$-branes $\mathcal{S}_\ell^\bullet$, we now determine with eq.~\eqref{eq:PerX14} their asymptotic integral period vector $\vec\Pi^\text{asy} = \left( \Pi_{\mathcal{E}_k^\bullet}^\text{asy}\right)_{k=0,\ldots,5}$ to be
\begin{equation} \label{eq:IntPeriods}
\vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t) \,=\,
\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\
t \\
10 t^2+20 t+\frac{107}{6} \\
4 t^2-4 t+\frac{7}{2} \\
-\frac{10}{3} t^3-5 t^2-\frac{19}{2} t-\frac{47}{12}+\frac{55 i \zeta (3)}{\pi^3} \\
\frac{5}{6} t^4+\frac{37}{12}t^2 - \frac{55 i \zeta (3)}{\pi ^3}t + \frac{7}{144}
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
The symmetric intersection pairing is readily computed to be
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:SymIntersect}
\chi({\vec{\mathcal{E}}}^\bullet,{\vec{\mathcal{E}}}^\bullet) \,=\,
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 20 & 8 & 10 & 24 \\
0 & 0 & 8 & 4 & -8 & 6 \\
0 & 1 & 10 & -8 & -14 & -7 \\
1 & 0 & 24 & 6 & -7 & 2
\end{pmatrix} \ ,
\end{equation}
which determines the monodromy matrix $M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}$ with the help of eq.~\eqref{eq:STtwist} to be
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:MTox}
M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}} \,=\,
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -24 & -6 & 7 & -1
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Picard--Fuchs system}
In ref. \cite{Honma:2013hma} Honma and Manabe analyze the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X_{1,4}$ with gauge theory techniques as described in Section~\ref{sec:GaugeTheories}. For the quantum periods they find the order six Picard--Fuchs operator
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:PFX14}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(z,\theta)\,=\,&(\theta -1) \theta ^5-8 z(2 \theta +1) (4 \theta +1) (4 \theta +3) \left(11\theta ^2+11 \theta +3\right) \theta\\
&-64 z^2(2 \theta +1) (2 \theta +3) (4 \theta +1) (4 \theta +3) (4 \theta +5) (4 \theta +7)\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Here, $z$ is the local algebraic coordinate in the large volume regime. In addition to the large volume limit at $z=0$ there are three additional regular singular points at $z=\infty$, $z=z_1$ and $z_2$, where the latter two points arise from the zero locus of the discriminant factor
\begin{equation} \label{eq:DisX14}
\Delta(z)=1-2\,816z -65\,536z^2 \ ,
\end{equation}
i.e., $z_1\approx-0.043$ and $z_2\approx 3.5\cdot 10^{-4}$.
Note that the same discriminant locus~\eqref{eq:DisX14} arises directly in the gauged linear sigma model description of the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X_{1,4}$. In this context the discriminant locus $\Delta(z)$ describes the locus in the quantum-corrected Fayet--Iliopoulos parameter space with emerging non-compact strata in the gauge theory moduli space \cite{Morrison:1994fr}. Analogously as in refs.~\cite{Hori:2006dk,Jockers:2012zr,Hori:2011pd} --- comparing to the expression~\eqref{eq:DisX14} of the discriminant --- we find that all singularities arise from non-compact strata attributed to the pure Coulomb branch with no contributions from mixed Higgs--Coulomb branches. This observation carries over to all our other examples collected in Appendix~\ref{app:tables} as well.
As described in Section~\ref{sec:Continuation} we are eventually interested in the monodromy matrices expressed in terms of integral periods. To this end, we first have to find a basis of solutions to the Picard--Fuchs equation at all singular points. The structure of these solutions is conveniently summarized by the Riemann P-symbol, which for the present example reads
\begin{equation}\label{eq:PSymbolX14}
\left\{
\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & \infty & z_1 & z_2\\[0.1em]
\hline
0 & \frac14 & 0 & 0 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac12 & 1 & 1 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac34 & 2 & 2 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac54 & 3 & 3 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac32 & 4 & 4 \\[0.1em]
1 & \frac74 & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2} \\
\end{array}
\right\}\ .
\end{equation}
Let us briefly recall its meaning: The first row lists the positions of the regular singular points, here given in terms of the algebraic coordinate $z$. To each such point $\tilde{z}$ the symbol associates the six --- i.e., the order of the operator --- rational numbers that are written in the corresponding column below the horizontal line. For example, the symbol associates the numbers $0$, $1$, $2$, $3$, $4$ and $3/2$ to $z_1$. These so called characteristic exponents are the rational roots of the indicial equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:indicial}
\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{z}}(u_{\tilde{z}},\theta_{\tilde{z}})\, u_{\tilde{z}}^\alpha = \mathcal{O}\left(u_{\tilde{z}}^\alpha\right)\ , \quad \alpha\in\mathbb{Q}
\end{equation}
for the exponent $\alpha$, where $u_{\tilde{z}}$ is a local coordinate on a patch around $\tilde{z}$.\footnote{Explicitly: For $\tilde{z}\neq \infty$ we have $u_{\tilde{z}}= z - \tilde{z}$, otherwise $u_{\tilde{z}}=z^{-1}$. How $\mathcal{L}_{\tilde{z}}(u_{\tilde{z}},\theta_{\tilde{z}})$ can be deduced from $\mathcal{L}(z,\theta)$ has been explained in section~\ref{sec:Continuation}.} The number of times that a particular solution $\alpha_0$ is listed in the corresponding column of the Riemann P-symbol precisely is the order to which it is a root of eq.~\eqref{eq:indicial}. Now let $\alpha_1<\ldots<\alpha_p$ for $1\leq p \leq 6$ be the distinct roots of the indicial equation at $\tilde{z}$, whose respective orders are $m_1,\ldots,m_p$ such that $\sum m_k \alpha_k=6$. A set of linearly independent solutions to the Picard--Fuchs equation on a disk $U_{\tilde{z}}$ around $\tilde{z}$ is then given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\Pi_{\tilde{z}}^{(k,0)}(u_{\tilde{z}}) &= u_{\tilde{z}}^{\alpha_k}\, \big(1 + \mathcal{O}(u_{\tilde{z}})\big)\ , \\
\Pi_{\tilde{z}}^{(k,l)}(u_{\tilde{z}})&= \Pi_{\tilde{z}}^{(k,0)}\cdot\frac{(\operatorname{ln}u_{\tilde{z}})^l}{(2\pi i)^l} + \mathcal{O}\left((\operatorname{ln}u_{\tilde{z}})^{l-1}\right) \quad \text{with} \quad 1\leq l \leq m_k-1
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
for all $1\leq k \leq p$. In the vicinity of the regular singular point $\tilde z$ the $m_{k_0}$ solutions $\Pi_{\tilde{z}}^{(k,0)}, \ldots ,\Pi_{\tilde{z}}^{(k,m_k-1)}$ thus transform irreducibly amongst each other when transported around $\tilde{z}$ by $u_{\tilde{z}}\to u_{\tilde{z}}\cdot e^{2\pi i}$, which leads to a non-trivial monodromy due to the branch cut of the logarithm or of a root $\sqrt[k]{z}$. Consequently, the Jordan normal form $J_{M_{\tilde{z}}}$ of the monodromy matrix $M_{\tilde{z}}$ is the block matrix
\begin{equation}
J_{M_{\tilde{z}}} = \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
J_1 & & \\
& \ddots & \\
& & J_p
\end{array}
\right)\quad \text{with} \quad J_q=
\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
e^{2\pi i \alpha_q} & 1 & & \\
& \ddots & \ddots & \\
& & e^{2\pi i \alpha_q} & 1 \\
& & & e^{2\pi i\alpha_q}
\end{array}\right) \ ,
\end{equation}
where the Jordan block $J_q$ is a matrix of dimension $m_q\times m_q$.
It would be interesting to see how the information encoded in the Riemann P-symbol relates to the associators for systems of differential equations recently presented in ref.~\cite{Puhlfuerst:2015zqw}. Developing such a relationship promises to shed light on the global analytic structure of solutions to the Picard--Fuchs differential equations.
For the present example of $X_{1,4}$ the Riemann P-symbol in eq.~\eqref{eq:PSymbolX14} shows that the large volume point at $z=0$ does not have maximially unipotent monodromy due to the additional solution
\begin{equation}
\Pi_0^{(2,0)}(z) \,=\,z\, \big(1 + \mathcal{O}(z) \big) \ .
\end{equation}
As a result, the monodromy matrix consists of two Jordan blocks rather than only one. Note that for Calabi--Yau threefolds in general and for those Calabi--Yau fourfolds with order five Picard--Fuchs operators the large volume point is always a regular singular point of maximally unipotent monodromy.
Let us now focus on the large volume point in more detail. As seen from the Riemann P-symbol~\eqref{eq:PSymbolX14} there are two regular solutions with the expansions
\begin{equation} \label{eq:FPex1}
\begin{aligned}
\Pi_0^{(1,0)}(z) &=\Pi_0(z) = 1 + 72 z + 47\,880 z^2 + 54\,331\,200 z^3 + \ldots \ , \\[0.2em]
\Pi_0^{(2,0)}(z) &= z \left(1+\frac{2\,625 z}{4}+\frac{6\,702\,850 z^2}{9}+\frac{17\,302\,910\,625 z^3}{16}+ \ldots\right)\ ,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
while there are four logarithmic solutions $\Pi_l \equiv \Pi_0^{(1,l)}$, $l=1,\ldots,4$, based upon the period $\Pi_0\equiv \Pi_0^{(1,0)}$. The logarithmic period $\Pi_1$ determines the flat coordinate $t$ in the large volume regime according to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:FlatCo}
t(z) = \frac{\Pi_1(z)}{\Pi_0(z)} = \frac{\operatorname{ln}z + \mathcal{O}(z)}{2\pi i} \ .
\end{equation}
With these ingredients a period vector $\vec{\Pi}=(\Pi_0,\ldots,\Pi_5)^T$ with asymptotic limit $\vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}$ as given by eq.~\eqref{eq:IntPeriods} in general reads
\begin{equation}\label{eq:IntPeriodVector}
\vec{\Pi}(z) = \Pi_0(z)\, \left[\vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t(z)) + \mathcal{O}(z)\right] + \frac{1}{\pi^2}\Pi_0^{(2,0)}(z)\, (0,0,\alpha_2,\alpha_3,\alpha_4, \alpha_5)^T\ .
\end{equation}
Note that by the second term on the right hand side of this equation we have added a multiple of $\Pi_0^{(2,0)}(z)$ to the at least doubly logarithmic solutions. This is possible --- in fact it is necessary to make $\vec{\Pi}$ integral --- since $\Pi_0^{(2,0)}(z)$ vanishes in the asymptotic limit $z\to 0$. As the additional period $\Pi^{(2,0)}_0$ relates to the existence of B-branes on the two non-trivial algebraic cycles associated to the described cohomology classes in $H^4(X_{1,4},\mathbb{Z})$ there are no such ambiguities for the quantum periods $\Pi_0$ and $\Pi_1$ for B-branes in higher codimension. Since the values for the integration constants $\alpha_2, \ldots, \alpha_5$, cannot be fixed by large volume asymptotics, we momentarily determine them by analyzing their global properties in the quantum K\"ahler moduli space.
In a next step we analytically continue the period vector $\vec{\Pi}$ to the other three singular points by the method described in Section~\ref{sec:Continuation}. As a result we obtain numerical expressions for the monodromy matrices $M_0$, $M_\infty$, $M_{z_1}$ and $M_{z_2}$ in the large volume basis $\{\Pi_0,\ldots,\Pi_5\}$, which still depend on the parameters $\alpha_2,\ldots,\alpha_5$. As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:Bbranes} we know, however, that one of the monodromy matrices should take the form $M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}$ given in eq.~\eqref{eq:MTox}. For the given example, this match can only be achieved for the monodromy matrix~$M_{z_2}$, whose last row reads\footnote{With the calculated numerical precision we are able to identify the exact numerical rational values. While strictly speaking this is an educated guess, the integrality of the genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants and the determined number of lines --- computed independently in Appendix~\ref{app:InterTheory} via intersection theory --- confirms these rational numbers.}
\begin{equation}
\left(-1\,,\,0\,,\,-24-\frac{\alpha_2}{720}\,,\,-\frac{179}{30}-\frac{\alpha_3}{720}\,,\,7-\frac{\alpha_4}{720}\,,\,-\frac{719}{720}-\frac{\alpha_5}{720}\right)\ .
\end{equation}
By matching this to the last row of the monodromy matrix~$M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}$ in eq.~\eqref{eq:MTox} we identify the parameters as
\begin{equation}
\alpha_2=\alpha_4=0 \ , \quad \alpha_3 =24\ , \quad \alpha_5=1 \ .
\end{equation}
With these values all four monodromy matrices are indeed integral and become
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
M_0&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 1 & 30 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 20 & 8 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\ , \quad
M_\infty =\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
-19 & -11 & -670 & -72 & 270 & -40 \\
-40 & -19 & -1340 & -168 & 540 & -80 \\
2 & 1 & 67 & 8 & -27 & 4 \\
-3 & -1 & -90 & -13 & 35 & -5 \\
2 & 1 & 66 & 8 & -27 & 4 \\
5 & 2 & 156 & 22 & -63 & 9 \\
\end{array}
\right)\ , \\[0.2em]
M_{z_1} &=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
21 & 10 & 700 & 80 & -300 & 50 \\
40 & 21 & 1400 & 160 & -600 & 100 \\
-2 & -1 & -69 & -8 & 30 & -5 \\
2 & 1 & 70 & 9 & -30 & 5 \\
-2 & -1 & -70 & -8 & 31 & -5 \\
-4 & -2 & -140 & -16 & 60 & -9 \\
\end{array}
\right)\ ,\quad
M_{z_2} = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -24 & -6 & 7 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Note that these results are in accord with the consistency condition $M_\infty M_{z_2} M_0 M_{z_1} = \mathds{1}$. Moreover, the monodromy matrix $M_{z_2}$ indeed agrees with the expected matrix $M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}$ given in eq.~\eqref{eq:MTox}. According to Section~\ref{sec:Bbranes} this shows that the $8$-brane $\mathcal{O}_X$ (described by the integral period $\Pi_5$) becomes massless at the point $z_2$. We also observe that at $z_1$ --- which is a second point of $\mathbb{Z}_2$-monodromy --- the brane $\mathcal{B}_{z_1}$ associated to the integral period
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_1}}=10 \Pi_0 + 20 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + \Pi_3 - \Pi_4 - 2\Pi_5
\end{equation}
becomes massless. The monodromy $M_{z_1}$ is thus described by a Seidel--Thomas twist as in eq.~\eqref{eq:STtwist} with the 8-brane $\mathcal{O}_X$ being replaced by the brane $\mathcal{B}_{z_1}$, with a spherical open-string index $\chi(\mathcal{B}_{z_1},\mathcal{B}_{z_1})=2$. This observation in fact carries over to all examples analzyed in this paper: At every point of $\mathbb{Z}_2$-monodromy there is a vanishing integral period and the monodromy is described by a Seidel--Thomas twist.
As anticipated in the introduction --- due to the non-maximally unipotent monodromy property with respect to the large volume regular singular point of the Picard--Fuchs operator --- the structure of the integral quantum periods of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,4}$ indeed admits integral linear combinations, which give rise to flux-induced superpotentials of the form~\eqref{eq:FluxW}. Namely, in terms of the flat coordinate $t$ we find for instance the superpotentials
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
W^{(1)}_\text{flux}(t) \,&=\, \frac{1}{\Pi_0} \left( 109 \Pi_0 + 360 \Pi_1 -12 \Pi_2 + 30 \Pi_3 \right) = \frac{2\,880}{4\pi^2} e^{2\pi i t} + \mathcal{O}(e^{4\pi i t}) \ , \\
W^{(2)}_\text{flux}(t) \,&=\, \frac{1}{\Pi_0} \left(60 \Pi_1 -2 \Pi_2 + 5 \Pi_3 \right) = -\frac{109}{6} + \frac{480}{4\pi^2} e^{2\pi i t} + \mathcal{O}(e^{4\pi i t}) \ , \\
W^{(3)}_\text{flux}(t) \,&=\, \frac{1}{\Pi_0} \left( 109 \Pi_0 -12 \Pi_2 + 30 \Pi_3 \right) = -360\,t + \frac{2\,880}{4\pi^2} e^{2\pi i t} + \mathcal{O}(e^{4\pi i t}) \ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Here, the integral coefficients in the presented linear combinations should be interpreted as flux quantum numbers. The leading non-perturbative terms arise from genus zero worldsheet instantons, which we study in the next subsection in the context of the quantum cohomology ring of the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X_{1,4}$.
\subsubsection{Gromov--Witten invariants and quantum cohomology ring}
In section~\ref{sec:QuantumCohomology} we have introduced the quantum cohomology ring of Calabi--Yau fourfolds with Picard--Fuchs operators of non-minimal order. We now explicitly determine the quantum cohomology ring and calculate the genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(a)}_{0,d}$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X_{1,4}$. Furthermore, with the help of the Klemm--Pandharipande meeting invariants we also infer the genus one invariants $n_{1,d}$ defined in eq.~\eqref{eq:MCg1}.
\begin{table}[t]\centering
\footnotesize{
\begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|}
\hline $d$ & $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ & $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ \\
\hline 1 & 400 & 520 \\
2 & 208\,240 & 226\,480 \\
3 & 175\,466\,480 & 191\,464\,760 \\
4 & 196\,084\,534\,160 & 213\,155\,450\,240 \\
5 & 255\,402\,582\,828\,400 & 277\,092\,686\,601\,400 \\
6 & 367\,048\,595\,782\,193\,680 & 397\,700\,706\,634\,553\,680 \\
7 & 564\,810\,585\,071\,858\,496\,880 & 611\,416\,342\,763\,726\,567\,800 \\
8 & 913\,929\,133\,261\,543\,393\,001\,760 & 988\,670\,017\,271\,687\,389\,572\,480 \\
9 & 1\,536\,929\,129\,164\,031\,410\,293\,358\,720 & 1\,661\,748\,145\,541\,449\,358\,296\,013\,440 \\
10 & 2\,664\,576\,223\,763\,330\,924\,317\,069\,072\,400 & 2\,879\,777\,881\,450\,393\,936\,532\,565\,976\,400 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{\label{tab:Genus0X14}Genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X_{1,4}$ associated to $\phi_{2,(1)} = \sigma_{1,1}$ and $\phi_{2,(2)} = \sigma_{2}$ up to degree $d=10$.}
\end{table}
First of all, with the classical ring structure encoded in the intersections~\eqref{eq:SomeIntegralsX14}, we determine the genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants from the identity
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Genus0Formula}
\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}\frac{\Pi_{\mathcal{S}^\bullet_i}(z(t))}{\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}(z(t))} = \int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \left(\sigma_1 * \sigma_1 \right)\cup \operatorname{ch} \mathcal{S}^\bullet_i\ , \qquad i=1,2 \ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of the mirror map $z(t)$ for the flat coordinate $t$. Note that this formula holds because in Gromov--Witten theory the metric for the chiral--anti-chiral operators is identified with the classical intersection pairing. Since we have previously determined the integral periods, the left hand side of this equation is known. Using the intersection numbers~\eqref{eq:SomeIntegralsX14}, the explicit Chern characters~\eqref{eq:ChSiX14} as well as the identification $\phi_{2,(1)} = \sigma_{1,1}$ and $\phi_{2,(2)} = \sigma_{2}$ in the quantum product~\eqref{eq:QuantumProduct}, we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}\frac{\Pi_{\mathcal{S}^\bullet_1}}{\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}} &= 20 + \sum_{d=1}^\infty d^2\frac{q^d}{1-q^d} \left(8n^{(1)}_{0,d}+12n^{(2)}_{0,d}\right)\ , \\
\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}\frac{\Pi_{\mathcal{S}^\bullet_2}}{\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}} &= 8 + \sum_{d=1}^\infty d^2\frac{q^d}{1-q^d} \left(4n^{(1)}_{0,d}+4n^{(2)}_{0,d}\right)\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
By expanding these equations in $q$ we obtain two independent equations for each degree $d$ and are thus able to identify the unknowns $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$. We have checked integrality up to degree $50$ and list the numbers up to degree $10$ in Table~\ref{tab:Genus0X14}. With the help of the recursive definition~\eqref{eq:MeetingInvariants} we further deduce the associated Klemm--Pandharipande meeting invariants listed in Table~\ref{tab:MeetingInvariantsX14}.
In Appendix~\ref{app:InterTheory} we employ intersection theory techniques to directly compute the number of lines with a marked point restricted to the codimension two Schubert classes $\sigma_{1,1}$ and $\sigma_2$. As further explained there, these results are in agreement with the genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{0,1}^{(1)}=400$ and $n_{0,1}^{(2)}=520$ at degree one. This provides for yet another independent consistency check on the linear combinations of the obtained integral quantum periods.
\begin{table}[t]\centering
\footnotesize{
\begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|r|}\hline
$m_{k,l}$ & $l=1$ & $l=2$ & $l=3$ & $l=4$ \\\hline
$k=1$ & 4\,536\,960 & 2\,075\,384\,960 & 1\,750\,629\,048\,960 & 1\,951\,117\,108\,140\,160 \\
$k=2$ & \text{} & 961\,126\,562\,880 & 811\,503\,225\,375\,360 & 904\,721\,970\,681\,455\,680 \\
$k=3$ & \text{} & \text{} & 685\,189\,180\,065\,298\,560 & 763\,898\,769\,976\,093\,842\,560 \\
$k=4$ & \text{} & \text{} & \text{} & 851\,650\,443\,220\,977\,804\,680\,320 \\\hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{\label{tab:MeetingInvariantsX14}Klemm--Pandharipande meeting invariants $m_{k,l}\equiv m_{l,k}$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X_{1,4}$ up to degree four. For ease of presentation we only list the invariants for $k \le l$. }
\end{table}
Our findings are consistent with the results presented by Honma and Manabe in ref.~\cite{Honma:2013hma}. There the quantum correlator genus zero invariants $n_{0,d}(\phi_{2,(a)})$ are computed, as for instance also used in ref.~\cite{Klemm:2007in}. With the identification $\phi_{2,(1)}=\sigma_1^2=H_1$ and $\phi_{2,(2)}=5\sigma_2-3\sigma_1^2=H_2$ these invariants are related to the quantum cohomology ring invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ according to
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
n_{0,d}(H_1) &= \int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \sigma_1^2 \cup \left(n^{(1)}_{0,d} \sigma_{1,1}+n^{(2)}_{0,d}\sigma_2\right) = 8 n^{(1)}_{0,d}+12 n^{(2)}_{0,d} \ ,\\
n_{0,d}(H_2) &= \int\limits_{X_{1,4}} \left(5\sigma_2-3\sigma_1^2\right) \cup \left(n^{(1)}_{0,d} \sigma_{1,1}+n^{(2)}_{0,d}\sigma_2\right) = -4 n^{(1)}_{0,d}+4 n^{(2)}_{0,d} \ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We note that integrality of $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ implies integrality of $n_{0,d}(H_1)$ and $n_{0,d}(H_2)$, while the converse is not true.
Finally, we want to determine the genus one invariants $n_{1,d}$ from the quantity $F_1^{\text{top}}$ specified in eq.~\eqref{eq:F1}. The discriminant locus has two rational factors, namely the large volume divisor $\Delta_\text{LV}=z$ and the discriminant factor $\Delta$ of eq.~\eqref{eq:DisX14}. From the asymptotic behaviour of $F_1^{\text{top}}$ at large volume~\eqref{eq:F1LV} and at the conifold~\eqref{eq:F1Coni} the coefficients $b_1$ and $b_2$ reflecting the holomorphic ambiguity are determined to be
\begin{equation}
1+b_1 =- \frac1{24} \int_X c_3(X) \cup J = \frac{55}{3}\quad \text{and}\quad b_2 = -\frac{1}{24} \ .
\end{equation}
With the Euler characteristic $\chi = 1\,848$ we thus have
\begin{equation}
F_1^{\text{top}}\,=\, 74\log \Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}+\log \left(\frac1{2\pi i} \frac{\partial z}{\partial t} \right) +\frac{52\, \log z}{3} -\frac{\log (1-2\,816z-65\,536z^2)}{24} \ .
\end{equation}
In the asymptotic large volume limit $z\to 0$ and after reexpressing $z$ in terms of the variable $q$ this expression reduces to
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
F_1^{\text{top}} &= \frac{55 \log (q)}{3}-\frac{8\,720 q}{3}-1\,163\,440 q^2-\frac{8\,709\,831\,680 q^3}{9} + \ldots \\
&= \frac{55 \log (q)}{3} + \sum_{d=1}^\infty N_{1,d}\, q^d\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Hence, we can read of the rational genus one invariants $N_{1,d}$. By the multicovering formula~\eqref{eq:MCg1} these are then translated into the integral genus one invariants, the first few of which are listed in Table~\ref{tab:Genus1X14}. We have checked integrality up to degree $50$, and we observe that $n_{1,1}=n_{1,2}=0$.
\begin{table}\centering
\begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|}
\hline $d$ & $n_{1,d}$ \\\hline
1 & 0 \\
2 & 0 \\
3 & -3\,200 \\
4 & 370\,151\,480 \\
5 & 4\,108\,408\,756\,800 \\
6 & 19\,279\,169\,520\,232\,000 \\
7 & 66\,081\,794\,099\,798\,279\,680 \\
8 & 194\,122\,441\,310\,522\,439\,007\,040 \\
9 & 522\,534\,128\,159\,184\,581\,441\,465\,280 \\
10 & 1\,332\,480\,344\,031\,795\,460\,733\,665\,780\,608 \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:Genus1X14}Integral genus one Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{1,d}$ of $X_{1,4}$ up to degree $d=10$.}
\end{table}
\subsection{Skew Symmetric Sigma Model Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,17,7}$} \label{sec:Example2}
As our second example we consider the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,17,7}$ arising as the large volume phase of a certain gauged linear sigma model \cite{Gerhardus:2015sla}. It is the non-complete intersection projective variety
\begin{equation}
X_{1,17,7} \,=\, \left\{ [x,\omega] \in \mathbb{P}(V \oplus \Lambda^2 V^*) \,\middle|\, \operatorname{rk} \omega \le 2 \,,\, x \in \ker \omega \right\} \cap \mathbb{P}(L) \ ,
\end{equation}
with the vector space $V=\mathbb{C}^7$ and a generic 17~dimensional subspace $L \subset V \oplus \Lambda^2 V^*$. In the following we use the isomorphsim to the incidence correspondence of ref.~\cite{Gerhardus:2015sla} to describe $X_{1,17,7}$ as
\begin{equation}
X_{1,17,7} \,\simeq\, \left\{ (x,p) \in \mathbb{P}^{16}\times\operatorname{Gr}(2,7) \,\middle|\, G(x,p) = 0 \right\} \ .
\end{equation}
Here $G(x,p)$ is a generic section of the rank $22$ bundle $\mathcal{B}$
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{B} \,=\, \frac{\mathcal{O}(1)\otimes\Lambda^2 V^*}{\mathcal{O}(1) \otimes \Lambda^2\mathcal{U}} \oplus
\left( \mathcal{O}(1) \otimes \mathcal{U}^* \right) \ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of the hyperplane bundle $\mathcal{O}(1)$ of the projective space $\mathbb{P}^{16}$ and the rank two universal subbundle $\mathcal{U}$ of the Grassmannian $\operatorname{Gr}(2,7)$. In particular, the class $[X_{1,17,7}]$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $\iota: X_{1,17,7} \hookrightarrow \mathbb{P}^{16}\times\operatorname{Gr}(2,7)$ becomes the top Chern class of the bundle $\mathcal{B}$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
[X_{1,17,7}] \,=\, c_{22}(\mathcal{B}) \ ,
\end{equation}
which is given in terms of the hyperplane class $H$ of $\mathbb{P}^{16}$ and the Schubert classes $\sigma_2$ of $\operatorname{Gr}(2,7)$.\footnote{For a review on Schubert classes see for instance ref.~\cite{MR1288523}.} Then --- for cohomology classes $\iota^*\alpha$ pulled back from the ambient space $\mathbb{P}^{16}\times\operatorname{Gr}(2,7)$ --- we compute the intersection numbers of $X_{1,17,7}$ according to\footnote{For ease of notation, in the following we suppress the pullback for the cohomology class on $X_{1,17,7}$ induced from the ambient space.}
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathbb{P}^{16}\times\operatorname{Gr}(2,7)} c_{22}(\mathcal{B}) \cup \alpha \,=\, \int_{X_{1,17,7}} \iota^*\alpha \ .
\end{equation}
Hence, we arrive at the intersection numbers
\begin{equation} \label{eq:SomeIntegralsX1177}
\int\limits_{X_{1,17,7}} H^4 = 98 \ ,\quad \int\limits_{X_{1,17,7}} \sigma_2\cup\sigma_2 = 44 \ , \quad \int\limits_{X_{1,17,7}} \sigma_2\cup H^2 = 65 \ .
\end{equation}
Note that on the variety $X_{1,17,7}$ we have in cohomology the equivalences $H \simeq \sigma_1$ (c.f., ref.~\cite{Gerhardus:2015sla}), $16H^3\simeq 49\sigma_3$, and $33H^3 \simeq 98 \sigma_{2,1}$, as well as $11H^4 \simeq 98\sigma_4$, $21 H^4 \simeq 98\sigma_{3,1}$, and $6 H^4\simeq 49\sigma_{2,2}$. As a result we obtain the integral cohomology generators
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
H^0(X_{1,17,7},\mathbb{Z}) &=\langle\!\langle 1 \rangle\!\rangle \ ,
&H^2(X_{1,17,7},\mathbb{Z})&=\langle\!\langle H \rangle\!\rangle \ ,
&H^4(X_{1,17,7},\mathbb{Z})&\supset \langle\!\langle H^2,\sigma_{2} \rangle\!\rangle\ , \\[0.2em]
H^6(X_{1,17,7},\mathbb{Z}) &=\langle\!\langle \tfrac1{98}H^3 \rangle\!\rangle \ ,
&H^8(X_{1,17,7},\mathbb{Z})&=\langle\!\langle \tfrac1{98}H^4 \rangle \!\rangle \ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Similarly as for the previously discussed Calabi--Yau fourfold, the classes $H^2$ and $\sigma_2$ are integral but not necessarily integral generators of $H^4(X_{1,17,7},\mathbb{Z})$. Finally, the total Chern class of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,17,7}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
c(X_{1,17,7}) \,=\, \frac{c(\mathbb{P}^{16}) c(\operatorname{Gr}(2,7))}{c(\mathcal{B})}
\,=\, 1 + (4 H^2 - 2 \sigma_2) - 328 \frac{H^3}{98} + 672 \frac{H^4}{98} \ ,
\end{equation}
i.e., the first Chern class vanishes and $\chi=672$ is the Euler characteristic of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,17,7}$.
Apart from the canonical B-branes $\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}$, $\mathcal{C}^\bullet[1]$, $\mathcal{E}^\bullet$ and $\mathcal{O}_X$, we construct the 4-branes $\mathcal{S}_1^\bullet$ and $\mathcal{S}_2^\bullet$ associated to the algebraic surfaces $\mathcal{S}_1$ and $\mathcal{S}_2$ of the zero sections of the rank two bundles $\mathcal{O}(1)^{\oplus 2}$ and $\mathcal{U}$ intersected with $X_{1,17,7}$. The Chern characters of the constructed 4-branes is computed by the Grothendieck--Riemann--Roch theorem to be
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ChernCharModel2}
\begin{aligned}
\operatorname{ch}\,\mathcal{S}^\bullet_1 \,&=\, H^2 - H^3 + \frac{7}{12} H^4 \ , \\
\operatorname{ch}\,\mathcal{S}^\bullet_2 \,&=\, (H^2 - \sigma_2) + \frac12 ( H^3 - H \sigma_2) + \frac1{12} (H^4 - \sigma_2^2) \ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
With respect to the B-branes
$
{\vec{\mathcal{E}}}^\bullet \,=\, \left( \mathcal{E}^\bullet_k \right)_{k=0,\ldots,5} \,=\,
\left(
\mathcal{O}_\text{pt},\,
\mathcal{C}^\bullet[1],\,
\mathcal{S}^\bullet_1,\,
\mathcal{S}^\bullet_2,\,
\mathcal{E}^\bullet,\,
\mathcal{O}_X \right)
$
the asymptotic periods $\vec\Pi^\text{asy} = \left( \Pi_{\mathcal{E}_k^\bullet}^\text{asy}\right)_{k=0,\ldots,5}$ for the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,17,6}$ become
\begin{equation} \label{eq:IntPeriods2}
\vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t) \,=\,
\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\
t \\
49 t^2+98 t+\frac{817}{12} \\
\frac{33}2 t^2-\frac{33}2 t+\frac{33}{4} \\
-\frac{49}{3} t^3-\frac{49}2 t^2-\frac{109}{4} t-\frac{229}{24}+\frac{41 i \zeta (3)}{\pi^3} \\
\frac{49}{12} t^4+\frac{131}{24}t^2 - \frac{41 i \zeta (3)}{\pi ^3}t + \frac{7}{18}
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
The symmetric intersection pairing is readily computed to be
\begin{equation}
\chi({\vec{\mathcal{E}}}^\bullet,{\vec{\mathcal{E}}}^\bullet) \,=\,
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 98 & 33 & 49 & 79 \\
0 & 0 & 33 & 12 & -33 & 12 \\
0 & 1 & 49 & -33 & -30 & -15 \\
1 & 0 & 79 & 12 & -15 & 2
\end{pmatrix} \ ,
\end{equation}
which determines the monodromy matrix $M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}$ with eq.~\eqref{eq:STtwist} to be
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:MTox2}
M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}} \,=\,
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -79 & -12 & 15 & -1
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Picard--Fuchs system}
In ref.~\cite{Gerhardus:2015sla} we have calculated the two sphere partition function of a gauged linear sigma model, which in its large volume phase realizes the non complete intersection fourfold $X_{1,17,7}$. From this calculation the fundamental period has been found as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:FundPeriod2}
\Pi_0(z) = 1 + 9 z + 469 z^2 + 38\,601 z^3 + 4\,008\,501 z^4 + \ldots \ ,
\end{equation}
where $z = z_{\text{LV}}$ is a coordinate around the large point. This period is annihilated by the order six Picard--Fuchs operator
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:PFModel2}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(z) = &+316\,932 (\theta -1) \theta ^5 -98 z\, \theta \big[700\,453 \theta ^5+1\,335\,058 \theta ^4+1\,609\,080 \theta ^3+879\,285 \theta ^2\\
&+249\,018 \theta +29\,106\big]+962754229z^2\big[ \theta ^6-1\,976\,960\,883 \theta ^5-10\,395\,509\,031 \theta ^4\\
&-14\,991\,662\,969 \theta ^3-10\,456\,423\,600 \theta ^2-3\,667\,629\,910 \theta -521\,151\,456 \big] \\
&+2 z^3 \big[9\,812\,727\,979 \theta ^6+53\,190\,263\,573 \theta ^5+105\,895\,432\,463 \theta ^4\\
&+103\,996\,363\,801 \theta ^3 +54\,017\,188\,106 \theta ^2+14\,078\,111\,747 \theta +1\,415\,445\,066\big]\\
&-2 z^4\big[11\,549\,486\,896 \theta ^6+46\,324\,321\,804 \theta ^5+73\,290\,469\,426 \theta ^4\\
&+60\,074\,870\,026 \theta ^3+27\,353\,847\,169 \theta ^2+6\,669\,746\,719 \theta +696\,036\,075\big]\\
&+174z^5 \big(1\,666\,198 \theta ^6+6\,006\,981 \theta ^5+10\,497\,819 \theta ^4+11\,551\,078 \theta ^3+8\,162\,130 \theta ^2\\
&+3\,331\,047 \theta +588\,537\big]-211\,932 z^6 (\theta +1)^5 (2 \theta +3) \ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In addition to the singular points at $z=0$ and $z=\infty$ there might be singularities at the zero loci of the polynomial multiplying $\theta^6$ in $\mathcal{L}(z)$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
h^{(6)}_{\text{LV}}(z)= -&\left(1 - 188 z - 2\,368 z^2 + 4 z^3\right)\cdot\\
&\left(-316\,932 + 9\,061\,178 z - 9\,747\,741 z^2 +105\,966 z^3\right)\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
It turns out, however, that at the zeros of the second factor in this polynomial there are six regular solutions. Consequently, these are regular points. On the other hand, the zero loci
\begin{equation}
z_1 \approx-0.084\ , \quad z_2 \approx592.079\ , \quad z_3 \approx0.005 \ ,
\end{equation}
of the first factor, $\Delta(z) = 1 - 188 z - 2\,368 z^2 + 4 z^3$, are indeed singular. The Riemann P-symbol reads
\begin{equation}\label{eq:PSymbolX1177}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ccccc}
0 & \infty & z_1 & z_2 & z_3\\[0.1em]
\hline
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1\\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 2 & 2 & 2\\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 3 & 3 & 3\\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 4 & 4 & 4\\[0.1em]
1 & \frac32 & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2}\\
\end{array}
\right\}\ .
\end{equation}
We note that the large volume point $z=0$ again does not have maximally unipotent monodromy. Its structure is, in fact, the same as for the Grassmannian example discussed in the previous section: In addtion to the fundamental period $\Pi_0=\Pi^{(1,0)}_0$ given in eq.~\eqref{eq:FundPeriod2} there is second regular solution,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:RegSol2Model2}
\Pi^{(2,0)}_0 = z\left(1+\frac{6\,125 z}{132}+\frac{1\,524\,635 z^2}{396}+\frac{210\,992\,845 z^3}{528}+\ldots\right)\ .
\end{equation}
The singly logarithmic period, $\Pi_1=\Pi^{(1,1)}_0$, defines the flat coordinate $t$ as in eq.~\eqref{eq:FlatCo} and the period vector $\vec{\Pi}=(\Pi_0,\ldots,\Pi_5)^T$ is as in eq.~\eqref{eq:IntPeriodVector} with the asymptotic limit $\vec{\Pi}^{\text{asy}}$ now given by eq.~\eqref{eq:IntPeriods2}.
By an analytic continuation of $\vec{\Pi}$ to the other four singular points we then again obtain numerical expressions for the monodromy matrices $M_0$, $M_\infty$, $M_{z_1}$, $M_{z_2}$ and $M_{z_3}$ in the large volume basis $\{\Pi_0,\ldots,\Pi_5\}$. Among these matrices only $M_{z_3}$ can possibly agree with $M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}$ in eq.~\eqref{eq:MTox2}. Hence, we compare its last line
\begin{equation}
\left(-1\,,\,0\,,\,-79-\frac{\alpha_2}{99}\,,\,-\frac{4\,675}{392}-\frac{\alpha_3}{99}\,,\,15-\frac{\alpha_4}{99}\,,\,-\frac{4\,675}{4\,704}-\frac{\alpha_5}{99}\right) \ ,
\end{equation}
to the last line of $M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}$ and deduce
\begin{equation}
\alpha_2=\alpha_4=0 \ , \quad \alpha_3 =\frac{2\,871}{392}\ , \quad \alpha_5=\frac{957}{1\,568} \ .
\end{equation}
Inserting these values indeed makes all five monodromy matrices integral and they read
\begin{align}
M_0&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 1 & 147 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 98 & 33 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \ , \quad
M_{z_1}=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
99 & 49 & 13328 & 588 & -3724 & 343 \\
196 & 99 & 26656 & 1176 & -7448 & 686 \\
-2 & -1 & -271 & -12 & 76 & -7 \\
2 & 1 & 272 & 13 & -76 & 7 \\
-2 & -1 & -272 & -12 & 77 & -7 \\
-4 & -2 & -544 & -24 & 152 & -13 \\
\end{array}
\right), \nonumber \\[0.1em]
M_{z_2}&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
4117 & 1568 & 478828 & 23520 & -115248 & 8232 \\
4809 & 1833 & 559447 & 27480 & -134652 & 9618 \\
-84 & -32 & -9771 & -480 & 2352 & -168 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
-168 & -64 & -19544 & -960 & 4705 & -336 \\
-441 & -168 & -51303 & -2520 & 12348 & -881 \\
\end{array}
\right) \ , \
M_{z_3}=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -79 & -12 & 15 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right) , \nonumber \\[0.1em]
M_\infty&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
-3975 & -1490 & -459291 & -22890 & 110201 & -7854 \\
-1757 & -617 & -197897 & -10479 & 46942 & -3318 \\
67 & 25 & 7728 & 387 & -1853 & 132 \\
121 & 47 & 14181 & 682 & -3423 & 245 \\
151 & 57 & 17499 & 867 & -4205 & 300 \\
198 & 74 & 22862 & 1146 & -5487 & 391 \\
\end{array}
\right)\ .
\end{align}
Note that $M_{z_3} = M_{t_{\mathcal{O}_X}}$ and that the consistency condition $M_\infty M_{z_2} M_{z_3} M_0 M_{z_1} = \mathds{1}$ is fulfilled. While this shows that the $8$-brane $\mathcal{O}_X$ becomes massless at $z_3$, the integral periods
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_1}} &= 49 \Pi_0 + 98 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2+\Pi_3-\Pi_4 - 2\Pi_5 \ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_2}} &= -196 \Pi_0 -229 \Pi_1 +4 \Pi_2+8\Pi_4 +21\Pi_5 \ ,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
vanish at $z_1$ and $z_2$, respectively. Hence, at each point of $\mathbb{Z}_2$-monodromy there is a massless brane and the monodromies are described by Seidel--Thomas twists. The regular singular point at infinity will be discussed in Section~\ref{sec:PointInf}.
Due to the non-minimal order property of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,17,7}$ we can find integral quantum periods, which give rise to flux-induced superpotentials of the form~\eqref{eq:FluxW}. In terms of the flat coordinate $t$ we for instance have
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
W^{(1)}_\text{flux}(t) \,&=\, \frac{1}{\Pi_0} \left(5\,753 \Pi_0 + 19\,404 \Pi_1 -132 \Pi_2 + 392 \Pi_3 \right) = \frac{11\,484}{4\pi^2} e^{2\pi i t} + \mathcal{O}(e^{4\pi i t}) \ , \\
W^{(2)}_\text{flux}(t) \,&=\, \frac{1}{\Pi_0} \left(4\,851 \Pi_1 -33 \Pi_2 + 98 \Pi_3 \right) = -\frac{5\,753}{4} + \frac{2\,781}{4\pi^2} e^{2\pi i t} + \mathcal{O}(e^{4\pi i t}) \ , \\
W^{(3)}_\text{flux}(t) \,&=\, \frac{1}{\Pi_0} \left(5\,753 \Pi_0 -132 \Pi_2 + 392 \Pi_3 \right) = -19\,404\,t + \frac{11\,484}{4\pi^2} e^{2\pi i t} + \mathcal{O}(e^{4\pi i t}) \ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{table}[t]\centering
\footnotesize{
\begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|}
\hline $d$ & $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ & $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ \\
\hline
1 & 0 & 33 \\
2 & 721 & 170 \\
3 & 38\,255 & 16\,126 \\
4 & 3\,042\,676 & 1\,141\,312 \\
5 & 274\,320\,123 & 100\,955\,257 \\
6 & 27\,276\,710\,118 & 9\,821\,360\,694 \\
7 & 2\,897\,092\,850\,989 & 1\,028\,274\,636\,900 \\
8 & 323\,207\,209\,581\,582 & 113\,458\,193\,073\,000 \\
9 & 37\,444\,642\,819\,824\,776 & 13\,032\,484\,062\,881\,000 \\
10 & 4\,469\,922\,540\,366\,355\,762 & 1\,545\,108\,865\,260\,914\,434 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{\label{tab:Genus0Model2}Genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X_{1,17,7}$ associated to $\phi_{2,(1)} = H^2$ and $\phi_{2,(2)} = \sigma_{2}$ up to degree $d=10$.}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Gromov--Witten invariants and quantum cohomology ring}
To determine the Gromov-Witten invariants $n^{(a)}_{0,d}$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,17,7}$ we insert the intersection numbers \eqref{eq:SomeIntegralsX1177}, the explicit Chern characters~\eqref{eq:ChernCharModel2} as well as the identifications $\phi_{2,(1)}=H^2$ and $\phi_{2,(2)}=\sigma_2$ into eq.~\eqref{eq:Genus0Formula}. This yields the two equations
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}\frac{\Pi_{\mathcal{S}^\bullet_1}}{\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}} &= 98 + \sum_{d=1}^\infty d^2\frac{q^d}{1-q^d} \left(98n^{(1)}_{0,d}+65n^{(2)}_{0,d}\right)\ , \\
\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}\frac{\Pi_{\mathcal{S}^\bullet_2}}{\Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}} &= 33 + \sum_{d=1}^\infty d^2\frac{q^d}{1-q^d} \left(33n^{(1)}_{0,d}+21n^{(2)}_{0,d}\right)\ ,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
from which we find the invariants $n^{(a)}_{0,d}$ and list them up to degree $10$ in Table~\ref{tab:Genus0Model2}. Further, we deduce the associated Klemm--Pandharipande meeting invariants listed in Table~\ref{tab:MeetingModel2}.
\begin{table}[t]\centering
\footnotesize{
\begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|r|}\hline
$m_{k,l}$ & $l=1$ & $l=2$ & $l=3$ & $l=4$ \\\hline
$k=1$ & 60\,784\,240 & 28\,194\,221\,040 & 23\,782\,299\,222\,640 & 26\,506\,970\,805\,517\,040 \\
$k=2$ & \text{} & 13\,065\,863\,900\,400 & 11\,031\,985\,902\,832\,240 & 12\,299\,429\,676\,016\,495\,600 \\
$k=3$ & \text{} & \text{} & 9\,314\,685\,486\,617\,406\,000 & 10\,384\,847\,256\,692\,114\,669\,040 \\
$k=4$ & \text{} & \text{} & \text{} & 11\,577\,959\,795\,730\,175\,108\,775\,920 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{\label{tab:MeetingModel2}Klemm--Pandharipande meeting invariants $m_{k,l}\equiv m_{l,k}$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold~$X_{1,17,7}$ up to degree four. For ease of presentation we only list the invariants for $k \le l$. }
\end{table}
Moreover, we use the quantity $F_1^{\text{top}}$ specified in eq.~\eqref{eq:F1} to determine the genus one invariants $n_{1,d}$. The discriminant locus has two rational factors, these are the large volume divisor $\Delta_{\text{LV}}=z$ and the discriminant factor $\Delta=1-188z-2\,368z^2+4z^3$. The coefficients $b_1$ and $b_2$ reflecting the holomorphic ambiguity are from the asymptotic behavior of $F_1^{\text{top}}$ at large volume~\eqref{eq:F1LV} and at the conifold~\eqref{eq:F1Coni} determined to be
\begin{equation}
1+b_1 = -\frac{1}{24}\int_X c_3(X)\cup J = \frac{328}{24} \quad \text{and} \quad b_2 = -\frac{1}{24}\ .
\end{equation}
With the Euler characteristic $\chi = 672$ we thus find
\begin{equation}
F_1^{\text{top}}\,=\, 25\log \Pi_{\mathcal{O}_\text{pt}}+\log \left(\frac1{2\pi i} \frac{\partial z}{\partial t} \right) +\frac{38\, \log z}{3} -\frac{\log (1-188z-2\,368z^2+4z^3)}{24} \ ,
\end{equation}
which in the large volume limit $z\to 0$ and after reexpressing $z$ in terms of $q$ reduces to
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
F_1^{\text{top}} &= \frac{41 \log (q)}{3}-\frac{473 q}{2}-\frac{13\,949 q^2}{2}-\frac{2\,276\,105 q^3}{6} + \ldots \\
&= \frac{41 \log (q)}{3} + \sum_{d=1}^\infty N_{1,d}\, q^d\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
This equation determines the rational genus one invariants $N_{1,d}$, which by the multicovering formula~\eqref{eq:MCg1} encode the integral genus one invariants $n_{1,d}$ listed in Table~\ref{tab:Genus1Model2}. Their integrality has been checked up to degree $50$.
\begin{table}\centering
\begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|}
\hline $d$ & $n_{1,d}$ \\\hline
1 & 0 \\
2 & 0 \\
3 & 0 \\
4 & 0 \\
5 & 224\,386 \\
6 & 206\,613\,908 \\
7 & 83\,707\,955\,196 \\
8 & 23\,455\,827\,469\,526 \\
9 & 5\,401\,382\,970\,402\,176 \\
10 & 1\,107\,021\,477\,254\,814\,128 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:Genus1Model2}Integral genus one Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{1,d}$ of $X_{1,17,7}$ up to degree $d=10$.}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{The regular singular point at infinity}\label{sec:PointInf}
From the Riemann P-symbol in eq.~\eqref{eq:PSymbolX1177} we see that the structure of solutions at the singular point $z=\infty$ is similar to that at the large volume point $z=0$. Namely, there are two non-logarithmic solutions, which in terms of $w=z^{-1}$ enjoy the expansions
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\Pi^{(1,0)}_\infty(w)&=w \,(1 + 21 w + 2\,989 w^2 + 714\,549 w^3 + 217\,515\,501 w^4+\ldots) \ , \\[0.1em]
\Pi^{(2,0)}_\infty(w)&=w^{3/2} \left(1+\frac{10\,085 w}{126}+\frac{782\,127 w^2}{50}+\frac{379\,170\,123\,893 w^3}{88\,200}+\ldots\right)\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Moreover, there are four logarithmic solutions $\Pi^{(1,l)}_\infty$ for $l=1,\ldots,4$. As opposed to the second non-logarithmic period at large volume --- $\Pi^{(2,0)}_0$ given in eq.~\eqref{eq:RegSol2Model2} --- the additional solution $\Pi^{(2,0)}_\infty$ has a branch cut arising from the square root of the solution. This already indicates that $z=\infty$ is not large volume limit of a smooth Calabi--Yau fourfold.
Let us now look at the integral period vector $\vec{\widetilde{\Pi}}=(\widetilde{\Pi}_0, \widetilde{\Pi}_1, \widetilde{\Pi}_2, \widetilde{\Pi}_3,\widetilde{\Pi}_4,\widetilde{\Pi}_5)^T$, which is related to the integral period vector $\vec{\Pi}$ by the $SL(5,\mathbb{Z})$ transformation $S$ according to
\begin{equation}
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\widetilde{\Pi}_0\\\widetilde{\Pi}_1\\ \widetilde{\Pi}_2\\ \widetilde{\Pi}_3 \\ \widetilde{\Pi}_4 \\ \widetilde{\Pi}_5
\end{array}
\right)=
\underbrace{\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
105 & 98 & -2 & -1 & -4 & -8 \\
-49 & -56 & 1 & 0 & 2 & 5 \\
-1498 & -1400 & 28 & 14 & 53 & 89 \\
-648 & -615 & 12 & 6 & 22 & 34 \\
-330 & -243 & 6 & 5 & 12 & 16 \\
196 & 229 & -4 & 0 & -8 & -21
\end{array}
\right)}_{S}\cdot
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\Pi_0\\\Pi_1\\ \Pi_2\\ \Pi_3 \\ \Pi_4 \\ \Pi_5
\end{array}
\right)\ .
\end{equation}
By an analytic continuation of this period vector to $z=\infty$ we find that it corresponds to the following linear combination of solutions $\Pi^{(k,l)}_\infty$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Basis2}
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\widetilde{\Pi}_0\\\widetilde{\Pi}_1\\ \widetilde{\Pi}_2\\ \widetilde{\Pi}_3 \\ \widetilde{\Pi}_4 \\ \widetilde{\Pi}_5
\end{array}
\right)=
\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
-\frac{29}{2} & \frac{53}{2} & \frac{87}{2} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
-\frac{57}{8} & 11 & \frac{87}{4} & 0 & 0 & -\frac{7}{2 \pi ^2} \\
-\frac{61}{16}+\frac{275 i \zeta (3)}{8 \pi ^3} & 10 & \frac{87}{8} & -\frac{29}{4} & 0 & \frac{21}{4 \pi ^2} \\
\frac{73}{192} & -\frac{275 i \zeta (3)}{8 \pi ^3} & \frac{29}{8} & 0 & \frac{29}{16} & \frac{7}{8 \pi ^2}
\end{array}
\right)\cdot
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\Pi^{(1,0)}_\infty\\\Pi^{(1,1)}_\infty\\ \Pi^{(1,2)}_\infty\\ \Pi^{(1,3)}_\infty \\ \Pi^{(1,4)}_\infty \\ \Pi^{(2,0)}_\infty
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation}
Hence, we deduce in the limit $w \to 0$ the asymptotic behavior for $\vec{\widetilde{\Pi}}$ to be
\begin{equation} \label{eq:IntPeriodsInf}
\vec{\widetilde{\Pi}}^{\text{asy}}(s) \,=\,
\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\[0.1em]
s \\[0.1em]
\frac{87}{2} s^2+\frac{53}{2} s-\frac{29}{2} \\[0.1em]
\frac{87}{4} s^2+11 s-\frac{57}{8} \\[0.1em]
-\frac{29}{4} s^3+\frac{87}{8} s^2+10 s-\frac{61}{16}+\frac{275 i \zeta (3)}{8\pi^3} \\[0.1em]
\frac{29}{16} s^4+\frac{29}{8}s^2 - \frac{275 i \zeta (3)}{8\pi ^3}s + \frac{73}{192}
\end{pmatrix} \ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of the flat coordinate
\begin{equation}
s(w) = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \frac{\widetilde\Pi_1(w)}{\widetilde\Pi_0(w)} \ .
\end{equation}
In the newly defined integral basis $\vec{\widetilde{\Pi}}$ the monodromy matrices at $z=\infty$ and $z_2$ transform into
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{M}_\infty=\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
1 & 1 & 70 & 33 & 6 & 9 \\
0 & 1 & 87 & 39 & 20 & 9 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & -2 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1 & 3 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1
\end{array}
\right)\ ,\quad
\widetilde{M}_{z_2} =\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -1
\end{array}
\right) \ ,
\end{equation}
while the intersection pairing becomes
\begin{equation}
S\, \chi({\vec{\mathcal{E}}}^\bullet,{\vec{\mathcal{E}}}^\bullet)\, S^{\,T}=
\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 174 & 87 & 70 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 87 & 44 & 32 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 70 & 32 & 32 & 0 \\
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)\ .
\end{equation}
\begin{table}\centering
\begin{tabular}{|r|p{3.5cm}|p{3.5cm}|}
\hline $d$ & \hfill$n^{(A)}_{0,d}$& \hfill$n^{(B)}_{0,d}$ \\\hline
$1/2$ & \hfill-- & \hfill14 \\
1 & \hfill7\,569 & \hfill3\,781 \\
3/2 & \hfill-- & \hfill167 \\
2 & \hfill735\,324 & \hfill367\,662 \\
5/2 & \hfill-- & \hfill23\,647 \\
3 & \hfill129\,395\,187 & \hfill$\frac{258\,790\,207}{4}$ \\
7/2 & \hfill-- & \hfill$\frac{18\,828\,027}{4}$ \\
4 & \hfill29\,766\,479\,280 & \hfill14\,883\,239\,640 \\
9/2 & \hfill-- & \hfill$\frac{9\,280\,303\,369}{8}$ \\
5 & \hfill7\,978\,989\,505\,959 & \hfill$\frac{15\,957\,978\,988\,271}{4}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:GWIsInf}Rational genus zero invariants $n^{(A)}_{0,d}$ and $n^{(B)}_{0,d}$ associated to the doubly logarithmic periods $\widetilde{\Pi}_2$ and $\widetilde{\Pi}_3$.}
\end{table}
We observe that in terms of the transformed intersection pairing the monodromy matrix $\widetilde{M}_{z_2}$ has the characteristic form of the Seidel--Thomas twist \eqref{eq:STtwist} with respect to the structure sheaf of a geometric target space. However, by the structure of the quantum periods in the vicinity of $w=0$, this target space cannot be a smooth Calabi--Yau fourfold for various reasons. Firstly, as can be seen from eq.~\eqref{eq:Basis2} --- apart from the logarithmic branch cut --- there is also a square root branch cut appearing in one doubly logarithmic, the triply logarithmic and quadruply logarithmic quantum periods. This square root branch cut, however, does not conform with the singularity behavior of quantum volumes of cycles in a large volume phase. Secondly, if the target space were a smooth Calabi--Yau fourfold, the leading asymptotic term $\frac{29}{16}s^4 + \ldots$ in the quadruply logarithmic period would encode the degree $\kappa$ of the Calabi--Yau fourfold according to $\frac{\kappa}{4!}s^4+ \ldots\,$. This yields, however, the non-integral coefficient $\kappa=\frac{87}2$.
On the other hand, due to the discussed similarities to a large volume phase, it is conceivable that the target space enjoys an interpretation as a singular Calabi--Yau variety --- possibly with a singularity in codimension two, which could explain the square root branch cut starting in one of the doubly logarithmic quantum periods. Having such a geometric picture in our mind, we naively extract an instanton expansion from the doubly logarithmic integral periods $\widetilde{\Pi}_2$ and $\widetilde{\Pi}_3$ according to
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\widetilde{\Pi}_2&= \frac{87}{2}s^2+\frac{53}{2}s - \frac{29}{2} + \sum_{d=1}^\infty n^{(A)}_{0,d} \operatorname{Li}_2\left(e^{2\pi i s \cdot d}\right)\ , \\
\widetilde{\Pi}_3&= \frac{87}{4}s^2+ 11s - \frac{57}{8} + \sum_{d=1}^\infty n^{(B)}_{0,d/2} \operatorname{Li}_2\left(e^{2\pi i s \cdot d/2}\right)\ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The leading numbers of this expansion are listed in in Table~\ref{tab:GWIsInf}. Note that the doubly logarithmic solution without the square root branch cut yields a conventional genus zero instanton expansion with integral invariants $n_{0,d}^{(A)}$ for integral $d$. The other doubly logarithmic solution, however, yields instanton invariants $n_{0,d}^{(B)}$ arising also at half instanton degrees, which reflects the square root branch cut behavior of this quantum period. Moreover, the invariants $n_{0,d}^{(B)}$ in general are rational numbers with powers of two in their denominators. It would be interesting to give a geometric interpretation of all the large volume like features, potentially as speculated in terms of a singular Calabi--Yau fourfold variety.
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:con}
In this work we have studied the Gromov--Witten theory on Calabi--Yau fourfolds, emphasizing the role of non-marginal chiral--anti-chiral operators in the associated quantum chiral rings. We established and demonstrated explicitly that the number of chiral--anti-chiral operators of conformal weight $(2,2)$ --- i.e., operators corresponding to generators of the middle-dimensional cohomology group of the Calabi--Yau fourfold --- yields the number of independent genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants with a single marked point at each degree. We argued that for Calabi--Yau fourfolds with a single K\"ahler modulus such examples arise from the Picard--Fuchs operators of quantum periods with non-minimal order. Namely, the regular singular point associated to the large volume limit is not a regular singular point with maximally unipotent monodromy of the associated Picard--Fuchs operator. Our explicit examples of this phenomenon were constructed from non-complete intersection projective varieties or from complete intersections in non-toric ambient spaces. To deduce their quantum cohomology rings we calculated the integral quantum periods with the help of numerical analytic continuation techniques. Furthermore, we computed the monodromy matrices about all regular singular points in quantum K\"ahler moduli space with respect to the established integral basis. Finally, we determined the Klemm--Pandharipande meeting invariants and the genus one BPS invariants for the analyzed Calabi--Yau fourfolds. The confirmed integrality property of these invariants furnished a non-trivial check on the deduced quantum cohomology rings. As a further check on our results, we independently verified the genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants at degree one entering the quantum cohomology ring with intersection theory methods.
We established that the large volume asymptotics of quantum periods admitted purely instanton generated integral linear combinations. As briefly mentioned, this observation may prove useful in string cosmology for F-term monodromy inflation scenarios \cite{Silverstein:2008sg,Hebecker:2014kva,Marchesano:2014mla,Hebecker:2014eua}. Moreover, such instanton generated quantum periods are interesting from an open-closed string duality point of view \cite{Mayr:2001xk}, which --- in certain geometric situations --- relates closed-string quantum periods of Calabi--Yau fourfolds to open-string quantum periods of Calabi--Yau threefolds with branes \cite{Mayr:2001xk,Alim:2009bx,Grimm:2009ef}. Identifying purely instanton generated open-string quantum periods would hence establish stable brane configurations in Calabi--Yau threefolds at large volume. The absence of perturbative terms in the expansion of open quantum periods would imply that the associated open-closed deformation space were obstructed by closed sphere and open disk instanton effects only. Such setups promise interesting enumerative interpretations in terms of real and Ooguri--Vafa invariants in compact Calabi--Yau geometries \cite{Walcher:2006rs,MR2425184,Jockers:2008pe,Alim:2009rf}.
We would like to point out an observation that the Picard--Fuchs operators of some of our Calabi--Yau fourfold examples --- namely for some of those given as complete intersections in ambient Grassmannian spaces --- exhibit intriguing algebraic properties. That is to say that the fundamental periods factorize into the Hadamard product of two new fundamental periods that are solutions to a Calabi--Yau threefold and elliptic curve Picard--Fuchs differential equations of fourth and first order, respectively.\footnote{We are thankful to Gert Almkvist for pointing and explaining this factorization property.} For instance, the fundamental period~\eqref{eq:FPex1} of the example discussed in Section~\ref{sec:Example1} enjoys the expansion
\begin{equation}
\Pi_0(z) \,=\, \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}\sum_{k=0}^n \binom{2n}{n}^2 \binom{4n}{2n} \binom{n}{k}^2\binom{n+k}n \, z^n \,=\, (\Pi_0^\text{CY3} \star \Pi_0^\text{E})(z) \ ,
\end{equation}
with the fundamental periods
\begin{equation}
\Pi_0^\text{CY3}(z)\,=\,\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}\sum_{k=0}^n \binom{2n}n \binom{4n}{2n} \binom{n}{k}^2\binom{n+k}n \, z^n \ ,
\qquad \Pi_0^\text{E}(z)\,=\, \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \binom{2n}n z^n \ ,
\end{equation}
and the Hadamard product $(f\star g)(z)= \sum_n a_nb_n z^n$ defined in terms of the series expansions $f(z)=\sum_n a_n z^n$ and $g(z)=\sum_n b_n z^n$. In particular, the fundamental period~$\Pi_0^\text{CY3}(z)$ is the solution to the fourth order Picard--Fuchs operator \cite{Almkvist:2005arxiv,vanStraten:2012db}\footnote{Compare with example~AESZ~51 in ref.~\cite{Almkvist:2005arxiv} and the online Calabi--Yau datebase~\cite{vanStraten:2012db}.}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}^\text{CY3}=\theta^4 - 4 z (4\theta+1)(4\theta+3)(11\theta^2+11\theta+3) -16z^2 (4\theta+1)(4\theta+3)(4\theta+5)(4\theta+7) \ ,
\end{equation}
with maximally unipotent monodromy point at $z=0$. It gives rise to the integral genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $920$, $50\,520$, $5\,853\,960$, \ldots, c.f.,~ref.~\cite{vanStraten:2012db}. It would be interesting to find a geometric interpretation for these Hadamard factorization of such Calabi--Yau fourfolds, perhaps along the lines of ref.~\cite{Doran:2015qy}.
Finally, let us mention that the non-minimal order property of the analyzed Picard--Fuchs operators for the Calabi--Yau fourfold periods may also exhibit interesting features from a modular form perspective, see, e.g., refs.~\cite{Gannon:2013jua,Doran:2013npa}. At least, we expect that a better understanding of global properties of the quantum K\"ahler moduli space should simplify the required derivation of integral quantum periods.
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank
Gert Almkvist,
Rolf Kappl,
Albrecht Klemm,
Peter Mayr,
Dave Morrison,
Urmi Ninad,
Thorsten Schimannek,
Stephan Stieberger
and
Eva Silverstein
for discussions and correspondences.
A.G. is supported by the graduate school BCGS and the Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes.
\newpage
\begin{appendix}
\section{Tabulated results of analyzed examples} \label{app:tables}
In this appendix we tabulate the data that specifies the quantum periods and monodromy structure for several Calabi--Yau fourfolds with a order six Picard--Fuchs operator. We also list the leading genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants generating the quantum cohomology rings and the genus one BPS invariants of these Calabi--Yau fourfolds. Two of these examples --- with their tables listed in Appendix~\ref{app:Tab1} and Appendix~\ref{app:Tab2} --- are discussed thoroughly in the main text in Section~\ref{sec:Example1} and Section~\ref{sec:Example2}, respectively. The data of the remaining examples is calculated analogously.
\bigskip
\footnotesize
\subsection{Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,4} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,5)$}
\label{app:Tab1}
\begin{tabular}{|L|L|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Picard--Fuchs operator:}\\
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(z)\,=\,&(\theta -1) \theta ^5-8 z(2 \theta +1) (4 \theta +1) (4 \theta +3) \left(11 \theta^2+11 \theta +3\right) \theta\\ &-64z^2 (2 \theta +1) (2 \theta +3) (4 \theta +1) (4 \theta +3) (4 \theta +5) (4 \theta +7) \end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Discriminant locus:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Riemann P-symbol:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \Delta(z)=1 - 2\,816 z - 65\,536 z^2$} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\multirow{4}{*}{$\left\{
\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & \infty & z_1 & z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\\[0.1em]
\hline
0 & \frac14 & 0 & 0 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac12 & 1 & 1 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac34 & 2 & 2 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac54 & 3 & 3 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac32 & 4 & 4 \\[0.1em]
1 & \frac74 & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2} \\
\end{array}
\right\}$}} \\
&\\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Regular singular points:} & \\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned} z&=0\\z&=\infty\\z&=z_{\mathcal{O}_X}(=z_2)\approx 3.5\cdot 10^{-4}\\z&=z_1 \approx- 0.043\end{aligned}$} & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Intersection pairing:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Large volume asymptotics:} \\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\chi = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 20 & 8 & 10 & 24 \\
0 & 0 & 8 & 4 & -8 & 6 \\
0 & 1 & 10 & -8 & -14 & -7 \\
1 & 0 & 24 & 6 & -7 & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)$} &
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t) = \left(
\begin{array}{*{1}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1\\
t\\
10t^2+20t+\frac{107}{6}\\
4t^2-4t+\frac{7}{2}\\
-\frac{10}{3}t^3-5t^2-\frac{19}{2}t-\frac{47}{12}+\frac{55 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}\\
\frac{5}{6}t^4+\frac{37}{12}t^2-\frac{55 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}t+\frac{7}{144}
\end{array}\right)$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Monodromy matrices:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$
\begin{aligned}
M_0&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 1 & 30 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 20 & 8 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_\infty =\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
-19 & -11 & -670 & -72 & 270 & -40 \\
-40 & -19 & -1340 & -168 & 540 & -80 \\
2 & 1 & 67 & 8 & -27 & 4 \\
-3 & -1 & -90 & -13 & 35 & -5 \\
2 & 1 & 66 & 8 & -27 & 4 \\
5 & 2 & 156 & 22 & -63 & 9 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.2em]
M_{z_1}&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
21 & 10 & 700 & 80 & -300 & 50 \\
40 & 21 & 1400 & 160 & -600 & 100 \\
-2 & -1 & -69 & -8 & 30 & -5 \\
2 & 1 & 70 & 9 & -30 & 5 \\
-2 & -1 & -70 & -8 & 31 & -5 \\
-4 & -2 & -140 & -16 & 60 & -9 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_{z_{\mathcal{O}_X}} = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -24 & -6 & 7 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right)
\end{aligned}
$}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\begin{tabular}{|R|R|}\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Generators of cohomology ring:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle\!\left\langle 1 \,;\,\sigma_1\,;\,\sigma_{1,1},\sigma_2\,;\,\frac{\sigma_3}{4}\,;\,\frac{\sigma_{2,2}}{4}\right\rangle\!\right\rangle
\,\subset\, H^{0,0}(X)\oplus \ldots \oplus H^{4,4}(X)
\end{aligned}$}\\[8pt]
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Total Chern character:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
c(X) \,=\, 1 + (8 \sigma_{1,1} + 7 \sigma_2) -440 \frac{\sigma_3}{4} + 1\,848 \frac{\sigma_{2,2}}{4}
\end{aligned}$}\\[8pt]
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Intersection numbers:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_{1,1}= 4 \ , \quad \sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_2 = 4 \ , \quad \sigma_2.\sigma_2=8
\end{aligned}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Zeros of integral quantum periods:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_5 &= 0 \quad \text{at } z_{\mathcal{O}_X} \ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_1}}&=10 \Pi_0 + 20 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + \Pi_3 - \Pi_4 - 2\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_1
\end{aligned}$}\\[8pt]
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ (left) and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ (right)}\\\hline
400 & 520 \\
208\,240 & 226\,480 \\
175\,466\,480 & 191\,464\,760 \\
196\,084\,534\,160 & 213\,155\,450\,240 \\
255\,402\,582\,828\,400 & 277\,092\,686\,601\,400 \\
367\,048\,595\,782\,193\,680 & 397\,700\,706\,634\,553\,680 \\
564\,810\,585\,071\,858\,496\,880 & 611\,416\,342\,763\,726\,567\,800 \\
913\,929\,133\,261\,543\,393\,001\,760 & 988\,670\,017\,271\,687\,389\,572\,480 \\
1\,536\,929\,129\,164\,031\,410\,293\,358\,720 & 1\,661\,748\,145\,541\,449\,358\,296\,013\,440 \\
2\,664\,576\,223\,763\,330\,924\,317\,069\,072\,400 & 2\,879\,777\,881\,450\,393\,936\,532\,565\,976\,400 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus one Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{1,d}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{-3\,200} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{370\,151\,480} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{4\,108\,408\,756\,800} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{19\,279\,169\,520\,232\,000} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{66\,081\,794\,099\,798\,279\,680} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{194\,122\,441\,310\,522\,439\,007\,040} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{522\,534\,128\,159\,184\,581\,441\,465\,280} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{1\,332\,480\,344\,031\,795\,460\,733\,665\,780\,608} \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\subsection{Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{2,3} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,5)$}
\begin{tabular}{|L|L|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Picard--Fuchs operator:}\\
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(z)\,=\,&(\theta -1) \theta ^5-6 z (2 \theta +1) (3 \theta +1) (3 \theta +2) \left(11 \theta ^2+11 \theta +3\right) \theta \\
&-36z^2 (2 \theta +1) (2 \theta +3) (3 \theta +1) (3 \theta +2) (3 \theta +4) (3 \theta +5)\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Discriminant locus:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Riemann P-symbol:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \Delta(z)= 1 - 1\,188 z - 11\,664 z^2$}& \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\multirow{4}{*}{$\left\{
\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & \infty & z_1 & z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\\[0.1em]
\hline
0 & \frac13 & 0 & 0 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac12 & 1 & 1 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac23 & 2 & 2 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac43 & 3 & 3 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac32 & 4 & 4 \\[0.1em]
1 & \frac53 & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2} \\
\end{array}
\right\}$}} \\
&\\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Regular singular points:} & \\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned} z&=0\\z&=\infty\\z&=z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\approx 8.3\cdot 10^{-4}\\z&=z_1 \approx -0.10 \end{aligned}$} & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Intersection pairing:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Large volume asymptotics:} \\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\chi = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 30 & 12 & 15 & 26 \\
0 & 0 & 12 & 6 & -12 & 5 \\
0 & 1 & 15 & -12 & -16 & -8 \\
1 & 0 & 26 & 5 & -8 & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)$} &
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t) = \left(
\begin{array}{*{1}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1\\
t\\
15t^2+30t+\frac{77}{4}\\
6t^2-6t+\frac{9}{4}\\
-5t^3-\frac{15}{2}t^2-\frac{47}{4}t-\frac{37}{8}+\frac{45 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}\\
\frac{5}{4}t^4+\frac{27}{8}t^2-\frac{45 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}t+\frac{23}{96}
\end{array}\right)$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Monodromy matrices:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$
\begin{aligned}
M_0&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 1 & 45 & 0 & -5 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 30 & 12 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_\infty =\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
-25 & -13 & -1015 & -46 & 390 & -50 \\
-60 & -29 & -2400 & -132 & 930 & -120 \\
2 & 1 & 80 & 4 & -31 & 4 \\
-3 & -1 & -105 & -8 & 40 & -5 \\
2 & 1 & 79 & 4 & -31 & 4 \\
5 & 2 & 184 & 13 & -72 & 9 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.2em]
M_{z_1}&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
25 & 12 & 1020 & 48 & -420 & 60 \\
60 & 31 & 2550 & 120 & -1050 & 150 \\
-2 & -1 & -84 & -4 & 35 & -5 \\
2 & 1 & 85 & 5 & -35 & 5 \\
-2 & -1 & -85 & -4 & 36 & -5 \\
-4 & -2 & -170 & -8 & 70 & -9 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_{z_{\mathcal{O}_X}} = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -26 & -5 & 8 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right)
\end{aligned}
$}\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\begin{tabular}{|R|R|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Generators of cohomology ring:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\left(1\,;\,\sigma_1\,;\,\sigma_{1,1},\sigma_2\,;\,\frac{\sigma_3}{6}\,;\,\frac{\sigma_{2,2}}{6}\right)\,\in\, H^{0,0}(X)\oplus \ldots \oplus H^{4,4}(X)
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Total Chern character:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
c(X) \,=\, 1 + (6 \sigma_{1,1} + 5 \sigma_2) -360 \frac{\sigma _3}{6} + 1188 \frac{\sigma _{2,2}}{6}
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Intersection numbers:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_{1,1}= 6 \ , \quad \sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_2 = 6 \ , \quad \sigma_2.\sigma_2=12
\end{aligned}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Zeros of integral quantum periods:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_5 &= 0 \quad \text{at } z_{\mathcal{O}_X} \ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_1}}&=12 \Pi_0 + 30 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + \Pi_3 - \Pi_4 - 2\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_1
\end{aligned}$}\\[8pt]
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ (left) and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ (right)}\\\hline
150 & 210 \\
34\,635 & 38\,175 \\
12\,266\,460 & 13\,599\,540 \\
5\,755\,894\,980 & 6\,352\,627\,620 \\
3\,144\,906\,174\,450 & 3\,462\,780\,142\,950 \\
1\,895\,113\,546\,937\,010 & 2\,083\,385\,152\,900\,350 \\
1\,222\,482\,269\,477\,448\,870 & 1\,342\,443\,529\,699\,952\,610 \\
829\,123\,506\,499\,521\,864\,000 & 909\,737\,222\,891\,667\,295\,200 \\
584\,369\,804\,499\,128\,982\,030\,870 & 640\,780\,961\,536\,667\,529\,927\,090 \\
424\,582\,414\,793\,779\,873\,760\,931\,825 & 465\,334\,861\,886\,835\,590\,355\,227\,325 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus one Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{1,d}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{-40} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{6\,629\,085} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{33\,762\,865\,500} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{72\,983\,984\,748\,600} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{111\,703\,298\,516\,011\,620} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{143\,677\,197\,771\,963\,884\,280} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{167\,307\,680\,280\,218\,203\,241\,460} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{183\,135\,579\,515\,334\,103\,668\,439\,662} \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\subsection{Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1^3,3} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,6)$}
\begin{tabular}{|L|L|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Picard--Fuchs operator:}\\
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(z)\,=\,& (\theta -1) \theta ^5-3 z(2 \theta +1) (3 \theta +1) (3 \theta +2) \left(13 \theta ^2+13 \theta +4\right)
\theta
\\&-27 z^2 (3 \theta +1) (3 \theta +2)^2 (3 \theta +4)^2 (3 \theta +5) z^2
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Discriminant locus:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Riemann P-symbol:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \Delta(z)= 1 - 702 z - 19\,683 z^2$}& \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\multirow{4}{*}{$\left\{
\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & \infty & z_1 & z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\\[0.1em]
\hline
0 & \frac13 & 0 & 0 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac23 & 1 & 1 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac23 & 2 & 2 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac43 & 3 & 3 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac43 & 4 & 4 \\[0.1em]
1 & \frac53 & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2} \\
\end{array}
\right\}$}} \\
&\\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Regular singular points:} & \\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned} z&=0\\z&=\infty\\z&=z_{\mathcal{O}_X}=729^{-1}\\z&=z_1 = -27^{-1} \end{aligned}$} & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Intersection pairing:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Large volume asymptotics:} \\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\chi = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 42 & 15 & 21 & 41 \\
0 & 0 & 15 & 6 & -15 & 8 \\
0 & 1 & 21 & -15 & -20 & -10 \\
1 & 0 & 41 & 8 & -10 & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)$} &
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t) = \left(
\begin{array}{*{1}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1\\
t\\
21t^2+42t+\frac{131}{4}\\
\frac{15}{2}t^2-\frac{15}{2}t+5\\
-7t^3-\frac{21}{2}t^2-\frac{61}{4}t-\frac{47}{8}+\frac{213 i \zeta(3)}{4\pi^3}\\
\frac{7}{4}t^4+\frac{33}{8}t^2-\frac{213 i \zeta(3)}{4\pi^3}t+\frac{3}{16}
\end{array}\right)$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Monodromy matrices:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$
\begin{aligned}
M_0&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 1 & 63 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 42 & 15 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_\infty =\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
-62 & -22 & -3360 & -300 & 1029 & -105 \\
-126 & -41 & -6720 & -645 & 2058 & -210 \\
3 & 1 & 160 & 15 & -49 & 5 \\
-4 & -1 & -200 & -22 & 60 & -6 \\
3 & 1 & 159 & 15 & -49 & 5 \\
7 & 2 & 359 & 38 & -110 & 11 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.2em]
M_{z_1}&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
43 & 21 & 2730 & 210 & -966 & 126 \\
84 & 43 & 5460 & 420 & -1932 & 252 \\
-2 & -1 & -129 & -10 & 46 & -6 \\
2 & 1 & 130 & 11 & -46 & 6 \\
-2 & -1 & -130 & -10 & 47 & -6 \\
-4 & -2 & -260 & -20 & 92 & -11 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_{z_{\mathcal{O}_X}} = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -41 & -8 & 10 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right)
\end{aligned}
$}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\begin{tabular}{|R|R|}\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Generators of cohomology ring:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\left(1\,;\,\sigma_1\,;\,\sigma_{1,1},\sigma_2\,;\,\frac{\sigma_3}{12}\,;\,\frac{\sigma_{2,2}}{6}\right)\,\in\, H^{0,0}(X)\oplus \ldots \oplus H^{4,4}(X)
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Total Chern character:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
c(X) \,=\, 1 + (6 \sigma_{1,1} + 4 \sigma_2) - 426 \frac{\sigma _3}{12} + 1368 \frac{\sigma _{2,2}}{6}
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Intersection numbers:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_{1,1}= 6 \ , \quad \sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_2 = 9 \ , \quad \sigma_2.\sigma_2=18
\end{aligned}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Zeros of integral quantum periods:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_5 &= 0 \quad \text{at } z_{\mathcal{O}_X} \ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_1}}&=21 \Pi_0 + 42 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + \Pi_3 - \Pi_4 - 2\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_1
\end{aligned}$}\\[8pt]
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ (left) and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ (right)}\\\hline
45 & 129 \\
11\,169 & 13\,731 \\
2\,334\,015 & 2\,977\,203 \\
670\,339\,377 & 843\,149\,973 \\
222\,531\,477\,228 & 278\,449\,436\,724 \\
81\,416\,926\,226\,097 & 101\,484\,761\,783\,937 \\
31\,861\,797\,197\,835\,564 & 39\,609\,507\,515\,035\,620 \\
13\,104\,024\,227\,969\,549\,085 & 16\,258\,171\,900\,604\,949\,897 \\
5\,598\,901\,286\,610\,753\,390\,696 & 6\,935\,937\,444\,307\,917\,236\,520 \\
2\,465\,575\,949\,291\,932\,283\,056\,560 & 3\,050\,652\,167\,218\,394\,830\,016\,340 \\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus one Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{1,d}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{ 20} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{117\,369} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{1\,111\,542\,426} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{ 2\,030\,821\,680\,744} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{ 2\,190\,254\,867\,538\,498} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{ 1\,859\,490\,547\,470\,080\,793} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{ 1\,386\,159\,363\,843\,011\,650\,458} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{ 955\,211\,114\,503\,390\,944\,999\,069} \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\subsection{Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1^2,2^2} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,6)$}
\begin{tabular}{|L|L|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Picard--Fuchs operator:}\\
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(z)\,=\,&(\theta -1) \theta ^5 -4z (2 \theta +1)^3 \left(13 \theta ^2+13 \theta +4\right) \theta -48z^2 (2 \theta +1)^2 (2 \theta +3)^2 (3 \theta +2) (3 \theta +4)
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Discriminant locus:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Riemann P-symbol:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \Delta(z)=1 - 416 z - 6\,912 z^2$}& \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\multirow{4}{*}{$\left\{
\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & \infty & z_1 & z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\\[0.1em]
\hline
0 & \frac12 & 0 & 0 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac12 & 1 & 1 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac23 & 2 & 2 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac43 & 3 & 3 \\[0.1em]
0 & \frac32 & 4 & 4 \\[0.1em]
1 & \frac32 & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2} \\
\end{array}
\right\}$}} \\
&\\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Regular singular points:} & \\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned} z&=0\\z&=\infty\\z&=z_{\mathcal{O}_X}=432^{-1}\\z&=z_1 = -16^{-1} \end{aligned}$} & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Intersection pairing:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Large volume asymptotics:} \\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\chi = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 56 & 20 & 28 & 50 \\
0 & 0 & 20 & 8 & -20 & 9 \\
0 & 1 & 28 & -20 & -22 & -11 \\
1 & 0 & 50 & 9 & -11 & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)$} &
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t) = \left(
\begin{array}{*{1}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1\\
t\\
28t^2+56t+\frac{124}{3}\\
10t^2-10t+\frac{35}{6}\\
-\frac{28}{3}t^3-14t^2-18t-\frac{20}{3}+\frac{43 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}\\
\frac{7}{3}t^4+\frac{13}{3}t^2-\frac{43 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}t+\frac{47}{144}
\end{array}\right)$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Monodromy matrices:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$
\begin{aligned}
M_0&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 1 & 84 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 56 & 20 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_\infty =\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
-83 & -29 & -5572 & -400 & 1512 & -140 \\
-168 & -55 & -11144 & -860 & 3024 & -280 \\
3 & 1 & 199 & 15 & -54 & 5 \\
-4 & -1 & -248 & -23 & 66 & -6 \\
3 & 1 & 198 & 15 & -54 & 5 \\
7 & 2 & 446 & 39 & -121 & 11 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.2em]
M_{z_1}&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
57 & 28 & 4592 & 280 & -1456 & 168 \\
112 & 57 & 9184 & 560 & -2912 & 336 \\
-2 & -1 & -163 & -10 & 52 & -6 \\
2 & 1 & 164 & 11 & -52 & 6 \\
-2 & -1 & -164 & -10 & 53 & -6 \\
-4 & -2 & -328 & -20 & 104 & -11 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_{z_{\mathcal{O}_X}} = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -50 & -9 & 11 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right)
\end{aligned}
$}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\begin{tabular}{|R|R|}\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Generators of cohomology ring:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\left(1\,;\,\sigma_1\,;\,\sigma_{1,1},\sigma_2\,;\,\frac{\sigma_3}{16}\,;\,\frac{\sigma_{2,2}}{8}\right)\,\in\, H^{0,0}(X)\oplus \ldots \oplus H^{4,4}(X)
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Total Chern character:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
c(X) \,=\, 1 + (5 \sigma_{1,1} + 3 \sigma_2) -344 \frac{\sigma _3}{16} + 888 \frac{\sigma _{2,2}}{8}
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Intersection numbers:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_{1,1}= 8 \ , \quad \sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_2 = 12 \ , \quad \sigma_2.\sigma_2=24
\end{aligned}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Zeros of integral quantum periods:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_5 &= 0 \quad \text{at } z_{\mathcal{O}_X} \ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_1}}&=28 \Pi_0 + 56 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + \Pi_3 - \Pi_4 - 2\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_1
\end{aligned}$}\\[8pt]
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ (left) and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ (right)}\\\hline
20 & 76 \\
3\,710 & 4\,662 \\
456\,996 & 601\,308 \\
77\,744\,208 & 100\,674\,808 \\
15\,262\,779\,768 & 19\,647\,842\,856 \\
3\,300\,982\,396\,086 & 4\,230\,686\,882\,622 \\
763\,420\,513\,970\,084 & 975\,446\,610\,603\,036 \\
185\,520\,589\,035\,937\,760 & 236\,505\,646\,336\,207\,216 \\
46\,831\,421\,841\,938\,832\,444 & 59\,596\,808\,422\,526\,994\,692 \\
12\,183\,382\,927\,032\,659\,991\,892 & 15\,482\,698\,161\,874\,509\,215\,956 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus one Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{1,d}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{17\,898} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{60\,657\,824} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{65\,864\,201\,248} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{43\,546\,640\,994\,304} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{22\,541\,684\,709\,460\,560} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{10\,173\,360\,305\,632\,854\,080} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{4\,221\,177\,321\,952\,488\,663\,680} \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\subsection{Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1^5,2} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,7)$}
\begin{tabular}{|L|L|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Picard--Fuchs operator:}\\
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(z)\,=\,&+9 (\theta -1) \theta ^5-6 z\theta \left(310 \theta ^5+919 \theta ^4+884 \theta ^3+476 \theta ^2+132 \theta +15\right)\\
&-4z^2 \left(21311 \theta ^6+78951 \theta ^5+154395 \theta ^4+180544 \theta ^3+121086 \theta ^2+42546 \theta +6048\right)\\
&-8 z^3(2 \theta +1) \left(57561 \theta ^5+249372 \theta ^4+412273 \theta ^3+310581 \theta^2+104388 \theta +11691\right)\\
&-16z^4 (2 \theta +1) (2 \theta +3) \left(10501 \theta ^4+20138 \theta ^3+13096 \theta ^2+2676 \theta -154\right)\\
&+1184z^5 (\theta +1)^3 (2 \theta+1) (2 \theta +3) (2 \theta +5)
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Discriminant locus:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Riemann P-symbol:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \Delta(z)=1 - 228 z - 4\,624 z^2 + 64 z^3$} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\multirow{4}{*}{$\left\{
\begin{array}{ccccc}
0 & \infty & z_1 & z_2 & z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\\[0.1em]
\hline
0 & \frac12 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 2 & 2 & 2\\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 3 & 3 & 3\\[0.1em]
0 & \frac32 & 4 & 4 & 4\\[0.1em]
1 & \frac52 & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2} &\frac{3}{2} \\
\end{array}
\right\}$}} \\
&\\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Regular singular points:} & \\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned} z&=0\\z&=\infty\\z&= z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\approx 0.004\\z&= z_1 \approx -0.053 \\z&=z_2\approx 72.3 \end{aligned}$} & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Intersection pairing:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Large volume asymptotics:} \\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\chi = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 84 & 28 & 42 & 70 \\
0 & 0 & 28 & 10 & -28 & 11 \\
0 & 1 & 42 & -28 & -28 & -14 \\
1 & 0 & 70 & 11 & -14 & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)$} &
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t) = \left(
\begin{array}{*{1}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1\\
t\\
42t^2+84t+\frac{119}{2}\\
14t^2-14t+\frac{89}{12}\\
-14t^3-21t^2-\frac{49}{2}t-\frac{35}{4}+\frac{91 i \zeta(3)}{2\pi^3}\\
\frac{7}{2}t^4+\frac{21}{4}t^2-\frac{91 i \zeta(3)}{2\pi^3}t+\frac{65}{192}
\end{array}\right)$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Monodromy matrices:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$
\begin{aligned}
M_0&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 1 & 126 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 84 & 28 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_\infty =\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
-533 & -43 & -36946 & -3626 & 6902 & -252 \\
-1008 & -83 & -70252 & -6916 & 13244 & -504 \\
13 & 1 & 897 & 89 & -167 & 6 \\
-14 & -1 & -966 & -99 & 182 & -7 \\
16 & 1 & 1078 & 110 & -195 & 6 \\
42 & 2 & 2772 & 294 & -490 & 13 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.2em]
M_{z_1}&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
85 & 42 & 9996 & 504 & -2940 & 294 \\
168 & 85 & 19992 & 1008 & -5880 & 588 \\
-2 & -1 & -237 & -12 & 70 & -7 \\
2 & 1 & 238 & 13 & -70 & 7 \\
-2 & -1 & -238 & -12 & 71 & -7 \\
-4 & -2 & -476 & -24 & 140 & -13 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_{z_2}=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
97 & 0 & 5824 & 672 & -896 & 0 \\
420 & 1 & 25480 & 2940 & -3920 & 0 \\
-3 & 0 & -181 & -21 & 28 & 0 \\
12 & 0 & 728 & 85 & -112 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-9 & 0 & -546 & -63 & 84 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.2em]
M_{z_{\mathcal{O}_X}} &= \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -70 & -11 & 14 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right)
\end{aligned}
$}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\begin{tabular}{|R|R|}\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Generators of cohomology ring:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\left(1\,;\,\sigma_1\,;\,\sigma_{1,1},\sigma_2\,;\,\frac{\sigma_3}{28}\,;\,\frac{\sigma_{2,2}}{10}\right)\,\in\, H^{0,0}(X)\oplus \ldots \oplus H^{4,4}(X)
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Total Chern character:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
c(X) \,=\, 1 + (5 \sigma_{1,1} + 2 \sigma_2) -364 \frac{\sigma _3}{28} + 846 \frac{\sigma _{2,2}}{10}
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Intersection numbers:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_{1,1}= 10 \ , \quad \sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_2 = 18 \ , \quad \sigma_2.\sigma_2=38
\end{aligned}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Zeros of integral quantum periods:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_5 &= 0 \quad \text{at } z_{\mathcal{O}_X} \ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_1}}&=42 \Pi_0 + 84 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + \Pi_3 - \Pi_4 - 2\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_1\ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_2}}&=32 \Pi_0 + 140 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + 4\Pi_3 -3\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_2
\end{aligned}$}\\[17pt]
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ (left) and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ (right)}\\\hline
-10 & 46 \\
1\,009 & 1\,499 \\
66\,436 & 111\,012 \\
6\,611\,218 & 10\,644\,996 \\
744\,513\,554 & 1\,186\,881\,242 \\
92\,436\,371\,702 & 146\,004\,322\,222 \\
12\,248\,099\,597\,230 & 19\,229\,229\,169\,542 \\
1\,704\,064\,096\,112\,480 & 2\,663\,089\,251\,024\,164 \\
246\,133\,929\,404\,316\,702 & 383\,301\,240\,195\,065\,542 \\
36\,625\,042\,233\,637\,069\,635 & 56\,876\,037\,388\,681\,122\,041 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus one Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{1,d}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{175} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{1\,251\,544} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{1\,106\,013\,132} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{502\,633\,629\,368} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{165\,747\,820\,001\,414} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{458\,876\,986\,698\,030\,32} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{11\,434\,511\,768\,888\,583\,676} \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\subsection{Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1^8} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,8)$}
\begin{tabular}{|L|L|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Picard--Fuchs operator:}\\
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(z)\,=\,&+121 (\theta -1) \theta ^5-22z\, \theta \left(438 \theta ^5+2094 \theta ^4+1710 \theta ^3+950 \theta ^2+275 \theta +33\right)\\
&+z^2\big(-839313 \theta ^6-2471661 \theta^5-4037556 \theta ^4-4497304 \theta ^3-3093948 \theta ^2-1158740 \theta\\
&-180048\big)-2z^3 \big(5746754 \theta ^6+26470666 \theta ^5+51184224 \theta ^4+50480470 \theta^3+26295335 \theta ^2\\
&+6684843 \theta +604098\big)-4z^4 \big(4081884 \theta ^6+14894484 \theta ^5+18825903 \theta ^4 +7472030 \theta ^3\\
&-3698839 \theta ^2-4099839\theta-993618\big)+56 z^5\big(29592 \theta ^6+255960 \theta ^5+806448 \theta ^4+1272787\theta^3\\
&+1088403 \theta ^2+483431 \theta +87609\big)+1568 z^6(\theta +1)^3 (2 \theta+3) (4 \theta +3) (4 \theta +5)
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Discriminant locus:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Riemann P-symbol:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \Delta(z)=(1 + 16 z) (1 - 136 z + 16 z^2)$} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\multirow{4}{*}{$\left\{
\begin{array}{ccccc}
0 & \infty & z_1 & z_2 & z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\\[0.1em]
\hline
0 & \frac34 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 2 & 2 & 2\\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 3 & 3 & 3\\[0.1em]
0 & \frac54 & 4 & 4 & 4\\[0.1em]
1 & \frac32 & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2} &\frac{3}{2} \\
\end{array}
\right\}$}} \\
&\\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Regular singular points:} & \\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned} z&=0\\z&=\infty\\z&= z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\approx 0.007\\z&= z_1 =-16^{-1} \\z&=z_2\approx 8.5 \end{aligned}$} & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Intersection pairing:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Large volume asymptotics:} \\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\chi = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 132 & 42 & 66 & 102 \\
0 & 0 & 42 & 14 & -42 & 14 \\
0 & 1 & 66 & -42 & -36 & -18 \\
1 & 0 & 102 & 14 & -18 & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)$} &
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t) = \left(
\begin{array}{*{1}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1\\
t\\
66t^2+132t+\frac{179}{2}\\
21t^2-21t+\frac{119}{12}\\
-22t^3-33t^2-\frac{69}{2}t-\frac{47}{4}+\frac{42 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}\\
\frac{11}{2}t^4+\frac{25}{4}t^2-\frac{42 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}t+\frac{115}{288}
\end{array}\right)$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Monodromy matrices:}\\[0.3em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{$
\begin{aligned}
M_0&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 1 & 198 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 132 & 42 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \, \,
M_\infty =\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
-1109 & -67 & -111054 & -10010 & 17610 & -462 \\
-2100 & -131 & -211308 & -19026 & 33780 & -924 \\
17 & 1 & 1699 & 154 & -269 & 7 \\
-18 & -1 & -1800 & -167 & 288 & -8 \\
20 & 1 & 1968 & 182 & -305 & 7 \\
50 & 2 & 4848 & 462 & -738 & 15 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.3em]
M_{z_1}&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
133 & 66 & 23760 & 924 & -6336 & 528 \\
264 & 133 & 47520 & 1848 & -12672 & 1056 \\
-2 & -1 & -359 & -14 & 96 & -8 \\
2 & 1 & 360 & 15 & -96 & 8 \\
-2 & -1 & -360 & -14 & 97 & -8 \\
-4 & -2 & -720 & -28 & 192 & -15 \\
\end{array}
\right) \, \,
M_{z_2}=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
157 & 0 & 14040 & 1456 & -1872 & 0 \\
648 & 1 & 58320 & 6048 & -7776 & 0 \\
-3 & 0 & -269 & -28 & 36 & 0 \\
12 & 0 & 1080 & 113 & -144 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-9 & 0 & -810 & -84 & 108 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.3em]
M_{z_{\mathcal{O}_X}} &= \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -102 & -14 & 18 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right)
\end{aligned}
$}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\begin{tabular}{|R|R|}\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Generators of cohomology ring:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\left(1\,;\,\sigma_1\,;\,\sigma_{1,1},\sigma_2\,;\,\frac{\sigma_3}{48}\,;\,\frac{\sigma_{2,2}}{14}\right)\,\in\, H^{0,0}(X)\oplus \ldots \oplus H^{4,4}(X)
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Total Chern character:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
c(X) \,=\, 1 + (5 \sigma_{1,1} + \sigma_2) -336 \frac{\sigma _3}{48} + 636 \frac{\sigma _{2,2}}{14}
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Intersection numbers:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_{1,1}= 14 \ , \quad \sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_2 = 28 \ , \quad \sigma_2.\sigma_2=62
\end{aligned}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Zeros of integral quantum periods:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_5 &= 0 \quad \text{at } z_{\mathcal{O}_X} \ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_1}}&=66 \Pi_0 + 132 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + \Pi_3 - \Pi_4 - 2\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_1\ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_2}}&=52 \Pi_0 + 216 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + 4\Pi_3 -3\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_2
\end{aligned}$}\\[17pt]
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ (left) and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ (right)}\\\hline
-20 & 28 \\
222 & 462 \\
7\,564 & 18\,732 \\
433\,184 & 999\,488 \\
27\,132\,712 & 61\,606\,888 \\
1\,883\,975\,,918 & 4\,190\,840\,486 \\
138\,861\,570\,764 & 305\,141\,892\,524 \\
10\,734\,197\,390\,880 & 23\,363\,298\,862\,176 \\
860\,337\,105\,561\,204 & 1\,859\,026\,775\,810\,036 \\
70\,983\,785\,067\,825\,508 & 152\,499\,803\,765\,006\,068 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus one Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{1,d}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{24\,528} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{14\,591\,360} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{4\,331\,039\,424} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{882\,540\,559\,446} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{145\,991\,147\,911\,616} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{21\,275\,702\,877\,573\,816} \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\subsection{Skew Symmetric Sigma Model Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{1,17,7}$}
\label{app:Tab2}
\begin{tabular}{|L|L|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Picard--Fuchs operator:}\\
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{{$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(z) \,=\, &+316\,932 (\theta -1) \theta ^5 -98 z\, \theta \big(700\,453 \theta ^5+1\,335\,058 \theta ^4+1\,609\,080 \theta ^3+879\,285 \theta ^2 +249\,018 \theta\\
&+29\,106\big)+962754229z^2\big( \theta ^6-1\,976\,960\,883 \theta ^5-10\,395\,509\,031 \theta ^4-14\,991\,662\,969 \theta ^3\\
&-10\,456\,423\,600 \theta ^2-3\,667\,629\,910 \theta -521\,151\,456 \big) +2 z^3 \big(9\,812\,727\,979 \theta ^6\\
&+53\,190\,263\,573 \theta ^5+105\,895\,432\,463 \theta ^4+103\,996\,363\,801 \theta ^3 +54\,017\,188\,106 \theta ^2\\
&+14\,078\,111\,747 \theta +1\,415\,445\,066\big)-2 z^4\big(11\,549\,486\,896 \theta ^6+46\,324\,321\,804 \theta ^5\\
&+73\,290\,469\,426 \theta ^4+60\,074\,870\,026 \theta ^3+27\,353\,847\,169 \theta ^2+6\,669\,746\,719 \theta+696\,036\,075\big)\\
&+174z^5 \big(1\,666\,198 \theta ^6+6\,006\,981 \theta ^5+10\,497\,819 \theta ^4+11\,551\,078 \theta ^3+8\,162\,130 \theta ^2\\
&+3\,331\,047 \theta +588\,537\big)-211\,932 z^6 (\theta +1)^5 (2 \theta +3)
\end{aligned}$}}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Discriminant locus:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Riemann P-symbol:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \Delta(z)=(1 - 188 z - 2368 z^2 + 4 z^3)$} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{\multirow{4}{*}{$\left\{
\begin{array}{ccccc}
0 & \infty & z_1 & z_2 & z_{\mathcal{O}_X}\\[0.1em]
\hline
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 2 & 2 & 2\\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 3 & 3 & 3\\[0.1em]
0 & 1 & 4 & 4 & 4\\[0.1em]
1 & \frac32 & \frac{3}{2} & \frac{3}{2} &\frac{3}{2} \\
\end{array}
\right\}$}} \\[0.3em]
&\\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Regular singular points:} & \\
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\begin{aligned} z&=0\\z&=\infty\\z&= z_{\mathcal{O}_X}(=z_3)\approx 0.005\\z&= z_1 \approx-0.084 \\z&=z_2\approx 592 \end{aligned}$} & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Intersection pairing:} & \multicolumn{1}{|l|}{Large volume asymptotics:} \\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$\chi = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 98 & 33 & 49 & 79 \\
0 & 0 & 33 & 12 & -33 & 12 \\
0 & 1 & 49 & -33 & -30 & -15 \\
1 & 0 & 79 & 12 & -15 & 2 \\
\end{array}
\right)$} &
\multicolumn{1}{|l|}{$ \vec\Pi^{\text{asy}}(t) = \left(
\begin{array}{*{1}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1\\
t\\
49t^2+98t+\frac{817}{12}\\
\frac{33}{2}t^2-\frac{33}{2}t+\frac{33}{4}\\
-\frac{49}{3}t^3-\frac{49}{2}t^2-\frac{109}{4}t-\frac{229}{24}+\frac{41 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}\\
\frac{49}{12}t^4+\frac{131}{24}t^2-\frac{41 i \zeta(3)}{\pi^3}t+\frac{7}{18}
\end{array}\right)$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Monodromy matrices:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{\scriptsize
$\begin{aligned}
M_0&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 1 & 147 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 98 & 33 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right) \quad
M_{z_1}=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
99 & 49 & 13328 & 588 & -3724 & 343 \\
196 & 99 & 26656 & 1176 & -7448 & 686 \\
-2 & -1 & -271 & -12 & 76 & -7 \\
2 & 1 & 272 & 13 & -76 & 7 \\
-2 & -1 & -272 & -12 & 77 & -7 \\
-4 & -2 & -544 & -24 & 152 & -13 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.2em]
M_{z_2}&=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
4117 & 1568 & 478828 & 23520 & -115248 & 8232 \\
4809 & 1833 & 559447 & 27480 & -134652 & 9618 \\
-84 & -32 & -9771 & -480 & 2352 & -168 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
-168 & -64 & -19544 & -960 & 4705 & -336 \\
-441 & -168 & -51303 & -2520 & 12348 & -881 \\
\end{array}
\right)\quad
M_{z_{\mathcal{O}_X}} = \left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & -79 & -12 & 15 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\\[0.2em]
M_\infty &=\left(
\begin{array}{*{6}{>{\scriptstyle}c}}
-3975 & -1490 & -459291 & -22890 & 110201 & -7854 \\
-1757 & -617 & -197897 & -10479 & 46942 & -3318 \\
67 & 25 & 7728 & 387 & -1853 & 132 \\
121 & 47 & 14181 & 682 & -3423 & 245 \\
151 & 57 & 17499 & 867 & -4205 & 300 \\
198 & 74 & 22862 & 1146 & -5487 & 391 \\
\end{array}
\right) \\[0.2em]
\end{aligned}
$}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\newpage
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{|R|R|}\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Generators of cohomology ring:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\left(1\,;\,H\,;\,\sigma_{2},H^2\,;\,\frac{H^3}{98}\,;\,\frac{H^4}{98}\right)\,\in\, H^{0,0}(X)\oplus \ldots \oplus H^{4,4}(X)
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Total Chern character:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
c(X) \,=\, 1 + (4 H^2 - 2 \sigma_2) -328\frac{H^3}{98} + 672\frac{H^4}{98}
\end{aligned}$}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Intersection numbers:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{2}.\sigma_{2}= 44 \ , \quad \sigma_{2}.H^2 = 65 \ , \quad H^2.H^2=98
\end{aligned}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Zeros of integral quantum periods:}\\[0.2em]
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{
$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_5 &= 0 \quad \text{at } z_{\mathcal{O}_X} \ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_1}}&=49 \Pi_0 + 98 \Pi_1 - \Pi_2 + \Pi_3 - \Pi_4 - 2\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_1\ , \\
\Pi_{\mathcal{B}_{z_2}}&=-196 \Pi_0 -229 \Pi_1 +4 \Pi_2 + 8\Pi_4 +21\Pi_5 = 0 \quad \text{at } z_2
\end{aligned}$}\\[17pt]
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n^{(1)}_{0,d}$ (left) and $n^{(2)}_{0,d}$ (right)}\\\hline
0 & 33 \\
721 & 170 \\
38\,255 & 16\,126 \\
3\,042\,676 & 1\,141\,312 \\
274\,320\,123 & 100\,955\,257 \\
27\,276\,710\,118 & 9\,821\,360\,694 \\
2\,897\,092\,850\,989 & 1\,028\,274\,636\,900 \\
323\,207\,209\,581\,582 & 113\,458\,193\,073\,000 \\
37\,444\,642\,819\,824\,776 & 13\,032\,484\,062\,881\,000 \\
4\,469\,922\,540\,366\,355\,762 & 1\,545\,108\,865\,260\,914\,434 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{Genus one Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{1,d}$}\\\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{0} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{224\,386} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{206\,613\,908} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{83\,707\,955\,196} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{23\,455\,827\,469\,526} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{5\,401\,382\,970\,402\,176} \\
\multicolumn{2}{|r|}{1\,107\,021\,477\,254\,814\,128} \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\normalsize
\newpage
\section{Lines on Calabi--Yau fourfolds} \label{app:InterTheory}
To verify the computed integral quantum periods and the deduced quantum cohomology ring, we here enumerate the number of lines with a marked point located on a codimension two algebraic cycle in the studied Calabi--Yau fourfolds, which arise as complete intersections in Grassmannian spaces $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$ for various choices of $n$. Note that the presented derivation generalizes to other complete intersection varieties embedded into general Grassmannians $\operatorname{Gr}(k,n)$ as well, and this appendix is rather independent from the main text.
The moduli space $\mathcal{M}_1$ of lines with a marked point in the ambient Grassmannian variety $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$ is the flag variety $\operatorname{Fl}(1,2,3,n)$, whose points are the flags $V_1 \subset V_2 \subset V_3 \subset V_n$ of complex vector spaces with $V_\ell \simeq \mathbb{C}^\ell$. For such a flag the two-dimensional quotient vector space $V_3/V_1$ describes the projective line $\mathbb{P}(V_3/V_1)$. The points in $\mathbb{P}(V_3/V_1)$ are the one-dimensional subvector spaces $\Lambda_1 \subset V_3/V_1$, which canonically define two planes $V_1 \oplus \Lambda_1$ to be identified with points in the Grassmannian variety $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$. Furthermore, the subvector space $\Lambda_1 = V_2/V_1$ corresponds to the marked point on the projective line that maps to the two plane $V_1\oplus V_2/V_1 \simeq V_2$ in $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$. It defines the evaluation map of the marked point
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{ev}_1: \mathcal{M}_1
\to \operatorname{Gr}(2,n) \ ,\
V_1 \subset V_2 \subset V_3 \subset V_n \mapsto V_2 \ .
\end{equation}
We realize the flag variety $\mathcal{M}_1\simeq\operatorname{Fl}(1,2,3,n)$ in terms of the nested fibrations of projective spaces \cite{MR658304}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:bundle}
\begin{CD}
\mathcal{U}_1 \oplus \mathcal{Q}_1 @. \mathcal{U}_2 \oplus \mathcal{Q}_2 @. \mathcal{U}_3 \oplus \mathcal{Q}_3\\
@VVV @VVV @VVV\\
\mathbb{P}(V_n) @<{\pi_1}<< \mathbb{P}(\mathcal{Q}_1)@<{\pi_2}<< \mathbb{P}(\mathcal{Q}_2)
\end{CD}
\end{equation}
Here, $\mathcal{U}_1$, $\mathcal{U}_2$ and $\mathcal{U}_3$ are the universal line bundles of the (fibered) projective spaces, whereas $\mathcal{Q}_1$, $\mathcal{Q}_2$ and $\mathcal{Q}_3$ are their respective quotient bundles of dimension $(n-1)$, $(n-2)$ and $(n-3)$, i.e.,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:relbundles}
\mathcal{U}_1 \oplus \mathcal{Q}_1 = V_n \ , \qquad
\mathcal{U}_2 \oplus \mathcal{Q}_2 = \pi_1^*\mathcal{Q}_1 \ , \qquad
\mathcal{U}_3 \oplus \mathcal{Q}_3 = \pi_2^*\mathcal{Q}_2 \ .
\end{equation}
Let $\mathcal{M}_2$ be the moduli space of lines with two marked points in $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$ given by the fibration
\begin{equation}
\begin{CD}
\mathbb{P}(\pi_2^*\mathcal{U}_2\oplus\mathcal{U}_3)@>>>\mathcal{M}_2 \\
@. @VfVV \\
@. \mathcal{M}_1 \\
\end{CD} \ .
\end{equation}
The projection $f$ to the base $\mathcal{M}_1$ is the forgetful map that removes the second marked point, whereas its evaluation map reads
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{ev}_2: \mathcal{M}_2 \to \operatorname{Gr}(2,n) \ ,
(\Lambda_1, V_1 \subset V_2 \subset V_3 \subset V_n) \mapsto V_1 \oplus \Lambda_1 \ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of the one-dimensional vector space $\Lambda_1$ for the points of the projective fibers and the flag $V_1 \subset V_2 \subset V_3 \subset V_n$ for the base point in $\mathcal{M}_1$.
The cohomology of the flag variety $\mathcal{M}_1$ --- as given in the nested fibration~\eqref{eq:bundle} --- becomes \cite{MR658304}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Hring}
H^*(\mathcal{M}_1,\mathbb{Q}) \,=\, \mathbb{Q}[H_1,H_2,H_3,\xi^{(1)},\ldots,\xi^{(n-3)}] / \mathcal{I} \ .
\end{equation}
The generators of the cohomology ring arise from the Chern classes of the bundles over the nested firbation~\eqref{eq:bundle} as
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&H_1 \,=\,- \pi_2^*\pi_1^* c_1(\mathcal{U}_1) \ , \quad
H_2 \,=\, -\pi_2^* c_1(\mathcal{U}_2) \ , \quad
H_3 \,=\, - c_1(\mathcal{U}_3) \ , \\[1ex]
&\xi^{(\ell)}_3 \,=\, c_\ell(\mathcal{Q}_3) \ , \quad \ell=1,\ldots,n-3 \ ,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $H_1$, $H_2$, and $H_3$ are the hyperplane classes of the (fibered) projective spaces and $\xi^{(\ell)}_3$ the Chern classes of the quotient bundle over the last fibered projective space $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{Q}_2)$. The ideal $\mathcal{I}$ is generated by the homogenous terms (with respect to the form degree of the generators) in the expression
\begin{equation}
1-(1- H_1)(1-H_2)(1-H_3)(1+\xi^{(1)}_3+\ldots+ \xi^{(n-3)}_3) \ .
\end{equation}
Note that the relations in the ideal $\mathcal{I}$ determine the cohomology classes $\xi^{(\ell)}_3$ in terms of the hyperplane class generators $H_1$, $H_2$, and $H_3$. Furthermore, the total Chern class of the quotient bundles $\pi_2^*\pi_1^*\mathcal{Q}_1$ and $\pi_2^*\mathcal{Q}_2$ read
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\pi_2^*\pi_1^*c(\mathcal{Q}_1) &= 1 + \xi^{(1)}_1 + \ldots + \xi^{(n-1)}_1 = \frac{1}{1-H_1}
\ \in\, H^*(\mathcal{M}_1)\ , \\
\pi_2^*c(\mathcal{Q}_2) &= 1 + \xi^{(2)}_2 + \ldots + \xi^{(n-2)}_2 = \frac{1}{(1-H_1)(1-H_2)}
\ \in\, H^*(\mathcal{M}_1) \ . \nonumber
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Now we want to enumerate the number of lines on Calabi--Yau fourfolds, which for our class of examples are given as complete intersections $X_{k_1,\ldots,k_\alpha}$ (with $k_i \ge 1$) embedded in the Grassmannian spaces $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$ as the zero locus of a generic section in $\mathcal{O}(k_1 \sigma_1)\oplus \ldots\oplus \mathcal{O}(k_\alpha \sigma_1)$. Since $\dim_\mathbb{C} \operatorname{Gr}(2,n) = 2(n-2)$ and $c_1(\operatorname{Gr}(2,n) ) = n\,\sigma_1$, we obtain four-dimensional Calabi--Yau varieties in $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$ only for
\begin{equation} \label{eq:cond}
\alpha \,=\, 2(n-4) \ , \qquad n = k_1 + \ldots + k_\alpha \ .
\end{equation}
In the next step, we impose the complete intersection constraints on the level of the moduli space $\mathcal{M}_1$. We observe that the line bundles $\mathcal{O}(k_i \sigma_1)$ induce on $\mathcal{M}_1$ the vector bundles
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{B}(k) \,=\, f_*\operatorname{ev}_2^*\mathcal{O}(k \sigma_1) \ .
\end{equation}
These bundles are explicitly determined to be
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{B}(k) \,=\, \operatorname{Sym}^{k}\left[ \pi_1^*\pi_2^*\mathcal{U}_1 \otimes \left( \pi_2^*\mathcal{U}_2\oplus\mathcal{U}_3\right) \right ] \ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of symmetrized tensor products of the rank two bundle $\pi_1^*\pi_2^*\mathcal{U}_1 \otimes \left( \pi_2^*\mathcal{U}_2\oplus\mathcal{U}_3\right)$ on $\mathcal{M}_1$. By construction the zeros of induced sections on $\mathcal{B}(k_i)$ describe the loci in $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$, where the entire projective line of $\mathcal{M}_1$ vanishes. Thus the zero locus of the induced section of the bundle $\mathcal{B}(k_1)\oplus\ldots\oplus\mathcal{B}_\alpha$ on $\mathcal{M}_1$ describes the moduli space of lines with a single marked point of the Calabi--Yau variety $X_{k_1,\ldots,k_\alpha}$.
To enumerate genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants at degree one on $X_{k_1,\ldots,k_\alpha}$, it remains to restrict the marked point on the lines to one of the codimension two (pulled-back) Schubert classes $\sigma_{1,1}$ or $\sigma_{2}$ in $X_{k_1,\ldots,k_\alpha}$. On the moduli space $\mathcal{M}_1$ these classes become $\operatorname{ev}_1^*\sigma_{1,1}$ and $\operatorname{ev}_1^*\sigma_{2}$, respectively. Note that the quotient bundle $\mathcal{Q}_{\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)}$ of $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$ pulls back to $\operatorname{ev}_1^*\mathcal{Q}_{\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)} \simeq \pi_2^*\mathcal{Q}_2$, which --- due to $c(\mathcal{Q}_{\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)}) = 1 + \sigma_1 + \sigma_2 + \ldots$ --- implies together with eqs.~\eqref{eq:relbundles} and \eqref{eq:Hring} that $\operatorname{ev}_1^*\sigma_{1} = H_1 + H_2$ and $\operatorname{ev}_1^*\sigma_{2}=H_1^2+H_2^2 + H_1 H_2$. Thus, with $\sigma_1^2 = \sigma_2 + \sigma_{1,1}$ we find
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{ev}_1^*\sigma_{1,1} \,=\, H_1 H_2 \ , \qquad
\operatorname{ev}_1^*\sigma_{2} \,=\,H_1^2+H_2^2 + H_1 H_2 \ .
\end{equation}
\begin{table}\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|r|r|}
\hline Calabi--Yau fourfold & $N(\sigma_{1,1})$ &$N(\sigma_{2})$ \\\hline
$X_{1,4} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,5)$ & 3\,680 & 5\,760 \\
$X_{2,3} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,5)$ & 2\,160 & 3\,420 \\
$X_{1^3,3} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,6)$ & 1\,431 & 2\,727 \\
$X_{1^2,2^2} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,6)$ & 1\,072 & 2\,064 \\
$X_{1^5,2} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,7)$ & 728 & 1\,568 \\
$X_{1^8} \subset \operatorname{Gr}(2,8)$ & 504 & 1\,176 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The table enumerates lines with marked points on the codimension two (pulled-back) Schubert cycles $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$ for the listed Calabi--Yau fourfolds embedded as complete intersections in Grassmannians. These number are calculated from the derived intersection formula~\eqref{eq:numlines}, and the results correctly relate with eq.~\eqref{eq:Nton11} to the genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants at degree one tabulated in Appendix~\ref{app:tables}.}\label{tab:NumberLines}
\end{table}
With all the necessary ingredients assembled, we now count the number of lines with its marked point restricted to a codimension two Schubert cycle in $X_{k_1,\ldots,k_n}$ according to
\begin{equation} \label{eq:numlines}
\begin{aligned}
N(\sigma_{1,1}) \,&=\, \int_{\mathcal{M}_1}
c_\text{top}(\mathcal{B}(k_1)) \cup \ldots \cup c_\text{top}(\mathcal{B}(k_\alpha)) \cup
\operatorname{ev}_1^*\sigma_{1,1} \ , \\
N(\sigma_{2}) \,&=\, \int_{\mathcal{M}_1}
c_\text{top}(\mathcal{B}(k_1)) \cup \ldots \cup c_\text{top}(\mathcal{B}(k_\alpha)) \cup
\operatorname{ev}_1^*\sigma_{2} \ .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Here $c_\text{top}$ denotes the top Chern class of the bundles $\mathcal{B}(k_i)$, which by construction have rank $k_i+1$. Thus --- imposing the Calabi--Yau fourfold conditions~\eqref{eq:cond} --- the integrand becomes an element of $H^{(3n-6,3n-6)}(\mathcal{M}_1)$, which indeed represents a top form on $\mathcal{M}_1$ because $\dim_\mathbb{C} \mathcal{M}_1=3n-6$. The numbers of lines $N(\sigma_{1,1})$ and $N(\sigma_{2})$ obtained in this way compare to the genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants $n_{0,1}^{(1)}$ and $n_{0,1}^{(2)}$ of the quantum cohomology ring as (c.f., Section~\ref{sec:Example1} and Appendix~\ref{app:tables})
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Nton11}
\begin{pmatrix}
N(\sigma_{1,1}) \\N(\sigma_{2})
\end{pmatrix} \,=\,
\begin{pmatrix}
\sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_{1,1} & \sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_{2}\\
\sigma_{1,1}.\sigma_{2} & \sigma_{2}.\sigma_{2}
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
n_{0,1}^{(1)} \\ n_{0,1}^{(2)}
\end{pmatrix}\ ,
\end{equation}
in terms of the intersection pairings of the Schubert cycles $\sigma_{1,1}$ and $\sigma_2$ on the Calabi--Yau fourfold $X_{k_1,\ldots,k_\alpha}$.
In this work we explicitly analyze the Calabi--Yau fourfolds $X_{1,4}$, $X_{2,3}$, $X_{1^3,3}$, $X_{1^2,2^2}$, $X_{1^5,2}$, and $X_{1^8}$ (with the obvious notation for repeated indices and the corresponding embedding space $\operatorname{Gr}(2,n)$ determined through Calabi--Yau fourfold conditions~\eqref{eq:cond}). For these Calabi--Yau fourfolds we explicitly count the number of lines according to eq.~\eqref{eq:numlines} as listed in Table~\ref{tab:NumberLines}. For all our examples we find agreement with the genus zero Gromov--Witten invariants at degree one listed in Appendix~\ref{app:tables}. This furnishes another non-trivial check on the deduced linear combinations for the integral doubly logarithmic quantum periods at large volume.
\end{appendix}
\newpage
\ifx\undefined\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\,
\newcommand{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\,}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\,}
\fi
|
\section{Model}
We consider the photosynthetic apparatus of the purple bacterium \textit{Rhodobacter sphaeroides} using the model described previously~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015}. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:structure}, it includes antenna complexes LH1 and LH2 that increase the amount of light absorbed per RC. Two RCs are surrounded by the S-shaped LH1 complex consisting of $56$ tightly packed BChls, which is itself surrounded by LH2 complexes, the structures being taken from crystal structures~\cite{Papiz2003,Qian2013}. Although each LH2 contains two rings of BChls, B800 and B850, we only consider the 18-member B850 because EET between B800 and B850 is fast and efficient. Overall, the main inter-complex EET pathway is LH2~$\to$~LH1~$\to$~RC.
LH2 has a beautiful 9-fold symmetry, with the transition dipoles of the B850 BChls almost in the plane of the ring (about \SI{5}{\degree} off), pointing alternately left and right as they go around. Although LH1 is less symmetric than LH2, its BChls are approximately arranged on a flat ring within each of its halves, with their transition dipole moments again roughly parallel to the plane of the ring (at most \SI{25}{\degree} off) and also alternating left-right.
Strong coupling between nearest-neighbor BChls results in exciton delocalization within each complex, i.e., LH2, LH1, or RC. The excitonic states are eigenstates of a Frenkel-type Hamiltonian of the particular complex~\cite{MayKuhn}, which---in weak light where there is at most one exciton present---takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}
H=\sum_i^N E_i |i\rangle\langle i| + \sum_{i<j}^N V_{ij}(|i\rangle\langle j|+|j\rangle\langle i|),
\end{eqnarray}
where $N$ is the number of pigments within the complex, $E_i$ is the ``site'' energy of state $|i\rangle$ corresponding to an exciton on BChl $i$, and $V_{i,j}$ is the coupling between sites $i$ and $j$.
Different computational methods can predict substantially different energies and couplings~\cite{Hu1997,Koolhaas1998,Scholes:1999tm,Tretiak2000-2,Linnanto2009,Baghbanzadeh2015}. Here, we compute the intra- and inter-complex couplings $V_{i,j}$ using Transition charges from electrostatic potentials (TrEsp)~\cite{Madjet2006}, a method that is not only fast, but also as accurate as is realistically possible across the full range of (bacterio)chlorophyll separations and orientations~\cite{Kenny2015}. The only exception is the RC special pair, whose coupling we take to be $\SI{418}{cm}^{-1}$~\cite{Madjet2009}. Furthermore, for each complex, we choose the site energies so that the energy of the brightest state matches the observed absorption maximum of that complex.
Because couplings between different complexes are weak, we neglect inter-complex excitonic delocalization. Accordingly, optical pumping and dynamics will be entirely through the eigenstates of the different complexes, as opposed to individual sites~\cite{MayKuhn,Mancal2010,Kassal2013,LeonMontiel2014}. In particular, EET between two weakly coupled aggregates is described by multichromophoric F\"orster resonant energy transfer (MC-FRET)~\cite{Sumi1999,Jang2004,Jang2007}. MC-FRET simplifies to the more tractable generalized F\"orster resonant energy transfer (gFRET)~\cite{Mukai1999,Scholes2000,Scholes2003} in several cases, including if the emission and absorption spectra of the complexes are diagonal in the excitonic basis or if the system-environment coupling is weak compared to the coupling between BChls in the same complex~\cite{Jang2007}. Assuming the latter, the gFRET transfer rate between eigenstates of two complexes is
\begin{equation}
k_{\phi\psi}^{\mathrm{ET}}=\frac{2\pi}{\hbar}|V_{\phi\psi}|^2 J_{\phi\psi},
\label{eq:FRETrate}
\end{equation}
where $V_{\phi\psi}=\sum_{i,j} c^{\psi}_i c^{\phi}_j V_{ij}$, $c^{\psi}_i$ and $c^{\phi}_j$ are the components of the excitonic states $\psi$ and $\phi$ in the site basis, and $V_{ij}$ is the coupling between sites $i$ and $j$. $J_{\phi\psi}=\int L_\psi(E)I_\phi(E)\,dE$ is the spectral overlap between the normalized emission spectrum $L_\psi$ of the donor and the normalized absorption spectrum $I_\phi$ of the acceptor. $L_\psi$ and $I_\phi$ can be calculated using multichromophoric FRET theory~\cite{Jang2004,Ma:2015kg,Ma:2015ju,Moix:2015ei}, but here we follow~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015} in taking both to be normalized Gaussians, giving $J_{\phi\psi} = \exp(-E_{\phi\psi}^2/4\sigma^2)/\sqrt{4\pi\sigma^2}$, where $E_{\phi\psi}$ is the energy difference between the states and $\sigma=\SI{250}{cm^{-1}}$. Finally, to ensure detailed balance, we use Eq.~\ref{eq:FRETrate} only for downhill transitions ($E_\psi > E_\phi$), otherwise taking $k_{\phi\psi}^{\mathrm{ET}} = k_{\psi\phi}^{\mathrm{ET}} e^{-E_{\phi\psi}/k_\mathrm{B}T_\mathrm{B}}$ with $T_\mathrm{B}=\SI{300}{K}$.
Because the site-to-site couplings in the generalized FRET expression (Eq.~\ref{eq:FRETrate}) are combined with amplitudes $c^{\psi}_i$ and $c^{\phi}_j$ that can be positive or negative (or complex), the overall rate $k_{\phi\psi}^{\mathrm{ET}}$ can be larger or smaller than an analogous incoherent sum of site-to-site FRET rates. When the excitonic states are delocalized so that the amplitudes cause a cooperative enhancement of the transfer rate, the effect is called supertransfer~\cite{Strek1977,Scholes:2002ie,Lloyd:2010fz}.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig2.pdf}
\caption{Light-harvesting efficiency when the BChls within either LH2 (blue) or LH1 (green) are rotated in the plane of their bacteriochlorin rings by angle $\theta$ (see \textbf{Inset}, which also shows the direction of the transition dipole moment as the blue arrow). The natural geometry ($\theta=0$) is close to optimal, with substantial decreases in efficiency as $\theta$ changes. The high efficiency at $\theta=0$ is caused by the very bright low-lying (thermally accessible at $k_\mathrm{B}T=\SI{200}{cm^{-1}}$) states of both LH2~\textbf{(a)} and LH1~\textbf{(c)}, which encourages the onward supertransfer of excitons. The efficiency reaches a minimum close to $\theta=\pi/2$ (transition dipoles perpendicular to the plane of the rings) for both LH2~\textbf{(b)} and LH1~\textbf{(d)} because the thermally accessible states are now much darker. Roughly speaking, the complex changes from a $J$~aggregate to an $H$~aggregate~\cite{MayKuhn} as $\theta$ changes. Note that the asymmetry of the curves around $\theta=0$ is due to the fact that the dipole moments of the pigments in the complexes are not exactly in the plane of the relevant rings. On the average, dipole moments within LH2 and LH1 are, respectively, \SI{5}{\degree} and \SI{7}{\degree} out of the plane.}
\label{fig:in-plane}
\end{figure*}
In natural light, optical pumping and relaxation take place continuously, meaning that the ensemble of complexes will reach a steady state, finding which is sufficient to determine all observables of interest~\cite{Kassal2013,Baghbanzadeh2015}. Because sunlight is incoherent, it creates excitons in energy eigenstates~\cite{Jiang:1991fk,Brumer:2011ty,Mancal2010}, i.e., it does not induce coherences in the energy basis. Strictly speaking, the incoherent pumping is into eigenstates of the combined system and bath, which, when reduced to the system alone, may not coincide with eigenstates of the system Hamiltonian~\cite{Olsina:2014vb,Tscherbul2014,Tscherbul2015}. Here we assume that the system-bath coupling is not large enough for this discrepancy to be significant.
Consequently, the dynamics of the apparatus can be described using a Pauli master equation, $\dot{\mathbf{p}} = K \mathbf{p}$, where $\mathbf{p}$ is the vector of all eigenstate populations, including the ground state. The rate matrix $K$ contains the absorption, relaxation, and inter-complex transfer rates,
\begin{eqnarray}
K_{\phi\psi} &=& k_{\phi\psi}^{\mathrm{ET}} + k_{\phi\psi}^{\mathrm{RR}} + k_{\phi\psi}^{\mathrm{NR}} + k_{\phi\psi}^{\mathrm{IC}} + k_{\phi\psi}^{\mathrm{OP}} + k_{\phi\psi}^{\mathrm{CS}} \nonumber \\
&& (\text{for}\;\; \phi\ne\psi), \nonumber\\
K_{\phi\phi} &=& -\! \sum_{\phi\ne\psi} K_{\psi\phi}.
\end{eqnarray}
Here, nonradiative recombination to the ground state $g$ is assumed to occur at rate $k_{g\phi}^\mathrm{NR}=(\SI{1}{ns})^{-1}$~\cite{Sener2007} and internal conversion to lower-lying excitonic levels with rate $k_{\phi\psi}^\mathrm{IC}=(\SI{100}{fs})^{-1}$~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015}. Radiative recombination is taken to occur with rate $k^\mathrm{RR}_{g\phi}=k^\mathrm{RR}_{0} f_\phi (E_{\phi}/E_0)^3$ where $k^\mathrm{RR}_{0}=(\SI{16.6}{ns})^{-1}$~\cite{Monshouwer1997} and $E_0=hc/(\SI{770}{nm})$ are, respectively, the radiative decay rate and site energy of BChl in solution, while $f_\phi=|\mu_{\phi}/\mu_0|^2$ is the oscillator strength (or brightness) of state $\phi$ relative to a single BChl. The optical pumping rate is $k^\mathrm{OP}_{\phi g}=k^\mathrm{RR}_{g\phi}\,n(E_\phi)$, where $n(E_\phi)=(e^{E_\phi/k_\mathrm{B}T_\mathrm{R}}-1)^{-1}$ is the mean photon number at energy $E_\phi$ at the effective black-body temperature of solar radiation, $T_\mathrm{R}=\SI{5780}{K}$. Finally, $k^\mathrm{CS}_{g\phi}=(\SI{3}{ps})^{-1}$ (if $\phi$ is a state of the RC) is the rate of charge separation in the RC~\cite{Blankenship2014,Sener2007}.
At steady state $\dot{\mathbf{p}}^\mathrm{SS}=0$ and the problem simplifies to finding the zero-eigenvalue eigenstate of $K$, whose existence and uniqueness are guaranteed because $K$ describes an irreducible continuous-time Markov chain. The overall EET efficiency,
\begin{equation}
\eta = \frac{k^\mathrm{CS} \sum_{\phi\in \mathrm{RC}} \, p_\phi^\mathrm{SS}}{p_g^\mathrm{SS}\,\sum_{\phi} k^\mathrm{OP}_{\phi g}},
\label{eq:efficiency}
\end{equation}
is the quantum yield of photoexcited excitons that drive charge separation in the RC at steady state.
\section{Results and Discussion}
We study how the orientations of BChls within LH2 and LH1 aggregates affect the efficiency of exciton transfer in the purple-bacterial light-harvesting apparatus. In doing so, we fix the site energies---whose role we examined previously~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015}---and the positions of the central Mg atom in each BChl. Rotating the BChls has a complex influence on the performance of the complexes because changing the orientations of the dipole moments affects inter-pigment couplings and thus the nature and energy of the eigenstates. These changes, in turn, affect the inter-complex EET rates and the overall efficiency.
We consider two types of changes: rotating BChls within their planes as well as randomizing their orientations completely.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig3.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of the efficiency as the orientations of the BChls are completely randomized in the LH2 complexes \textbf{(a)}, in LH1 \textbf{(b)}, or in both~\textbf{(c)}, with $7000$ realizations in each case. In each panel, the dashed red line indicates the efficiency at the natural geometry, showing that reorientations in LH2 do not affect the efficiency, while those in LH1 reduce it significantly. Indeed, efficiency when LH1 is at its natural geometry is an outlier by 5.5 standard deviations.
\textbf{(d--f)} Same as panels (a--c), except that the complexes are trimmed by removing every second BChl, suppressing excitonic delocalization. In particular, the natural LH1 geometry is no longer an outlier, indicating that delocalization enhances the natural efficiency through supertransfer.
}
\label{fig:EfficiencyDistributions}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{In-plane rotations of BChls}
The bacteriochlorin ring within each BChl is approximately planar, meaning that it would occupy roughly the same space if it were rotated about an axis passing through the Mg atom and perpendicular to the ring (see inset to Fig.~\ref{fig:in-plane}). Thus, in-plane BChl rotations might be considered more plausible evolutionary alternatives than some other rotations, since the bacteriochlorin ring would not require large adjustments in the surrounding protein. Although this argument neglects the BChl’s phytyl tail, the tail is of secondary importance because it would be flexible enough to bend out of the way in many cases of steric hindrance. Most importantly, the simple rotation provides substantial intuition about the role of BChl orientations that can be used to understand more complicated rearrangements.
Figure~\ref{fig:in-plane} shows how in-plane BChl rotations affect the overall efficiency. Two cases are shown, with all the BChls in either LH2 or LH1 rotated by the same angle $\theta$. The X-ray geometry corresponds to $\theta=0$, whose efficiency (73\%) is nearly optimal. Indeed, rotating the BChls can reduce the efficiency significantly, as low as 15\% in the case where LH1 BChls are set to be perpendicular to the LH1 plane.
The reduction in efficiency upon BChl rotation can be understood by considering the brightnesses of the aggregate energy levels. If the aggregates were far apart compared to their size, each could be considered as a supermolecule, with FRET rates proportional to the oscillator strengths of the excitonic states. Here, the small inter-complex distances mean that the supermolecule approximation does not capture all the details of Eq.~\ref{eq:FRETrate}, but it is nevertheless a useful conceptual tool. We stress that the brightness of the states relates to the efficiency because it is a proxy for supertransfer, not because it implies that more light is absorbed in the first place. On the contrary, the oscillator sum rule implies that the total absorption cross-section of all the states will be constant regardless of their individual brightnesses, assuming the solar intensity is approximately constant over the absorption spectrum.
As depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:in-plane}(a) and (c), the natural geometries of both LH2 and LH1 give rise to very bright states near the bottom of the energy spectrum (within $k_\mathrm{B}T=\SI{200}{cm^{-1}}$ of the lowest state). This is important because the high internal-conversion rate $k^\mathrm{IC}$ ensures rapid thermalization, meaning that only the low-lying states contribute to EET and that their brightness regulates supertransfer. As the dipole moments rotate away from the plane of the rings, the low-lying bright states are gradually lost until, at the minima shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:in-plane}(b) and (d), the thermally accessible states carry very little oscillator strength. Thus, EET is slowed down and efficiency decreases.
Figure~\ref{fig:in-plane} shows that the efficiency is more sensitive to the reorientation of BChls in LH1 than in LH2. This is because LH1~$\to$~RC transfer is the kinetic bottleneck of the entire process, largely because it is energetically uphill (for the complete energy diagrams of LH2, LH1, and RC, see ref.~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015}). Therefore, decreases in the LH1~$\to$~RC EET rate caused by reorientation immediately translate to a reduced efficiency. By contrast, LH2~$\to$~LH1 transfer is energetically downhill and relatively fast, meaning that it can proceed with high efficiency even if the rate decreases somewhat. Thus, the broad plateau in the efficiency as a function of LH2 rotation angle reflects the need for a significant rotation of the BChls before the rate is decreased enough for it to affect the overall efficiency. Even at the minimum, the efficiency only decreases from 73\% to 49\%, reflecting the decisive effect of downhill energetic funnelling~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015}.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig4.pdf}
\caption{Determining why the efficiency is more sensitive to geometric changes in LH1 than in LH2. In each panel, the completely randomized orientations are denoted with blue dots (R) and the perturbed orientations (within \SI{5}{\degree} for each BChl) with green dots (P). The dashed red lines indicate parameter values at the natural geometry.
\textbf{(a)} In LH2, randomization increases the energy $E_1$ of the lowest excitonic state, but with no significant effect on the efficiency.
\textbf{(b)} In LH1 as well, there is no correlation between excitonic energies and the efficiency.
\textbf{(c)} In LH2, randomization decreases the total brightness of the low-lying states (those within $k_\mathrm{B} T$ of $E_1$) approximately three-fold, with no significant decrease in efficiency.
\textbf{(d)} In LH1, the roughly four-fold decrease in brightness \emph{does} lead to a large decrease in efficiency.
\textbf{(e)} In LH2, the reduced brightness is reflected in the reduced energy transfer rate to LH1, but the rate is high enough that the reduction does not affect the overall efficiency.
\textbf{(f)} In LH1, the transfer rate to the reaction centre is the kinetic bottleneck, and even in the natural geometry the rate is low enough to become comparable to exciton loss through recombination (at a rate of \SI{1}{ns^{-1}}). Slowing this process down causes the decrease in efficiency.
}
\label{fig:ScatterPlots}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Complete randomization of BChl orientations}
To further investigate the influence of geometry on EET efficiency in purple bacteria, we considered aggregates in which the orientations of the BChls in LH2 and/or LH1 were completely randomized, the orientations being chosen using a standard spherical point-picking algorithm. Because random rotations could cause nearest-neighbor BChls to collide with each other, we only accepted geometries in which the distance between any two atoms in different BChls is greater than $\SI{2.36}{\AA}$, which is the shortest distance between BChls in LH1 aggregate and is approximately twice the van der Waals radius of a hydrogen atom.
The distributions of efficiencies for the random orientations are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:EfficiencyDistributions}(a--c). In particular, the efficiency is not sensitive to the orientation of BChls in the LH2 complexes, always attaining a value close to the original $73\%$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:EfficiencyDistributions}(a)). This indicates that no geometric fine tuning is necessary to achieve a high efficiency and that LH2s are tolerant to orientational disorder.
By contrast, BChl orientations in LH1 have a large effect on the efficiency (Fig.~\ref{fig:EfficiencyDistributions}(b)). Importantly, the mean efficiency is $57\%$, with none of the $7000$ samples coming close to the original $73\%$, making the natural geometry an outlier by 5.5 standard deviations. It follows that the whole light-harvesting apparatus has an unusually high efficiency, as is seen when the BChls in both LH2 and LH1 are randomized (Fig.~\ref{fig:EfficiencyDistributions}(c)).
The natural LH1 geometry is an outlier because it occupies a corner of an enormous, 168-dimensional space (three angles per BChl). If only small perturbations to the original BChl angles were considered (up to~\SI{5}{\degree}), the efficiency would only change by up to a few percent (see Fig.~\ref{fig:ScatterPlots}). Indeed, it is unlikely that BChl orientations are fine-tuned to less than several degrees, considering the constant fluctuations at physiological temperatures.
The stark difference between the effect of randomization on LH2 and LH1 can be understood, as in the case of in-plane rotations, in terms of the brightnesses of the states and of the rate-limiting nature of the LH1~$\to$~RC step. To establish this conclusion, Fig.~\ref{fig:ScatterPlots} shows the relationships between the overall efficiency and the two properties that have the greatest influence on EET, energy funnelling and coherent excitonic delocalization~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015}. Energetic alignment enters $J_{\phi\psi}$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:FRETrate}, strongly favoring downhill EET, while the oscillator strength is a useful, if approximate, proxy for the delocalization and supertransfer contained in $V_{\phi\psi}$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:ScatterPlots}(a) and (b) show there is no appreciable correlation between efficiency and the energy of the lowest excited states in either LH2 or LH1. In LH2, random reorientations increase the energy of the lowest excitonic state a few hundred wavenumbers with no effect on the efficiency because the EET to LH1 remains downhill. In LH1, it might be expected that an increase in energy upon randomization would increase the efficiency by reducing the uphill energy barrier for transfer to the RC. However, the range of energetic variation is comparable to $k_\mathrm{B}T=\SI{200}{cm^{-1}}$, resulting in minor changes to the efficiency compared to other effects.
Fig.~\ref{fig:ScatterPlots}(c) and (d) examine the correlation between efficiency and the brightness of the low-lying states in LH2 and LH1, defined as the sum of oscillator strengths of the states lying within $k_\mathrm{B}T$ of the lowest state. In both LH2 and LH1, randomization destroys the symmetry and decreases the oscillator strength by a factor of 3--4. Nevertheless, there is a large difference between the effect of brightness on efficiency for the two complexes: for LH2 there is no effect, while for LH1 it leads to a large decrease in efficiency. The same difference is seen when considering the rates of forward EET (from LH2 to LH1 and from LH1 to RC): although the decrease in brightness reduces forward EET rates in both LH2 and LH1, only the decrease in LH1 affects the efficiency (Fig.~\ref{fig:ScatterPlots}(e) and (f)). Indeed, in LH1 the decrease in brightness is sufficient to decrease the EET rate despite the improved energetic landscape.
As with in-plane rotations, LH1 is more sensitive to changes in the brightness of its states because the rate of LH1~$\to$~RC transfer is low to begin with; at \SI{6.4}{ns^{-1}}, it is the lowest EET rate in the entire light-harvesting apparatus~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015} and is comparable to the recombination rate $k^\mathrm{NR}=\SI{1}{ns^{-1}}$. Decreasing it further by reducing brightness tightens the bottleneck, directly resulting in a decrease in efficiency (Fig.~\ref{fig:ScatterPlots}(f)). By contrast, the LH2~$\to$~LH1 rate is high enough even with the decrease in brightness that there is little risk of the exciton being lost while on LH2.
Bright states are a manifestation of excitonic delocalization, and their crucial contribution to the nearly optimal efficiency in the natural geometry can be corroborated by turning delocalization off. Fig.~\ref{fig:EfficiencyDistributions}(d--f) shows the distribution of efficiencies for complexes that are trimmed by removing every second BChl. Doing so doubles the nearest-neighbor distances, weakening intra-complex couplings and suppressing excitonic delocalization, meaning that EET takes place by ordinary, site-to-site FRET~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015}. In particular, trimming LH1 not only reduces the efficiency from the natural delocalized case, but it also makes it so that the original orientation of BChls is no longer an efficiency outlier. This confirms our claim that the feature which makes the original orientation of the BChls within LH1 an outlier is the coherent excitonic delocalization and the resulting supertransfer.
\section{Conclusions}
In summary, our study of geometric effects in purple-bacterial energy transfer reveals that, if the site energies are fixed, altering pigment orientations can significantly reduce the efficiency. The effect is due to the fragility of low-lying excitonic states, whose high brightness in the natural geometry yields the high efficiency through supertransfer. The magnitude of the improvement---a natural geometry that is 5.5 standard deviations better than the mean random geometry---is one of the largest photosynthetic efficiency enhancement we are aware of that has been attributed to a coherent effect.
The natural geometry's exceptional efficiency among plausible evolutionary alternatives suggests that it may have conferred an evolutionary advantage. If so, delocalization would likely be a spandrel, a feature that was originally a byproduct of evolution, but was later exploited to improve fitness~\cite{Gould:1979db,Gould:1997fv}. We argued previously that delocalization was not required for high efficiencies in purple-bacterial light harvesting, suggesting that it arose as a byproduct of the tight bacteriochlorophyll packing that enhances the absorption cross-section per RC~\cite{Baghbanzadeh2015}. But if ring-like structures with delocalization were already present, it is plausible that subsequent evolution adjusted the directions of the dipole moments to take advantage of supertransfer. Of course, these speculations would need to be tested by future work, especially through a comparison of corresponding structures in different taxa of purple bacteria.
More generally, our results confirm the predicted importance of supertransfer as one of the few coherent mechanisms possible in incoherent light~\cite{Kassal2013} and promise to increase its deployment in artificial light-harvesting complexes.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We thank Saleh Rahimi-Keshari for useful discussions. We were supported by the Australian Research Council through a Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DE140100433) and the Centre of Excellence for Engineered Quantum Systems (CE110001013).
|
\section{Introduction }
Recall that a \Index{simplicial complex} $\Delta$ on a vertex set $\mathcal{V}(\Delta)=V$ is a finite subset of $2^{V}$, such that $A \in \Delta$ and $B \subseteq A$ implies $B \in \Delta$. The set $A$ is called a \Index{face} if $A \in \Delta$, and called a \Index{facet} if $A$ is a maximal face with respect to inclusion.
The set of facets of $\Delta$ will be denoted by $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Typically, for the complexes considered here, the vertex set is the set $[n]\mathrel{\mathop:}=\Set{1,2,\dots,n}$ for some $n\in {\mathbb Z}_+$.
When $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)=\Set{F_1, \cdots, F_m}$, we write $\Delta=\braket{ F_1, \cdots, F_m }$.
In particular, if $\Delta$ has a unique facet $F$, then $\Delta$ is called a \Index{simplex}.
The \Index{dimension} of a face $A$, denoted by $\dim(A)$, is $|A|-1$. The \Index{dimension} of a complex $\Delta$, denoted by $\dim(\Delta)$, is the maximum dimension of its faces. The complex $\Delta$ is called \Index{pure} if all the facets of $\Delta$ have the same dimension; otherwise, it will be called \Index{nonpure}.
Recall that a $d$-dimensional pure complex $\Delta$ on $[n]$ is called \Index{shellable} if there exists a shelling order on its facet set $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, say $F_1, \ldots, F_m$, such that the subcomplex $\braket{F_1,\dots,F_{k-1}}\cap \braket{F_k}$ is pure of dimension $d-1$ for each $2\leq k \leq m$.
As pointed out in \cite{MR1453579}, ``Shellability is a simple but powerful tool for proving the Cohen-Macaulay property, and almost all Cohen-Macaulay complexes arising `in nature' turn out to be shellable. Moreover, a number of invariants associated with Cohen-Macaulay complexes can be described more explicitly or computed more easily in the shellable case.'' Shellability was later generalized to nonpure complexes by Bj\"orner and Wachs \cite{MR1333388, MR1401765}. Matroid complexes, shifted complexes and vertex decomposable complexes are all known to be important shellable complexes.
In the present paper,
we will impose a stronger requirement on the linear order of shellability, hence end up with
a new kind of complex, which will be called as \Index{strongly shellable}.
Its basic properties will be discussed in Section 2.
Using restriction maps, Bj\"orner and Wachs \cite{MR1333388} showed that any nonpure shellable complex has a dimension-decreasing shelling order.
Using a different technique, we will establish a similar result for strongly shellable complexes; see Theorem \ref{thm:Rearrangement} and its corollary.
In Section 3, we introduce the codimension one graph of complexes. We will investigate the strong shellability from this point of view. In Section 4, we focus on pure strongly shellable complexes and provide several equivalent characterizations, in particular, using its codimension one graph.
It is well-known that if $\Delta$ is a shellable complex, then the Stanley-Reisner ideal of its dual complex $\Delta^{\vee}$ has linear quotients. If in addition $\Delta$ is strongly shellable, we will show that
the facet ideal of $\Delta$ also has linear quotients. This property will be the main topic when we study the chordal (hyper)-graphs in the sequel paper \cite{ESSC}.
As applications, we will consider strongly shellable posets in Section 5.
In section 6, we will discuss the relationship between strongly shellable complexes and other shellable complexes in the pure case. In the final section, we notice that strongly shellable complexes can be characterized by strong h-assignments, an easy generalization of a result of Moriyama \cite{ISI:000292480700004}. This provides a relatively fast algorithm for checking strong shellability.
\section{Strongly shellable complexes, general case}
Shellability of general complexes were introduced by Bj\"orner and Wachs in \cite{MR1333388,MR1401765}.
\begin{definition}
A complex $\Delta$ is \Index{shellable} if its facets can be ordered $F_1,F_2, \dots ,F_t$ such that the subcomplex $\braket{F_1,\dots,F_{k-1}}\cap \braket{F_k}$ is pure of dimension $\dim (F_k) - 1$ for all $k = 2, \dots , t$.
Such an ordering of facets is called a \Index{shelling order} of $\Delta$.
\end{definition}
Sometimes, one may refer to shellable complexes as \Index{semipure shellable} or \Index{nonpure shellable} to emphasize that the complexes are not necessarily pure. Related to this concept, we will impose additional requirement on the above linear order as follows.
\begin{definition}
\label{nonpure strongly shellable}
A complex $\Delta$ is called \Index{strongly shellable} if its facets can be ordered $F_1, F_2, \cdots, F_t$ such that for every $i$ and $j$ with $1\le i<j\le t$, there exists a $k$ with $1\le k<j$, such that:
\begin{enumerate}[1]
\item \label{nss-1} $|F_j \setminus F_k|=1$,
\item \label{nss-2} $F_j \setminus F_k \subseteq F_j \setminus F_i$, and
\item \label{nss-3} $F_k \setminus F_j \subseteq F_i$.
\end{enumerate}
Such an ordering of facets will be called a \Index{strong shelling order} of $\Delta$, or more specifically, a \Index{strong shelling order} on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$.
\end{definition}
Note that a complex $\Delta$ is shellable if and only if it satisfies the conditions \ref{nss-1} and \ref{nss-2} of Definition \ref{nonpure strongly shellable} by \cite[Lemma 2.3]{MR1333388}. Hence, for a simplicial complex, strong shellability is indeed stronger than shellability.
\begin{rem}
\label{1/2/3 equivalent discription}
It is easy to see that the conditions \ref{nss-1}, \ref{nss-2} and \ref{nss-3} of Definition \ref{nonpure strongly shellable} are equivalent to
\begin{enumerate}
\item[$(1)'$] $\dim(F_j) = \dim(F_j \cap F_k)+1$,
\item[$(2)'$] $F_i \cap F_j \subseteq F_k$, and
\item[$(3)'$] $F_k \subseteq F_i \cup F_j$
\end{enumerate}
respectively. In particular, we will always have $\dim(F_j)\le \dim(F_k)$. It will be helpful to think of the $F_i,F_j$ and $F_k$ in
Definition \ref{nonpure strongly shellable} as depicted in Figure \ref{Fijk}, namely, we may assume that $F_i=P_1\sqcup P_2\sqcup P_3$, $F_k=P_2\sqcup P_3 \sqcup P_4$, $F_j=P_3\sqcup P_4 \sqcup P_5$ with $|P_5|=1$.
Here, by $\sqcup$, we mean disjoint union. With this figure in mind,
we will be able to see, for instance, that $|F_j\setminus F_i|=|F_k\setminus F_i|+1$.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{minipage}[h]{\linewidth} \centering
\includegraphics{1.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Relations among $F_i$, $F_j$ and $F_k$} \label{Fijk}
\end{figure}
\end{rem}
Taking advantage of the restriction map, Bj\"orner and Wachs \cite[Rearrangement lemma 2.6]{MR1333388} showed that any shelling order of a nonpure shellable complex can be rearranged to be a shelling order with decreasing dimensions. In the following, we will establish a similar result with respect to strong shellability.
\begin{lemma}
\label{dim < dim}
Let $\Delta$ be a strongly shellable complex. Then for each pair of facets $F_1$ and $F_2$ with $\dim(F_1) < \dim(F_2)$, there exists a facet $G$, such that $\dim(F_1)=\dim(F_1\cap G)+1$ and $F_1\cap F_2 \subseteq G \subseteq F_1\cup F_2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $G_1, G_2, \cdots, G_t$ be a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Assume that $F_1 = G_{i_1}$ and $F_2 = G_{i_2}$.
We claim that one can find suitable $G=G_{i}$, with $i<\max (i_1,i_2)$, satisfying the requirement. We establish this claim by induction on $t$. When $t=2$, this is easy. Thus, we may assume that $t\ge 3$.
If $i_1 > i_2$, the existence of $G$ follows directly from Remark \ref{1/2/3 equivalent discription}. Thus, we may assume that $i_1 < i_2$.
Since $G_1, G_2, \cdots, G_t$ is a strong shelling order, by Remark \ref{1/2/3 equivalent discription}, there exists some $i_3 < i_2$ such that $G_{i_1} \cap G_{i_2} \subseteq G_{i_3}\subseteq G_{i_1}\cup G_{i_2}$. Therefore,
\begin{equation}
G_{i_1} \cap G_{i_2} \subseteq G_{i_1} \cap G_{i_3}\quad \text{ and } \quad G_{i_1}\cup G_{i_3}\subseteq G_{i_1}\cup G_{i_2}. \label{i3-1}
\end{equation}
As $i_1,i_3<i_2\le t$ and $G_1,G_2,\dots,G_{i_2-1}$ forms a strong shelling order, by induction, we can find $G=G_i$ with $i<\max(i_1,i_3)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\dim(G_{i_1})=\dim(G_{i_1}\cap G)+1 \quad \text{ and }\quad G_{i_1}\cap G_{i_3} \subseteq G \subseteq G_{i_1}\cup G_{i_3}. \label{i3-2}
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{i3-1} and \eqref{i3-2}, we see that the claim works.
\end{proof}
Let $\succ: F_1, \dots, F_t$ be a linear order on the facet set of $\Delta$, i.e., $F_i\succ F_j$ if and only $i<j$. One can define an \Index{induced dimension-related order} $\vdash_{\succ}$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ as follows: $F \vdash_{\succ} G$ if and only if
\begin{enumerate}[1]
\item $\dim(F)>\dim(G)$, or
\item $\dim(F)=\dim(G)$ and $F \succ G$.
\end{enumerate}
For a given $F\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, we will write
$\Ini_\succ(F)\mathrel{\mathop:}=\Set{G\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)| G\succcurlyeq F}$ for the \Index{initial interval} with respect to $\succ$ and $F$.
The following result follows easily from Definition \ref{nonpure strongly shellable} and Remark \ref{1/2/3 equivalent discription}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lex and o are sso}
Let $\Delta$ be a strongly shellable complex with a strong shelling order $\succ$. Then for each facet $F$, the restrictions of $\succ$ on both
$\Ini_{\succ}(F)$ and $\Ini_{\vdash_\succ}(F)$
are also strong shelling orders of the corresponding subcomplexes.
\end{lemma}
Let $\succ:F_1,\dots,F_t$ be a linear order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Thus, the induced dimension-related order $\vdash_\succ$ is fixed. If we are given another linear order $\succ'$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, we will call $(F_i, F_j)$ a \Index{relative inverse pair with respect to $\succ$}, if $F_i \vdash_{\succ} F_j$ and $F_j \succ' F_i$. Denote by $\operatorname{Inv}_{\succ}(\succ')$ the set of relative inverse pairs with respect to $\succ$.
Obviously, one can recover the linear order $\succ'$ from $\vdash_\succ$ by switching the pairs of facets in $\operatorname{Inv}_{\succ}(\succ')$.
We will simply write $\operatorname{Inv}_\succ(\succ)$ as $\operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$. An ordered pair $(F_i, F_j) \in \operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$ precisely when $j<i$ and $\dim (F_j)<\dim(F_i)$.
\begin{lemma}
Let $\succ$ and $\succ'$ be two linear orders on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. If $\operatorname{Inv}_{\succ}(\succ') \subseteq \operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$, then the induced dimension-related orders $\vdash_\succ$ and $\vdash_{\succ'}$ coincide.
\label{vdashes}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $F_i$ and $F_j$ be two distinct facets. When $\dim(F_i)>\dim(F_j)$, we have both $F_i\vdash_{\succ} F_j$ and $F_i\vdash_{\succ'}F_j$. Therefore, we may assume that $\dim(F_i)=\dim(F_j)$ and $F_i \succ F_j$. Whence, $F_i\vdash_\succ F_j$. Note that $(F_i,F_j)\notin \operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$. It follows from the condition $\operatorname{Inv}_{\succ}(\succ') \subseteq \operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$ that $(F_i,F_j)\notin \operatorname{Inv}_\succ(\succ')$. But $F_i\vdash_\succ F_j$. This simply means that $F_i \succ'F_j$ and in turn $F_i\vdash_{\succ'}F_j$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{simplification}
If $(F_i,F_j)\in \operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$, then $j<i$ with $\dim(F_j)<\dim(F_i)$. In this case, we will be able to find a $k$ with $j\le k<i$ such that $\dim(F_k)<\dim(F_{k+1})$. Now $(F_{k+1},F_{k})\in \operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$. We can modify $\succ$ by only switching the relation between $F_k$ and $F_{k+1}$ and end up with $\succ'$. Then, $\succ'$ is indeed a linear order with $\operatorname{Inv}_\succ(\succ')\subsetneq \operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$ and $\operatorname{Inv}(\succ)\setminus \operatorname{Inv}_\succ(\succ')=\{(F_{k+1},F_{k})\}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}
[Rearrangement]
\label{thm:Rearrangement}
Let $\Delta$ be a nonpure strongly shellable complex with a strong shelling order $\succ$. Then any linear order $\succ'$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ is also a strong shelling order, provided that $\operatorname{Inv}_{\succ}(\succ') \subseteq \operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $\succ:F_1,F_2,\dots,F_t$ gives the strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Let $\succ'$ be another linear order with $\operatorname{Inv}_{\succ}(\succ') \subseteq \operatorname{Inv}(\succ)$. We may assume that this containment is strict, for otherwise, $\succ$ coincides with $\succ'$.
By Lemma \ref{vdashes} and Remark \ref{simplification}, it suffices to consider the case when
\[
\operatorname{Inv}(\succ) \setminus \operatorname{Inv}_{\succ}(\succ') = \{(F_{i+1}, F_{i})\}.
\]
Whence, for arbitrary distinct $k_1,k_2\in[t]$, if $\Set{k_1,k_2}\ne \Set{i,i+1}$, then $F_{k_1}\succ F_{k_2}$ if and only if $F_{k_1}\succ' F_{k_2}$. On the other hand, $\dim(F_i)<\dim(F_{i+1})$ and $F_{i+1}\succ' F_i$.
Note that the restriction
\[
\succ_{\Ini_{\succ}(F_{i+1})}:
\, F_1, \cdots, F_{i-1}, F_i, F_{i+1}
\]
is a strong shelling order of $\Delta'\mathrel{\mathop:}=\braket{F_1,\dots,F_{i+1}}$ by Lemma \ref{lex and o are sso}. We claim that the restriction
\[
(\succ')_{\Ini_{\succ'}(F_i)}:
\, F_1, \cdots, F_{i-1}, F_{i+1}, F_i
\]
is still a strong shelling order of $\Delta'$. To this end, we only need to check the facets $F_{i+1}$ and $F_i$. Since $\dim(F_i)< \dim(F_{i+1})$, the claim follows from Lemma \ref{dim < dim}. Consequently, $\succ'$ is a strong shelling order of $\Delta$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{d dimension}
Let $\Delta$ be a nonpure strongly shellable complex. Then, there exists a dimension-decreasing strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $\succ$ be an arbitrary strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ and choose $\vdash_\succ$ as $\succ'$. Then $\operatorname{Inv}_\succ(\succ')=\varnothing$. Thus, by Theorem \ref{thm:Rearrangement}, $\vdash_\succ$ is also a strong shelling order. On the other hand, $\vdash_\succ$ trivially satisfies the dimensional requirement.
\end{proof}
Let $\Delta$ be a complex and let $0\le i \le \dim(\Delta)$.
Recall that the \Index{$i$-th skeleton} of $\Delta$, denoted by $\Delta^{(i)}$, is the subcomplex of $\Delta$ generated by all faces of $\Delta$ of dimension at most $i$.
On the other hand, the \Index{pure $i$-th skeleton} of $\Delta$, denoted by $\Delta^{[i]}$, is the pure subcomplex of $\Delta$ generated by all $i$-dimensional faces.
The following result is clear.
\begin{proposition}
\label{pure d}
Let $\Delta$ be a strongly shellable complex of dimension $d$. Then $\Delta^{[d]}$ is also strongly shellable.
\end{proposition}
It is shown in \cite[Theorem 8.2.18]{MR2724673} that for any shellable complex, its skeletons and pure skeletons are still shellable. This property is not preserved for strong shellability of complexes, as the following example shows.
\begin{example}
Let $\Delta$ be a complex with the facet set
\[
\Set{\{1, 2, 3\}, \{2, 3, 4\}, \{3, 4, 5\},\{4, 5, 6\}}.
\]
It is direct to check that $\Delta$ is strongly shellable, but
\[
\Delta^{(1)}=\Delta^{[1]}=\braket{ \{1, 2\}, \{2, 3\},\{1, 3\}, \{2, 4\},\{3, 4\}, \{3, 5\}, \{4, 5\}, \{4, 6\}, \{5, 6\} }
\]
is not strongly shellable. Actually, using the terminology introduced in the next section, we have
\[
\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(\{1, 2\}, \{5, 6\})=2,
\]
and
\[
\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(\{1, 2\}, \{5, 6\})=3.
\]
Thus, by Theorem \ref{distance of graph less than complex}, the skeleton $\Delta^{[1]}$ is not strongly shellable.
\end{example}
For a complex $\Delta$,
we denote by $\overline{\operatorname{pure}_k}(\Delta)$ the pure complex generated by the $k$-dimensional facets of $\Delta$.
Generally speaking, $\overline{\operatorname{pure}_k}(\Delta)$ may not necessarily be strongly shellable even though $\Delta$ is. For example, if $\Delta=\braket{ \{1245\}, \{123\}, \{456\} }$, it is easy to check that $\Delta$ is strongly shellable, while $\overline{\operatorname{pure}_2}(\Delta)=\braket{\{123\}, \{456\}}$ is not. However, in the special case when $k=1$, the following result holds:
\begin{proposition}
\label{pure_1 ss}
Let $\Delta$ be a strongly shellable complex of positive dimension. Then $\overline{\operatorname{pure}_1}(\Delta)$ is also strongly shellable.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $F_1, \cdots, F_t$ is a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, with $\dim(F_i) \geq \dim(F_j)$ whenever $i<j$. We may assume that $\overline{\operatorname{pure}_1}(\Delta) = \braket{ F_{s+1}, \cdots, F_t }$. For each pair $F_i$ and $F_j$ with $s+1 \leq i<j \leq t$, there exists a $k$ with $1\le k<t$, such that $F_k \subseteq F_i\cup F_j$. Notice that $\dim(F_k)\ge \dim(F_j)=\dim(F_i)=1$. If $\dim(F_k)\ge 2$, this will force $F_i\subsetneq F_k$ or $F_j\subsetneq F_k$. Thus, we have indeed $\dim(F_k)=1$, and $F_k \in \overline{\operatorname{pure}_1}(\Delta)$. This shows that $F_{s+1}, \cdots, F_t$ is a strong shelling order of $\overline{\operatorname{pure}_1}(\Delta)$.
\end{proof}
The above result hints that one-dimensional pure strongly shellable complexes are very special. In our next paper \cite{ESSC}, we will show that they are indeed the complement graphs of chordal graphs.
Recall that for a simplicial complex $\Delta$, the \Index{link} of a face $A \in \Delta$ is defined as
\[
\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(A)\mathrel{\mathop:}= \Set{B \in \Delta \mid B \cup A \in \Delta, \, B \cap A =\varnothing}.
\]
When $A=\Set{x}$, we will simply write it as $\operatorname{link}_\Delta(x)$.
On the other hand, for a subset $W\subseteq \mathcal{V}(\Delta)$, the \Index{restriction} of $\Delta$ on $W$ is the subcomplex
\[
\Delta_W\mathrel{\mathop:}= \Set{F\in \Delta: F\subseteq W}.
\]
The restriction is sometimes denoted by $\Delta[W]$ as well. For a vertex $x\in \mathcal{V}(\Delta)$, we will usually write $\Delta_{\mathcal{V}(\Delta)\setminus x}$ as $\Delta\setminus x$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{link ss}
Let $\Delta$ be a strongly shellable complex. Then $\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(A)$ is also strongly shellable for any $A \in \Delta$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $\succ$ is a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. It induces a linear order $\succ'$ on $\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{link}_\Delta(A))=\Set{F\setminus A\mid A\subseteq F\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)}$:
\[
\text{$F'\succ' G'$\quad if and only if \quad $(F'\sqcup A)\succ (G'\sqcup A)$ in $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$.}
\]
Now, take arbitrary pair $F_i'\succ' F_j'$ in $\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{link}_\Delta(A))$. Equivalently, $(F_i'\sqcup A) \succ (F_j' \sqcup A)$ in $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Hence, there exists some $F_k\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ such that $F_k\succ (F_j'\sqcup A)$ and
\[
|(F_j'\sqcup A) \setminus F_k|=1 \quad \text{ and } \quad (F_i'\sqcup A)\cap (F_j'\sqcup A) \subseteq F_k \subseteq (F_i'\sqcup A)\cup (F_j'\sqcup A).
\]
Obviously, $A \subseteq F_k$. So, we can find $F_k'\mathrel{\mathop:}= F_k\setminus A\in \mathcal{F}(\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(A))$ such that $F_k'\succ' F_k$ with
\[
|F_j'\setminus F_k'| =1 \quad \text{ and } \quad F_i'\cap F_j' \subseteq F_k' \subseteq F_i' \cup F_j'.
\]
This shows that $\succ'$ is a strong shelling order of $\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(A)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
Note that even when both $\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(x)$ and $\Delta \setminus x$ are pure strongly shellable, $\Delta$ may not necessarily be strongly shellable. For example, let $\Delta$ be the complex whose facet set is
\[
\Set{\{1, 2, 3\}, \{2, 3, 4\}, \{3, 4, 5\}, \{4, 5, 6\}, \{5, 6, 7\}}.
\]
One can check directly that $\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(7)$ and $\Delta \setminus 7$ are pure strongly shellable. On the other hand, notice that
\[
\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(\{1,2,3\},\{5,6,7\})=3,
\]
while
\[
\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(\{1,2,3\},\{5,6,7\})=4.
\]
Thus, again by Theorem \ref{distance of graph less than complex}, we see that $\Delta$ is not strongly shellable.
\end{example}
\begin{proposition}
\label{nonpure restriction}
Assume that $\Delta$ is a strongly shellable complex, and let $S$ be some subset of the set of vertices of $\Delta$. Assume furthermore that the induced complex $\Delta[S]$ satisfies the following condition:
\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}[h]{0.8\linewidth}
if $\sigma$ is a maximal simplex in $\Delta$, then $\sigma \cap \Delta[S] = \sigma[S]$ is a maximal simplex in $\Delta[S]$.
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\noindent In this case, the complex $\Delta[S]$ is strongly shellable as well, and any strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ induces a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta[S])$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\succ$ be a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. For each $F\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta[S])$, let $\widetilde{F}$ be the first facet in $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ with respect to $\succ$ such that $\widetilde{F}\cap S=F$. Then, we have the following induced order $\succ_S$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta[S])$:
\[
\text{for each $F,G\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta[S])$, $F\succ_S G$ if and only if $\widetilde{F}\succ \widetilde{G}$.}
\]
To check that $\succ_S$ is a strong shelling order, we take arbitrary $F,G\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta[S])$ with $F\succ_S G$. Thus, $\widetilde{F}\succ \widetilde{G}$. As $\succ$ is a strong shelling order, one can find an $L' \in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ such that $L' \succ \widetilde{G}$ and satisfies:
\[
|\widetilde{G} \setminus L'|=1 \quad \text{ and }\quad
\widetilde{F}\cap \widetilde{G} \subseteq L' \subseteq \widetilde{F}\cup \widetilde{G}.
\]
Assume that $L \mathrel{\mathop:}= L'\cap S$ and $\widetilde{G} \setminus L' = \{a\}$.
We claim that $a \in G \setminus L$. In fact, it is easy to see that $a \notin L$ since $a \notin L'$. On the other hand, if $a \notin G$, then $G \subseteq L'\cap S$, i.e., $G \subseteq L$. Note that $L$ and $G$ are facets of $\Delta[S]$, so $L=G$. However, we will have $L'\cap S=\widetilde{G}\cap S$ and $L' \succ \widetilde{G}$. This contradicts to the assumption that $\widetilde{G}$ is the first facet in $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ whose restriction to $S$ is $G$.
Consequently, $a\in G\setminus L \subseteq \widetilde{G}\setminus L'=\Set{a}$, and hence $|G\setminus L|=1$. On the other hand, it is clear that $F\cap G\subseteq L \subseteq F\cup G$. Finally, $\widetilde{L}\succcurlyeq L'\succ \widetilde{G}$, hence $L\succ_S G$.
Thus $\succ_S$ is a strong shelling order of $\Delta[S]$.
\end{proof}
Recall that if $\Gamma$ and $\Delta$ are two complexes over disjoint vertex sets, the \Index{join} of them is the complex on the vertex set $\mathcal{V}(\Gamma)\sqcup \mathcal{V}(\Delta)$:
\[
\Gamma * \Delta \mathrel{\mathop:}= \Set{F\sqcup G | F\in \Gamma \text{ and }G\in \Delta}.
\]
It is well-known that the join of two complexes is shellable if and only if each of the complexes is shellable; see \cite[Remark 10.22]{MR1401765}. We also have a strongly shellable version here.
\begin{proposition}
\label{nonpure join}
Let $\Gamma$ and $\Delta$ be two complexes. Then the join complex $\Gamma*\Delta$ is strongly shellable if and only if both $\Gamma$ and $\Delta$ are strongly shellable.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $\Gamma$ and $\Delta$ are strongly shellable.
Let $\succ_1$ and $\succ_2$ be two strong shelling orders on $\mathcal{F}(\Gamma)$ and $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, respectively. Let $\succ$ be the lexicographic order with respect to $(\succ_1,\succ_2)$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Gamma*\Delta)$, namely, for $F_1,F_2\in \mathcal{F}(\Gamma)$ and $G_1,G_2\in\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, $F_1\sqcup G_1\succ F_2\sqcup G_2$ precisely whenever either $F_1\succ_1 F_2$, or $F_1=F_2$ and $G_1\succ_2 G_2$.
To check the strong shellability of $\succ$, it suffices to take distinct $F_1,F_2\in \mathcal{F}(\Gamma)$ and distinct $G_1,G_2\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ such that $F_1\sqcup G_1\succ F_2\sqcup G_2$. Then $F_1\succ_1 F_2$. We can choose $F_3$ such that $F_3 \succ_1 F_2$ in $\mathcal{F}(\Gamma)$, and satisfies:
\[
|F_2 \setminus F_3|=1 \quad \text{ and } \quad
F_1 \cap F_2 \subseteq F_3 \subseteq F_1\cup F_2.
\]
It is clear that $F_3 \sqcup G_2 \succ F_2 \sqcup G_2$, and satisfies
\[
|(F_2 \sqcup G_2) \setminus (F_3 \sqcup G_2)|=1
\]
with
\[
(F_1\sqcup G_1) \cap (F_2\sqcup G_2) \subseteq (F_3\sqcup G_2) \subseteq (F_1\sqcup G_1) \cup (F_2\sqcup G_2).
\]
Thus $\succ$ is a strong shelling order of $\Gamma*\Delta$.
For the other direction, we can apply Proposition \ref{nonpure restriction} by using $S=\mathcal{V}(\Gamma)$ and $S=\mathcal{V}(\Delta)$, respectively.
\end{proof}
Recently, Moradi and Khosh-Ahang \cite{arXiv:1601.00456} considered the expansion of simplicial complexes.
\begin{definition}
Let $\Delta$ be a simplicial complex with the vertex set $\mathcal{V}(\Delta)=\Set{x_1,\dots,x_n}$ and $s_1,\dots,s_n$ be arbitrary positive integers. The \Index{$(s_1,\dots,s_n)$-expansion} of $\Delta$, denoted by $\Delta^{(s_1,\dots,s_n)}$, is the simplicial complex with the vertex set $\Set{x_{i,j}\mid 1\le i\le n, 1\le j\le s_i}$ and the facet set
\[
\Set{ \{x_{i_1,r_1},\dots,x_{i_{t},r_{t}}\} \mid \{x_{i_1},\dots,x_{i_t}\}\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta) \text{ and } (r_1,\dots,r_{t})\in [s_{i_1}]\times \cdots \times [s_{i_{t}}]}.
\]
\end{definition}
Now, we wrap up this section with the following strongly shellable version of \cite[Corollary 2.15]{arXiv:1511.04676}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{expansion-complex}
Assume that $s_1, \dots, s_n$ are positive integers. Then $\Delta$ is strongly shellable if and only if $\Delta^{(s_1,\dots,s_n)}$ is so.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For simplicity, we will write $\Delta'$ for $\Delta^{(s_1,\dots,s_n)}$.
\begin{enumerate}[a]
\item The ``only if'' part: By induction, it suffices to consider the special case when $s_k=1$ for $k=2,\dots,n$. Let $f: \mathcal{V}(\Delta') \to \mathcal{V}(\Delta)$ be the map by assigning each $x_{i,j}$ to $x_i$ and extend it to be a map from $\Delta'$ to $\Delta$.
Let $\succ_\Delta$ be a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Consider two distinct facets $F_1,F_2\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta')$.
\begin{enumerate}[i]
\item If $f(F_1)\ne f(F_2)$, we define $F_1\succ_{\Delta'} F_2$ if and only if $f(F_1)\succ_{\Delta} f(F_2)$.
\item If $f(F_1)=f(F_2)$, then $F_1=\{x_{1,i},x_{i_2,1},\dots,x_{i_t,1}\}$ and $F_2=\{x_{1,j},x_{i_2,1},\dots,x_{i_t,1}\}$ for suitable $x_{i_2},\dots,x_{i_t} \in \mathcal{V}(\Delta)\setminus \{x_1\}$. In this case, we define $F_1\succ_{\Delta'} F_2$ if and only if $i<j$.
\end{enumerate}
Now, we show that $\succ_{\Delta'}$ defines a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta')$. Indeed, we only need to check two distinct edges $F_1\succ_{\Delta'} F_2$ such that $f(F_1)\ne f(F_2)$. Whence, $f(F_1)\succ_{\Delta} f(F_2)$. Since $\Delta$ is strongly shellable, one can find $\widetilde{F}_3\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ such that $\widetilde{F}_3 \succ_{\Delta} f(F_2)$, $|f(F_2)\setminus \widetilde{F}_3|=1$ and $f(F_1)\cap f(F_2)\subseteq \widetilde{F}_3 \subseteq f(F_1)\cup f(F_2)$.
We will construct a facet $F_3\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta')$ with $f(F_3)=\widetilde{F}_3$ accordingly. Take arbitrary $x_{i}\in \widetilde{F}_3$ and we will find the $x_{i,j}$ for $F_3$. Here, if $i\ne 1$, $j$ is forced to be $1$. If $x_1\in \widetilde{F}_3$, then $x_1\in f(F_1)\cup f(F_2)$. We have two sub-cases here. If $x_1\in f(F_2)$, we will take the $j$ such that $x_{1,j}\in F_2$. Otherwise, we will take the $j$ such that $x_{1,j}\in F_1$.
In the following, we verify that $F_3$ is the expected facet proceeding $F_2$ with respect to $\succ_{\Delta'}$.
\begin{enumerate}[1]
\item As $f(F_3)=\widetilde{F}_3\succ_{\Delta} f(F_2)$, $F_3\succ_{\Delta'}F_2$.
\item Now, suppose that $\{x_k\}=f(F_2)\setminus \widetilde{F}_3$. If $k\ne 1$, obviously $F_2\setminus F_3=\{x_{k,1}\}$. If $k=1$, then $F_2\setminus F_3=\{x_{1,j}\}$ for the unique $x_{1,j}\in F_2$. In both cases, $|F_2\setminus F_3|=1$.
\item For $i\ne 1$, then $x_{i,1}\in F_3$ if and only if $x_i\in \widetilde{F}_3$. On the other hand, $x_{i,1}\in f(F_1)$ or $f(F_2)$ if and only if $x_i\in F_1$ or $F_2$ respectively. Thus
\[
F_1\cap F_2 \cap \{x_{i,1}\} \subseteq F_3\cap \{x_{i,1}\} \subseteq (F_1 \cup F_2)\cap \{x_{i,1}\}.
\]
For $i=1$, we may assume that $x_1\in f(F_1)\cup f(F_2)$.
Write $X_1=\Set{x_{1,1},\dots,x_{1,s_1}}$.
Depending on whether $x_1\in f(F_2)$ or not, we have $F_3\cap X_1=F_2\cap X_1$ or $F_1\cap X_1$. Thus,
\[
F_1\cap F_2 \cap X_1 \subseteq F_3\cap X_1 \subseteq (F_1 \cup F_2)\cap X_1.
\]
To sum up, we have $F_1\cap F_2 \subseteq F_3 \subseteq F_1\cup F_2$.
\end{enumerate}
Therefore, $\succ_{\Delta'}$ is a strong shelling order on $\Delta'$.
\item The ``if'' part: Let $\succ_{\Delta'}$ be a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta')$. We will identify $x_{i,1}\in \mathcal{V}(\Delta')$ with $x_i\in\mathcal{V}(\Delta)$, treating $\Delta$ as a subcomplex of $\Delta'$. Thus, one has a natural induced linear order $\succ_{\Delta}$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. It suffices to show that $\succ_{\Delta}$ is a strong shelling order.
Take two distinct facets $F_1\succ_{\Delta} F_2$ in $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)\subset \mathcal{F}(\Delta')$. Thus, by the strong shellability of $\Delta'$, one has $F_3\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta')$ with $F_3\succ_{\Delta'}F_2$, $|F_2\setminus F_3|=1$ and $F_1\cap F_2\subseteq F_3 \subseteq F_1\cup F_2$. As $F_1\cup F_2 \subset \mathcal{V}(\Delta)$, $F_3\subset \mathcal{V}(\Delta)$. In particular, $F_3\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Therefore, $F_3 \succ_\Delta F_2$. \qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\section{Codimension one graph}
Zheng \cite{MR2100472} considered the following property of simplicial complexes.
\begin{definition}
A complex is called \Index{connected in codimension one} if for any two facets $F$ and $G$ with $\dim(F) \geq \dim(G)$, there exists a chain of facets $F = F_0, \cdots, F_n = G$ between $F$ and $G$ such that
$\dim(F_i \cap F_{i+1})=\dim(F_{i+1})-1$ for all $i = 0,\cdots, n-1$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}
[{\cite[Lemma 9.1.12]{MR2724673}}]
\label{lem-connected-1}
Every Cohen-Macaulay complex is connected in codimension one.
\end{lemma}
As pure shellable complexes are Cohen-Macaulay by \cite[Theorem 8.2.6]{MR2724673}, the following simple result follows easily from the definition.
\begin{corollary}
\label{connected in codimension one}
Let $\Delta$ be a pure shellable complex. Then there exists a linear order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, say $F_1, \ldots, F_m$, such that $\braket{ F_1, \ldots, F_k }$ is connected in codimension one for each $k \in [m]$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{definition}
\label{distance}
For a complex $\Delta$, the \Index{distance} between two facets $F_1$ and $F_2$ is defined by
\[
\operatorname{dis}(F_1, F_2)\mathrel{\mathop:}= \min(\dim(F_1), \dim(F_2))-\dim(F_1 \cap F_2),
\]
which can be easily verified to be $\min(|F_1 \setminus F_2|, |F_2 \setminus F_1|)$.
Sometimes, we will also write it as $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_1, F_2)$, in order to emphasize the underlying complex.
\end{definition}
Note that in the pure case, the function $\operatorname{dis}_\Delta$ satisfies the usual triangle inequality. However, this is generally false in the nonpure case.
\begin{lemma}
\label{nonpure subset}
Let $\Delta$ be a complex. If $F,G,H$ are three facets such that
\[
\min(\dim(F), \dim(G)) \leq \dim(H) \leq \max(\dim(F), \dim(G)),
\]
then
$\operatorname{dis}(F,H)+\operatorname{dis}(H,G)=\operatorname{dis}(F,G)$ if and only if $F\cap G \subseteq H \subseteq F\cup G$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As indicated in Figure \ref{fig: nonpure same}, we may assume that $F=P_1\sqcup P_2 \sqcup P_4 \sqcup P_5$, $G=P_1\sqcup P_3 \sqcup P_4 \sqcup P_7$ and $H=P_1\sqcup P_2 \sqcup P_3 \sqcup P_6$.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{minipage}[h]{\linewidth} \centering
\includegraphics{2.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Venn diagram of 3 intersecting sets} \label{fig: nonpure same}
\end{figure}
Suppose that $\dim(F)\ge \dim(G)$. Therefore, indeed, $\dim(F)\ge \dim(H)\ge \dim(G)$. In this case, $\operatorname{dis}(F,H)=|H\setminus G|=|P_3|+|P_6|$, $\operatorname{dis}(H,G)=|G\setminus H|=|P_4|+|P_7|$ and $\operatorname{dis}(F,G)=|G\setminus F|=|P_3|+|P_7|$. Thus, the condition $\operatorname{dis}(F,H)+\operatorname{dis}(H,G)=\operatorname{dis}(F,G)$ is translated into $|P_4|+|P_6|=0$, i.e., $P_4=P_6=\varnothing$. But this is equivalent to saying that $F\cap G \subseteq H \subseteq F\cup G$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{nonpure same}
Under the assumptions in Proposition \ref{nonpure restriction}, let $F_1,F_2$ be two distinct facets of $\Delta$ such that $F_1\cap S=F_2\cap S$. If $G$ is another facet such that
\[
\min(\dim(F_1), \dim(F_2)) \leq \dim(G) \leq \max(\dim(F_1), \dim(F_2))
\]
and
\[
\operatorname{dis}(F_1,G)+\operatorname{dis}(G,F_2)=\operatorname{dis}(F_1,F_2),
\]
then $G\cap S=F_1\cap S$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality, we assume that $\dim(F_1) \geq \dim(G) \geq \dim(F_2)$.
By Lemma \ref{nonpure subset}, we have $F_1 \cap F_2 \subseteq G \subseteq F_1 \cup F_2$, and thus $(F_1\cap S) \cap (F_2\cap S) \subseteq G\cap S \subseteq (F_1\cap S) \cup (F_2\cap S)$. As $F_1\cap S=F_2\cap S$, we have $G\cap S=F_1\cap S$.
\end{proof}
In the above corollary, the condition on dimensions
is necessary, as the following example shows.
\begin{example}
Let $\Delta$ be a complex on the set $\{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7\}$ whose facet set is
\[
\Set{F_1=\{1, 2, 3, 4\}, \quad F_2=\{4, 5, 6\},\quad G=\{1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7\}}.
\]
It is direct to check that $\operatorname{dis}(F_1,G)+\operatorname{dis}(G,F_2)=\operatorname{dis}(F_1,F_2)$. If $S= \{4, 7\}$, then $F_1\cap S=F_2\cap S= \{4\}$, but $G\cap S=\{7\} \neq F_1\cap S$.
\end{example}
Note that every finite graph $\Gamma$ has a well-defined distance function defined from $\mathcal{V}(\Gamma)^2$ to ${\mathbb N}\cup \{+\infty\}$. We will denote it by $\operatorname{dis}_\Gamma$.
\begin{definition}
Given a complex $\Delta$, the \Index{codimension one graph} related to $\Delta$, denoted by $\Gamma(\Delta)$, is a finite simple graph whose vertex set is $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, and two facets $F$ and $G$ are adjacent in $\Gamma(\Delta)$ if and only if $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F, G)=1$.
The codimension one graph $\Gamma(\Delta)$ will be called \Index{harmonious} with respect to $\Delta$ if
$\operatorname{dis}_\Delta(F,G)=\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F,G)$ for every pair of facets $F$ and $G$. In this case, we also call $\Delta$ a \Index{harmonious} complex.
\end{definition}
\begin{example}
\label{example:3.2}
Let $\Delta$ be the complex whose facets are $\{1, 2\}$, $\{2, 3\}$, $\{3, 4\}$ and $\{4, 5\}$. The codimension one graph of $\Delta$ is pictured in Figure \ref{Fig:codim1}. For simplicity, in this figure, we write $x_{i,j}$ for the vertex corresponding to the facet $\{i,j\}$.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{minipage}[h]{\linewidth} \centering
\begin{minipage}[h]{\linewidth} \centering
\includegraphics{3.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Codimension one graph of $\Delta$} \label{Fig:codim1}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
Note that
\[
\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(\{1, 2\},\, \{4, 5\})=3\ne \operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(\{1, 2\},\, \{4, 5\})=2.
\]
Hence $\Delta$ is not a harmonious complex.
\end{example}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem-connected-2}
If $\Delta$ is a Cohen-Macaulay complex, then $\Gamma(\Delta)$ is connected.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This is simply a paraphrase of Lemma \ref{lem-connected-1}.
\end{proof}
We will have more control regarding the connectivity when strong shellability is present.
\begin{lemma}
\label{distance of graph less than complex}
Let $\Delta$ be a strongly shellable complex. Then $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F, G) \leq \operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F, G)$ for each pair of facets $F, G \in \Delta$. In particular, $\Gamma(\Delta)$ is connected.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $F_1, F_2, \cdots, F_t$ be a dimension-decreasing strong shelling order. We will prove by induction on the distance $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F, G)$.
The case $\operatorname{dis}_\Delta(F,G)=0$ is trivial. Thus, we will assume that $F\ne G$ and $\operatorname{dis}_\Delta(F,G)>0$.
Let $F=F_i$ and $G=F_j$ with $i<j$. Then there exists $k<j$, such that $|F_j \setminus F_k|=1$ and $F_i\cap F_j \subseteq F_k \subseteq F_i\cup F_j$. Obviously, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_k, F_j)=1=\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F_k, F_j)$. We have the following two subcases:
\begin{enumerate}[1]
\item $\dim(F_k) \leq \dim(F_i)$. In the case, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_k)=|F_k \setminus F_i|$ and $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_j)=|F_j \setminus F_i|$. Since $|F_j \setminus F_i|= |F_k \setminus F_i|+1$ by Remark \ref{1/2/3 equivalent discription}, it follows that $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_k)=\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_j)-1$.
\item \label{lemma-case-2} $\dim(F_k) > \dim(F_i)$. In the case, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_k)=|F_i \setminus F_k| < |F_k \setminus F_i|$. Since $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_j)=|F_j \setminus F_i|= |F_k \setminus F_i|+1$, it follows that $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_k) < \operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_j)-1$.
\end{enumerate}
By inductive assumption, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F_i, F_k) \leq \operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_k)$. Hence
\[
\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F_i, F_j) \leq \operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F_i, F_k)+1 \leq \operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_k)+1 \leq \operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_j). \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
The above proof indicates that the appearance of $F_k$ in the case \ref{lemma-case-2} induces the strict inequality $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F_i, F_j) < \operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F_i, F_j)$. Thus, we have the following result.
\begin{lemma}
\label{not add dim}
Let $\Delta$ be a strongly shellable complex, and $\succ$ be a dimension-decreasing strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. If $\Gamma(\Delta)$ is harmonious with respect to $\Delta$, then for each pair $F_i\succ F_j$, there exists a facet $F_k\succ F_j$, such that:
\begin{enumerate}[1]
\item \label{nad-1} $|F_j \setminus F_k|=1$ and $F_i\cap F_j \subseteq F_k \subseteq F_i\cup F_j$;
\item \label{nad-2} $\dim(F_i)\ge \dim(F_k)\ge \dim(F_j)$.
\end{enumerate}
In particular, $\operatorname{dis}(F_i,F_j)=\operatorname{dis}(F_i,F_k)+\operatorname{dis}(F_k,F_j)$ with $\operatorname{dis}(F_k,F_j)=1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
\label{strong-harmonious}
As a matter of fact, if $\Delta$ is harmonious, then it is clear from the proof of Lemma \ref{distance of graph less than complex} that any $F_k$ satisfying the condition \ref{nad-1} in Lemma \ref{not add dim} will automatically satisfy the condition \ref{nad-2} as well.
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}
A complex $\Delta$ will be called \Index{quasi-harmonious}, if there exists a dimension-decreasing strong shelling order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, such that for each pair $F_i\succ F_j$, there exists a facet $F_k\succ F_j$ such that $F_k$ satisfies the conditions \ref{nad-1} and \ref{nad-2} in Lemma \ref{not add dim}.
\end{definition}
Obviously, strongly shellable harmonious complexes are quasi-harmonious.
Later, in Theorem \ref{strongly shellable=keeping distance order}, we will show that pure strongly shellable complexes are harmonious. Hence pure strongly shellable complexes are always quasi-harmonious. But in the nonpure case, a strongly shellable complex may not necessarily be quasi-harmonious.
\begin{example}
[Strongly shellable, but not quasi-harmonious]
Let $\Delta$ be a complex with facets
\[
\{3, 4, 5, 6, 7\}, \{2, 4, 5, 6, 7\}, \{2, 3, 5, 6, 7\}, \{2, 3, 4, 6, 7\}, \{2, 3, 4, 5\}, \{1, 6, 7\}.
\]
One can check directly that $\Delta$ is a nonpure strongly shellable complex. But for the facets $\{2, 3, 4, 5\}$ and $\{1, 6, 7\}$, the condition for being quasi-harmonious is not satisfied.
\end{example}
On the other hand, nonpure quasi-harmonious complexes are generally not harmonious.
\begin{example}
[Quasi-harmonious, but not harmonious]
Let $\Delta$ be a complex with facets
\[
\{2,3,5,6\}, \{1,2,3\}, \{2,3,4\},\{3,4,5\},\{4,5,6\}.
\]
One can check directly that this strongly shellable complex is a quasi-harmonious, but not harmonious.
\end{example}
However, the distance function does behave more tamely for quasi-harmonious complexes.
\begin{proposition}
\label{cor:dist-1}
Suppose that the simplicial complex $\Delta$ is quasi-harmonious with respect to the dimension-decreasing strong shelling order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Then, for each pair of facets $F_i\succ F_j$, there exists a sequence of facets $F_i=G_0,G_1,\dots,G_t=F_j$ such that
\begin{enumerate}[a]
\item $t=\operatorname{dis}(F_i,F_j)$;
\item $\dim(G_0)\ge \dim(G_1)\ge \cdots \ge \dim(G_t)$;
\item $\operatorname{dis}(G_h,G_{h+1})=1$ for each $h$ with $0\le h \le t-1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $t=\operatorname{dis}(F_i,F_j)$ and $F_k$ is the facet as in Lemma \ref{not add dim}. It suffices to consider the case when $t\ge 2$. Whence, $F_i\ne F_k$. Denote $F_i,F_k$ and $F_j$ by $G_0,G_{t-1}$ and $G_t$ respectively.
\begin{enumerate}[1]
\item If $F_i\succ F_k$, by induction, we will have a sequence of facets $G_0,G_1,\dots,G_{t-1}$ such that $\dim(G_0)\ge \dim(G_1)\ge \cdots \ge \dim(G_{t-1})$, and $\operatorname{dis}(G_h,G_{h+1})=1$ for each $h$ with $0\le h \le t-2$.
\item If $F_k\succ F_i$, then $\dim(F_i)=\dim(F_k)$. Again by induction, we will have a sequence of facets $G_0,G_1,\dots,G_{t-1}$ of same dimension with $\operatorname{dis}(G_h,G_{h+1})=1$ for each $h$ with $0\le h \le t-2$.
\end{enumerate}
In either case, we are done after concatenating the sequence with $G_t$ in the end.
\end{proof}
The harmonious property behaves well with respect to restrictions of strong shellability.
\begin{lemma}
\label{harmonious subcomplex}
Let $\Delta$ be a harmonious strongly shellable complex. Let $S$ be a non-empty subset of $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ and $\Delta'=\braket{S}$. If $\Delta'$ is also strongly shellable, then it is harmonious as well.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Take arbitrary $F_a,F_b\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta')$. As any minimal path connecting $F_a$ and $F_b$ in $\Gamma(\Delta')$ is a path connecting $F_a$ and $F_b$ in $\Gamma(\Delta)$, one has $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta')}(F_a,F_b)\ge \operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F_a,F_b)=\operatorname{dis}(F_a,F_b)$. But $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta')}(F_a,F_b)\le \operatorname{dis}(F_a,F_b)$ by Lemma \ref{distance of graph less than complex}. Consequently, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta')}(F_a,F_b)= \operatorname{dis}(F_a,F_b)$.
\end{proof}
For a given linear order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, a facet $F$ of dimension $k$ is called an \Index{initial facet}, if $F \succ G$ for any other facet $G$ of same dimension.
One can similarly define \Index{terminal facet}.
Meanwhile, for any facet $F_1,F_2$, we have the \Index{interval} $[F_1, F_2]_\succ \mathrel{\mathop:}= \Set{G \in \mathcal{F}(\Delta) \mid F_1 \succcurlyeq G \succcurlyeq F_2}$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{interval ss}
Let $\Delta$ be a harmonious strongly shellable complex with a dimension-decreasing strong shelling order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. If $F_i$ is an initial facet of $\succ$, then for every $F_j$ with $F_i\succ F_j$, the interval $[F_i, F_j]_\succ$ generates a harmonious strongly shellable complex.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{not add dim}, for each pair of facets $F_a, F_b \in [F_i, F_j]_\succ$ with $F_a \succ F_b$, there exists a facet $F_c \succ F_b\succcurlyeq F_j$, such that $|F_b \setminus F_c|=1$, $F_a\cap F_b\subseteq F_c \subseteq F_a\cup F_b$, and $\dim(F_c) \leq \dim(F_a)$. Since $F_i$ is an initial facet,
and $\succ$ is dimension-decreasing, $\dim F_a\le \dim F_i$. Thus, $F_c \in [F_i, F_j]_\succ$. This shows that $[F_i, F_j]_\succ$ generates a strongly shellable complex. As for the expected harmonious property, we apply Lemma \ref{harmonious subcomplex}.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{pure_k F hss}
Let $\Delta$ be a harmonious strongly shellable complex. Then $\overline{\operatorname{pure}_k}(\Delta)$ is also harmonious strongly shellable for any $0 < k \leq \dim(\Delta)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Take arbitrary dimension-decreasing strong shelling order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Let $F_i$ and $F_j$ be the initial and terminal facet of dimension $k$ respectively. Then $\mathcal{F}(\overline{\operatorname{pure}_k}(\Delta))=[F_i,F_j]_\succ$. Now, we apply Proposition \ref{interval ss}.
\end{proof}
\section{Strongly shellable complexes, pure case}
In this section, we focus on pure strongly shellable complexes.
In this case, the distance function $\operatorname{dis}_\Delta$ in Definition \ref{distance} satisfies the usual triangle inequality:
\[
\operatorname{dis}(F,H)+\operatorname{dis}(H,G)\ge\operatorname{dis}(F,G) \quad \text{for $F,H,G\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$}.
\]
The following lemma is the pure version of Lemma \ref{nonpure subset}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{subset}
Let $F,G,H \in \binom{[n]}{d}$. Then $\operatorname{dis}(F,H)+\operatorname{dis}(H,G)=\operatorname{dis}(F,G)$ if and only if $F\cap G \subseteq H \subseteq F\cup G$.
\end{lemma}
The following fact follows directly from the definition and the above lemma:
\begin{lemma}
\label{d=d-1+1}
Let $\Delta$ be a pure complex. Then $\Delta$ is strongly shellable if and only if there exists a linear order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, such that whenever $F_i\succ F_j$, there exists a facet $F_k\succ F_j$, such that $\operatorname{dis}(F_k, F_j)=1$ and $\operatorname{dis}(F_i, F_k) = \operatorname{dis}(F_i, F_j)-1$.
\end{lemma}
Given a linear order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, if $F\succcurlyeq G$, we will say that $F$ is \Index{on the left side} of $G$. Similar to the phenomenon in Proposition \ref{cor:dist-1}, pure strongly shellable complexes can be further characterized by the distance function as follows.
\begin{proposition}
\label{distance 1 chain}
The following statements are equivalent for a pure simplicial complex $\Delta$:
\begin{enumerate}[a]
\item \label{dist-1-a} $\Delta$ is strongly shellable.
\item \label{dist-1-b} There exists a linear order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, such that for each pair $F,G \in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ with $F\succ G$, there exists a chain of facets $F= H_{0}, \ldots, H_{t} = G$ of length $t=\operatorname{dis}(F,G)$ on the left side of $G$ with $\operatorname{dis}(F_{l-1}, F_{l})=1$ for $1 \leq l \leq t$.
\item \label{dist-1-c} There exists a linear order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, such that for each pair $F,G \in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ with $F\succ G$, there exists a chain of facets $F = H_{0}, \ldots, H_{t} = G$ of length $t=\operatorname{dis}(F,G)$ on the left side of $G$ with $\operatorname{dis}(H_{l_1}, H_{l_2})=l_2-l_1$ for $0\le l_1 \le l_2 \le t$.
\item \label{dist-1-d} There exists a linear order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, such that for each pair $F, G \in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ with $F\succ G$, either $\operatorname{dis}(F,G)=1$, or $\operatorname{dis}(F,G)\ge 2$ and there exists some $H\succ G$ with $F\ne H$ such that $\operatorname{dis}(F,H)+\operatorname{dis}(H,G)=\operatorname{dis}(F,G)$.
\item \label{dist-1-e} There exists a linear order $\succ$ on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, such that for each pair $F,G\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ with $F\succ G$, either $\operatorname{dis}(F,G)=1$, or $\operatorname{dis}(F,G)\ge 2$ and there exists some $H\succ G$ with $F\ne H$ such that $F \cap G \subseteq H \subseteq F \cup G$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The implications \ref{dist-1-d} $\Leftrightarrow$ \ref{dist-1-e}
follows from Lemma \ref{subset}.
The implications \ref{dist-1-d} $\Leftarrow$ \ref{dist-1-a} $\Leftarrow$ \ref{dist-1-b} $\Leftarrow$ \ref{dist-1-c} are clear from Lemma \ref{d=d-1+1}.
\begin{enumerate}[i]
\item The implication \ref{dist-1-a} $\Rightarrow$ \ref{dist-1-c} is straightforward as follows. Assume that $F\succ G$. If $t=\operatorname{dis}(F,G)=1$, this is clear. Thus, we may assume that $t\ge 2$.
Write $F=H_0$ and $G=H_t$.
Therefore, there exists $H_{t-1}\succ H_t$ with $\operatorname{dis}(H_{t-1},H_t)=1$ and $\operatorname{dis}(H_0,H_{t-1})=t-1$.
If $H_0\succ H_{t-1}$, by induction, we can find $H_0,H_1,\dots,H_{t-1}$ on the left side of $H_{t-1}$ such that $\operatorname{dis}(H_{l_1},H_{l_2})=l_2-l_1$ for $0\le l_1\le l_2\le t-1$. Now take $0\le l \le t-1$ and check $\operatorname{dis}(H_l,H_t)$. Obviously, $\operatorname{dis}(H_l,H_t)\le \operatorname{dis}(H_l,H_{t-1})+\operatorname{dis}(H_{t-1},H_t)=(t-1-l)+1=t-l$. On the other hand, $\operatorname{dis}(H_l,H_t)\ge \operatorname{dis}(H_0,H_t)-\operatorname{dis}(H_0,H_l)=t-l$. Thus, $\operatorname{dis}(H_l,H_t)=t-l$, as expected.
The case when $H_{t-1}\succ H_{0}$ is similar. By induction, we will find a chain of facets $H_{t-1}=H_0',H_1',\dots,H_{t-1}'=H_0$ on the left of $H_0$ with $\operatorname{dis}(H_{l_1}',H_{l_2}')=l_2-l_1$ for $0\le l_1\le l_2 \le t-1$. We will take $H_{l}=H_{t-1-l}'$ for $1\le l\le t-2$. Notice that $H_0=H_{t-1}'$ and $H_{t-1}=H_0'$ already. The remaining argument is similar to that of the above.
\item As a final step, we show \ref{dist-1-d} $\Rightarrow$ \ref{dist-1-a}, which is also easy. Take arbitrary $F\succ G$.
We show that there exists some $L$ with $L\succ G$, $\operatorname{dis}(L,G)=1$ and $\operatorname{dis}(F,L)=\operatorname{dis}(F,G)-1$. To show this,
we may assume that $t=\operatorname{dis}(F,G)\ge 2$. Therefore, there exists some $H\succ G$ with $F\ne H$ and $\operatorname{dis}(F,H)+\operatorname{dis}(H,G)=t$. As $1\le \operatorname{dis}(H,G)\le t-1$, by induction, we can find $L\succ G$ such that $\operatorname{dis}(L,G)=1$ and $\operatorname{dis}(H,L)=\operatorname{dis}(H,G)-1$. Now, $\operatorname{dis}(F,L)\le \operatorname{dis}(F,H)+\operatorname{dis}(H,L)=(t-\operatorname{dis}(H,G))+(\operatorname{dis}(H,G)-1)=t-1$. On the other hand, $\operatorname{dis}(F,L)\ge \operatorname{dis}(F,G)-\operatorname{dis}(L,G)=t-1$. Therefore, $\operatorname{dis}(F,L)=t-1$, as expected. \qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
In the following, we will characterize the strong shellability of a pure complex by investigating its codimension one graph.
\begin{definition}
For a given finite simple graph $G$, we can delete a vertex $v_1$ to get a subgraph $G_1=G\setminus v_1$. If for each pair of vertices $u,\,v$ in $G_1$, $\operatorname{dis}_{G_1}(u, v)=\operatorname{dis}_{G}(u, v)$, the graph $G_1$ is called \Index{distance-preserving} with respect to $G$. More generally, if we can order the vertex set $\mathcal{V}(G)=\Set{v_1,v_2,\dots,v_{t}}$, such that the induced subgraphs $G_k=G|_{\{v_{k+1},v_{k+2},\dots,v_{t}\}}$ satisfy the requirement that
$G_i$ preserves distance with respect to $G_{i-1}$ for each $1 \leq i < t-1$, then we say that the graph $G$ has a \Index{distance-preserving order}: $v_1, v_2, \cdots, v_{t}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{example}
Let $\Delta$ be a pure complex with the facet set
\[
\Set{\{1, 2, 3, 4\}, \{2, 3, 4, 5\}, \{3, 4, 5, 6\}, \{4, 5, 6, 7\}, \{1, 4, 6, 7\}, \{1, 2, 4, 7\}}.
\]
The codimension one graph $\Gamma(\Delta)$ is a cycle with 6 vertices, as Figure \ref{Fig:circle} shows.
It is easy to check that $\Gamma(\Delta)$ is harmonious
but does not have any distance-preserving order.
\end{example}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{minipage}[h]{\linewidth} \centering
\begin{minipage}[h]{\linewidth} \centering
\includegraphics{4.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{$\Gamma(\Delta)$}
\label{Fig:circle}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
As $\operatorname{dis}_\Delta$ is indeed a distance metric on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ in pure case, we have the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{pure distance of complex less than graph}
Let $\Delta$ be a pure complex. Then $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F, G) \leq \operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F, G)$ for each pair of facets $F, G \in \Delta$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F, G)=t$. If $F=F_0,F_1,\dots,F_t =G$ is a path of length $t$ in $\Gamma(\Delta)$, then, for each $1 \leq i \leq t$, $|F_{i-1} \cap F_i| =d-1$, i.e., $\operatorname{dis}_\Delta(F_{i-1},F_i)=1$. By the triangle inequality, $\operatorname{dis}_\Delta(F,G)\le t$.
\end{proof}
The following is the first main result of this section.
\begin{theorem}
\label{strongly shellable=keeping distance order}
A pure complex $\Delta$ is strongly shellable if and only if its codimension one graph $\Gamma(\Delta)$ is harmonious and has a distance-preserving order.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For the necessity part: If $\Delta$ is strongly shellable, then for each pair of facets $F, G \in \Delta$, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F, G) \leq \operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F, G)$ by Lemma \ref{distance of graph less than complex}. On the other hand, by Lemma \ref{pure distance of complex less than graph}, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(F, G) \leq \operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma(\Delta)}(F, G)$. Hence $\Gamma(\Delta)$ is harmonious.
Since $\Delta$ is strongly shellable, we can assume that $G_1, G_2, \dots, G_s$ is a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Note that each subcomplex $\braket{ G_1, \dots, G_k}$ for $1 \leq k \leq s$ is also strongly shellable, therefore harmonious, by the previous argument. It is clear that $G_s, G_{s-1}, \cdots, G_1$ gives a distance-preserving order on $\Gamma(\Delta)$.
For the sufficiency part: Assume that $\Gamma(\Delta)$ has a distance-preserving order: $G_s, G_{s-1}, \dots, G_1$. Since $\Gamma(\Delta)$ is harmonious, the subcomplexes $\Delta_k\mathrel{\mathop:}=\braket{G_1, \cdots, G_k}$ are also harmonious for $1 \leq k \leq s$. In the following, we will show that $G_1, \cdots, G_s$ is a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. Take arbitrary facets $G_i, G_j \in \Delta$ with $i<j$ and suppose that $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(G_i, G_j)=t$. Let $\Gamma_j=\Gamma(\Delta_j)$. Since $\Delta_j$ is harmonious, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma_j}(G_i,G_j)=\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta_j}(G_i,G_j)=t$. Therefore, there exists a path of length $t$ in $\Gamma_j$: $G_i=G_{k_0},G_{k_1}, \dots,G_{k_t}=G_j$, with all $k_l\le j$. Obviously, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(G_{k_{t-1}}, G_j) = \operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma_j}(G_{k_{t-1}}, G_j)=1$. Note that $ \operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(G_{k_{t-1}}, G_i)\geq \operatorname{dis}_\Delta(G_i,G_j)-\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(G_j,G_{k_{t-1}})=t-1$. On the other hand, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma_j}(G_{k_{t-1}}, G_i) \leq t-1$ by the existence of the previous path connecting $G_i$ and $G_j$. Hence, by Lemma \ref{pure distance of complex less than graph}, we have $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(G_{k_{t-1}}, G_i)=\operatorname{dis}_{\Gamma_j}(G_{k_{t-1}}, G_i) = t-1$. It follows from Lemma \ref{d=d-1+1} that $G_1, \dots, G_s$ is a strong shelling order of $\Delta$.
\end{proof}
Recall that a cycle in a finite simple graph $G$ is called \Index{minimal} if there is no chord in the cycle. And the \Index{girth} of $G$, denoted by $\operatorname{g}(G)$, is the length of a shortest cycle contained in the graph.
If a graph has no cycle, then its girth is assumed to be 0.
\begin{lem}
\label{girth not more than 4}
Let $G$ be a connected simple graph. If it has a distance-preserving order, then its girth is at most $4$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We may assume that $G$ has at least one cycle, and has a distance-preserving order: $v_1, v_2, \dots, v_{n+1}$. Let $G_i$ be the induced subgraph from $G$ by removing the vertices $v_1,\dots,v_i$.
Assume for contradiction that $\operatorname{g}(G)\ge 5$.
As $G_{n-1}$ has no cycle, we can find the least $k$ such that $G_k$ has no cycle. Obviously $1\le k \le n-1$. From $G_{k-1}$ to $G_k$, we removed the vertex $v_k$. Thus, $v_k$ is contained in some minimal cycle in $G_{k-1}$. Consider one such minimal cycle. Let $v'$ and $v''$ be the two vertices adjacent to $v_k$ on this cycle. As $\operatorname{g}(G)\ge 5$, and $G_{k-1}$ contains cycles, $\operatorname{g}(G_{k-1})\ge 5$. Thus, $v'$ and $v''$ are not adjacent in $G_{k-1}$ and indeed $\operatorname{dis}_{G_{k-1}}(v',v'')=2$. By the distance-preserving condition, $\operatorname{dis}_{G_k}(v',v'')=2$. This implies the existence of some vertex $u\in G_k$ which are adjacent to both $v'$ and $v''$. But $u\ne v_{k}$. Thus we have a cycle in $G_{k-1}$ consisting of the vertices $v_k, v', u$ and $v''$. This implies that $\operatorname{g}(G_{k-1})\le 4$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
By Theorem \ref{strongly shellable=keeping distance order} and Lemma \ref{girth not more than 4}, we have the following result.
\begin{proposition}
\label{girth diameter}
If $\Delta$ is a pure strongly shellable complex,
then its codimension one graph $\Gamma(\Delta)$ is connected, and $\operatorname{g}(\Gamma(\Delta)) \leq 4$, $\operatorname{diam}(\Gamma(\Delta)) \leq \dim(\Delta)+1$.
\end{proposition}
We will wrap up this section with a very important property of pure strongly shellable complexes.
We have already mentioned that any pure strongly shellable complex $\Delta$ (say, over the vertex set $[n]$) is Cohen-Macaulay, i.e., the Stanley-Reisner ring ${\mathbb K}[\Delta]= {\mathbb K}[x_1, \ldots, x_n]/I_{\Delta}$ is a Cohen-Macaulay ring over arbitrary field ${\mathbb K}$. This is an important property related to the Stanley-Reisner ideal $I_\Delta$ of $\Delta$. In the following, we will consider the \Index{facet} ideal $I(\Delta)\mathrel{\mathop:}=\braket{{\bm x}^F\mid F\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)}\subseteq {\mathbb K}[x_1,\dots,x_n]$. Here, for any $F\subseteq [n]$, we write ${\bm x}^F\mathrel{\mathop:}=\prod_{i\in F}x_i$.
Notice that for any
given simplicial complex $\Delta$, its \Index{complement complex} $\Delta^c$ has the facet set $\mathcal{F}(\Delta^c)=\Set{F^c: F\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)}$, where $F^c\mathrel{\mathop:}=\mathcal{V}(\Delta)\setminus F$. The following observation is important.
\begin{lemma}
\label{complement shellable}
A pure complex $\Delta$ is strongly shellable if and only if its complement complex $\Delta^{c}$ has the same property.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that $\Delta^c$ is also a pure complex with $(\Delta^{c})^{c}=\Delta$. Furthermore, for each pair of facets $A, B$ of $\Delta$, $\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta^{c}}(A^{c}, B^{c})=\operatorname{dis}_{\Delta}(A, B)$. Thus, the result follows directly from Lemma \ref{d=d-1+1}.
\end{proof}
Let $S={\mathbb K}[x_1,\dots,x_n]$ be a polynomial ring over a field ${\mathbb K}$ and $I$ a graded proper ideal. Recall that $I$ has \Index{linear quotients}, if there exists a system of homogeneous generators $f_1 ,f_2 ,\dots,f_m$ of $I$ such that the colon ideal $\braket{f_1 ,\dots,f_{i-1}} : f_i$ is generated by linear forms for all $i$. If $I$ has linear quotients, then $I$ is componentwise linear; see \cite[Theorem 8.2.15]{MR2724673}. In particular, if $I$ has linear quotients and can be generated by forms of degree $d$, then it has a $d$-linear resolution; see \cite[Proposition 8.2.1]{MR2724673}.
On the other hand, recall that the \Index{Alexander dual} of $\Delta$ (with respect to the vertex set $\mathcal{V}(\Delta)$), denoted by $\Delta^{\vee}$, is the complex $\Delta^{\vee}\mathrel{\mathop:}=\Set{F^c \mid F \notin \Delta,\, F\subseteq [n]}$. Note that $I_{\Delta^{\vee}} = I(\Delta^{c})$ by \cite[Lemma 1.5.3]{MR2724673}. Thus, we have the second main result of this section.
\begin{theorem}
\label{linear quotients}
If $\Delta$ is a pure strongly shellable complex, then the facet ideal $I(\Delta)$ has linear quotients.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
It is well-known that $\Delta$ is shellable if and only if $I_{\Delta^{\vee}}$ has linear quotients; see \cite[Proposition 8.2.5]{MR2724673}. Since $\Delta$ is strongly shellable, $\Delta^{c}$ is shellable by Lemma \ref{complement shellable}. Hence $I_{(\Delta^{c})^{\vee}}$ has linear quotients. Note that $I_{(\Delta^{c})^{\vee}} = I(\Delta)$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
This important property will be vital for the sequel paper \cite{ESSC}, where we deal with chordal (hyper)-graphs.
\section{Strongly shellable posets}
Recall that a poset $P$ is called \Index{bounded} if it has a top element $\hat{1}$ and a bottom element $\hat{0}$. If $P$ is bounded, let $\bar{P}=P\setminus\Set{\hat{0},\hat{1}}$. Conversely, for any poset $P$, let $\widehat{P}=P\cup \Set{\hat{0},\hat{1}}$ where $\hat{0}$ and $\hat{1}$ are new elements adjoined so that $\hat{0}<x<\hat{1}$ for all $x\in P$. A finite poset is said to be \Index{pure} if all maximal chains have the same length. And a poset is called \Index{graded} if it is finite, bounded and pure.
Given a finite poset $P$, its \Index{order complex} $\Delta(P)$ is the simplicial complex whose $k$-dimensional faces are the chains $x_0<x_1<\cdots<x_k$ of $P$. A finite pure poset $P$ will be called \Index{(strongly) shellable} if its order complex $\Delta(P)$ is so. Note that a finite poset $P$ is (strongly) shellable if and only if $\widehat{P}$ is so.
Let $P$ be a finite pure poset of length $r-1$. Then $\widehat{P}$ is graded with a well-defined \Index{rank function} $\rho$, where $\rho(x)$ is defined to be
the common length of all unrefinable chains from $\hat{0}$ to $x$ in $\widehat{P}$. Obviously, $\rho(x) \in [r]$ for all $x \in P$. For any subset $S \subseteq [r]$, we define the \Index{rank-selected subposet} $P_S$ by $\{x\in P \mid \rho(x)\in S\}$. Like \cite[Theorem 4.1]{MR570784}, we have
\begin{proposition}
\label{Rank-Selection}
If $P$ is a pure strongly shellable poset of length $r - 1$, then $P_S$ is strongly shellable for all $S\subseteq [r]$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The order complex $\Delta(P_S)=\Delta({P})[P_S]$. Obviously, if $\sigma$ is a maximal simplex in $\Delta({P})$, then $\sigma [P_S]$ is a maximal simplex in $\Delta(P_S)$. Now, we may apply Proposition \ref{nonpure restriction}.
\end{proof}
The proof for \cite[Proposition 4.2]{MR570784} also works for the following result:
\begin{proposition}
If $P$ is a pure strongly shellable poset, then all intervals of $P$ are strongly shellable.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof is standard. Assume that $P$ is strongly shellable and that $[x, y]$ is an interval of $P$. Let ${\bm c}:
x_1 < x_2 < \cdots < x_g = x$ and ${\bm d}: y = y_1 < y_2 < \cdots < y_h$ be two unrefinable chains in $P$ such that $x_1$ is a minimal element and $y_h$ is a maximal element. Let ${\bm m}_1, {\bm m}_2,\dots, {\bm m}_t$ be the maximal chains in $P$ which contain ${\bm c} \cup {\bm d}$, and assume that they are listed in the order in which they appear in the strong shelling order $\succ$ of $P$. Denote $({\bm m}_i \setminus ({\bm c} \cup {\bm d})) \cup \Set{x, y}$ by $\widetilde{{\bm m}}_i$.
For each $i$ and $j$ with $1\le i< j \le t$, by the strong shellability of $\Delta(P)$, we can find ${\bm m}\succ {\bm m}_j$ with $\operatorname{dis}({\bm m},{\bm m}_j)=1$ and $\operatorname{dis}({\bm m},{\bm m}_i)=\operatorname{dis}({\bm m}_i,{\bm m}_j)-1$ by Lemma \ref{d=d-1+1}.
With the help of Lemma \ref{subset},
we have ${\bm c}\cup {\bm d} \subseteq {\bm m}$. Thus, ${\bm m}={\bm m}_k$ for some $k$. As ${\bm m}_k\succ {\bm m}_j$, we have $k<j$. Now, it is straightforward to verify that $\operatorname{dis}(\widetilde{{\bm m}}_k,\widetilde{{\bm m}}_j)=1$ and $\operatorname{dis}(\widetilde{{\bm m}}_k,\widetilde{{\bm m}}_i)=\operatorname{dis}(\widetilde{{\bm m}}_i,\widetilde{{\bm m}}_j)-1$.
Therefore, $\widetilde{{\bm m}}_1,\cdots,\widetilde{{\bm m}}_t$ is a strong shelling order of the interval $[x, y]$.
\end{proof}
Let $P$ and $Q$ be two posets. The \Index{ordinal sum} $P\oplus Q$ is the poset on the disjoint union of $P$ and $Q$ defined by the rule: $x\le y$ in $P\oplus Q$ if and only if (i) $x,y\in P$ and $x\le y$ in $P$, or (ii) $x,y\in Q$ and $x\le y$ in $Q$, or (iii) $x\in P$ and $y\in Q$. Like \cite[Theorem 4.4]{MR570784}, we have
\begin{proposition}
\label{Ordinal-Sum}
Let $P$ and $Q$ be two finite posets. Then the ordinal sum $P \oplus Q$ is strongly shellable if and only if both $P$ and $Q$ are strongly shellable.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The order complexes satisfy $\Delta(P\oplus Q)=\Delta(P)*\Delta(Q)$. Thus, we can apply Proposition \ref{nonpure join}.
\end{proof}
However, other poset constructions, like direct product, cardinal power, interval poset, are easily seen to be not compatible with strong shellability.
\section{Relations with other shellable conditions}
In this section, we will show some relations among the concepts related to shellability. First, recall the following two conditions:
\begin{definition}
\begin{enumerate}[a]
\item A \Index{matroid complex} $\Delta$ is a simplicial complex with the exchange property: for any two distinct facets $F,G\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$ and for any $i\in F\setminus G$, there exists some $j\in G\setminus F$ such that $(F\setminus\Set{i})\cup\Set{j}\in \Delta$. Alternatively, $\Delta$ is called a \Index{matroid complex} if for every subset $W\subseteq \mathcal{V}(\Delta)$, the induced subcomplex $\Delta_W$ is pure. For other equivalent characterizations, see, for instance, \cite[Proposition III.3.1]{MR1453579}.
\item A \Index{shifted} complex $\Delta$ on $[n]$ is a simplicial complex such that for each $F \in \Delta$, if $i \in F$ and $j \in [n]$ with $j > i$, then $(F \setminus \{i\}) \cup \{j\} \in \Delta$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{example}
Let $\Delta$ be the nonpure simplicial complex with the facet set $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$:
\[
\Set{ \{1, 2\}, \{1, 3, 6\}, \{1, 4, 6\}, \{1, 5, 6\}, \{2, 3, 6\}, \{2, 4, 6\}, \{2, 5, 6\}, \{3, 4, 5\}, \{3, 4, 6\}, \{3, 5, 6\}, \{4, 5, 6\} }.
\]
One can check directly that $\Delta$ is shifted. On the other hand, this simplicial complex is not strongly shellable; it suffices to compare the two facets $\{1,2\}$ and $\{3,4,5\}$.
\end{example}
Note that any matroid complex is pure, and as the above example shows, a nonpure complex needs not to be strongly shellable, even though it is shifted. Thus, in this section, we are mainly concerned with pure complexes.
\begin{proposition}
\label{matroid implies ss}
Matroid complexes are strongly shellable.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Delta$ be a matroid complex defined on the set $[n]$. We will prove that $\Delta$ is strongly shellable by induction on $n$.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that the vertex $n$ appears in some but not all facets of $\Delta$. Now, $\Delta \setminus n$ and $\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(n)$ are matroid complexes on the set $[n-1]$ with dimension $\dim(\Delta)$ and $\dim(\Delta)-1$ respectively. By inductive assumption, both $\Delta \setminus n$ and $\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(n)$ are strongly shellable. Assume that $F_1, \cdots, F_s$ and $G_1, \cdots, G_t$ are strong shelling orders on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta \setminus n)$ and $\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(n))$ respectively. We claim that
\[
\succ: \quad F_1, \cdots, F_s, G_1 \cup \{n\}, \cdots, G_t \cup \{n\}
\]
is a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. It suffices to compare the pair $F_a\succ G_b\cup \{n\}$, where $1\le a \le s$ and $1\le b\le t$. Since $\Delta$ is a matroid complex and $n\in (G_b\cup\{n\})\setminus F_a$, we can find some $m\in F_a\setminus (G_b\cup\{n\})$ such that $( (G_b\cup\{n\})\setminus \{n\})\cup \{m \} = G_b\cup \{m\} \in \Delta$. Thus, $G_b\cup \{m\}\in \Delta\setminus n$ which means that $G_b\cup\{m\}=F_c$ for some $1\le c\le s$. Obviously, $F_c \succ G_b\cup\{n\}$.
\end{proof}
The proof of the above proposition also shows that, for a matroid complex, the reverse lexicographic order on the facet set gives a strong shelling order.
\begin{example}
In \cite{arXiv:1311.0981}, the authors investigated the spanning tree complex of a connected graph.
More generally, one can consider the spanning forests of a not necessarily connected graph $G$. A subset $F\subseteq \mathcal{E}(G)$ is called a \Index{spanning forest} if for each connected component $L$ of $G$, $L \cap F$ is a spanning tree of $L$.
We will write $s(G)$ for the set of spanning forests of $G$. The \Index{spanning forest complex} $\Delta_S(G)$ of $G$ will be the unique complex over $\mathcal{E}(G)$, whose facet set is $s(G)$.
It is not difficult to see that $\Delta_S(G)$ is a matroid complex,
which is known as the \Index{cycle matroid} of the graph $G$; see, for instance, \cite{MR2849819}.
Indeed, if $G_1,\dots,G_s$ are the connected components of $G$, then
\[
\Delta_S(G)\cong \Delta_S(G_1)*\cdots * \Delta_S(G_s),
\]
the join of matroid complexes, hence again a matroid complex.
In particular, by \ref{matroid implies ss}, $\Delta_S(G)$ is strongly shellable.
To be more specific, if $|\mathcal{E}(G)|=n$ and we label the edges of $G$ arbitrarily by distinct integers in $[n]$, the reverse lexicographic order on the sets of labels of the spanning forest gives rise to a strong shelling order.
For instance, one can consider the simple graph $G$ of Figure \ref{Fig:Labeling edges-b} with the given labels. List all spanning trees by reverse lexicographic order on the labels:
\[
124, 134, 234, 125, 135, 235, 145, 245.
\]
This order is a strong shelling order on the facet set of the spanning forest complex $\Delta_S(G)$. The codimension one graph of $\Delta_S(G)$ is pictured in Figure \ref{Fig:Labeling edges-c}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\ffigbox[\FBwidth]{}{{%
\begin{subfloatrow}[2]
\ffigbox{\caption{A simple graph $G$ with labeled edges}}{
\begin{minipage}[h]{\linewidth} \centering
\includegraphics{5.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\label{Fig:Labeling edges-b}
}
\ffigbox{\caption{$\Gamma(\Delta_S(G))$}}{
\begin{minipage}[h]{\linewidth} \centering
\includegraphics{6.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\label{Fig:Labeling edges-c}
}
\end{subfloatrow}}
\caption{Labels and the codimension one graph of the spanning complex} \label{Labeling edges} }
\end{figure}
\end{example}
\begin{proposition}
\label{strongly chain}
Pure shifted complexes are strongly shellable.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Delta$ be a pure shifted complex on the vertex set $[n]$. We will show that $\Delta$ is strongly shellable by induction on the cardinality of the vertex set. Assume that the result holds for the case of $n-1$.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that the vertex $1$ appears in some but not all facets of $\Delta$.
Note that $\Delta \setminus 1$ and $\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(1)$ are pure shifted complexes on the vertex set $\{2, 3, \cdots, n\}$ of dimension $\dim(\Delta)$ and $\dim(\Delta)-1$ respectively. Thus, by inductive assumption, we can find strong shelling orders $F_1, \ldots, F_p$ and $E_1, \ldots, E_q$ for $\mathcal{F}(\Delta \setminus 1)$ and $\mathcal{F}(\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(1))$ respectively. We claim that
\[
\succ:\quad F_1, \ldots, F_p, E_1 \cup \{1\}, \ldots, E_q \cup \{1\}
\]
is a strong shelling order on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$. In fact, for $F_i\succ E_j \cup \{1\}$ in $\mathcal{F}(\Delta)$, there exists an integer $t \in F_i \setminus (E_j \cup \{1\})$. Since $\Delta$ is shifted, $E_j \cup \{t\} \in \mathcal{F}(\Delta)$.
Obviously, $E_j\cup \{t\}\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta\setminus 1)$ which means $E_j\cup\{t\}=F_k$ for some $1\le k \le p$. Of course, $F_k\succ E_j\cup \{1\}$.
It is also easy to see that $\operatorname{dis}(E_j \cup \{t\}, E_j \cup \{1\})=1$ and $\operatorname{dis}(F_i, E_j \cup \{t\})=\operatorname{dis}(F_i, E_j \cup \{1\})-1$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
The proof of the above proposition also shows that, for a pure shifted complex, if $L_1, \cdots, L_s$ is a linear order on the facet set given by the lexicographic order, then $L_s, \cdots, L_1$ is a strong shelling order.
Recall that a $d$-dimensional pure complex $\Delta$ is \Index{vertex decomposable} if either $\Delta$ is a $d$-simplex, or there exists a vertex $x$ of $\Delta$ (called a \Index{shedding vertex}), so that
\begin{enumerate}[i]
\item $\Delta \setminus x$ is pure of dimension $d$ and vertex decomposable, and
\item $\operatorname{link}_{\Delta}(x)$ is pure of dimension $d-1$ and vertex decomposable.
\end{enumerate}
This definition was introduced by Provan and Billera \cite[Definition 2.1]{MR0593648}. For the nonpure version, see \cite[Definition 11.1]{MR1401765}.
It is not difficult to see that matroid complexes are pure vertex decomposable, see \cite[Theorem 3.2.1]{MR0593648}.
It was also shown in \cite{MR1401765} that for nonpure complexes, we have
\[
\text{shifted $\Longrightarrow$ vertex decomposable $\Longrightarrow$ shellable}.
\]
Recall that Kokubo and Hibi \cite{MR2260118} introduced the weakly polymatroidal ideals. We will consider the Eagon complexes of squarefree weakly polymatroidal ideals. To be more precise,
\begin{definition}
\label{WM}
A simplicial complex $\Delta$ on the vertex set $[n]$ is called a \Index{weakly matroid complex}, if for each distinct facets $G$ and $F$, with respect to the unique vertex $q\in G\setminus F$ such that for each $i<q$, $i\in F$ if and only if $i\in G$, there exists some $p\notin G$ with $q<p\le n$ such that $(\{p\}\cup G) \setminus \{q\}\in \Delta$.
\end{definition}
It is immediate that shifted complexes and matroid complexes are weakly matroidal. On the other hand, by \cite[Theorem 2.5]{MR2845598}, weakly matroid complexes are vertex decomposable.
In \cite{MR2771603}, Hachimori and Kashiwabara introduced hereditary-shellable complexes. According to them, a complex is called \Index{hereditary-shellable} if all its restrictions are (nonpure) shellable. For pure complexes, they \cite{hachimori2009hereditary} established the relations
\[
\xymatrixrowsep{0pc}
\xymatrixcolsep{2pc}
\xymatrix{
&\text{hereditary-shellable} \ar@{=>}[dr] & \\
\text{matroid} \ar@{=>}[ur] \ar@{=>}[dr] & & \text{shellable}. \\
&\text{vertex decomposable} \ar@{=>}[ur]&
}
\]
It is easy to find a pure vertex decomposable complex which is not hereditary-shellable. On the other hand,
\cite[Example 4.6]{hachimori2009hereditary} shows a pure hereditary-shellable complex which is not vertex decomposable.
In the following, we will give additional examples which show that there is no implication between strong shellability with hereditary-shellability or vertex decomposability.
\begin{example}
[Strongly shellable, but not vertex decomposable]
We have already mentioned that \cite[Example 4.6]{hachimori2009hereditary} gives a pure complex which is hereditary-shellable but not vertex decomposable. Actually, one can check directly that it is also strongly shellable. The facet set of this complex has the following strong shelling order:
\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}[h]{0.75\linewidth}
$\{a_1, b_1, c_1\}$,
$\{a_1, b_1, c_2\}$,
$\{a_1, b_1, c_3\}$,
$\{a_1, b_1, c_4\}$,
$\{a_1, b_2, c_1\}$,
$\{a_1, b_2, c_2\}$,
$\{a_1, b_2, c_3\}$,
$\{a_1, b_2, c_4\}$,
$\{a_1, b_3, c_1\}$,
$\{a_1, b_3, c_2\}$,
$\{a_1, b_3, c_3\}$,
$\{a_1, b_3, c_4\}$,
$\{a_1, b_4, c_1\}$,
$\{a_1, b_4, c_2\}$,
$\{a_1, b_4, c_3\}$,
$\{a_1, b_4, c_4\}$,
$\{a_2, b_1, c_1\}$,
$\{a_2, b_1, c_2\}$,
$\{a_2, b_1, c_3\}$,
$\{a_2, b_1, c_4\}$,
$\{a_2, b_2, c_1\}$,
$\{a_2, b_2, c_2\}$,
$\{a_2, b_2, c_3\}$,
$\{a_2, b_2, c_4\}$,
$\{a_2, b_3, c_1\}$,
$\{a_2, b_3, c_2\}$,
$\{a_2, b_3, c_3\}$,
$\{a_2, b_3, c_4\}$,
$\{a_2, b_4, c_1\}$,
$\{a_2, b_4, c_2\}$,
$\{a_2, b_4, c_3\}$,
$\{a_2, b_4, c_4\}$,
$\{a_3, b_1, c_1\}$,
$\{a_3, b_1, c_2\}$,
$\{a_3, b_1, c_3\}$,
$\{a_3, b_1, c_4\}$,
$\{a_3, b_2, c_1\}$,
$\{a_3, b_2, c_2\}$,
$\{a_3, b_2, c_3\}$,
$\{a_3, b_2, c_4\}$,
$\{a_3, b_3, c_1\}$,
$\{a_3, b_3, c_2\}$,
$\{a_3, b_3, c_3\}$,
$\{a_3, b_3, c_4\}$,
$\{a_3, b_4, c_1\}$,
$\{a_3, b_4, c_2\}$,
$\{a_3, b_4, c_3\}$,
$\{a_3, b_4, c_4\}$,
$\{a_4, b_1, c_1\}$,
$\{a_4, b_1, c_2\}$,
$\{a_4, b_1, c_3\}$,
$\{a_4, b_1, c_4\}$,
$\{a_4, b_2, c_1\}$,
$\{a_4, b_2, c_2\}$,
$\{a_4, b_2, c_3\}$,
$\{a_4, b_2, c_4\}$,
$\{a_4, b_3, c_1\}$,
$\{a_4, b_3, c_2\}$,
$\{a_4, b_3, c_3\}$,
$\{a_4, b_3, c_4\}$,
$\{a_4, b_4, c_1\}$,
$\{a_4, b_4, c_2\}$,
$\{a_4, b_4, c_3\}$,
$\{a_4, b_4, c_4\}$,
$\{a_2, b_1, b_2\}$,
$\{a_2, a_3, b_2\}$,
$\{a_3, b_2, b_3\}$,
$\{a_3, a_4, b_3\}$,
$\{b_1, c_1, c_2\}$,
$\{b_1, b_4, c_2\}$,
$\{b_4, c_2, c_3\}$,
$\{b_4, b_2, c_3\}$,
$\{c_1, a_3, a_1\}$,
$\{c_1, c_4, a_1\}$,
$\{c_4, a_1, a_4\}$,
$\{c_4, c_2, a_4\}$.
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
Using the language in \cite[Example 4.6]{hachimori2009hereditary}, the above strong shelling order first starts with the matroidal part, and then proceeds by carefully arranging the 12 extra facets.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
[Strongly shellable, but not hereditary-shellable]
Let $\Delta$ be a pure complex with the facet set:
\[
\Set{ \{1, 2, 8\}, \{1, 2, 5\}, \{2, 5, 6\}, \{1, 2, 4\}, \{1, 2, 7\}, \{1, 3, 4\}, \{1, 2, 6\}, \{1, 2, 3\} }.
\]
It is direct to check that $\Delta$ is strongly shellable with respect to the above given order. On the other hand, the restriction of $\Delta$ to the subset $W=\Set{3,4,5,6,7,8}\subseteq \mathcal{V}(\Delta)$ has facets $\{3,4\},\{5,6\},\{7\},\{8\}$. Obviously, $\Delta_W$ is not shellable. Therefore, the original complex $\Delta$ is not hereditary-shellable.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
[Hereditary-shellable, weakly matroid, but not strongly shellable]
Let $\Delta$ be a pure complex with the facet set:
\[
\Set{ \{1, 2, 6\}, \{1, 3, 4\}, \{1, 4, 6\}, \{2, 3, 5\}, \{2, 5, 6\}, \{3, 4, 5\}, \{3, 4, 6\}, \{3, 5, 6\} }.
\]
It is direct to check that $\Delta$ is hereditary-shellable and weakly matroid, but not strongly shellable.
\end{example}
\begin{proposition}
\label{hereditary chain}
Shifted complexes are hereditary-shellable.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to note that for a shifted complex, any restriction is also shifted.
\end{proof}
Combining the concepts of hereditary-shellable and strongly shellable, we have the following natural definition.
\begin{definition}
A complex is called \Index{hereditarily strongly shellable} if all its restrictions are strongly shellable.
\end{definition}
Clearly, we have the following implications:
\[
\xymatrixrowsep{0pc}
\xymatrixcolsep{1.5pc}
\xymatrix{
& & \text{hereditary-shellable}\\
\text{matroid} \ar@{=>}[r]& \text{ hereditarily strongly shellable} \ar@{=>}[ur] \ar@{=>}[dr]& \\
& & \text{strongly shellable}
}
\]
The implications are strict.
\begin{example}
Let $\Delta$ be the pure complex with facets:
\[
\{1, 2, 3\}, \{1, 2, 4\}, \{1, 2, 5\}, \{1, 2, 6\}, \{1, 3, 4\}, \{1, 3, 5\}, \{1, 3, 6\}, \{2, 4, 5\}.
\]
One can check that $\Delta$ is hereditarily strongly shellable.
On the other hand, the restriction of $\Delta$ to the subset $W=\Set{4,5,6}\subseteq \mathcal{V}(\Delta)$ has facets $\{4,5\}$ and $\{6\}$. Therefore, the induced complex $\Delta_W$ is not pure and the original complex $\Delta$ is not a matroid complex.
\end{example}
The implications among pure shellable complexes that we encountered in this section are summarized in Figure \ref{Fig:relation}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\xymatrix{
\text{shifted} \ar@{=>}[ddr]\ar@{=>}[ddrr]\ar@{=>}[d] & & \text{matroid} \ar@{=>}[d]\ar@{=>}[dll] \\
\text{weakly matroid} \ar@{=>}[d] & & \text{hereditarily strongly shellable} \ar@{=>}[d] \ar@{=>}[dl] \\
\text{vertex decomposable} \ar@{=>}[dr]& \text{hereditary-shellable} \ar@{=>}[d] & \text{strongly shellable} \ar@{=>}[dl]\\
& \text{shellable} &
}
\caption{Relations among pure shellable complexes} \label{Fig:relation}
\end{figure}
\section{Deciding strong shellability of pure complexes with $h$-assignments}
In this final section, we briefly talk about how to decide the strong shellability of a pure complex. In \cite{ISI:000292480700004} Moriyama considered a similar question for deciding the shellability of pure complexes.
Let $\Delta$ be a $d$-dimensional pure complex with $h$-vector
\[
{\bm h}(\Delta)=(h_0(\Delta),\dots,h_{d+1}(\Delta))\in {\mathbb N}^{d+2}.
\]
In $\Delta$, a $(d-1)$-dimensional face is called a \Index{ridge} of $\Delta$. A ridge contained in only one facet will be called a \Index{boundary ridge}.
An \Index{$h$-assignment} $A$ of $\Delta$ is a assignment $A:\mathcal{F}(\Delta)\to [d+1]$ such that $|A^{-1}(i)|=h_i(\Delta)$ for each $i$. With respect to this $h$-assignment, a facet $F$ of $\Delta$ is called a \Index{candidate facet} if $F$ contains exactly $d+1-A(F)$ boundary ridges of $\Delta$.
Given a candidate facet $F$ of $\Delta$ with respect to the $h$-assignment, we can apply a \Index{removing step} by
\begin{enumerate}[i]
\item replacing $\Delta$ by $\Delta'=\Braket{G\in \mathcal{F}(\Delta):G\ne F}$, and
\item replacing $A$ by the its restriction on $\mathcal{F}(\Delta')$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{theorem}
[{\cite[Theorem 1.3]{ISI:000292480700004}}]
\label{Moriyama}
A pure complex $\Delta$ is shellable if and only if there exists an $h$-assignment such that we can remove all facets of $\Delta$ by applying the removing steps successively.
\end{theorem}
From its proof, we know that given a shelling order of $\Delta$, one has a natural $h$-assignment in which the last facet of the shelling will be a candidate facet. Conversely, given an $h$-assignment which allows the removing steps above, we can build a shelling order by reversing the removal order.
Given an $h$-assignment, a candidate facet $F$ is called a \Index{strong candidate facet} if for each $G\ne F$, there exists a facet $H$ such that $\operatorname{dis}(F,H)=1$ and $\operatorname{dis}(G,H)=\operatorname{dis}(G,F)-1$.
It follows immediately from Lemma \ref{d=d-1+1} and Theorem \ref{Moriyama} that
\begin{theorem}
A pure complex $\Delta$ is strongly shellable if and only if there exists an $h$-assignment such that we can remove all facets of $\Delta$ by applying the removing steps successively such that we remove a strong candidate facet at each step.
\end{theorem}
The benefit of applying this deciding method is the same as that for Moriyama's suggestion, namely, instead of checking all $|\mathcal{F}(\Delta)|!$ possible cases by definition, we only need to check, roughly speaking,
\[
\frac{|\mathcal{F}(\Delta)|!}
{h_0(\Delta)!\cdots h_{d+1}(\Delta)!}
\]
possible cases. The last integer is the number of all $h$-assignments of $\Delta$.
\begin{bibdiv}
\begin{biblist}
\bib{arXiv:1311.0981}{article}{
author={Anwar, Imran},
author={Raza, Zahid},
author={Kashif, Agha},
title={Spanning simplicial complexes of uni-cyclic graphs},
date={2015},
ISSN={1005-3867},
journal={Algebra Colloq.},
volume={22},
pages={707\ndash 710},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S1005386715000590},
}
\bib{MR570784}{article}{
author={Bj{\"o}rner, Anders},
title={Shellable and {C}ohen-{M}acaulay partially ordered sets},
date={1980},
ISSN={0002-9947},
journal={Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.},
volume={260},
pages={159\ndash 183},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1999881},
}
\bib{MR1333388}{article}{
author={Bj{\"o}rner, Anders},
author={Wachs, Michelle~L.},
title={Shellable nonpure complexes and posets. {I}},
date={1996},
ISSN={0002-9947},
journal={Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.},
volume={348},
pages={1299\ndash 1327},
}
\bib{MR1401765}{article}{
author={Bj{\"o}rner, Anders},
author={Wachs, Michelle~L.},
title={Shellable nonpure complexes and posets. {II}},
date={1997},
ISSN={0002-9947},
journal={Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.},
volume={349},
pages={3945\ndash 3975},
}
\bib{ESSC}{unpublished}{
author={Guo, Jin},
author={Shen, Yi-Huang},
author={Wu, Tongsuo},
title={Edgewise strongly shellable clutters},
note={preprint},
}
\bib{MR2724673}{book}{
author={Herzog, J{\"u}rgen},
author={Hibi, Takayuki},
title={Monomial ideals},
series={Graduate Texts in Mathematics},
publisher={Springer-Verlag London Ltd.},
address={London},
date={2011},
volume={260},
ISBN={978-0-85729-105-9},
}
\bib{MR2771603}{article}{
author={Hachimori, Masahiro},
author={Kashiwabara, Kenji},
title={Obstructions to shellability, partitionability, and sequential
{C}ohen-{M}acaulayness},
date={2011},
ISSN={0097-3165},
journal={J. Combin. Theory Ser. A},
volume={118},
pages={1608\ndash 1623},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2011.01.011},
}
\bib{hachimori2009hereditary}{unpublished}{
author={Hachimori, Masahiro},
author={Kashiwabara, Kenji},
title={Hereditary-shellable simplicial complexes},
date={2014},
}
\bib{MR2260118}{article}{
author={Kokubo, Masako},
author={Hibi, Takayuki},
title={Weakly polymatroidal ideals},
date={2006},
ISSN={1005-3867},
journal={Algebra Colloq.},
volume={13},
pages={711\ndash 720},
}
\bib{arXiv:1601.00456}{article}{
author={Moradi, Somayeh},
author={Khosh-Ahang, Fahimeh},
title={{Expansion of a simplicial complex}},
eprint={arXiv:1601.00456},
}
\bib{MR2845598}{article}{
author={Mohammadi, Fatemeh},
title={Powers of the vertex cover ideal of a chordal graph},
date={2011},
ISSN={0092-7872},
journal={Comm. Algebra},
volume={39},
pages={3753\ndash 3764},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00927872.2010.512582},
}
\bib{ISI:000292480700004}{article}{
author={Moriyama, Sonoko},
title={{Deciding Shellability of Simplicial Complexes with
h-Assignments}},
language={{English}},
date={{2011}},
ISSN={{0916-8508}},
journal={IEICE Trans. Fundamentals},
volume={{E94A}},
pages={{1238\ndash 1241}},
}
\bib{arXiv:1511.04676}{article}{
author={Moradi, Somayeh},
author={{Rahmati-Asghar}, Rahim},
title={{On the Stanley-Reisner ideal of an expanded simplicial
complex}},
eprint={arXiv:1511.04676},
}
\bib{MR2849819}{book}{
author={Oxley, James},
title={Matroid theory},
edition={Second},
series={Oxford Graduate Texts in Mathematics},
publisher={Oxford University Press},
address={Oxford},
date={2011},
volume={21},
ISBN={978-0-19-960339-8},
}
\bib{MR0593648}{article}{
author={Provan, J.~Scott},
author={Billera, Louis~J.},
title={Decompositions of simplicial complexes related to diameters of
convex polyhedra},
date={1980},
ISSN={0364-765X},
journal={Math. Oper. Res.},
volume={5},
pages={576\ndash 594},
}
\bib{MR1453579}{book}{
author={Stanley, Richard~P.},
title={Combinatorics and commutative algebra},
edition={Second},
series={Progress in Mathematics},
publisher={Birkh\"auser Boston Inc.},
address={Boston, MA},
date={1996},
volume={41},
ISBN={0-8176-3836-9},
}
\bib{MR2100472}{article}{
author={Zheng, Xinxian},
title={Resolutions of facet ideals},
date={2004},
ISSN={0092-7872},
journal={Comm. Algebra},
volume={32},
pages={2301\ndash 2324},
}
\end{biblist}
\end{bibdiv}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Gaussian process models are flexible distributions that can provide
priors over non linear functions. They rely on properties of the
multivariate Gaussian for their tractability and their non-parametric
nature. In particular, the sum of two functions, drawn from a Gaussian
process is also given by a Gaussian process. Mathematically, if
$f\sim\gaussianSamp{\mu_f}{k_f}$ and
$g\sim\gaussianSamp{\mu_g}{k_f}$ and we define $y
= g + f$ then properties of multivariate Gaussian give us that $y \sim
\gaussianSamp{\mu_f + \mu_g}{k_f +
k_g}$ where $\mu_f$ and $\mu_g$ are
deterministic functions of a single input, $k_f$ and
$k_g$ are deterministic, positive semi definite functions
of two inputs and $y$, $g$ and $f$ are stochastic processes.
This elementary property of the Gaussian process is the foundation of much of its power. It makes additive models trivial, and means we can easily combine any process with Gaussian noise. Naturally, it can be applied recursively, and covariance functions can be designed to reflect the underlying structure of the problem at hand (e.g. \citet{Hensman:hierarchical13}~uses additive structure to account for variation in replicate behavior in gene expression).
In practice observations are often \emph{non Gaussian}. In response, statistics has developed the field of \emph{generalized linear models} \citep{Nelder:glm72}. In a generalized linear model a link function is used to connect the mean function of the Gaussian process with the mean function of another distribution of interest. For example, the log link can be used to relate the rate in a Poisson distribution with our GP, $\log \lambda = f + g$. Or for classification the logistic distribution can be used to represent the mean probability of positive outcome, $\log \frac{p}{1-p} = f + g$.
Writing models in terms of the link function captures the linear nature of the underlying model, but it is somewhat against the probabilistic approach to modeling where we consider the \emph{generative model} of our data. While there's nothing wrong with this relationship mathematically, when we consider the generative model we never apply the link function directly, we consider the inverse link or \emph{transformation function}. For the log link this turns into the exponential, $\lambda = \exp(f + g)$. Writing the model in this form emphasizes the importance that the transformation function has on the generative model (see e.g.\ work on warped GPs \citep{Snelson:warped04}). The log link implies a multiplicative combination of $f$ and $g$, $\lambda = \exp(f+g) = \exp(f)\exp(g)$, but in some cases we might wish to consider an additive model, $\lambda = \exp(f) + \exp(g)$. Such a model no longer falls within the class of generalized linear models as there is no link function that renders the two underlying processes additive Gaussian. In this paper we address this issue and use variational approximations to develop a framework for \emph{non-linear combination} of the latent processes. Because these models cannot be written in the form a single link function we call this approach ``Chained Gaussian Processes''.
In this paper we are interested in performing variational inference when we have input-dependent likelihood parameters. We will focus on the case when where the likelihood contains two latent parameters, though the model is general enough to handle more. Parameters of interest could be a latent mean which we wish to infer, a shape parameter for determining the shape of the tails, amongst other things. We will focus on the cases where we have two such latent parameters but propose methods for extending this further.
We will focus on likelihoods $p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}|{\bf \latentFuncOne}, {\bf \latentFuncTwo})$ that depend on two latent functions, ${\bf \latentFuncOne} \sim \gaussianDist{{\bf \latentFuncOne}}{{\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncOne}}{\fFunc(\xV)}$, ${\bf \latentFuncTwo} \sim \gaussianDist{{\bf \latentFuncTwo}}{{\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncTwo}}{\gFunc(\xV)}$. If this noise distribution is a Gaussian then we have two special cases, with $\gFunc(\xV) = \sigma^{2}$ we have a Gaussian process with the conjugate homogeneous Gaussian likelihood. With $\gFunc(\xV) = e^{g(\mathbf{\latentScalar})}$ we obtain a model for a heteroscedastic Gaussian process~\citep{LazaroGredilla:hetero11}.
A range of other noise models require multiple parameters to be learnt. Traditionally within the Gaussian process literature MAP solutions are used, or alternatively these parameters are integrated out approximately \citep{Rue:CCD09}. In this work we accept that these parameters may change as a function of the input space, and look at inferring posterior Gaussian process functions for these parameters. We do so in a scalable way with sparse variational methods, with the capability of using stochastic gradients during inference. We believe scalability is essential as parameters may only become well determined as the number of observations grow large. We show results with a number of different noise models
We will first introduce notation, and review previous work on heteroscedastic Gaussian processes. Then, we show how to elegantly extend this idea into a more scalable and general framework, allowing a huge number of likelihoods to utilise multiple input dependent processes.
\section{Background}
Assume we have access to a training dataset of $n$ input-output observations $\{(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i}, y_{i})\}^{n}_{i=1}$, $y_{i}$ is assumed to be a noisy realisation of an underlying latent function ${\bf \latentFuncOne} = f(\mathbf{\latentScalar})$, i.e.\ $y_{i} = f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i}) + \epsilon_{i}$. For a Gaussian likelihood $\epsilon_{i} \sim \gaussianSamp{\mu}{\sigma^{2}}$, $\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i} \in \mathbb{R}^{q}$ and $y_{i} \in \mathbb{R}$. Normally the mean of the likelihood is assumed to be input dependent and given a GP prior $\mu = {\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i} = f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})$ where $f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) \sim \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncOne}, k_{\latentFuncTwo}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$, and $\sigma$ is fixed at an optimal point. In this case the integrals required to infer a posterior, $p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|\mathbf{\dataScalar})$, are tractable.
One extension of this model is the heteroscedastic GP regression model \citep{Bishop:gpsnips97,LazaroGredilla:hetero11}, where the noise variance $\sigma$ is dependent on the input. The noise variance can be assigned a log GP prior, $y_{i} \sim \gaussianSamp{f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})}{e^{g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})}}$, where $g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) = \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncTwo}, k_{\latentFuncTwo}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$, i.e.\ a log link function is used. Unfortunately this generalization of the original Gaussian process model is not analytically tractable and requires an approximation to be made. Suggested approximations include MCMC \citep{Bishop:gpsnips97}, variational inference~\citep{LazaroGredilla:hetero11}, Laplace approximation~\citep{Vanhatalo:gpstuff15} and expectation propagation~\citep{Lobato:hetero14} (EP).
Another generalization of the standard GP is to vary the scale of the process as a function of the inputs. \citet{Adams:hetero08} suggest a log GP prior for the scale of the process giving rise to non-parametric non-stationarity in the model. \citet{Turner:pad11} took a related approach to develop probabilistic amplitude demodulation, here the amplitude (or scale) of the process was given by a Gaussian process with a link function given by $\sigma = \log(\exp(f)-1)$. Finally~\citet{Tolvanen:hetero14} assign both the noise variance and the scale a log GP prior.
Both these two variations on Gaussian process regression combine processes in a non-linear way within a Gaussian likelihood, but the idea may be further generalized to systems that deal with non-Gaussian observation noise.
In this paper we describe a general approach to combining processes in a non-linear way. We assume that the likelihood factorizes across the data, but is a general non-linear function of $b$ input dependent latent functions. Our main focus will be examples of likelihoods with $b = 2$, $f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})$ and $g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})$, such that, $p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}|f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i}), g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i}))$, though the ideas can all be generalized to $b > 2$.
Previous work in this domain include the use of the Laplace approximation~\citep{Vanhatalo:gpstuff15}, however this method scales poorly, $\mathcal{O}(b^3n^{3})$ and so isn't applicable to datasets of a moderate size.
To render the model tractable we extend recent advances in large scale variational inference approaches to GPs~\citep{Hensman:bigdata13}. With non-Gaussian likelihoods restrictions on the latent function values may differ, and a non-linear transformation of the latent function, ${\bf \latentFuncTwo} \in \mathbb{R}^{q}$ may be required. The inference approach builds on work by~\citet{Hensman:class15}, that in turn builds on the variational inference method proposed by~\citet{Opper:variational09}.
In other work \citep{Nguyen:blackbox14} mixtures of Gaussian latent functions have also been applied for non-Gaussian likelihoods, we expect such mixture distributions would also be applicable to our case. More recently this approach~\citep{Dezfouli:blackbox15} was extended to provide scalability utilising sparse methods similar to this work.
\section{Chained Gaussian Processes}
Our approach to approximate inference in chained GPs builds on previous work in inducing point methods for sparse approximations of GPs~\citep{Snelson:pseudo05,Titsias:variational09,Hensman:class15,Hensman:bigdata13}. Inducing point methods introduce $m$ `pseudo inputs', known as inducing inputs, at locations $\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\inducingInputScalar}} = \{\mathbf{\inducingInputScalar}_{i}\}^{m}_{i=1}$. The corresponding function values are given by ${\bf \uS}_{i} = f(\mathbf{\inducingInputScalar}_{i})$. These inducing inputs points do not effect the marginal of ${\bf \latentFuncOne}$ because
\begin{equation*}
p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\latentScalar}},\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\inducingInputScalar}}) = \int p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|{\bf \uS},\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\latentScalar}})p({\bf \uS}|\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\inducingInputScalar}})d{\bf \uS},
\end{equation*}
where $p({\bf \uS}|\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\inducingInputScalar}}) = \gaussianDist{{\bf \uS}}{0}{\kernelMatrix_{\inducingVector \inducingVector}}$ and $p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|{\bf \uS},\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\latentScalar}}) = \gaussianDist{{\bf \latentFuncOne}}{\oldKfu\Kuu^{-1}{\bf \uS}}{\oldKff - \oldKfu\Kuu^{-1}\oldKuf}$. The part-covariances given by $\oldKfu = \kernelScalar_{f}(\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\latentScalar}},\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\inducingInputScalar}})$ where $\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\latentScalar}}$ is the locations of ${\bf \latentFuncOne}$, define the relationship between inducing variables and the latent function of interest, $f$. The marginal likelihood is $p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}) = \int p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}|{\bf \latentFuncOne})p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|{\bf \uS})p({\bf \uS})d{\bf \latentFuncOne}\,d{\bf \uS}$. To avoid $\mathcal{O}(n^{3})$ computation complexity~\citet{Titsias:variational09} invokes Jensen's inequality to obtain a lower bound on the marginal likelihood $\log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar})$, an approach known as \emph{variational compression}. This approximation also forms the basis of our approach for non-Gaussian models.
\subsection{Variational Bound}
For non-Gaussian likelihoods, even with a single latent process the marginal likelihood, $p(\mathbf{\dataScalar})$, is not tractable, but it can be lower bounded variationally. We assume that the latent functions, ${\bf \latentFuncOne} = f(\mathbf{\latentScalar})$ and ${\bf \latentFuncTwo} = g(\mathbf{\latentScalar})$ are \emph{a priori} independent
\begin{equation}
p({\bf \latentFuncOne},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne},\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}) = p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne})p({\bf \latentFuncTwo}|\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}). \label{eq:factFuncs}
\end{equation}
The derivation of the variational lower bound then follows a similar form as~\citep{Hensman:class15} with the extension to multiple latent functions. We begin by writing down our log marginal likelihood,
\begin{align*}
\log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}) &= \log \int p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}|{\bf \latentFuncOne},{\bf \latentFuncTwo})p({\bf \latentFuncOne},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne},\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})p(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})p(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}) d{\bf \latentFuncOne}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo}\,d\uV_{\latentFuncOne}\,d\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}
\end{align*}
then introduce a variational approximation to the posterior,
\begin{equation}
p({\bf \latentFuncOne},{\bf \latentFuncTwo},\uV_{\latentFuncTwo},\uV_{\latentFuncOne}|\mathbf{\dataScalar}) \approx p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne})p({\bf \latentFuncTwo}|\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})q(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})q(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}), \label{eq:approxPosterior}
\end{equation}
where we have made the additional assumption that the latent functions factorize in the variational posterior.
Using Jensen's inequality and the factorization of the latent functions~\eqref{eq:factFuncs}, a variational lower bound can then be obtained for the log marginal likelihood,
\begin{align}
\log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}) &= \log \int p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}|{\bf \latentFuncOne},{\bf \latentFuncTwo})p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne})p({\bf \latentFuncTwo}|\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})p(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})p(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})d{\bf \latentFuncOne}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo}\,d\uV_{\latentFuncOne}\,d\uV_{\latentFuncTwo} \nonumber\\
&\geq \int q({\bf \latentFuncOne})q({\bf \latentFuncTwo})\log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}|{\bf \latentFuncOne},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}) d{\bf \latentFuncOne}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo} - \KL{q(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})}{p(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})} - \KL{q(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})}{p(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})}, \label{eq:bound}
\end{align}
where $q({\bf \latentFuncOne}) = \int p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne})q(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})d\uV_{\latentFuncOne}$ and $q({\bf \latentFuncTwo}) = \int p({\bf \latentFuncTwo}|\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})q(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})d\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}$, and $\KL{p(a)}{p(b)}$ denotes the KL divergence between the two distributions.
For Gaussian process priors on the latent functions we recover
\begin{align*}
p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne}) &= \gaussianDist{{\bf \latentFuncOne}}{\kernelMatrix_{\mappingFunctionVector \inducingVector}\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\uVf \uVf}^{-1}\uV_{\latentFuncOne}}{\kernelMatrix_{\mappingFunctionVector \mappingFunctionVector} - {\bf Q}_{\mappingFunctionVector \mappingFunctionVector}}\\
p({\bf \latentFuncTwo}|\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}) &= \gaussianDist{{\bf \latentFuncTwo}}{\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\gV \uVg}\Kuuig\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}}{\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\gV \gV} - \mathbf{Q}_{\gV \gV}},
\end{align*}
where \begin{gather*}{\bf Q}_{\mappingFunctionVector \mappingFunctionVector} = \kernelMatrix_{\mappingFunctionVector \inducingVector}\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\uVf \uVf}^{-1}\kernelMatrix_{\inducingVector \mappingFunctionVector} \\ \mathbf{Q}_{\gV \gV} = \mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\gV \uVg}\Kuuig\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\uVg \gV}. \end{gather*}
Note that covariances for ${\bf \latentFuncOne}$ and ${\bf \latentFuncTwo}$, can differ though their inducing input locations, $\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\inducingInputScalar}}$, are shared.
We take $q(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})$ and $q(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})$ to be Gaussian distributions with variational parameters, ${q(\uV_{\latentFuncOne}) = \gaussianDist{\uV_{\latentFuncOne}}{{\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncOne}}{{\bm S}_{\latentFuncOne}}}$ and ${q(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}) = \gaussianDist{\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}}{{\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncTwo}}{{\bm S}_{\latentFuncTwo}}}$. Using the properties of multivariate Gaussians this results in tractable integrals for $q({\bf \latentFuncOne})$ and $q({\bf \latentFuncTwo})$,
\begin{align}
q({\bf \latentFuncOne}) &= \gaussianDist{{\bf \latentFuncOne}}{\kernelMatrix_{\mappingFunctionVector \inducingVector}\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\uVf \uVf}^{-1}{\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncOne}}{\kernelMatrix_{\mappingFunctionVector \mappingFunctionVector} + \mathbf{\hat{Q}}_{\fV \fV}}\label{eq:qf}\\
q({\bf \latentFuncTwo}) &= \gaussianDist{{\bf \latentFuncTwo}}{\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\gV \uVg}\Kuuig{\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncTwo}}{\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\gV \gV} + \mathbf{\hat{Q}}_{\gV \gV}}\label{eq:qg},
\end{align}
where \begin{gather*} \mathbf{\hat{Q}}_{\fV \fV} = \kernelMatrix_{\mappingFunctionVector \inducingVector}\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\uVf \uVf}^{-1}({\bm S}_{\latentFuncOne} - \Kuuf)\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\uVf \uVf}^{-1}\kernelMatrix_{\inducingVector \mappingFunctionVector} \\ \mathbf{\hat{Q}}_{\gV \gV} = \mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\gV \uVg}\Kuuig({\bm S}_{\latentFuncTwo} - \Kuug)\Kuuig\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\uVg \gV}. \end{gather*}
The KL terms in~\eqref{eq:bound} and their derivative can be computed in closed form and are inexpensive as they are divergence between Gaussians. However, an intractable integral, ${\int q({\bf \latentFuncOne})q({\bf \latentFuncTwo})\log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}|{\bf \latentFuncOne},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}) d{\bf \latentFuncOne}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo}}$, still remains.
Since the likelihood factorizes,
\begin{equation*}
p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}|{\bf \latentFuncOne},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}) = \prod\nolimits^{n}_{i=1} p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}|{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}),
\end{equation*}
the problematic integral in~\eqref{eq:bound} also factorizes across data points, allowing us to use stochastic variational inference~\citep{Hensman:bigdata13,Hoffman:stochastic13},
\begin{align}
\int q({\bf \latentFuncOne})q({\bf \latentFuncTwo})\log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}|{\bf \latentFuncOne},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}) d{\bf \latentFuncOne}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo} &= \int q({\bf \latentFuncOne})q({\bf \latentFuncTwo})\log \prod^{n}_{i=1}p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}|{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}) d{\bf \latentFuncOne}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo} \nonumber\\
&= \sum\nolimits^{n}_{i=1} \int q({\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i})q({\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i})\log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}|{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}) d{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}.\label{eq:keyint}
\end{align}
We are then left with $n$, $b$ dimensional Gaussian integrals over the log-likelihood,
\begin{align}
\log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}) &\geq \sum\nolimits^{n}_{i=1} \int q({\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i})q({\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}) \log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}|{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i})d{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}\nonumber\\
&\quad- \KL{q(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})}{p(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})} - \KL{q(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})}{p(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})}.\label{eq:finalbound}
\end{align}
The bound will also hold for any additional number of latent functions
by assuming they all factorize in the variational
posterior.
The bound decomposes into a sum over data, as such the $n$ input points
can be visited in mini-batches, and the gradients and log-likelihood
of each mini-batch can be subsequently summed, this operation can be
also be parallelized~\citep{Gal:distributed14}. A single mini-batch can
instead be visited obtaining a stochastic gradient for use in a
stochastic
optimization~\citep{Hensman:bigdata13,Hoffman:stochastic13}. This
provides the ability to scale to huge datasets.
If the likelihood is Gaussian these integrals are analytic \citep{LazaroGredilla:hetero11}, though the noise variance must be constrained positive via a transformation of the latent function, e.g\ an exponent. In this case,
\begin{align*}
&\int q({\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i})q({\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}) \log p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}|{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i})d{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}\\
&\quad= \int \gaussianDist{{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i}}{{{\bm m}_{\latentFuncOne}}_i}{{{\bm v}_{\latentFuncOne}}_i}\gaussianDist{{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}}{{{\bm m}_{\latentFuncTwo}}_i}{{{\bm v}_{\latentFuncTwo}}_i} \log \gaussianDist{\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}}{{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i}}{e^{{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_i}}\\
&\quad= \log \gaussianDist{\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}}{{{\bm m}_{\latentFuncOne}}_i}{e^{{{\bm m}_{\latentFuncTwo}}_i - \frac{{{\bm v}_{\latentFuncTwo}}_i}{2}}} - \frac{{{\bm v}_{\latentFuncTwo}}_i}{4} - \frac{{{\bm v}_{\latentFuncOne}}_ie^{-{{\bm m}_{\latentFuncTwo}}_i + \frac{{{\bm v}_{\latentFuncTwo}}_i}{2}}}{2}
\end{align*}
where we define \begin{align*}\hfill & {{\bm m}_{\latentFuncOne}} = \kernelMatrix_{\mappingFunctionVector \inducingVector}\mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\uVf \uVf}^{-1}{\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncOne} & \hfill & {{\bm v}_{\latentFuncOne}} = \kernelMatrix_{\mappingFunctionVector \mappingFunctionVector} + \mathbf{\hat{Q}}_{\fV \fV} \\ \hfill & {{\bm m}_{\latentFuncTwo}} = \mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\gV \uVg}\Kuuig{\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncTwo} & \hfill & {{\bm v}_{\latentFuncTwo}} = \mathbf{\MakeUppercase{\kernelScalar}}_{\gV \gV} + \mathbf{\hat{Q}}_{\gV \gV}. \end{align*} ${{\bm v}_{\latentFuncOne}}_i$ denotes the $i$th diagonal element of the matrix with ${{\bm v}_{\latentFuncOne}}$ along its diagonal.
It may be possible in this Gaussian case to find the optimal $q({\bf \latentFuncOne})$ such that the bound collapses to that of~\citet{LazaroGredilla:hetero11}, however this would not allow for stochastic optimization. Here we arrive at a sparse extension, where a Gaussian distribution is assumed for the posterior over of ${\bf \latentFuncOne}$, where as previously $q({\bf \latentFuncOne})$ has been collapsed out and could take any form. This sparse extension provides the ability to scale to much larger datasets whilst maintaining a similar variational lower bound.
The model is however not restricted to heteroscedastic Gaussian likelihoods. If the integral~\eqref{eq:keyint} and its gradients can be computed in an unbiased way, any factorizing likelihood can be used.
This can be seen as a chained Gaussian process. There is no single link function that allows the specification of this model under the modelling assumptions of a generalised linear model.
An example that will be revisited in the experiments is the beta distribution, $y_{i} \sim B(\alpha, \beta)$ where $\alpha, \beta \in \mathbb{R}^{+}$ and observations $y_{i} \in (0, 1)$, $\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i} \in \mathbb{R}^{q}$. Since $\alpha, \beta$ must maintain positiveness, then can be assigned log GP priors,
\begin{equation}
y_{i} \sim B(\alpha = e^{f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})}, \beta = e^{g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})}),\label{eq:beta}
\end{equation}
where $f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) = \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncOne}, k_{\latentFuncOne}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$ and $g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) = \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncTwo}, k_{\latentFuncTwo}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$. This allows the shape of the beta distribution to change over time, see Supplementary Material and section~\ref{sec:twitter} for an example plots.
Using the variational bound above, all that is required is to perform a series of $n$ two dimensional quadratures, for both the log-likelihood and its gradients, a relatively simple task and computationally feasible when looking at modest batch sizes. From this example the power and adaptability of the method should be apparent.
A major strength of this method is that performing this integral is the only requirement to implement a new noise model, similarly to~\citep{Nguyen:blackbox14,Hensman:class15}. Further, since a stochastic optimizer is used the gradients do not need to be exact. Our implementations can use off the shelf stochastic optimizer, such as Adagrad~\citep{Duchi:adagrad11} or RMSProp~\citep{Tieleman:RMSProp12}. Further, for many likelihoods some portion of these integrals is analytically tractable, reducing the variance introduced by numerical integration. See supplementary material for an investigation.
\subsection{Posterior and Predictive Distributions}
Following from~\eqref{eq:approxPosterior} it is clear that when the variational lower bound bound has been maximised with respect to the variational parameters, $p(\uV_{\latentFuncOne}|\mathbf{\dataScalar}) \approx q(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})$ and $p(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo}|\mathbf{\dataScalar}) \approx q(\uV_{\latentFuncTwo})$. The posterior for $p({\bf \latentFuncOne}^{*}|\mathbf{\dataScalar}^{*})$ under this approximation is
\begin{align*}
p({\bf \latentFuncOne}^{*}|\mathbf{\dataScalar}^{*}) &= \int p({\bf \latentFuncOne}^{*}|\mathbf{\latentScalar}, {\bf \latentFuncOne})p({\bf \latentFuncOne}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne})p(\uV_{\latentFuncOne}|\mathbf{\dataScalar})d{\bf \latentFuncOne}\,d\uV_{\latentFuncOne}\\
&= \int p({\bf \latentFuncOne}^{*}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne})p(\uV_{\latentFuncOne}|\mathbf{\dataScalar})d\uV_{\latentFuncOne}\\
&\approx \int p({\bf \latentFuncOne}^{*}|\uV_{\latentFuncOne})q(\uV_{\latentFuncOne})d\uV_{\latentFuncOne} = q({\bf \latentFuncOne}^{*}),
\end{align*}
where $q({\bf \latentFuncOne}^{*})$ and $q({\bf \latentFuncTwo}^{*})$ become similar to~\eqref{eq:qf}.
Finally, treating each prediction point independently, the predictive distribution for each data pair $\{(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i}^{*}, \mathbf{\dataScalar}^{*}_{i})\}^{n^{*}}_{i=1}$ follows as
\begin{align*}
p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}^{*}|\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i}) &= \int p(\mathbf{\dataScalar}_{i}^{*}|{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i}^{*},{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}^{*})q({\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i}^{*})q({\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}^{*}) d{\bf \latentFuncOne}_{i}^{*}\,d{\bf \latentFuncTwo}_{i}^{*}.
\end{align*}
This integral is analytically intractable in the general case, but again can be computed using a series of two dimensional quadrature or simple Monte Carlo sampling.
\section{Experiments}
To evaluate the effectiveness of our chained GP approximations we consider a range of real and synthetic datasets. The performance measure used throughout is the negative log predictive density (NLPD) on held out data, \reftable{tab:results}.\footnote{Data used in the experiments can be downloaded via the pods package: \url{https://github.com/sods/ods}} The results for mean absolute error (MAE) (Supplementary Material) show comparable results between methods. 5-fold cross-validation is used throughout. The non-linear optimization of (hyper-) parameters is subject to local minima, as such multiple runs were performed on each fold with a range of parameter initialisations. The solution obtaining the highest log-likelihood on the training data of each fold was retained. Automatic relevance determination exponentiated quadratic kernels are used throughout allowing one lengthscale per input dimension, in addition to a bias kernel.\footnote{Code is publically available at: \url{https://github.com/SheffieldML/ChainedGP}}.. In all experiments 100 inducing points were used and their locations were optimized with respect to the lower bound of the log marginal likelihood following~\citep{Titsias:variational09}.
\begin{table*
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Data}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{NLPD}}\\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{G}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{CHG}} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Lt}} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Vt}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{CHt}}\\
\hline
elevators1000 & $0.39 \pm 0.13$ & $0.1 \pm 0.01$ & NA & NA & NA \\
elevators10000 & $0.07 \pm 0.01$ & $0.03 \pm 0.02$ & NA & NA & NA \\
motorCorrupt & $2.04 \pm 0.06$ & $1.79 \pm 0.05$ & $1.73 \pm 0.05$ & $2.52 \pm 0.09$ & $1.7 \pm 0.05$ \\
boston & $0.27 \pm 0.02$ & $0.09 \pm 0.01$ & $0.23 \pm 0.02$ & $0.19 \pm 0.02$ & $0.09 \pm 0.02$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results NLPD over 5 cross-validation folds with 10 replicates each. Models shown in comparison are sparse Gaussian (G), chained heteroscedastic Gaussian (CHG), Student-$t$ Laplace approximation (Lt), Student-$t$ VB approximation (Vt), and chained heteroscedastic Student-$t$ (CHt).}
\label{tab:results}
}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Heteroscedastic Gaussian}
In our introduction we related our ideas to heteroscedastic GPs. We will first use our approximations to show how the addition of input dependent noise to a Gaussian process regression model effects performance, compared with a sparse Gaussian process model~\citep{Titsias:variational09}. Performance is shown to improve as more data is provided as would be expected, making it clear that both models can scale with data, though the new model is more flexible when handling the distributions tails. A sparse Gaussian process with Gaussian likelihood is chosen in these experiments as a baseline, as a non-sparse Gaussian process cannot scale to the size of all the experiments.
The Elevator1000 uses a subset of $1,000$ of the Elevator dataset
. In this data the heteroscedastic model (Chained GP) offers considerable improvement in terms of negative log predictive density (NLPD) over the sparse GP (Table~\ref{tab:results}.
Our second experiment with the Gaussian likelihood, Elevator10000, examines scaling of the model. Here a subset of $10,000$ data points of the Elevator dataset are used, and performance is improved as expected. Previous models for heteroscedastic Gaussian process models cannot scale, the chained GP can implement the heteroscedastic setting and scale.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.33\textwidth}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{%
\input{motorCorrupt_NLPD.tikz}
}
\subcaption{\small{NLPD motor}}
\label{fig:NLPDMotor}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{.33\textwidth}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{%
\input{boston_NLPD.tikz}
}
\subcaption{\small{NLPD Boston}}
\label{fig:NLPDBoston}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\protect\subref{fig:NLPDMotor}) NLPD on corrupt motorcycle dataset. \protect\subref{fig:NLPDBoston}) NLPD of Boston housing dataset. In NLPD lower is better, models shown in comparison are sparse Gaussian (G), Student-$t$ Laplace approximation (Lt), Student-$t$ VB approximation (Vt), chained heteroscedastic Gaussian (CHG), and chained heteroscedastic Student-$t$ (CHt). Boxplots show the variation over 5 folds.}
\label{fig:results}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Non-Gaussian Heteroscedastic likelihoods}
\label{sec:nonGaussian}
One of the major strengths of the approximation over pure scalability, is the ability to use more general non-Gaussian likelihoods. In this section we will investigate this flexibility by performing inference with non-standard likelihoods. This allows models to be specified that correspond to the modellers belief about the data in a flexible way.
We first investigate an extension of the Student-$t$ likelihood
that endows it with an input-dependent scale
parameter. This is straightforward in the chained GP
paradigm.
The corrupt motorcycle dataset is an artificial modification to the
benchmark motorcycle dataset~\citep{Silverman:splines85} and shows the
models capabilities more clearly. The original motorcycle dataset has
had 25 of its data randomly corrupted with Gaussian noise of
$\gaussianSamp{0}{3}$, simulating spurious accelerometer readings.
We hope that our method will be robust and ignore such outlying values.
An input-dependent mean, $\mu$, is set alongside an input dependent scale which
must be positive, $\sigma$. A constant degrees of freedom
parameter $\nu$, is initalized to 4.0 and then is optimized to its MAP solution.
\begin{equation}
y_{i} \sim St(\mu = f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i}), \sigma^{2}= e^{g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})}, \nu) \label{eq:stut}
\end{equation}
where $f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) = \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncOne}, k_{\latentFuncOne}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$ and
$g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) = \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncTwo}, k_{\latentFuncTwo}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$. This
provides a heteroscedastic extension to the Student-$t$ likelihood. We
compare the model with a Gaussian process with homogeneous Student-$t$
likelihood, approximated variationally~\citep{Hensman:class15} and the Laplace approximation.
Figure~\ref{fig:corruptMotor} shows the improved quality of the error bars with the chained heteroscedastic Student-$t$ model. Learning a model
with heavy tails allows outliers to be ignored, and so its input dependent variance can
be collapsed around just points close to the underlying function,
which in this case is known to be well modelled with a heteroscedastic
Gaussian process~\citep{LazaroGredilla:hetero11,Bishop:gpsnips97}. It
is also interesting to note the heteroscedastic Gaussian's performance,
although not able to completely ignore outliers the model has learnt a
very short lengthscale. This renders the prior over the scale
parameter independent across the data, meaning that the resulting
likelihood is more akin to a scale-mixture of Gaussians (which endows
appropriate robustness characteristics). The main difference is that
the scale-mixture is based on a log-Gaussian prior, as opposed to the
Student-$t$ which is based on an inverse Gamma.
Figure~\ref{fig:results} shows the NLPD on the corrupt motorcycle dataset and Boston
housing dataset. The Boston housing dataset shows the median house
prices throughout the Boston area, quantified by 506 data points, with
13 explanatory input variables~\citep{Kuss:robust06}. We find that the chained heteroscedastic Gaussian process model
already outperforms the Student-$t$ model on this dataset, and the additional ability to use heavier tails in the chained Student-$t$ is not used. This ability to regress back to an already powerful model is a useful property of the chained Student-$t$ model.
\begin{figure*}
\resizebox{1.0\textwidth}{!}{%
\input{corrupt_motorcycle_all.tikz}
}
\caption{Corrupted motorcycle dataset, fitted with a Gaussian
process model with a Gaussian likelihood, a Gaussian process
with input dependent noise (heteroscedastic) with a Gaussian
likelihood, and a Gaussian process with Student-$t$ likelihood,
with an input dependent shape parameter. The mean is
shown in solid and the variance is shown as dotted}
\label{fig:corruptMotor}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,keepaspectratio]{labour_pdf_mean_var.pdf}
\caption{Twitter sentiment from the UK general election modelled using a heteroscedastic beta distribution. The timing of the exit poll is marked and is followed by a night of tweets as election counts come in. Other night time periods have a reduced volume of tweets and a corresponding increase in sentiment variance. Ticks on the x-axis indicate midnight.}
\label{fig:twitterpdf}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Survival Analysis}
Survival analysis focuses on the analysis of time-to-event data. This data arises frequently in clinical trials, though it is also commonly found in failure tests within engineering. In these settings it is common to observe censoring. Censoring occurs when an event is only observed to exist between two times, but no further information is available. For right-censoring, the most common type of censoring, the event time $T \in [t, \infty)$.
A common model to analyse this type of data is an \emph{accelerated failure time} model. This suggests that the distribution of when an random event, $T$, may occur, is multiplicatively effected by some function of the covariates, $f(\mathbf{\latentScalar})$, thus accelerating or retarding time; akin to notion of dog years. In a generalized linear model we may write this as $\log T = \log T_{0} + \log f(\mathbf{\latentScalar})$, where $T$ is the random variable for failure time of the individual with covariates $\mathbf{\latentScalar}$, and $T_{0}$ follows a parametric distribution describing a non-accelerated failure time.
To account for censoring the cumulative distribution needs to be computable and event times are restricted to be positive. A common parametric distribution for $T_{0}$ that fulfills these restrictions is the log-logistic distribution, with the median being some function of the covariates, $f(\mathbf{\latentScalar})$. This however is restrictive as the \emph{shape} of failure time distribution is assumed to be the same for all patients. We relax this assumption by allowing the shape parameter of the log-logistic distribution to vary with response to the input,
\begin{equation*}
y_{i} \sim LL(\alpha = e^{f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})}, \beta = e^{g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})}),
\end{equation*}
where $f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) = \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncOne}, k_{\latentFuncOne}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$ and $g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) = \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncTwo}, k_{\latentFuncTwo}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$. This allows both skewed unimodal and exponential shaped distributions for the failure time distribution depending on the individual, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:survivalDist}. Again there is no associated link-function in this case, and the model can be modelled as a chained-survival model.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,keepaspectratio,resolution=300]{hetero_toy_lower_res.png}
\caption{Resulting model on synthetic survival dataset. Shows variation of median survival time and shape of log-logistic distribution, in response to differing covariate information. Background colour shows the chained-survivals predictions, coloured dots show ground truth. Lower figures show associated failure time distributions and hazards for two different synthetic patients. Shapes can be both unimodal or exponential.}
\label{fig:survivalDist}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\small{
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Data}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{NLPD}}\\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{G}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{LSurv}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{VSurv}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{CHSurv}}\\
\hline
leuk & $4.03 \pm .08$ & $1.57 \pm .01$ & $1.57 \pm .01$ & $1.56 \pm .01$ \\
Surv & $5.45 \pm .06$ & $2.52 \pm .02$ & $2.52 \pm .02$ & $2.16 \pm .02$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results NLPD over 5 cross-validation folds with 10 replicates each. Models shown in comparison are sparse Gaussian (G), survival Laplace approximation (LSurv), survival VB approximation (VSurv), chained heteroscedastic survival (CHSurv).}
\label{tab:survival}
}
\end{table}
Table~\ref{tab:survival} shows the models performance a real and synthetic datasets. The leukemia dataset~\citep{henderson:leukemia2002} contains censored event times for 1043 leukemia patients and is known to have non-linear responses certain covariates~\citep{Gelman:BDA32013}. We find little advantage from using the chained-survival model, but as usual the model is robust such that performance isn't degraded in this case. We additionally show the results on a synthetic dataset where the shape parameter is known to vary with response to the input, in this case an increase in performance is seen. See Appendix~\ref{appendix:survival} for more details on the model and synthetic dataset.
\subsubsection{Twitter Sentiment Analysis in the UK Election}
\label{sec:twitter}
The final experiment shows the adaptability of the model even further, on a novel dataset and with a novel heteroscedastic model. We consider sentiment in the UK general election, focussing on tweets tagged as supporters of the Labour party. We used a sentiment analysis tagging system\footnote{Available from \url{https://www.twinword.com/}} to evaluate the positiveness of 105,396 tweets containing hashtags relating to recent the major political parties, over the run in to the UK 2015 general election.
We are interested in modeling the distribution of positive sentiment as a function of time. The sentiment value is constrained to be to be between zero and one, and we do not believe the distribution of tweets through time to be necessarily unimodal. A natural likelihood to use in this case is the beta likelihood. This allows us to accommodate bathtub shaped distributions, indicating tweets are either extremely positive or extremely negative. We then allow the distribution over tweets to be heterogenous throughout time by using Gaussian process models for each parameter of the beta distribution,
\begin{equation*}
y_{i} \sim B(\alpha = e^{f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})}, \beta = e^{g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}_{i})}),
\end{equation*}
where $f(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) = \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncOne}, k_{\latentFuncOne}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$ and $g(\mathbf{\latentScalar}) = \mathcal{GP}({\bm \mu}_{\latentFuncTwo}, k_{\latentFuncTwo}(\mathbf{\latentScalar}, \mathbf{\latentScalar}^{\prime}))$.
The upper section of Figure~\ref{fig:twitterpdf} shows the data and the probability of each sentiment value throughout time. The lower part shows the corresponding mean and variance functions induced by the above parameterization. This year's general election was particularly interesting: polls throughout the election showed it to be a close race between the two major parties, Conservative and Labour. But at the end of polling an exit poll was released that predicted an outright win for the Conservatives. This exit poll proved accurate and is associated with a corresponding dip in the sentiment of the tweets. Other interesting aspects of the analysis include the reduction in number of tweets during the night and the corresponding increase in the variance of our estimates.
\subsubsection{Decomposition of Poisson Processes}
The intensity, $\lambda(x)$, of a Poisson process can be modelled as the product of two positive latent functions, $\exp(f(x))$ and $\exp(g(x))$, as a generalrised linear model,
\begin{gather*}
\log(\lambda) = f(x) + g(x)\\
y \sim \textrm{Poisson}(\lambda = \exp(f+g) = \exp(f(x))\exp(g(x))),
\end{gather*}
using a \emph{log} link function.
Instead imagine we form a new process by combining two different underlying Poisson processes through addition. The superposition property of Poissons means that the resulting process is also Poisson with rates given by the sum of the underlying rates.
To model this via a Gaussian process we have to assume that the intensity of the resulting Poisson, $\lambda(x)$ is a \emph{sum} of two positive functions, which are denoted by $\exp(f(x))$ and $\exp(g(x))$ respectively,
\begin{align}
y \sim \textrm{Poisson}(\lambda = \exp(f(x)) + \exp(g(x))),
\label{eq:multipoisson}
\end{align}
there is no link function representation for this model, it takes the form of a chained-GP.
Focusing purely on the generative model of the data, the lack of an link function does not present an issue. Figure~\ref{fig:multipoisson} shows a simple demonstration of the idea in a simulated data set.
Using an additive model for the rate rather than a multiplicative model for counting processes has been discussed previously in the context of linear models for survival analysis, with promising results~\cite{lin:additive1995}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0 0.7cm 0 0},clip,width=0.7\textwidth]{multi_poisson.png}
\caption{Even with 350 data we can start to see the differentiation of the addition of a long lengthscale positive process and a short lengthscale positive process. Red crosses denote observations, dotted lines are the true latent functions generating the data using Eq~\eqref{eq:multipoisson}, the solid line and associated error bars are the approximate posterior predictions, $q({\bf \latentFuncOne}^{*}), q({\bf \latentFuncTwo}^{*})$, of the latent processes.}
\label{fig:multipoisson}
\end{figure}
To illustrate the model on real data we considered homicide data in Chicago. Taking data from \url{http://homicides.redeyechicago.com/}~(see also \citet{adams:point2014}) we aggregated data into three months periods by zip code. We considered an additive Poisson process with a particular structure for the covariance functions. We constructed a rate of the form:
\[
\Lambda(x, t) = \lambda_1(x)\mu_1(t) + \lambda_2(x)\mu_2(t)
\]
where $\lambda_1(x)=\exp(f_1(x))$, $\lambda_2(x) = \exp(g_1(x))$, $\mu_1(t)=\exp(f_2(t))$ and $\mu_2(t)=\exp(g_2(t))$ where $f_1(x)$, $g_1(x)$ are spatial GPs and $f_2(t)$ and $g_2(t)$ are temporal GPs. The overall rate decomposes into two separable rate functions, but the overall rate function is not separable. We have a sum of separable \citep{Alvarez:vector12} rate functions. This structure allows us to decompose the homicide map into separate spatial maps that each evolve at different time rates. We selected one spatial map with a length scale of 0.04 and one spatial map with a length scale of 0.09. The time scales and variances of the temporal rate functions were optimized by maximum likelihood. The results are shown in Figure \ref{fig:short_length_chicago}. The long length scale process hardly fluctuates across time, whereas the short lengthscale process, which represents more localized homicide activity, fluctuates across the seasons with scaled increases of around 1.25 deaths per month per zip code. This decomposition is possible and interpretable due to the structured underlying nature of the GPs inside the chained model.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.43\textwidth,keepaspectratio]{crime_func_f_fast.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.43\textwidth,keepaspectratio]{crime_func_g_slow.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.43\textwidth,keepaspectratio]{time_f_fig.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.43\textwidth,keepaspectratio]{time_g_fig.pdf}
\caption{Homicide rate maps for Chicago. The short length scale spatial process, $\lambda_1(x)$ (above-left) is multiplied in the model by a temporal process, $\mu_1(t)$ (below-left) which fluctuates with passing seasons. Contours of spatial process are plotted as deaths per month per zip code area. Error bars on temporal processes are at 5th and 95th percentile. The longer length scale spatial process, $\lambda_2(x)$ (above-right) has been modeled with little to no fluctuation temporally $\mu_2(t)$ (below-right). }\label{fig:short_length_chicago}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We have introduced ``Chained Gaussian Process'' models. They allow us to make predictions which are based on a non-linear combination of underlying latent functions. This gives a far more flexible formalism than the generalized linear models that are classically applied in this domain.
Chained Gaussian processes are a general formalism and therefore are intractable in the base case. We derived an approximation framework that is applicable for any factorized likelihood. For the cases we considered, involving two latent functions, the approximation made use of two dimensional Gauss-Hermite quadrature. We speculated that when the idea is extended to higher numbers of latent functions it may be necessary to resort to Monte Carlo sampling.
Our approximation is highly scalable through the use of stochastic variational inference. This enables the full range of standard stochastic optimizers to be applied in the framework.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments}
AS was supported by a University of Sheffield, Faculty Scholarship, JH was supported by a MRC fellowship. The authors also thank Amazon for a donation of AWS compute time and the anonymous reviewers of a previous transcript of this work.
{\small
\section{#1}\begin{frame}\frametitle{Outline}\tableofcontents[currentsection,hideallsubsections]\end{frame}\includetalkfile{#2}}
\global\long\def\inputdiagram#1{{\small\input{#1}\vspace{0.5cm}}}
\global\long\def\newsubsection#1#2{\subsection{#1}\includetalkfile{#2}}
\global\long\def\newsubsubsection#1#2{\subsubsection{#1}\includetalkfile{#2}}
\global\long\def\includeyoutube#1{\includemedia[
width=0.6\linewidth,height=0.45\linewidth,
activate=pageopen,
flashvars={
modestbranding=1
&autohide=1
&showinfo=0
}
]{}{https://www.youtube.com/v/#1?rel=0}}
\global\long\def\includesmallyoutube#1{\includemedia[
width=0.4\linewidth,height=0.3\linewidth,
activate=pageopen,
flashvars={
modestbranding=1
&autohide=1
&showinfo=0
}
]{}{https://youtube.googleapis.com/v/#1?rel=0}}
\global\long\def\includevimeo#1{\includemedia[width=0.6\linewidth,height=0.45\linewidth,activate=pageopen]{}{http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=#1}}
\global\long\def\includecvfile#1{\input{#1}}
\global\long\def\newcvsection#1#2{\section*{#1}\includecvfile{#2}}
\global\long\def\newcvsubsection#1#2{\subsection*{#1}\includecvfile{#2}}
\global\long\def\newcvsubsubsection#1#2{\subsubsection*{#1}\includecvfile{#2}}
\global\long\def\newcvparagraph#1#2{\paragraph{#1}\includecvfile{#2}}
\global\long\def\twoimageslidewidth#1#2#3#4{\begin{frame}[plain]
\begin{center}
\href{#3}{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{#1}}\hfill
\href{#3}{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{#2}}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\note{#4}}
\global\long\def\imageslidewidth#1#2#3{\begin{frame}[plain]
\begin{center}
\href{#2}{\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{#1}}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\note{#3}}
\global\long\def\imageslideheight#1#2#3{\begin{frame}[plain]
\begin{center}
\href{#2}{\includegraphics[height=0.9\textheight]{#1}}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\note{#3}}
\global\long\def\paperslide#1#2#3{\begin{frame}[plain]
\begin{center}
{\setlength\fboxsep{0pt}%
\colorbox{white}{
\href{#2}{\includegraphics[trim=0cm 20cm 0cm 0cm, clip=true, width=\textwidth]{#1}}}
}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\note{#3}}
|
\subsection{Please Capitalize the First Letter of Each Notional Word in Subsection Title}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sect:intro}
Solar energetic particles (SEPs) are charged particles with energies much greater than those of the bulk solar wind, and
originate from explosive processes at the Sun such as flares and coronal mass ejections (CMEs), termed as ``impulsive''
event and ``gradual'' event respectively. Historical studies show that
large gradual SEP events are almost always associated with coronal mass ejections (CMEs)
\citep{Kahler.etal84,Reames95,Kahler96,Gopalswamy.etal02,Cliver.etal04,Tylka.etal03,Kahler.Vourlidas13}.
However, not all fast and wide CMEs lead to large SEP events \citep{Kahler96,Ding.etal13,Ding.etal14}.
\citet{Kahler96,Kahler.etal00} noted that although the the maximum energy and intensity of energetic particles in large
SEPs events are generally correlated with CME speed, the scatter is very large, and suggested that the ambient superthermal
seed particles can be another important factor for producing large SEP events. The seed population commonly derive from
the materials of solar flares \citep{Mason.etal99,Mason.etal00,Cane.etal06,Ding.etal15} and the preceding CMEs
\citep{Gopalswamy.etal02,Gopalswamy.etal04,Li.etal12,Ding.etal13,Ding.etal15}.
\citet{Gopalswamy.etal02} first showed that the interaction of two CMEs is an important aspect of SEP production, and the shocks
can preferrentially accelerate particles from the material of the preceding CMEs rather than from the quiet solar wind.
Later, \citet{Gopalswamy.etal04} found that there is a strong correlation between high particle intensity events and the
existence of preceding CMEs within $24$ hrs ahead of the primary CMEs, but poor correlation with the flare class.
Then, \citet{Li.Zank05a} proposed that two consecutive CMEs may provide a favorable environment for particle acceleration.
Recently, \citet{Ding.etal13} suggested that
large gradual solar energetic particle events are often associated with twin-CMEs, a scenario first proposed by
\citet{Li.etal12}. In this scenario, the preceding CME can provide enough enhanced
turbulence and seed population ahead the main CME-driven shock to generate a more efficient particle acceleration process
compared to single CME \citep{Li.etal12,Ding.etal15}. Based on a statistical analysis of the SEP events in Solar Cycle 23,
\citet{Ding.etal13} found that 61\% twin CMEs lead to large SEP events as compared to
only 29\% single fast CMEs leading to large SEP events.
However, not all twin-CMEs lead to a large SEP event \citep{Ding.etal13,Ding.etal14}, and the relevance of
CME-CME interactions for larger SEP events remains unclear \citep{Kahler.Vourlidas14}.
After the launch of STEREO mission, CME observations from multiple vintage points became available. By using the co-observations
of STEREO combined with SOHO and SDO, two CMEs were identified to erupt successively from the same active region within merely
3 minutes in the 2012 May 17 GLE event \citep{Shen.etal13}.
Also, \citet{Ding.etal14a} investigated the eruption
and interaction of two CMEs during the large SEP event occurred on 2013 May 22 using multiple spacecraft observations,
and found that the release times of proton and electron agreed with the time when the second CME caught up with the
trailing edge of the first CME, indicating that CME-CME interaction (or shock-CME interaction) plays an important
role in the process of particle acceleration in that event.
The time at which SEPs are first released into interplanetary space, and its relation to CMEs and various photon emissions,
are important clues to the site and nature of the SEP acceleration mechanism
\citep{Lin.etal81,Kahler94,Tylka.etal03,Reames09a,Lin11}. The velocity dispersion analysis (VDA) is an often used tool for
obtaining the solar particle release (SPR) time in studying impulsive and gradual SEP events.
Plotting onset times versus $v^{-1}$ yields a line with the initial SPR time in the solar vicinity as the intercept and
the magnetic path length as the slope.
This SPR time defines only the earliest acceleration or release of particles that are unscattered in transit.
In this practice, SEPs of different energies are assumed to be released at the same time and the same location near the Sun.
Using this method, \citet{Tylka.etal03} examined two impulsive events and three GLEs and found that the SPR times in
impulsive events occurred precisely at the peak time of hard X-rays, while that in GLEs often coincided with CME-driven
shocks. \citet{Reames09a} tested all the GLE events in Solar Cycle 23 with the VDA method and found that the path length of
GLEs vary from 1.1AU to 2.2 AU and the SPR times in all of the GLEs occur after the onset of the shockwave-induced type II
radio emission. Further, \citet{Reames09b} found that acceleration for magnetically well-connected large GLEs begins at
$\sim2$ solar radii, in contrast to non-GLEs that have been found to be strongly associated with shocks above 3 solar radii,
as well as \citet{Gopalswamy.etal12}.
From the VDA analysis, \citet{Tan.etal13} noted that the deduced path length of low-energy electrons from their release site
near the Sun to the 1 AU observer is consistent with the ion path length deduced by \citet{Reames09a,Reames09b}.
However, for many gradual SEP events, the release of particles accelerated to different energy by CME-driven shock becomes
complicated and doesn't occur at the same time \citep[see e.g.][]{Li.etal03,Li.etal05,Ding.etal14a}.
Recently an alternative VDA practice is used where the path length of energetic particle is assumed to be the nominal
Parker spiral and then obtain the release times for particles of different energies. Using this method,
\citet{Kim.etal14} suggested a new classification scheme of SEP events based on the release timing relative to flares and
energy-dependent flux enhancement, unlike the conventional classification of SEP based on whether the flux time profile is
impulsive or gradual. And \citet{Kim.etal15} also implied that there were some different characteristics of different
groups with different origins and acceleration processes.
Following this practice \citep{Kim.etal14,Kim.etal15}, \citet{Ding.etal16} found that there
were two particle release processes that occurred in the 2012 May 17 GLE event: the first one is consistent
with particles accelerated at the solar flare, and the second one is consistent with particles accelerated at the
associated CME-driven shock.
Obviously, the inferred release times and the path length have some uncertainties in the VDA practices.
\citet{Dalla.etal03} found that the derived path length at Ulysses are 1.06 to 2.45 times the length of a Parker spiral magnetic field line connecting the spacecraft to the Sun, and the time of particle release from the Sun is between 100 and 350 min later than the release time derived from in-ecliptic measurements.
To apply the VDA method more reasonably, many numerical simulation studies have been done to investigate the validity of the method. Only when the parallel mean-free path (MFP) are large enough ($\lambda_{||}>0.3$AU), the interplanetary scattering can have an insignificant effect on the derived solar release time \citep{Lintunen.Vainio04}. Further, when the background level is below 0.01 of the peak intensity of the flux, the onset time of the SEP event can be identified precisely \citep{Saiz.etal05}. Recently, \citet{Wang.Qin15} analyzed the accuracy of the VDA method and proposed that an ideal SEP event for VDA analysis should meet the following conditions: impulsive source duration, large parallel MFP, low background level, and good connection between the observer and the source.
To argue whether twin CMEs are the cause of large SEP events, the release time of SEPs at the Sun has to be later than
the eruption of the second CME. In principle, one can use the VDA method to obtain the solar release time of SEPs and examine
if this is after the eruption of the second CME. However, the VDA methods are subject to uncertainties. Therefore for twin CMEs erupting closely in time (e.g., within an hour), it is hard to obtain the correct ordering of the SEP release time and
the eruption time of the second CME unless accurate VDA can be performed.
In this work, we performed a case study and examined a SEP event where two consecutive CMEs were found.
The event occurred on 2012 March 7 and was observed by both STEREO-A and -B, WIND and ACE. Applying the VDA to multi-spacecraft
observations allows us to estimate the SEP release time more accurately than that to a single spacecraft observation. We found that
the VDA analysis is best applied when the spacecraft is magnetically well-connected to the acceleration site.
\section{Observations}
\label{sect:obs}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth, angle=0]{ms20160022fig1.pdf}
\caption{The positions of the STEREO-A/B spacecraft and the Earth. The orange arrow indicates the propagation direction of the associated CME.}
\label{Fig1}
\end{figure}
We use in-situ and remote-sense observations from multiple-vantage spacecraft in this study. They included energetic
particle fluxes detected from the STEREO/HET \citep{Rosenvinge.etal08} and similar observations from near-Earth
spacecraft (e.g. SOHO/ERNE \citep{Torsti.etal95,Valtonen.etal97} and Wind/3DP \citep{Bougeret.etal95,Lin.etal95}), coronagraph
observations from the STEREO/SECCHI \citep{Howard.etal08} and the SOHO/LASCO \citep{Brueckner.etal95}, and radio observations from
the STEREO/WAVES \citep{Cecconi.etal08} and Wind/WAVES spacecraft respectively.
Figure~\ref{Fig1} shows the relative configuration of three spacecraft at 01:00UT on 7 March 2012. The angular separation
between the Earth and STEREO-A is $109.5^\circ$; the angular separation between the Earth and STEREO-B is $117.8^\circ$.
Since the associated AR (No.11429 in NOAA) is located at about E20 from the Earth, the event was a backside event for STEREO-A
and a western limb event for STEREO-B. The propagation direction of two successive CMEs is also marked by the orange arrow.
\subsection{CME observation}
\label{sub:cme}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth, angle=0]{ms20160022fig2.pdf}
\caption{The two CMEs during this SEP event detected by STEREO-A(/B)/SECCHI and SOHO/LASCO, and their GCS model fitting results. }
\label{Fig2}
\end{figure}
On 2012 March 7, an X5.4 flare (onset: 00:02UT, peak: 00:24UT, end: 00:40UT) at E$27^\circ$ was followed by an X1.3 flare
(onset: 01:05UT, peak: 01:14UT, end: 01:23UT) at E$17^\circ$. Two fast halo LASCO CMEs were accompanied with these events,
the first observed above the occulting disk at 00:24UT (with a speed of 2684 km/s
\footnote{http://cdaw.gsfc.nasa.gov/CME\_list/UNIVERSAL/2012\_03/univ2012\_03.html}), and the second at } %\textcolor{black{01:36UT} (1825 km/s$^1$).
Coronagraph observations made by SOHO/LASCO, STEREO-A(STA)/COR2, and STEREO-B(STB)/COR2 are shown in Figure~\ref{Fig2}.
Panel a1(c1) is the STB(STA) COR2 image at 01:39UT. Panel b1 is the running difference of the SOHO/LASCO C3 image
(01:39UT - 01:27UT). The envelopes of the two CMEs can be clearly seen from these panels. To better examine these two CMEs,
we also used the Graduated Cylindrical Shell (GCS, \citet{Thernisien.etal06,Thernisien.etal09}) model to fit the CME1 and CME2. In bottom panels of Figure~\ref{Fig2}, the green grids denote the
fitting result of CME1, and the red grids denote the fitting result of CME2. From the fitting results, one can see
clearly that the propagation directions of these two CMEs have similar longitudes but distinct latitudes in space.
\subsection{Radio bursts}
\label{sub:radio}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth, angle=0]{ms20160022fig3.pdf}
\caption{The radio bursts observations detected by three spacecraft (STEREO-A(B)/WAVES and Wind/WAVES). The white line shows the shift of type II radio bursts. }
\label{Fig3}
\end{figure}
Type II radio bursts are caused by shock-accelerated electrons radiating at local plasma frequencies.
As the shock propagates out, the ambient plasma density drops and the radio burst drifts to lower frequencies.
Type II radio bursts have been used as a diagnostic of the CME and its driven shock in the corona and interplanetary space
in studying SEP events \citep[see e.g.][]{kahler82,Cane.etal02,Cliver.etal04,Gopalswamy05}. Figure~\ref{Fig3} shows
radio observations in the frequency range of 1-14MHz detected by the WAVES instrument onboard STEREO and Wind respectively.
Multiple episodes of type II and type III radio emissions can be seen from the radio dynamic spectra. All three spacecraft
observed a bright type III radio burst beginning at about 00:18UT, which we intepret to be associated with the first flare
and coronal eruption. A type II radio burst followed from about 00:35UT to 01:00UT. It was not continuous and is marked
by white solid lines in each panel. Often both plasma emissions at the fundamental and the second harmonic frequencies
can be observed. We believe that this is also the case in this event. The second harmonic branch can be clearly identified
in STB and STA, marked by the white dash lines in the panel (a-c). This type II radio burst is evidently associated with
the shock driven by the first CME.
Later, the second type III radio burst was detected from about 01:09UT to 01:30UT. It is associated with the second
flare eruption. There are also other type II radio burst episodes shown between 01:38UT and 02:05UT. From the radio spectra
of the Wind/WAVES shown in the panel (b), we can clearly see the fundamental and second harmonic branches. These are clearly
not the continuations of those type II radio emissions associated with the first CME. So we intepret
the second type II radio bursts to be associated with the shock driven by the second CME in this event.
From the start frequency of these two episodes of type II radio bursts, we see that the first shock is formed at
lower height than the second one.
\subsection{In-situ observation of SEPs}
\label{sub:sep}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth, angle=0]{ms20160022fig4.pdf}
\caption{The solar energetic protons detected by three spacecraft (STEREO-A/B and SOHO/ERNE). The shaded areas denote
the interval of energetic proton enhancement in each observation.
The vertical dash line and dot-dash line in the panel (a) indicate the time of IP shocks respectively (solar wind observations shown in Figure~\ref{Fig6}).}
\label{Fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth, angle=0]{ms20160022fig5.pdf}
\caption{The in-situ observations of solar energetic electrons detected by three spacecraft (STEREO-A/B and Wind/3DP).
The shaded areas denote the intervals of energetic electron enhancement in each observation.
The vertical lines in the panel (a) show the time of IP shocks, the same as those in Figure~\ref{Fig4}(a).}
\label{Fig5}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{Fig4} shows one-minute averaged energetic proton observations from the STB(STA)/HET and SOHO ERNE/HED
respectively in panel (a), (b) and (c) during the onset of this SEP event. The shaded areas indicate the ascending period
in each in-situ observation. As shown in the figure, the event was a global event and seen in all three spacecraft.
The HET instrument onboard STB was best magnetically connected. It detected prompt enhancements in all energy channels from
$\sim$01:15UT to $\sim$02:10UT on March 7, with clear velocity dispersion. These onset times are delayed
by about 40 minutes (due to propagation) from the release near the sun (see section~\ref{sect:vda}).
These SEPs are clearly consistent with the first solar eruption before 01:00UT and inconsistent with the second solar
eruption after 01:00UT.
Then SOHO detected gradual enhancements in all energy channels within $4.5$ hours after about 02:10UT. The peak flux intensity
in SOHO was $\sim 10$ times lower than that observed in STB. Later, STA also detected gradual enhancement in all energy channels
within about $3$ hours, and the peak intensity was $\sim$10 times lower than that observed in SOHO too. The onsets
in SOHO and STA were after the second CME. Therefore from only the SOHO and STA observation, one can not tell
if the in-situ SEPs are due to the shock driven by the 1st CME, or the 2nd CME.
However, with STB observation, which is well magnetically situated,
we can clearly identify that these SEPs are accelerated by the 1st CME-driven shock.
We note that the first shock was formed at a lower height, which is more suitable for leading to high intensity SEP event or
GLE event \citep{Reames09b,Gopalswamy.etal12,Mewaldt.etal12}.
Our study shows that multi-vantage-point observations are crucial in understanding SEP events.
We next examine the observations of energetic electron from multi-vantage points in Figure~\ref{Fig5}.
From the panel (a) of this figure, the electron intensity at STB/SEPT clearly increased rapidly in all energy channels
by $\sim$00:50UT. About 30 minutes later, the STA detected gradual enhancements in all energy channels shown in the panel (c).
Unexpectedly, the energetic electron flux detected by Wind/3DP seem to start to increase very gradually at about 00:00UT
as shown in the panel (b).
} %\textcolor{black{
Due to the passage of an IP shock through the Wind spacecraft at about 03:30UT on March 7, which may cause a slow rise beginning several hours before the shock \citep{Tsurutani.Lin85},
the time profiles in that time are contaminated and it is difficult to accurately identify their onsets.
}
Again, only STB, the best-connected detector, provides unambiguous association between the energetic electrons and
the first CME-driven shock. Neither STA nor SOHO can reveal this association.
\subsection{In-situ observation of solar wind}
\label{sub:sw}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth, angle=0]{ms20160022fig6.pdf}
\caption{The solar wind observations in the point of STEREO-B.
The vertical dash lines and dot-dash lines in each panel represent two IP shocks.}
\label{Fig6}
\end{figure}
The intensity time profile of solar wind detected by STB became complicated by the passage of shocks, sheath,
and interplanetary (IP) coronal mass ejection (ICME) on March 7-8.
} %\textcolor{black{
In particular, the intensities weakly increased at about 18:20UT on March 7 and sharply decreased at about 13:25UT on March 8, which were probably associated with the passage of two ICMEs and/or their shocks respectively as shown in Figure~\ref{Fig6}. Increases of SEP intensities observed in association with the passage of transient interplanetary (IP) shocks are known as energetic storm particle (ESP) events \citep{Bryant.etal62,Reames99}. There are also cases where there are decreases in the time profiles associated with shock passage. For example, \citet{Hietala.etal11} noted that such decreases may occur due to accelerated particle trapped between shocks (e.g. see the Wind observations at the second shock passage in \citet{Hietala.etal11}).
}
The first shock (denoted by vertical dash lines) followed by
a hypothetical ICME structure was detected at about 18:20UT, which erupted at March 5 from the AR 11429. Because this ICME is
situated between the source and STB when the accelerated particles start to escape in the solar vicinity, the propagation path
length of particles observed by STB presents a distinguishable difference from the nominal Parker spiral path length corresponding
to solar wind speed (see VDA results below). The second shock (denoted by vertical dot-dash lines) followed by an ICME detected at about
13:25UT on March 8 was probably produced by the first CME launched at 00:24UT on March 7 mentioned before. This shock can also be observed
by the spacecraft near the Earth (not shown here).
{
For the energetic protons and electrons, the intensities in STB and SOHO present a nominal decay phase after the passage of the shock, while those in STA show a second enhancement in this period (after $\sim$05:00UT on March 9). It's very interesting to find that there is a corotating interaction region (CIR) passing through the STA coincidentally at that time, which may be considered to contribute to the second enhancement, as the CIR is also an efficient particle accelerator \citep{Fisk.Lee81,Reames.etal97,Zhao.etal16}.
}
\section{Velocity Dispersion Analysis}
\label{sect:vda}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth, angle=0]{ms20160022fig7.pdf}
\caption{The velocity dispersion analysis (VDA) of energetic protons (black cross line) and energetic electrons
in low energy channels (blue cross line) detected by STEREO-B. }
\label{Fig7}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth, angle=0]{ms20160022fig8.pdf}
\caption{Solar particle release times near the sun of SEPs detected by different spacecraft in different energies and
related eruptive phenomena including flare, CME and radio bursts. The green line shows the soft X-rays detected by GOES
in $1-8\AA$. The brown line with crosses displays the heliocentric height of CME as a function of time. }
\label{Fig8}
\end{figure}
To compare the solar energetic particle releases with those of other associated solar activities, it is necessary to compensate
proton travel time from the Sun corresponding to their energies. We perform the VDA of the proton data obtained from STEREO/HET
and SOHO ERNE/HED, and the electron data obtained from STEREO/SEPT and Wind/3DP. To obtain the solar release time, we use
\begin{equation}
t_{onset}=t_{rel}+t_{trans}=t_{rel}+L/v(E)
\label{eq1}
\end{equation}
where $t_{rel}$ is the particle release time at its source region near the Sun; $t_{trans}=L/v(E) $ is the travel time for the
particle with energy $E$; $L$ is the propagation path length and $v(E)$ is the velocity of energetic particle with energy $E$.
} %\textcolor{black{
We determined the onset times by following the procedure outlined in \citet{Ding.etal14a,Ding.etal16}. The onset time is decided by $f(t_{onset})=<f>+2\sigma$, where $<f>$ is the average of the pre-event background and $\sigma$ is its standard deviation. So, the onset time signals the time when the distribution function $f$ becomes $2\sigma$ higher than the background. The uncertainty of the onset time mainly comes from possible measurement uncertainty, such as data resolution. We also calculate a possible uncertainty by using either $3\sigma$ or $1\sigma$ \citep[e.g. see][]{Ding.etal16}.
}
For the data of energetic proton and electron obtained from STEREO and near Earth spacecraft (SOHO and Wind), we first performed
the VDA assuming all first arriving energetic particles are released at the same time from their source and
propagating with scatter free along the IP magnetic field lines.
} %\textcolor{black{
It is hard to address the uncertainty due to the scatter-free assumption, because the pitch angles of the first arriving energetic particles can not be determined exactly along the transport path from the Sun to the the observer. However, if we use Equation~(\ref{eq1}), a nonzero pitch angle would result in the experimental path length being larger than the actual path length by approximately a factor of $1/cos\theta$, with $\theta$ representing the pitch angle of the first arriving particles, and estimates of the release time are accurate to the order of several minutes for the first practice of VDA \citep{Dalla.etal03,Saiz.etal05}.
}
Unfortunately, except STB (the best-connected spacecraft),
all other observations show poor velocity dispersion and the inferred VDA results are unreliable. Here we only display the results
of the STB observations. As shown in Figure~\ref{Fig7}, the $t_{onset}s$ are plotted as a function of $1/v$ for energetic protons and
electrons. The black cross points denote the protons in all energy channels observed by HET and the blue cross points denote the
electrons in low energy channels observed by SEPT. It is obviously indicated that the velocity dispersion distribution of
the protons does not overlap with that of the electrons. We fitted the points of energetic protons and electrons separately.
From the fitting results, it is interesting to find that the protons and electrons were released at the same time $\sim00:30$UT,
but they have different propagation path lengths. The path length of protons is $\sim2.06$AU, and that of electrons is $\sim1.63$AU,
while the nominal Parker spiral length from the Sun to STB with a solar wind speed of 353km/s is $\sim 1.25$AU. This
path length of energetic particles may be caused by the presence of the ICME structure situated between the source region and the
detector. Such a structure may be also the reason that the path length of protons are distinct from that of electrons.
In order to reveal the release process of energetic particles at different longitudes, the release times in all energy channels
derived from the data of different detectors are shown in Figure~\ref{Fig8}. Here we assume that the particles in different
energies transport along the nominal Parker spiral if there is no special magnetic structure situated between the Sun and the
detector. To compare with, e.g., CME eruption and radio observations, we add 8.3 min, the travel time of light from the Sun to
the Earth, to the release time $t_{rel}$. For the energetic protons observed by STB, we use the deduced path length 2.06AU
obtained above as their actual transport path length, as well as 1.63AU as that of energetic electrons. Under the assumption of
scatter free, the release times of protons and electrons in different energy channels are obtained, as indicated by the red points
and cyan points in the figure respectively. From the distribution of the release times versus particle energies, it is clear that
all protons and electrons (except from high energy channels) observed by STB were released at about the same time. This time also
coincided with the start time of DH type II radio bursts (denoted by the vertical dot line) that is associated with the first
CME driven shock.
The simultaneity of the particle release in all energy channels for proton and low energy electrons supports
the proposal that the interplanetary magnetic field in this event was distorted by some IP structures and the
the the path length electrons and protons are different. It also suggests that
the result from the VDA as shown in the Figure~\ref{Fig7} is reliable.
As a comparison, we also calculate the release times of energetic particles detected by STA and SOHO using the VDA method.
We assume nominal Parker spiral path length (1.16AU for STA and 1.18AU for SOHO) as no considerable IP magnetic structures were
between the Sun and STA and SOHO.
From the figure, one can see that the release times of protons in different energy as observed by SOHO and STA have
large scatterings. This imply that energetic protons in different energy channels may not be released at the same time
or that they have propagated along different paths. It should be noted that the SOHO and STA are not well-connected with the
source region in this event. So if we apply the VDA to SOHO or STA in this event (not show the results here), one can find
that it does not yield a fine result of release time or path length like STB.
Since the particle release times for the STA and SOHO show large scatterings, these release times can not be used to
compare with other solar activities. This of course is because both STA and SOHO are poorly-connected spacecraft.
Indeed, if one were to use the releases of protons observed by SOHO and STA, one may mistakenly arrive at the
conclusion that these SEPs are associated with the shock driven by the second CME.
As shown in the figure, the energetic electrons detected by STA/SEPT seem to be released at almost the same time but with
slight scatter. We also apply the VDA to this data to obtain the electron release time and path length.
It's interesting that the calculated path length is similar to the nominal Parker spiral path length. The resultant release time
is about 01:13UT, which coincided with the peak time of the second flare, but the uncertainty of the result is large } %\textcolor{black{($\pm9$ minutes)}.
Note that the protons and electrons observed by STA yield the different release times.
From our event we see that it should be very cautious when using the VDA to obtain the path length and SEP release time.
Under the assumption that particles are released at the same time from the solar vicinity in different energy channels, it seems that
reasonable transport path length from the Sun to the observer can be obtained, even if there is magnetic structures situated between the source and the detector.
However, the release times may be different for different observers located at different longitudes, suggesting that the release time
can strongly depend on if the spacecraft is well magnetically connected or not. This of course is realistic
since the acceleration site
can connect to different field lines at different times.
Usually, the energetic particles are released later when the foot point of the observer is far away
the source region, because of the shock expansion along the longitude during the propagation outward.
Alternatively, energetic particles may undergo cross-field diffusion.
Finally, we note that there can exist significant differences between ions and electrons in both the release time and the
path length.
\section{Conclusion and Discussion}
\label{sect:discussion}
In this paper, we performed the case study of the SEP event occurred on 2012 March 7 using the in-situ and remote-sense
observations of the multi-vantage spacecraft. There were two X-class solar flares and fast and wide successive CMEs erupting
from the same source region during the event. These two CMEs agree with the proposed twin-CME scenario
\citep{Li.etal12,Ding.etal13,Ding.etal14a}, except that in this event the second CME was slower than the first one.
Analyses of particle onset and release indicate that particle acceleration in this event was associated with the first
solar event/CME and that the second CME was not involved, in agreement with the result of \citet{Richardson.etal14}.
In addition, there is no obvious indication in the STB intensity time profile of a second particle injection that was
associated with the second solar event. That energetic particles are accelerated at the second CME-driven
shock, as suggested by the twin-CMEs scenario \citep{Li.etal12}, may not be in operation in this event.
The release time of the protons and electrons detected by the best-connected STB coincided well with the start time of
the type II (DH) radio bursts associated with the first CME shock, which occurred after the peak time of the first flare
but prior to that of the second flare. This means both energetic protons and electrons in this SEP event were accelerated
only by the first CME-driven shock. On the contrary, if we only consider the release time deduced from observations by single
spacecraft that are not well-connected (e.g. SOHO or STA in this event) via the VDA method, then, for either proton or electron,
we will mistakenly conclude that the second solar eruption is responsible for this SEP event.
When applying the VDA analysis and in particular examining data from multiple spacecraft, we note that certain issues need to
be carefully considered. These are,
(1) In the first VDA practice mentioned in section~\ref{sect:intro}, the assumption of all particles released at the same time
is usually not satisfied (see four classes in \citet{Kim.etal14}), because the particle acceleration process is different
from event to event. Even in a single event, this condition may not be met in different longitudes, especially for
not-well-connected points, such as the cases of SOHO and STA observations in this event.
(2) If some magnetic structures (e.g. ICME) lie between the detector and source region, the path length may have large
difference from the nominal Parker spiral path length, such as the results of the STB in this event. And the path length of
protons and electron may also differ.
(3) If particles are not released at the same time, one can use the second VDA practice mentioned above and examine
the associations and acceleration process of one SEP event \citep{Kim.etal14}. Under such cases, the assumption of the path
length being that from the nominal Parker spiral is often made. However, this is only appropriate if there is no large
magnetic structure in the IP space. For obervations made at not-well-connected vantage points, cautions must also be exercised
because time intensity profiles made at these locations may not yield clear onset times.
As a result, we suggested that
to accurately estimate the reasonable release time and path length of energetic particles via the VDA method,
the VDA should be performed using the data from a well-connected spacecraft.
This conclusion agrees with the modeling result of \citet{Wang.Qin15}.
Furthermore, the standard assumption of a scatter-free IP space needs to be made.
Under these conditions, the VDA method can be exercised in two different cases:
in the first, one can use the VDA assuming particles of different energies are released at the same time; this practice is
often done when we are almost certain that the IP fields are not Parker-like (e.g. pre-existing MC structure between the Sun and
the spacecraft); in the second, one often adopt a nominal Parker field and then the VDA can be used to obtain the release times
for particles of different energies.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We are grateful to STEREO, SOHO, Wind, and CDAW database for making their data available online.
This work is supported at NUIST by NSFC-41304150 for Ding L.G.;
at CMA by NSFC-41274193, 41474166 for Le G.M.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{raa}
|
\section{Introduction}
The satisfiability problem for boolean formulae in conjunctive normal form (\textsc{Sat}), where each clause is monotone, i.\,e., all literals in a clause are positive or all of them are negative, is known to be $\mathcal{NP}$-complete \cite{Gold1978}, even if every clause contains exactly three \emph{distinct} literals (see the work by Li \cite{Li1997}). Further, Tovey \cite{Tovey1984} proved {\sc{3-Sat-4}}{}, where each clause contains exactly three distinct variables and every variable appears in at most four clauses, to be $\mathcal{NP}$-complete and showed that instances of this problem where every variable appears at most three times are always satisfiable. Darmann and Döcker~\cite{Darmann2016} show that \textsc{Monotone} {\sc{3-Sat-4}}, i.e., the restriction of {\sc{3-Sat-4}}{} to instances in which each clause is monotone remains $\mathcal{NP}$-complete. For a general information on computational complexity and, in particular, the concept of $\mathcal{NP}$-completeness we refer to Garey and Johnson \cite{Garey1979}.
Unless otherwise stated, we write clauses as subsets of a finite set $\mathcal{V}$ of variables; only in one of the problems considered (see Definition~\ref{def:duplicates}) we use multisets in order to allow for duplicates of literals within a clause. A $k$-clause contains exactly $k$ distinct variables and a clause is called monotone if either all contained literals are positive or all of them are negative, respectively. A mixed clause is a clause which is not monotone, i.e., it contains at least one positive and at least one negative literal. A clause is called positive (negative) if it contains only positive (negative) literals. We will refer to the replacement rule Gold~\cite[p.\,314f]{Gold1978} described to transform an instance $\mathcal{I}$ of the satisfiability problem for boolean formulae in conjunctive normal form into an instance $\mathcal{I}'$, such that each clause in $\mathcal{I}'$ is monotone and the two instances $\mathcal{I}$ and $\mathcal{I}'$ are equisatisfiable, as \emph{Gold's rule}. In set notation this rule looks as follows: A mixed clause $C = C^+ \cup C^-$ ($C^+$ contains the positive literals of $C$ and $C^-$ the negative literals, respectively) is replaced by the two monotone clauses $C^+ \cup \{u\}$ and $C^- \cup \{\bar{u}\}$, where $u$ is a new variable.
In this paper, we consider planar variants of the satisfiability problem, i.\,e, instances $\mathcal{I} = (\mathcal{V}, \mathcal{C})$, where $\mathcal{V}$ is a set of variables and $\mathcal{C}$ a collection of clauses $C_j$ so that the graph~$G_{\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C}} := (V,\,E)$ with $V := \mathcal{V} \cup \mathcal{C}$ and
\[
E := \{\{v_i,\,C_j\} : v_i \in C_j \vee \bar{v}_i \in C_j\}
\]
is planar. Lichtenstein \cite{Lichtenstein1982} proved the planar variant of the satisfiability problem to be $\mathcal{NP}$-complete, even for the case that each clause contains at most three variables and with the additional edges~$\{\{v_i,\,v_{i+1}\} : 1 \leq i < n\} \cup \{v_n,\, v_1\}$ where $n := |V|$ -- this variant is called {\sc{Planar 3-Sat}}. The restriction of this problem -- without the additional edges -- to monotone instances remains $\mathcal{NP}$-complete, even if a rectilinear representation is given \cite{Berg2010}. Other related $\mathcal{NP}$-complete problems -- without the monotonicity requirement -- are, e.\,g., \plantc3sat4\ \cite{Kratochvil1994} and a variant of Dahlhaus et al. \cite{Dahlhaus1994} where every variable appears exactly three times (more details on these variants are given in the following section when they are used in reductions). We present hardness proofs for planar and monotone variants of the satisfiability problem with bounds on the number of variable appearances. \newline
In what follows, by \textsc{Sat}-$s$ (respectively \textsc{Sat}-E$s$) we denote the restriction of \textsc{Sat} to instances in which each variable appears at most $s$ times (respectively exactly $s$ times), $s \in \mathbb{N}$.
\section{Bounded planar variants}
In this section we consider planar variants of the monotone satisfiability problem with the main focus on hardness with respect to bounds on variable appearances.
\begin{definition}[\textsc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat}]\
\label{def:PlanMon23Sat}
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Input:} A set of variables $\mathcal{V} = \{v_1,\,v_2,\,\ldots,\,v_n\}$, a collection of clauses $\mathcal{C} = \{C_1,\,C_2,\,\ldots,\,C_m\}$ and a graph $G_{\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C}} := (V,\,E)$ with $V := \mathcal{V} \cup \mathcal{C}$ and $E := \{\{v_i,\,C_j\} : v_i \in C_j \vee \bar{v}_i \in C_j\}$, so that the following properties hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The bipartite graph $G_{\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C}}$ is planar.
\item Each clause contains two or three distinct literals, either all or none of them are negated.
\end{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Question:} Is the collection of clauses $\mathcal{C}$ satisfiable?
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{the:scpmsat}
{\sc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-3}}\ is $\mathcal{NP}$-complete.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The problem is in $\mathcal{NP}$, since it is a special case of the satisfiability problem for boolean formulas in conjunctive normal form. We show that {\sc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-3}}\ is $\mathcal{NP}$-hard by a reduction from a restricted version of Lichtenstein's {\sc{Planar 3-Sat}}\ \cite{Lichtenstein1982}. Dahlhaus et al. \cite{Dahlhaus1994} have shown that the latter problem remains $\mathcal{NP}$-hard if each clause contains two or three literals, each variable appears in exactly three clauses, with one of its literals appearing in two clauses and the other literal in one clause. It is easy to see that applying Gold's rule to each mixed clause of such an instance preserves planarity and respects the bounds on variable appearances. Therefore, {\sc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-3}}\ is $\mathcal{NP}$-hard.
\end{proof}
Note that for any instance $\mathcal{I}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C})$ of \textsc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-$3$} and any variable $x \in \mathcal{V}$ which appears at most twice, we can construct an equisatisfiable instance $\mathcal{I}'=(\mathcal{V}',\mathcal{C}')$ of \textsc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-$3$} in which the number of appearances of $x$ is increased by exactly one by adding to $\mathcal{C}$ the clauses $\{x,u,v\}$, $\{u,v\}$, $\{\bar{u},\bar{v}\}$, where $u,v$ are newly introduced variables. As a consequence, we get the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:plan23SatE3}
\textsc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-E$3$} is $\mathcal{NP}$-complete.
\end{corollary}
\begin{definition}[{\sc{Restricted Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat}}]\
\label{def:restrSAT}
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Input:} A set of variables $\mathcal{V} = \{v_1,\,v_2,\,\ldots,\,v_n\}$, a collection of clauses $\mathcal{C} = \{C_1,\,C_2,\,\ldots,\,C_m\}$ and a graph $G_{\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C}} := (V,\,E)$ with $V := \mathcal{V} \cup \mathcal{C}$ and $E := \{\{v_i,\,C_j\} : v_i \in C_j \vee \bar{v}_i \in C_j\}$, so that the following properties hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The bipartite graph $G_{\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C}}$ is planar.
\item Each clause contains two or three distinct literals, either all or none of them are negated. Every 3-clause contains only positive literals.
\item Each variable appears negated exactly once.
\end{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Question:} Is the collection of clauses $\mathcal{C}$ satisfiable?
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{the:bpmsat}
{\sc{Restricted Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-4}}\ is $\mathcal{NP}$-complete, even if every variable appears at least three times.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
As in Theorem \ref{the:scpmsat} the problem is in $\mathcal{NP}$ and we use the variant of Dahlhaus et al. \cite{Dahlhaus1994} for the reduction: each clause contains two or three literals, each variable appears in exactly three clauses, with one of its literals appearing in two clauses and the other literal in one clause. We can compute a planar and orthogonal drawing of the graph on a grid of size $n \times n$ in linear time using the algorithm of Biedl and Kant~\cite{Biedl1998}. On this drawing we apply the local replacements shown in Figure \ref{fig:orientations},
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{orientations}
\caption{Local replacement of a variable vertex $x$. After application of this rule the drawing of the vertex looks locally as shown in the dashed square.}
\label{fig:orientations}
\end{figure}
so that for each variable the outgoing edges of the corresponding vertex are locally drawn identically (see the dashed squares in Figure \ref{fig:orientations}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gadget}
\caption{Creating an equisatisfiable planar monotone instance with bounded variable appearances. The dotted line is used if the corresponding appearance of the variable is negated; otherwise the dashed line is used.}
\label{fig:gadget}
\end{figure}
For every variable we replace the dashed square with the construction shown in Figure \ref{fig:gadget} (this gadget is inspired by the one given by Dahlhaus et al. \cite[p.\,18]{Dahlhaus1994} and the one by de Berg and Khosravi \cite[p.\,6]{Berg2010}). For every appearance of a variable $x$ we create two new variables $x_i$ and $a_i$ and replace $x$ with $x_i$. In order to satisfy the two clauses between $a_i$ and $x_i$ in the gadget (see Figure \ref{fig:gadget}) we have to assign opposite truth values to $a_i$ and $x_i$. The ring structure forces us to assign the same truth value to all $x_i$, and consequently the opposite truth value to all $a_i$. If $x_i$ appears non-negated in the corresponding clause $C_{x_i}$ of the original instance, we just use the outgoing dashed line of $x_i$. Otherwise, we replace $\bar{x}_i$ with $a_i$ in $C_{x_i}$, and replace the edge $\{x_i,\, C_{x_i}\}$ with $\{a_i,\, C_{x_i}\}$. The graph remains planar since we only need to reroute the dashed line to $a_i$ by using the corresponding dotted line instead. Now, it is not hard to see that the resulting instance is equisatisfiable. Every clause contains two or three distinct literals since we introduced only monotone 2-clauses. All clauses of the original instance are replaced with positive clauses containing the same number of literals. Hence, every clause is monotone and all 3-clauses are positive. We replace every variable with the construction described above, so every variable appears either three or four times; either $a_i$ appears three times and $x_i$ four times or the other way round. Moreover, recalling that only the clauses introduced in the gadget contain negative literals in the final instance, we can conclude that every variable appears exactly once negated.
\end{proof}
Now, for any instance $\mathcal{I}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C})$ of {\sc{Restricted Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-4}}\ we can construct an equisatisfiable instance $\mathcal{I}'=(\mathcal{V}',\mathcal{C}')$ of {\sc{Restricted Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat}}-\textsc{E$4$} as follows:
for any variable $x \in \mathcal{V}$ which appears three times add to $\mathcal{C}$ the clauses $\{x,a,b\}$, $\{a,c,d\}$,
$\{b,c,d\}$, $\{a,b\}$, $\{\bar{a},\bar{b}\}$, $\{c,d\}$, $\{\bar{c},\bar{d}\}$, where $a, b, c, d$ are newly introduced variables. As a consequence, from Theorem~\ref{the:bpmsat} we get the following result.
\begin{corollary}
{\sc{Restricted Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat}}-\textsc{E$4$} is $\mathcal{NP}$-complete.
\end{corollary}
\bigskip
An interesting question is whether or not we can replace a monotone 2-clause in an instance of \textsc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat} with monotone 3-clauses such that the result is an equisatisfiable instance of this problem, i.\,e., the corresponding graph remains planar. Unfortunately, the replacement rules presented in previous work \cite{Darmann2016} do not preserve planarity. In Figure \ref{fig:bipartite} this is shown for the rules $\mathcal{R}_i$ in Theorem 1 of this article: Rule $\mathcal{R}_1$ replaces a clause $\{x,\,y\}$ with clauses
\[
\{x,\,y,\,u\},\,\{x,\,y,\,v\},\,\{x,\,y,\,w\},\,\{\bar{u},\,\bar{v},\,\bar{w}\},
\]
where $u,\,v,\,w$ are new variables; a clause $\{\bar{x},\,\bar{y}\}$ is handled analogously (this rule is due to Li \cite[p.\,295]{Li1997}). Since the other rules use $\mathcal{R}_1$ as a ``subroutine''(in the case of $\mathcal{R}_3$ indirectly by building on $\mathcal{R}_2$), none of the rules preserves planarity. An application of the replacement rule presented in the proof of Theorem 2 in the article \cite[p.\,4]{Darmann2016} mentioned above results in a graph with $K_{3,3}$ as a minor as well, since the clauses 3, 4, 5 and 6 together with the variables contained in these clauses induce a subgraph isomorphic to the graph shown on the left in Figure \ref{fig:bipartite}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{bipartite}
\caption{The replacement rules $\mathcal{R}_i$ do not preserve planarity, since already the bipartite graph associated with $\mathcal{R}_1(\{x,y\})$ has $K_{3,3}$ as a minor.}
\label{fig:bipartite}
\end{figure}
Of course, we can achieve the goal described above by allowing duplicates of a variable in a clause; the clauses are now multisets for this reason. We denote this variation of \textsc{Sat} in which clauses are multisets of variables by {\sc{Sat}$^*$} (again, {\sc{Sat}$^*$}-E$s$ indicates that each variable appears exactly $s$ times). With this relaxation we show that the problem is $\mathcal{NP}$-complete already for the case that each variable appears exactly $4$ times.
Formally, we define the following problem.
\begin{definition}[{\sc{Planar Monotone 3-\multisat}}]\
\label{def:duplicates}
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Input:} A set of variables $\mathcal{V} = \{v_1,\,v_2,\,\ldots,\,v_n\}$, a collection of clauses $\mathcal{C} = \{C_1,\,C_2,\,\ldots,\,C_m\}$ and a graph $G_{\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C}} := (V,\,E)$ with $V := \mathcal{V} \cup \mathcal{C}$ and $E := \{\{v_i,\,C_j\} : v_i \in C_j \vee \bar{v}_i \in C_j\}$, so that the following properties hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The bipartite graph $G_{\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C}}$ is planar.
\item Each clause contains exactly three literals, either all or none of them are negated (duplicates are allowed).
\end{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Question:} Is the collection of clauses $\mathcal{C}$ satisfiable?
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{the:planmultisatE4} {\sc{Planar Monotone 3-\multisat}}-\textsc{E}$4$ is $\mathcal{NP}$-complete. \end{theorem}
\begin{proof}Reduction from \textsc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-E$3$} (see Corollary~\ref{cor:plan23SatE3}). Given an instance $\mathcal{I}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C})$
of \textsc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-E$3$}, construct instance $\mathcal{I}'=(\mathcal{V}',\mathcal{C}')$
of {\sc{Planar Monotone 3-\multisat}}-\textsc{E}$4$ as follows. Replace each $2$-clause $\{x,y\}$ of
$\mathcal{C}$ by the two $3$-clauses $\{x,y,z\}$, $\{\bar{z},\bar{z},\bar{z}\}$
($z$ is a new variable). Recall that each variable $x \in \mathcal{V}$ appears exactly three times in
collection $\mathcal{C}$. For each variable $x \in \mathcal{V}$
add the clauses $\{x,u,u\}$, $\{u,u,v\}$, $\{v,v,v\}$,
where $u,v$ are new variables. \newline
Obviously, $\mathcal{I}$ is a ``yes''-instance of \textsc{Planar Monotone $(2,\,3)$-Sat-E$3$} if
and only if $\mathcal{I}'$ is a ``yes''-instance of {\sc{Planar Monotone 3-\multisat}}-\textsc{E}$4$.
It is also easy to see that the graph $G_{\mathcal{V}',\mathcal{C}'}$
is planar. \end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{the:planmultisatE5}
{\sc{Planar Monotone 3-\multisat}}-\textsc{E}$5$ is $\mathcal{NP}$-complete, even if restricted to instances in which the graph $G_{\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C}}$ is biconnected.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Again, the problem is clearly in $\mathcal{NP}$. This time we use a reduction from \plantc3sat4\ \cite{Kratochvil1994} in order to show $\mathcal{NP}$-hardness. In an instance $\mathcal{I} := (\mathcal{V},\, \mathcal{C})$ of this variant, every variable appears at least three and at most four times and every clause contains exactly three distinct variables. Further, the bipartite graph $G_{\mathcal{V},\mathcal{C}} := (V,\,E)$ with $V := \mathcal{V} \cup \mathcal{C}$ and $E := \{\{v_i,\,C_j\} : v_i \in C_j \vee \bar{v}_i \in C_j\}$ is planar and vertex 3-connected. As in Theorem \ref{the:bpmsat}, we may assume an orthogonal drawing to be given -- otherwise we can compute it in linear time -- and replace every variable vertex locally. In Figure \ref{fig:gadget} the construction for a vertex of degree~3 is given. The adaptation of the gadget for a vertex of degree 4 is straightforward (see Figure \ref{fig:gadget2}). For details on the gadgets see the proof of Theorem \ref{the:bpmsat}. Every clause of the original instance $\mathcal{I}$ contains exactly three variables, and is monotone after the local replacements. Further, every variable vertex of $\mathcal{I}$ is replaced. Thus, by showing that after using a gadget $\mathcal{G}$ for a local replacement, we can duplicate literals in the clauses of $\mathcal{G}$ so that every clause of $\mathcal{G}$ contains exactly three literals and every variable of $\mathcal{G}$ appears exactly 5 times in the final instance, these properties follow globally for the final instance. Recall that duplication of a literal within a clause is now possible. Now, the reasoning is identical for both gadgets: We consider the ring structure of a gadget in the clockwise direction. For $a_i$ and $x_i$ recall that depending on the instance either $a_i$ or $x_i$ has degree~3 and the other one has degree 4. We always duplicate $x_i$ in the clause on the right of the corresponding variable vertex (on the bottom of Figure \ref{fig:gadget2} this clause is drawn on the left). For the two clauses drawn between $a_i$ and $x_i$ we have two cases: If the degree of the vertex $x_i$ is 5 after the just described duplication, we duplicate $a_i$ in the upper clause and $\bar{a}_i$ in the lower clause. Since in this case $a_i$ must have had degree 3 before the duplication, it now has degree 5 as well. Otherwise both $x_i$ and $a_i$ have degree 4 and we duplicate, e.\,g., $x_i$ in the upper clause and $\bar{a}_i$ in the lower clause. Again both variable vertices have now degree~5. Doing this for every pair $(a_i,\,x_i)$ in the ring structure yields an equisatisfiable construction with the desired properties.
The resulting graph is biconnected since the graph in the instance $\mathcal{I}$ is vertex 3-connected and the gadget we used for the local replacement in the construction of the instance of {\sc{Planar Monotone 3-\multisat}}-\textsc{E}$5$ is (obviously) biconnected.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gadget2}
\caption{Gadget for vertices of degree 4.}
\label{fig:gadget2}
\end{figure}
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion}
We have shown $\mathcal{NP}$-completeness for several planar variants of the monotone satisfiability problem for boolean formulae in conjunctive normal form involving bounds on the number of times a variable may appear in the formula. The variants considered in Theorem \ref{the:scpmsat} and \ref{the:bpmsat} have an associated bipartite graph with vertex degree bounded by three and four, respectively. Further, we have shown that these variants remain hard, even if restricted to instances in which every variable appears exactly as often in the collection of clauses as the upper bound for the variables allows. Thus, planar and orthogonal drawings of these graphs exist and can be computed efficiently (see the work by Biedl and Kant~\cite{Biedl1998}), which may be useful when using these variants as a starting point for a reduction in a $\mathcal{NP}$-hardness proof. Moreover, the variant proven to be $\mathcal{NP}$-complete in Theorem \ref{the:planmultisatE4} has the property that each clause contains exactly three, not necessarily distinct, literals and every variable appears exactly four times in the collection of clauses. Finally, the variant shown to be $\mathcal{NP}$-complete in Theorem~\ref{the:planmultisatE5} differs from the one considered in Theorem \ref{the:planmultisatE4} in the way that every variable is required to appear exactly five times and the corresponding planar graph is biconnected.
An interesting open question remains: If we require every clause to contain exactly three \emph{distinct} variables, is there a number $s \in \mathbb{N}$ such that {\sc Planar Monotone 3-Sat-$s$} is $\mathcal{NP}$-hard and if so, what is the smallest number with this property (clearly, $s \geq 4$)? In order to show the first part it would suffice to find a finite set of monotone 3-clauses similar to the sets used in the replacement rules in previous work \cite{Darmann2016} (these rules do not preserve planarity) and a planar drawing thereof such that the variable with the forced truth value is drawn on the outer face. The latter property ensures that we can add this variable to a 2-clause without destroying planarity.
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
The theory of connection is a classical topic in differential geometry. It was initially developed to
solve pure geometrical problems. It provides an extremely important tool to study geometrical structures on
manifolds and, as such, has been applied with great sources in many different settings. B. Opozda in
(\cite{op}) classified locally homogeneous connection on $2$-dimensional manifolds equipped with torsion
free affine connection. T. Arias-Marco and O. Kowalski \cite{ak} classify locally homogeneous connections
with arbitrary torsion on $2$-dimensional manifolds. E. Garc\'ia-Rio \textit{et al.} \cite{gar} introduced the notion
of the affine Osserman connections. The affine Osserman connections are well understood in dimension
two (see \cite{di,gar} for more details).
A (Pseudo) Riemannian manifold $(M,g)$ is said to be Szab\'o if the eigenvalues of the Szab\'o operator given by
$$S(X):Y\rightarrow (\nabla_{X}R)(Y,X)X$$ are constants on the unit (Pseudo) sphere bundle, where $R$
denoting the curvature tensor (see \cite{broz} and \cite{gi} for details). The Szab\'o operator is a self adjoint operator with $S(X)X=0$. It plays an important role in the study of totally isotropic manifolds \cite{gis}. Szab\'o in \cite{sz1} used techniques from algebraic topology to show, in the Riemannian setting, that any such a metric is locally symmetric. He used this observation to
prove that any two point homogeneous space is either flat or is a rank one symmetric space. Subsequently
Gilkey and Stravrov \cite{gs} extended this result to show that any Szab\'o Lorentzian manifold has constant
sectional curvature. However, for metrics of higher signature the situation is different. Indeed it was
showed in \cite{gis} the existence of Szab\'o Pseudo-Riemannian manifolds endowed with metrics of signature $(p,q)$
with $p\geq 2$ and $q\geq 2$ which are not locally symmetric .
In \cite{dm}, the authors introduced the so-called \textit{affine Szab\'o connections}. They proved, in
dimension $2$, that an affine connection $\nabla$ is affine Szab\'o if and only if the Ricci tensor of $\nabla$ is
cyclic parallel while in dimension $3$ the concept seems to be very challenging by giving only partial results.
The aim of the present paper is to give an explicit form of two families of affine connections which are affine Szab\'o on $3$-dimensional manifolds. Moreover, although both results provide examples of affine Szab\'o connections, they are essentially different in nature since, in the first family, the affine
Szab\'o condition coincides with the cyclic parallelism of the Ricci tensor, whereas the second one is not. For any affine connection $\nabla$ on $M$,
there exist a technique called \textit{Riemannian extension}, which relates affine and pseudo-Riemannian geometries.
This technique is very powerful in constructing new examples of pseudo-Riemannian metrics. The relation between affine Szab\'o
manifolds and pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifolds are investigated by using Riemannian extensions.
The paper is organized as follows. In section \ref{Prem}, we recall some basic definitions and geometric objects,
namely, torsion, curvature tensor, Ricci tensor and affine Szab\'o operator on an affine manifold. In section \ref{RiccCycl}, we study the cyclic parallelism of the Ricci tensor for two particular cases of affine connections in $3$-dimensional affine manifolds. We establish geometrical configurations of affine manifolds admitting a cyclic parallel Ricci tensor (Propositions 3.2 and 3.4). In section \ref{Szabo}, we study the Szab\'o
condition on two particular affine connections (Theorems 4.5 and 4.7). Finally, we end the paper in section 5 by investigating the Riemannian extensions defined on the cotangent bundle over an affine Szab\'o manifold.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{Prem}
Let $M$ be an $n$-dimensional smooth manifold and $\nabla$ be an affine connection on $M$. We consider a
system of coordinates $(x_{1},x_{2},\cdots,x_{n})$ in a neighborhood $\mathcal{U}$ of a point $p$ in $M$. In
$\mathcal{U}$ the affine connection is given by
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\partial_{i}}\partial_{j} =f^{k}_{ij}\partial_{k}
\end{equation}
where $\{\partial_{i}=\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{i}}\}_{1\leq i\leq n}$ is a basis of the tangent space
$T_{p} M$ and the functions $f_{ij}^{k}\, (i,j,k=1,2,3,\cdots,n)$ are called the \textit{Christoffel symbols} of
the affine connection. We shall call the pair $(M,\nabla)$ \textit{affine manifold}. Some tensor fields associated
with the given affine connection $\nabla$ are defined below.
The \textit{torsion tensor} field $T^{\nabla}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
T^{\nabla}(X,Y)=\nabla_{X}Y-\nabla_{Y}X-\nabla_{[X,Y]}
\end{equation}
for any vector fields $X$ and $Y$ on $M$. The components of the torsion tensor $T^{\nabla}$ in local coordinates are
\begin{equation}
T_{ij}^{k}=f_{ij}^{k}-f^{k}_{ji}.
\end{equation}
If the torsion tensor of a given affine connection $\nabla$ vanishes, we say that $\nabla$ is torsion-free
The \textit{curvature tensor field} $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(X,Y)=\nabla_{X}\nabla_{Y}Z-\nabla_{Y}\nabla_{X}Z-\nabla_{[X,Y]}Z
\end{equation}
for any vector field $X, Y$ and $Z$ on $M$. The components in local coordinates are
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{k},\partial_{l})=\sum_{i}R^{i}_{jkl}\partial_{i}.
\end{equation}
We shall assume that $\nabla$ is torsion-free. If $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}=0$ on $M$, we say that $\nabla$ is flat
affine connection. It is known that $\nabla$ is flat if and only if around a point $p$ there exist a local coordinate
system such that $f_{ij}^{k}=0$ for all $i,j,k$.
We define \textit{Ricci tensor} $Ric^{\nabla}$ by
\begin{equation}
Ric^{\nabla}(X,Y)= \mathrm{trace}\{Z\mapsto \mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(Z,X)Y\}.
\end{equation}
The components in local coordinates are given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{CurRicc1}
Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_{j},\partial_{k})=\sum_{i}R^{i}_{kij} .
\end{eqnarray}
It is known that in Riemannian geometry the Levi-Civita connection of a Riemannian metric has symmetric
Ricci tensor, that is $Ric^{\nabla}(X,Y)=R^{\nabla}(Y,X)$. But this property is not true for an arbitrary
torsion-free affine connection. In fact, the property is closely related to the concept of parallel volume
element. (See ~\cite{ns} for more details).
The covariant derivative of the curvature tensor $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$ is given by
\begin{align*}
(\nabla_{X}\mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(Y, Z)W &= \nabla_{X}\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(Y,Z)W
-\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\nabla_X Y,Z)W \\
&-\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(Y,\nabla_X Z)W -\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(Y,Z) \nabla_X W.
\end{align*}
The covariant derivative of the Ricci tensor $Ric^{\nabla}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}\label{CoDerRicNa1}
(\nabla_{X}Ric^{\nabla})(Z,W)=X(Ric^{\nabla}(Z,W))-Ric^{\nabla}(\nabla_{X}Z,W)-Ric^{\nabla}(Z,\nabla_{X}W).
\end{equation}
For $X\in\Gamma(T_{p}M)$, we define the \textit{affine Szab\'o operator} $S^{\nabla}(X):T_p M\rightarrow T_p M$ with
respect to $X$ by
\begin{equation}
S^{\nabla} (X)Y :=(\nabla_{X} \mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(Y,X)X
\end{equation}
for any vector field $Y$. The affine Szab\'o operator satisfies $S^{\nabla}(X)X=0$ and
$S^{\nabla}(\beta X)=\beta^{3}S^{\nabla}(X)$ for $\beta\in \mathbb{R}-\{0\}$ and $X\in T_{p}M$. If $Y=\partial_{m}$, for
$m=1,2,\cdots,n$ and $X= \sum_{i}\alpha_{i}\partial_{i}$ one get
\begin{equation}
S^{\nabla}(X)\partial_{m}=\sum_{i,j,k=1}^{n}\alpha_{i}\alpha_{j}\alpha_{k}(\nabla_{\partial_{i}}\mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(\partial_{m},\partial_{j})\partial_{k}.
\end{equation}
Note that, by definition of the Ricci tensor, one has
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{trace}(Y\mapsto (\nabla_{X} \mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(Y,X)X)=(\nabla_{X}Ric^{\nabla})(X,X).
\end{equation}
\section{Affine connections with cyclic parallel Ricci tensor}\label{RiccCycl}
In this section, we investigate affine connections whose Ricci tensors are cyclic parallel. We shall consider two
cases of $3$-dimensional smooth manifolds with specific affine connections. We start with a formal definition.
\begin{definition}{\rm The Ricci tensor $Ric^{\nabla}$ of an affine manifold $(M,\nabla)$ is cyclic parallel if
\begin{equation}\label{RicciCycP1}
(\nabla_{X}Ric^{\nabla})(X,X)=0,
\end{equation}
for any vector field $X$ tangent to $M$ or, equivalently, if
$$
\mathfrak{G}_{X,Y,Z}(\nabla_{X}Ric^{\nabla})(Y,Z)=0,
$$
for any vector fields $X,Y,$ and $Z$ tangent to $M$ where $\mathfrak{G}_{X,Y,Z}$ denotes the cyclic sum with respect
to $X,Y$ and $Z$.
}
\end{definition}
Locally, the equation (\ref{RicciCycP1}) takes the form
\begin{equation}
(\nabla_{\partial_{i}}Ric^{\nabla})_{jk}=0
\end{equation}
or can be written out without the symmetrizing brackets
\begin{equation}
(\nabla_{\partial_{i}}Ric^{\nabla})_{jk}+(\nabla_{\partial_{j}}Ric^{\nabla})_{ki}+(\nabla_{\partial_{k}}Ric^{\nabla})_{ij}=0.
\end{equation}
For $X=\sum_{i}\alpha_{i}\partial_{i}$ , it is easy to show that
\begin{equation}\label{RicciCycP2}
(\nabla_{X}Ric^{\nabla})(X,X)=\sum_{i,j,k}\alpha_{i}\alpha_{j}\alpha_{k}(\nabla_{\partial_{i}}Ric^{\nabla})_{jk}.
\end{equation}
Now, we are going to present two cases of affine connections in which we investigate the cyclic parallelism of the Ricci
tensor.
\textit{Case 1:}
Let $M$ be a $3$-dimensional smooth manifold and $\nabla$ be an affine torsion-free connection. Suppose that the action
of the affine connection $\nabla$ on the basis of the tangent space $\{\partial_{i}\}_{1\le i\le 3}$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{CoefCon1}
\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1} =f_{1} \partial_{1},\;\;\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{2} =f_{2} \partial_{1}\;\;\mbox{and}\;\;\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{3} = f_{3} \partial_{1},
\end{equation}
where the smooth functions$f_{i} =f_{i}(x_1,x_2,x_3)$ are Christoffel symbols. The non-zero components of the curvature tensor
$\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$ of the affine connection (\ref{CoefCon1}) are given by
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{2})\partial_{1}&= (\partial_{1}f_{2}-\partial_{2}f_{1})\partial_{1}, \;\;\;
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{2})\partial_{2} = -(\partial_{2}f_{2}+f_{2}^{2})\partial_{1}, \\
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{2})\partial_{3}&= -(\partial_{2}f_{3}+f_{2}f_{3})\partial_{1},\;\;\;
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{3})\partial_{1}= (\partial_{1}f_{3}-\partial_{3}f_{1})\partial_{1},\\
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{3})\partial_{2}&= -(\partial_{3}f_{2}+f_{2}f_{3})\partial_{1},\;\;\;
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{3})\partial_{3} = -(\partial_{3}f_{3}+f_{3}^{2})\partial_{1}\nonumber\\
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{2},\partial_{3})\partial_{1}&= (\partial_{2}f_{3}-\partial_{3}f_{2})\partial_{1}.
\end{align*}
From (\ref{CurRicc1}), the non-zero components of the Ricci tensor $Ric^{\nabla}$ of the affine connection (\ref{CoefCon1})
are given by:
\begin{align*}
Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_2,\partial_1) &= \partial_1f_2-\partial_2f_1, \;\;\;
Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_2,\partial_2) = -(\partial_2f_2+f_2^2),\\
Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_2,\partial_3) & = -(\partial_2f_3+f_2f_3),\;\;\;
Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_3,\partial_1) = \partial_1f_3-\partial_3f_1,\\
Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_3,\partial_2) &= -(\partial_3f_2+f_2f_3),\;\;\;
Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_3,\partial_3) = -(\partial_3f_3+f_3^2).
\end{align*}
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition}
On $\mathbb{R}^{3}$, the affine connection $\nabla$ defined in (\ref{CoefCon1}) satisfies the relation (\ref{RicciCycP1}) if the
functions $f_i=f_{i}(x_1,x_2,x_3)$, for $i=1,2,3$, satisfy the following partial differential equations:
\begin{align}
&\partial^2_3f_3+2f_3\partial_3f_3=0\nonumber\\
&\partial^2_2f_2+2f_2\partial_2f_2=0\nonumber\\
&\partial^2_3f_1+4f_3\partial_1f_3-2f_3\partial_3f_1=0\nonumber\\
&\partial^2_2f_1+4f_2\partial_1f_2-2f_2\partial_2f_1=0\nonumber\\
&\partial^2_1f_3-\partial_1\partial_3f_1-f_1\partial_1f_3+f_1\partial_3f_1=0\nonumber\\
&\partial^2_1f_2-\partial_1\partial_2f_1-f_1\partial_1f_2+f_1\partial_2f_1=0\nonumber\\
&\partial^2_2f_3+2\partial_3\partial_2f_2+2f_2\partial_3f_2+2f_3\partial_2f_2+2f_2\partial_2f_3=0\nonumber\\
&\partial^2_3f_2+2\partial_3\partial_2f_3+2f_3\partial_2f_3+2f_3\partial_3f_2+2f_2\partial_3f_3=0\nonumber\\
&4f_3\partial_1f_2+4f_2\partial_1f_3-2f_3\partial_2f_1-2f_2\partial_3f_1+2\partial_3\partial_2f_1=0
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
From a straightforward calculation, using (\ref{CoDerRicNa1}) and (\ref{RicciCycP2}), one obtain the result.
\end{proof}
As an example to the Proposition \ref{proposition}, we have the following.
\begin{example}{\rm
The Ricci tensors of the affine connections defined in (\ref{CoefCon1}) on $\mathbb{R}^3$ with
\begin{enumerate}
\item $f_1=0, f_2=-x_3$ and $f_3 = x_2$;
\item $f_1 =x_1, f_2 =2x_3$ and $f_3=-2x_2$
\end{enumerate}
are cyclic parallel.}
\end{example}
\textit{Case 2:}
Let $M$ be a $3$-dimensional smooth manifold and $\nabla$ be an affine torsion-free connection. Suppose that
the action of the affine connection $\nabla$ on the basis of the tangent space $\{\partial_{i}\}_{1\le i\le 3}$ is
given by
\begin{equation}\label{CoefCon2}
\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1} = f_{1} \partial_{2},\;\;\nabla_{\partial_{2}}\partial_{2} = f_{2} \partial_{3}\;\;\mbox{and}\;\;\nabla_{\partial_{3}}\partial_{3} = f_{3} \partial_{1},
\end{equation}
where smooth functions $f_{i} =f_{i}(x_1,x_2,x_3)$ are Christoffel symbols . The non-zero components of the curvature tensor
$\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$ of the affine connection (\ref{CoefCon2}) are given by
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{2})\partial_{1}& =-(\partial_{2}f_{1}\partial_{2}+f_{1}f_{2}\partial_{3}), \;\;\;
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{2})\partial_{2}=\partial_{1}f_{2}\partial_{3},\\
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{3})\partial_{1}&=-\partial_{3}f_{1}\partial_{2},\;\;\;
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{3})\partial_{3}=\partial_{1}f_{3}\partial_{1}+f_{1}f_{3}\partial_{2},\\
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{2},\partial_{3})\partial_{2}&=-(\partial_{3}f_{2}\partial_{3}+f_{3}f_{2}\partial_{1}),\;\;\;
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_{2},\partial_{3})\partial_{3}=\partial_{2}f_{3}\partial_{1}.
\end{align*}
From (\ref{CurRicc1}), the non-zero components of the Ricci tensor $Ric^{\nabla}$ of the affine connection (\ref{CoefCon2})
are given by $Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_{1},\partial_{1})=\partial_{2}f_{1}$, $Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_{2},\partial_{2})=\partial_{3}f_{2}$, $ Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_{3},\partial_{3})=\partial_{1}f_{3}$.
\begin{proposition}\label{PropoNewfunc}
The affine connection $\nabla$ defined on $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ by (\ref{CoefCon2}) satisfies (\ref{RicciCycP1}) if the
functions $f_i=f_{i}(x_1,x_2,x_3)$, for $i=1,2,3$, has the following form:
\begin{equation*}
f_1 =f(x_1) + g(x_3),\;\;
f_2 = h(x_1) + u(x_2),\;\;
f_3 = v(x_2) + t(x_3),
\end{equation*}
where $f$, $g$, $h$, $u$, $v$ and $t$ are smooth functions on $\mathbb{R}^{3}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
From a straightforward calculation, using (\ref{CoDerRicNa1}) and (\ref{RicciCycP2}), one obtain
the following partial differential equations:
\begin{align}
&\partial_{1}\partial_{2}f_{1}=0, \;\;\; \partial_{3}\partial_{2}f_{1}=0, \;\; \partial_{1}\partial_{3}f_{2}=0, \;\; \partial_{2}\partial_{3}f_{2}=0, \;\; \partial_{2}\partial_{1}f_{3}=0,\nonumber\\
&\partial_{3}\partial_{1}f_{3}=0, \;\; \partial^{2}_{2}f_{1}-2f_{1}\partial_{3}f_{2}=0,\;\;\partial^{2}_{1}f_{3}-2f_{3}\partial_{2}f_{1}=0, \;\;\partial^{2}_{3}f_{2}-2f_{2}\partial_{1}f_{3}=0,\nonumber
\end{align}
and the result follows.
\end{proof}
As an application to this proposition, we have:
\begin{example}\label{ExamplImport}{\rm
The Ricci tensor of the following affine connection defined on $\mathbb{R}^3$ by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_1 = x^{2}_{1} \partial_2,\quad
\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_2 = (x_1 + x_2) \partial_3,\quad \mbox{and}\quad
\nabla_{\partial_3} \partial_3 &=& (x_2 + x^{2}_{3}) \partial_1,
\end{eqnarray*}
is cyclic parallel.}
\end{example}
The manifolds with cyclic parallel Ricci tensor, known as $L_{3}$-spaces, are well-developed in Riemannian
geometry. The cyclic parallelism of the Ricci tensor is sometime called the ``\textit{First Ledger condition}''
\cite{pt}. In \cite{sz2}, for instance, the author proved that a smooth Riemannian manifold satisfying the
first Ledger condition is real analytic. These Riemannian manifolds were introduced by A. Gray in (~\cite{gr})
as a special subclass of (connected) Riemannian manifolds $(M,g)$, called Einstein-like spaces, all of which
have constant scalar curvature. Also, Riemannian manifolds of dimension $3$ with cyclic parallel Ricci tensor
are locally homogeneous naturally reductive (~\cite{pt}). Tod in \cite{to} used the same condition to characterize
the $4$-dimensional K\"ahler manifolds which are not Einstein. It has also enriched the D'Atri spaces
(see \cite{ks,pt} for more details).
\section{The affine Szab\'o manifolds}\label{Szabo}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be an $n$-dimensional affine manifold, i.e., $\nabla$ is a torsion free
connection on the tangent bundle of a smooth manifold $M$ of dimension $n$. Let $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$
be the associated curvature operator. We define the \textit{affine Szab\'o operator}
$S^{\nabla}(X):T_p M\rightarrow T_p M$ with respect to a vector $X\in T_p M$ by
\begin{equation*}
S^{\nabla}(X) Y := (\nabla_X \mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(Y,X)X.
\end{equation*}
\begin{definition}{\rm
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a smooth affine manifold and $p\in M$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(M,\nabla)$ is called affine Szab\'o at $p\in M$ if the affine Szab\'o operator $S^{\nabla}(X)$ has the
same characteristic polynomial for every vector field $X$ on $M$.
\item Also, $(M,\nabla)$ is called affine Szab\'o if $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at each point $p\in M$.
\end{enumerate}
}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}{\rm
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be an $n$-dimensional affine manifold and $p\in M$. Then $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at
$p\in M$ if and only if the characteristic polynomial of the affine Szab\'o operator $S^{\nabla}(X)$ is
$$P_{\lambda}(S^{\nabla}(X))=\lambda^{n},$$
for every $X\in T_{p}M$.
}
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}{\rm
We say that $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o if the affine Szab\'o operators are nilpotent, i.e., $0$ is the
eigenvalue of $S^{\nabla}(X)$ on the tangent bundle.
}
\end{corollary}
\begin{corollary}{\rm
If $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at $p\in M$, then the Ricci
tensor is cyclic parallel.
}
\end{corollary}
Affine Szab\'o connections are well-understood in $2$-dimension, due to the fact that an affine connection
is Szab\'o if and only if its Ricci tensor is cyclic parallel \cite{dm}. The situation is however more
involved in higher dimensions where the cyclic parallelism is a necessary but not sufficient condition for
an affine connection to be Szab\'o.
Let $X=\sum_{i=1}^{3} \alpha_i \partial_i$ be a vector field on a $3$-dimensional affine manifold $M$. Then the
affine Szab\'o operator is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
S^{\nabla}(X) (\partial_{m}) = \sum_{i,j,k=1}^{3}\alpha_{i}\alpha_{j}\alpha_{k}(\nabla_{\partial_{i}}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(\partial_{m},\partial_{j})\partial_{k}, \quad m=1,2,3.
\end{eqnarray*}
\subsection{First Family of affine Szab\'o connection.}
Next, we give an example of a family of affine Szab\'o connection on a $3$-dimensional manifold. Let us consider
the affine connection defined in $(3.5)$, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1}=f_{1}\partial_{1},\quad
\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{2}=f_{2}\partial_{1}\quad \mbox{and}\quad
\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{3}=f_{3}\partial_{1},
\end{equation*}
where the smooth functions $f_i = f_i(x_1,x_2,x_3)$ ($i=1,2,3$) are Christoffel symbols. For $ X=\sum_{i=1}^{3}\alpha_{i}\partial_{i}$, the affine
Szab\'o operator is given by
\begin{align*}
S^{\nabla}(X) (\partial_{1})=a_{11}\partial_1, \quad
S^{\nabla}(X) (\partial_{2})=a_{12}\partial_1 \quad \mbox{and}\quad
S^{\nabla}(X) (\partial_{3})=a_{13}\partial_1
\end{align*}
with
\begin{align}
a_{11} &=\alpha_{3}^{3}\{\partial^2_3f_3 + 2f_3\partial_3f_3\}
+ \alpha_{2}^{3}\{\partial^2_2f_2 + 2f_2\partial_2f_2\}\nonumber\\
&
+ \alpha_{3}^{2}\alpha_{1}\{\partial^2_3f_1 + 4f_3\partial_1f_3 - 2f_3\partial_3f_1\}\nonumber\\
& + \alpha_{2}^{2}\alpha_{1}\{\partial^2_2f_1 + 4f_2\partial_1f_2 - 2f_2\partial_2f_1\}\nonumber\\
&
+ \alpha_{1}^{2}\alpha_{3}\{\partial^2_1f_3 - \partial_1\partial_3f_1 - f_1\partial_1f_3
+ f_1\partial_3f_1\}\nonumber\\
& + \alpha_{1}^{2}\alpha_{2}\{\partial^2_1f_2 - \partial_1\partial_2f_1 - f_1\partial_1f_2
+ f_1\partial_2f_1\}\nonumber\\
& + \alpha_{2}^{2}\alpha_{3}\{\partial^2_2f_3 + 2\partial_3\partial_2f_2
+ 2f_2\partial_3f_2 + 2f_3\partial_2f_2 + 2f_2\partial_2f_3\}\nonumber\\
& +\alpha_{3}^{2}\alpha_{2} \{\partial^2_3f_2 + 2\partial_3\partial_2f_3 + 2f_3\partial_2f_3
+ 2f_3\partial_3f_2 + 2f_2\partial_3f_3\}\nonumber\\
& +\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}\alpha_{3}\{4f_3\partial_1f_2 + 4f_2\partial_1f_3 - 2f_3\partial_2f_1
- 2f_2\partial_3f_1 + 2\partial_3\partial_2f_1\},\nonumber\\
a_{12}&= \alpha_{1}^{3}\{\partial_{1}\partial_2f_1 - \partial_{1}^{2}f_{2} - f_{1}\partial_{2}f_{1}\nonumber\\
&
+ 2f_{1}\partial_{1}f_{2}\}
+ \alpha_{2}^{2}\alpha_{1}\{\partial^2_2f_2 + 2f_2\partial_2f_2 - f^{3}_{2}\}\nonumber\\
&+\alpha_{3}^{2}\alpha_{1} \{-\partial^2_3f_2f_{3} - 2f_3\partial_2f_3 + 2f_3\partial_3f_2 + 2f_2\partial_3f_3
+ 2\partial_3\partial_2f_3 \}\nonumber\\
& +\alpha_{1}^{2}\alpha_{3}\{2\partial_1\partial_2f_3 - 2\partial_1\partial_3f_2 + \partial_3\partial_2f_1
+ f_{2}\partial_3f_1 - 3f_3\partial_2f_1 + 4f_3\partial_1f_2\}\nonumber\\
& +\alpha_{1}^{2}\alpha_{2}\{\partial^2_2f_1 - 2f_{2}\partial_2f_1 + 4f_2\partial_1f_2\}
+\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}\alpha_{3}\{4f_2\partial_3f_2 + 2\partial_{2}^{2}f_3\},\nonumber
\end{align}
\begin{align}
a_{13}& = \alpha_{1}^{3}\{\partial_{1}\partial_3f_1 - \partial_{1}^{2}f_{3} - f_{1}\partial_{3}f_{1}
+ f_{1}\partial_{1}f_{3}\}\nonumber\\
&+ \alpha_{1}^{2}\alpha_{3}\{\partial^2_3f_1 + 3f_3\partial_1f_3 - f_3\partial_3f_1\}\nonumber\\
& + \alpha_{1}^{2}\alpha_{2}\{\partial_{2}\partial_3f_1 + 4f_2\partial_1f_3 - 2\partial_{2}\partial_1f_3
- 3f_{2}\partial_3f_1 + f_{3}\partial_2f_1\}\nonumber\\
& + \alpha_{2}^{2}\alpha_{1}\{2f_{3}\partial_2f_2 + 2f_2\partial_2f_3 + \partial_{2}\partial_{3}f_{2}\}\nonumber\\
&
+ \alpha_{3}^{2}\alpha_{1}\{\partial_3^{2}f_3 - f_{3}\partial_3f_3 - f^{3}_{3} + 2f_{3}\partial_3f_3\}\nonumber\\
& + \alpha_{1}^{2}\alpha_{3}\{4f_3\partial_2f_3 - 2f_{2}\partial_3f_3 - f_3\partial_3f_2 + 2\partial^{2}_{3}f_{2}
- f^{2}_{3}f_{2}\}.\nonumber
\end{align}
Since the Ricci tensor of any affine Szab\'o connection is cyclic parallel, it follows that $a_{11}=0$. Thus
the characteristic polynomial of the matrix associated to $S^{\nabla}(X)$ with respect to the basis
$\{\partial_{1},\partial_{2},\partial_{3}\}$ is equal to:
$$
P_{\lambda}(S^{\nabla}(X))=-\lambda^{3}.
$$
We have the following result.
\begin{theorem} \label{THeorDim3}
Let $M=\mathbb{R}^{3}$ and $\nabla$ be the torsion free affine connection, whose nonzero coefficients of the
connection are given by
\begin{equation*}
\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1} = f_{1} \partial_{1},\;\;\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{2} = f_{2} \partial_{1}\;\;\mbox{and}\;\;\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{3} = f_{3} \partial_{1}.
\end{equation*}
Then $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o if and only if the Ricci tensor of $(M,\nabla)$ is cyclic parallel.
\end{theorem}
From Theorem \ref{THeorDim3}, one can construct examples of affine Szab\'o connections.
\begin{example}{\rm
The following affine connections on $\mathbb{R}^3$ whose non-zero Christoffel symbols are given by:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1}=0, \quad \nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{2}=-x_3\partial_1,
\quad \nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{3}=x_2\partial_1$;
\item $\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1}=x_1\partial_1, \quad \nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{2}=2x_3\partial_1,
\quad \nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{3}=-2x_2\partial_1$;
\end{enumerate}
are affine Szab\'o.}
\end{example}
Note that the result in Theorem \ref{THeorDim3} remains the same if the affine connection $\nabla$ has non-zero components
$\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1}$, $\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{2}$ and $\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{3}$ in the same
direction of the element of the basis $\{\partial_{i}\}_{i=1.2.3}$.
The affine manifolds in Theorem \ref{THeorDim3} are also called $L_3$-spaces, and Therefore, are d'Atri spaces. We refer to
\cite{ks} for a further discussion of D'Atri spaces.
\subsection{Second Family of affine Szab\'o connection}
Let us consider the affine connection defined in (\ref{CoefCon2}), i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1}=f_{1}\partial_{2},\quad
\nabla_{\partial_{2}}\partial_{2}=f_{2}\partial_{3}\quad \mbox{and} \quad
\nabla_{\partial_{3}}\partial_{3}=f_{3}\partial_{1}
\end{equation*}
where the smooth functions $f_i=f_i(x_1,x_2,x_3)$, for $i=1,2,3$, are Christoffel symbols. Since the Ricci tensor of any affine Szab\'o connection is
cyclic parallel, it follows from the Proposition \ref{PropoNewfunc}, that the matrix associated to the affine Szab\'o operator
with respect to the basis $\{\partial_{1},\partial_{2},\partial_{3}\}$ is reduced to
\begin{eqnarray*}
(S^{\nabla})(X)=
\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
0&b_{12}&b_{13}\\
b_{21}&0&b_{23}\\
b_{31}&b_{32}&0
\end{array}
\right)
\end{eqnarray*}
with
\begin{align*}
b_{12}&= \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_3(-\partial_{1}\partial_{3}f_{1})
+\alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{2}(f_{2}\partial_{3}f_{1})
+ \alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{3}(f_{3}\partial_{1}f_{1} - \partial_{3}^{2}f_{1})\\
&+ \alpha^{2}_{2}\alpha_3(-2f_{2}f_{3}f_{1})
+\alpha_2\alpha^{2}_{3}(f_{1}\partial_{2}f_{3})
+\alpha^{3}_{3}(2f_{3}\partial_{3}f_{1}+f_{1}\partial_{3}f_{3});\\
b_{13}&= \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_2 (-2f_{1}\partial_{1}f_{2}-f_{2}\partial_{1}f_{1})
+\alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{2}(\partial_{1}^{2}f_{2}-f_{1}\partial_{2}f_{2})\\
&+\alpha_1\alpha_2\alpha_3(-2f_2\partial_{3}f_{1}) + \alpha^{3}_{2}(\partial_{2}\partial_{1}f_{2})
+\alpha_2\alpha^{2}_{3}(2f_{2}f_{3}f_{1});\\
b_{21}&= \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_3(2f_{3}f_{2}f_{1})
+\alpha_1\alpha_2\alpha_3(-2f_{3}\partial_{1}f_{2})
+\alpha^{2}_{2}\alpha_3(-2f_{2}\partial_{2}f_{3}-f_{3}\partial_{2}f_{2})\\
&+ \alpha_2\alpha^{2}_{3}(\partial_{2}^{2}f_{3}-f_2\partial_{3}f_{3})
+\alpha^{3}_{3}(\partial_{3}\partial_{2}f_{3});
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
b_{23}&= \alpha^{3}_{1}(2f_{1}\partial_{1}f_{2}+f_{2}\partial_{1}f_{1})
+\alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_2(-\partial_{1}^{2}f_{2}+f_{1}\partial_{2}f_{2})
+\alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_3(f_{2}\partial_{3}f_{1})\\
&+ \alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{2}(-\partial_{2}\partial_{1}f_{2})
+\alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{3}(-2f_{2}f_{3}f_{1})
+\alpha_2\alpha^{2}_{3}(f_{3}\partial_{1}f_{2});\\
b_{31}&= \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_2(-2f_{1}f_{2}f_{3})
+\alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_3(f_{1}\partial_{2}f_{3})
+\alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{2}(f_{3}\partial_{1}f_{2})\\
&+ \alpha^{3}_{2}(2f_{2}\partial_{2}f_{3}+f_{3}\partial_{2}f_{2})
+\alpha^{2}_{2}\alpha_3(-\partial_{2}^{2}f_{3}+f_{2}\partial_{3}f_{3})
+\alpha_2\alpha^{2}_{3}(-\partial_{3}\partial_{2}f_{3});\\
b_{32}&= \alpha^{3}_{1}(\partial_{1}\partial_{3}f_{1})
+\alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_3(-f_{3}\partial_{1}f_{1}+\partial_{3}^{2}f_{1})
+\alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{2}(2f_{1}f_{3}f_{2})\\
&+ \alpha_1\alpha_2\alpha_3(-2f_1\partial_{2}f_{3})
+\alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{3}(-2f_{3}\partial_{3}f_{1}-f_{1}\partial_{3}f_{3}).
\end{align*}
The characteristic polynomial of the affine Szab\'o operator is now seen to be:
\begin{eqnarray*}
P[S^{\nabla}(X)] (\lambda) =- \lambda^{3}
+(b_{12}b_{21} +b_{23}b_{32} + b_{13}b_{31})\lambda
+(b_{12}b_{23}b_{31} + b_{13}b_{21}b_{32}).
\end{eqnarray*}
It follows that the affine connection given by (\ref{CoefCon2}) is affine Szab\'o if and only if:
\begin{eqnarray*}
b_{12}b_{21} +b_{23}b_{32} + b_{13}b_{31} =0 \quad \mbox{and}\quad b_{12}b_{23}b_{31} + b_{13}b_{21}b_{32}=0.
\end{eqnarray*}
A straightforward calculation shows that: $b_{12}b_{23}b_{31} + b_{13}b_{21}b_{32}=0$. Then
$S^{\nabla}(X)$ has eigenvalue zero if and only if:
\begin{equation}\label{EquationCond}
b_{12}b_{21} +b_{23}b_{32} + b_{13}b_{31} =0.
\end{equation}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Assume $f_1 =0$. Then, the relation (\ref{EquationCond}) reduces to:
\begin{eqnarray*}
b_{13}b_{31} =0.
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\partial_1 f_2 =0$, then $f_2 = u(x_2)$ and $f_3= v(x_2)+ t(x_3)$.
\item If $\partial_1 f_2 \neq 0$, then $f_3 = 0$.
\end{enumerate}
\item Assume $f_2=0$, then we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
b_{12}b_{21} =0.
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\partial_2 f_3 =0$, then $f_3 = t(x_3)$ and $f_1= f(x_1)+g(x_3)$.
\item If $\partial_2 f_3 \neq 0$, then $f_1 = 0$.
\end{enumerate}
\item Assume $f_3=0$, then we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
b_{23}b_{32} =0.
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\partial_3 f_1 =0$, then $f_1 = f(x_1)$ and $f_2= h(x_1)+k(x_2)$.
\item If $\partial_3 f_1 \neq 0$, then $f_2 = 0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
We have the following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{THeor2Dim3}
Let $M=\mathbb{R}^{3}$ and $\nabla$ be the torsion free affine connection, whose non-zero coefficients of the
connection are given by
\begin{equation*}
\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1} = f_{1}\partial_{2},\;\;\nabla_{\partial_{2}}\partial_{2} = f_{2}\partial_{3}\;\;\mbox{and}\;\;\nabla_{\partial_{3}}\partial_{3} = f_{3}\partial_{1}.
\end{equation*}
Then $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o if at least one of the following conditions holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $f_1 =0$, $f_2=u(x_2)$ and $f_3 = v(x_2) + t(x_3)$.
\item $f_2 =0$, $f_3=t(x_3)$ and $f_1 = f(x_1) + g(x_3)$.
\item $f_3 =0$, $f_1=f(x_1)$ and $f_2 = h(x_1) + u(x_2)$.
\end{enumerate}
Or at least one of the following conditons holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $f_1 =0$, $f_2 = f(x_1) + g(x_2)$ and $f_3 = 0$.
\item $f_2 =0$, $f_3=v(x_2) + t(x_3)$ and $f_1 = 0$.
\item $f_3 =0$, $f_1=f(x_1) + g(x_3)$ and $f_2 = 0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
From Theorem \ref{THeor2Dim3}, one can construct examples of affine Szab\'o connections. As an example, we have the following.
\begin{example}{\rm
The following connections on $\mathbb{R}^3$ whose non-zero Christoffel symbols are given by:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1}=0, \quad \nabla_{\partial_{2}}\partial_{2}=x_2\partial_3,
\quad \nabla_{\partial_{3}}\partial_{3}=(x_2+x^{2}_{3})\partial_1$;
\item $\nabla_{\partial_{1}}\partial_{1}=x^{2}_{1}\partial_2, \quad \nabla_{\partial_{2}}\partial_{2}=(x_1+x_2)\partial_3,
\quad \nabla_{\partial_{3}}\partial_{3}=0$;
\end{enumerate}
are affine Szab\'o.}
\end{example}
\begin{remark}{\rm
The affine connection defined in Example \ref{ExamplImport} has a Ricci tensor which is cyclic parallel but it is not affine Szab\'o. This means that the manifold defined in Example \ref{ExamplImport} is an $L_{3}$-space but not an affine Szab\'o manifold.}
\end{remark}
One has also the following observation.
\begin{theorem}
Let $(M_1,\nabla_1)$ be an affine Szab\'o at $p_1 \in M_1$ and $(M_2,\nabla_2)$ be an affine Szab\'o at $p_2 \in M_2$.
Then the product manifold $(M,\nabla):=(M_1\times M_2, \nabla \oplus \nabla_2)$ is affine Szab\'o at $p=(p_1,p_2)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $X=(X_1,X_2)\in T_{(p_1,p_2)} (M_1\times M_2)$ with $X_1\in T_{p_1} M_1$ and $X_2\in T_{p_2} M_2$. Then we have
$
S^{\nabla}(X) = S^{\nabla_1}(X_1)\oplus S^{\nabla_2}(X_2).
$
So
$
Spect\{S^{\nabla}(X)\} = Spect\{S^{\nabla_1}(X_1)\} \cup Spect\{S^{\nabla_2}(X_2)\} = \{0\}\cup \{0\} = \{0\}.
$
\end{proof}
Affine Szab\'o connections are of interest not only in affine geometry, but also in the study of Pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o metrics
since they provide some examples without Riemannian analogue by means of the Riemannian extensions.
\section{Riemannian extension construction}
Let $\nabla$ be a torsion free affine connection on an $n$-dimensional affine manifold $M$ and
$T^*M$ be the cotangent bundle of $(M,\nabla)$. In the locally induced coordinates $(u_i,u_{i'})$ on
$\pi^{-1}(U)\subset T^* M$, the \textit{Riemannian extension} $g_{\nabla}$ is the
pseudo-Riemannian metric on $T^*M$ of neutral signature $(n,n)$ defined by
\begin{eqnarray}
g_{\nabla}=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-2u_{k'}\Gamma^{k}_{ij}&\delta^{j}_{i}\\
\delta^{j}_{i}&0
\end{array}
\right),
\end{eqnarray}
with respect to $\partial_1,\cdots,\partial_n,\partial_{1'},\cdots,\partial_{n'} (i,j,k=1,\cdots,n;k'=k+n)$, where $\Gamma^{k}_{ij}$ are the Christoffel symbols of the torsion free affine connection $\nabla$ with respect to $(U,u_i)$.
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be an $3$-dimensional affine manifold. Let $(x_1,x_2,x_3)$ be local coordinates on $M$. We expand
$\nabla_{\partial_i} \partial_j = \sum_k \Gamma_{ij}^{k}\partial_k$ for $i,j,k=1,2,3$ to define the Christoffel symbols $\Gamma_{ij}^{k}$of
$\nabla$. If $\omega \in T^* M$, we expand $\omega=x_4dx_i + x_5dx_2 + x_6dx_3$ to define the dual fiber coordinates
$(x_4,x_5,x_6)$ thereby obtain canonical local coordinates $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5,x_6)$ on $T^* M$. The Riemannian
extension in the metric of neutral signature $(3,3)$ on the cotangent bundle $T^* M$ given localy by
\begin{eqnarray*}
g_{\nabla}(\partial_1,\partial_4)&=& g_{\nabla}(\partial_2,\partial_5)=g_{\nabla}(\partial_3,\partial_6)=1,\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_1,\partial_1)&=& -2x_4\Gamma_{11}^{1}-2x_5\Gamma_{11}^{2}-2x_6\Gamma_{11}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_1,\partial_2)&=& -2x_4\Gamma_{12}^{1}-2x_5\Gamma_{12}^{2}-2x_6\Gamma_{12}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_1,\partial_3)&=& -2x_4\Gamma_{13}^{1}-2x_5\Gamma_{13}^{2}-2x_6\Gamma_{13}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_2,\partial_2)&=& -2x_4\Gamma_{22}^{1}-2x_5\Gamma_{22}^{2}-2x_6\Gamma_{22}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_2,\partial_3)&=& -2x_4\Gamma_{23}^{1}-2x_5\Gamma_{23}^{2}-2x_6\Gamma_{23}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_3,\partial_3)&=& -2x_4\Gamma_{33}^{1}-2x_5\Gamma_{33}^{2}-2x_6\Gamma_{33}^{3}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{lemma}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be an $n$-dimensional affine manifold and $(T^* M, g_{\nabla})$ be the cotangent bundle with
the twisted Riemannian extension. Then, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
Spect\{\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})\} = Spect\{\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)\}
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Gamma_{ij}^{k}$ be the Christoffel symbols of $\nabla$. The non-zero Christoffel symbols $\tilde{\Gamma}_{\alpha \beta}^{\gamma}$ of the Levi-Civita connection of
$g_{\nabla}$ are given by:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tilde{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij} &=& \Gamma^{k}_{ij}, \quad \tilde{\Gamma}^{k'}_{i'j} = -\Gamma^{i}_{jk}\quad
\tilde{\Gamma}^{k'}_{ij'} = -\Gamma^{j}_{ik},\\
\tilde{\Gamma}^{k'}_{ij} &=& \sum_r x_{r'}\Big(\partial_k \Gamma^{r}_{ij} - \partial_i \Gamma^{r}_{jk}
-\partial_j \Gamma^{r}_{ik} + 2 \sum_l \Gamma^{r}_{kl}\Gamma^{l}_{ij}\Big);
\end{eqnarray*}
where $(i,j,k,l,r=1,\cdots,n)$ and $(i'=i+n,j'=j+n,k'=k+n,r'=r+n)$. The non-zero components of the curvature tensor of
$(T^*M,g_{\nabla})$ up to the usual symmetries are given as follows: we omit $\tilde{R}_{kji}^{h'}$, as it plays no role
in our considerations.
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tilde{R}_{kji}^{h}&=& R_{kji}^{h}, \quad \tilde{R}_{kji}^{h'}, \quad \tilde{R}_{kji'}^{h'}=-R_{kjh}^{i},\\
\tilde{R}_{k'ji}^{h'} &=& R_{hij}^{k};
\end{eqnarray*}
where $R_{kji}^{h}$ are the components of the curavture tensor of $(M,\nabla)$.
Let $\tilde{X}=\alpha_i \partial_i + \alpha_{i'}\partial_{i'}$ and $\tilde{Y}=\beta_i \partial_i + \beta_{i'}\partial_{i'}$
be vectors fields on $T^* M$. Let $X=\alpha_i \partial_i$ and $Y=\beta_i\partial_i$ be the correspoding vectors
fields on $M$. Let $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ be the matrix of the affine Szab\'o operator on $M$ relative
to the basis $\{\partial_i\}$. Then the matrix of the Szab\'o operator $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})$ with
respect to the basis $\{\partial_i,\partial_{i'}\}$ have the form
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X}) = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)&0\\
*& {}^t\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
We have the following results.
\begin{theorem}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a smooth torsion-free affine manifold. Then the following statements are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o.
\item[(ii)] The Riemannian extension $(T^*M,g_{\nabla})$ of $(M,\nabla)$ is a pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifold.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\tilde{X}=\alpha_i \partial_i + \alpha_{i'}\partial_{i'}$ be a vector field on $T^* M$.
Then the matrix of the Szab\'o operator $\tilde{S}(\tilde{X})$ with respect to the basis $\{\partial_i,\partial_{i'}\}$ is of the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{SzaboMatrix}
\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X}) = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)&0\\
*& {}^t\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ is the matrix of the affine Szab\'o operator on $M$ relative
to the basis $\{\partial_i\}$. Note that the characteristic polynomial $P_{\lambda}[\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})]$ of $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})$
and $P_{\lambda}[\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]$ of $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ are related by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{CharacteristicPolynomial}
P_{\lambda}[\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})]=P_{\lambda}[\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]\cdot P_{\lambda}[{}^t\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)].
\end{eqnarray}
Now, if the affine manifold $(M,\nabla)$ is assumed to be affine Szab\'o, then $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ has zero eigenvalues for each
vector field $X$ on $M$. Therefore, it follows from (\ref{SzaboMatrix}) that the eigenvalues of $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})$ vanish
for every vector field $\tilde{X}$ on $T^* M$. Thus $(T^*M, g_{\nabla})$ is pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifold.\\
Conversely, assume that $(T^*M, g_{\nabla})$ is an pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifold. If $X=\alpha_i \partial_i$ with $\alpha_{i}\neq 0$, for any $i$, is a vector field on $M$, then $\tilde{X}=\alpha_i \partial_i + \frac{1}{2\alpha_i}\partial_{i'}$ is an unit vector field at every point of
the zero section on $T^* M$. Then from (\ref{SzaboMatrix}), we see that, the characteristic polynomial
$P_{\lambda}[\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})]$ of $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})$ is the square of the characteristic polynomial
$P_{\lambda}[\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]$ of $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$. Since for every unit vector field $\tilde{X}$ on $T^* M$ the
characteristic polynomial $P_{\lambda}[\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})]$ sould be the same, it follows that for every vector field
$X$ on $M$ the characteristic polynomial $P_{\lambda}[\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]$ is the same. Hence $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o.
\end{proof}
As an example, we have the following. The Riemannian extension of the affine Szab\'o connection on $\mathbb{R}^3$
defined by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_1 =x_1\partial_1, \quad
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_2 =2x_3\partial_1,\quad
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_3 =-2x_2\partial_1
\end{eqnarray*}
is the pseudo-Riemannian metric of signature $(3,3)$ given by
\begin{align}
g_{\nabla} &= 2dx_1\otimes dx_4 +2dx_2\otimes dx_5 +2dx_3\otimes dx_6 \nonumber\\
& -2x_1x_4 dx_1\otimes dx_1 -4x_3x_4dx_1\otimes dx_2 +4x_2x_4dx_1\otimes dx_3.\nonumber
\end{align}
After, a straightforward calculation, it easy to see that this metric is Szab\'o.
The Riemannian extensions provide a link between affine and pseudo-Riemannian geometries. Some properties
of the affine connection $\nabla$ can be investigated by means of the corresponding properties of the
Riemannian extension $g_{\nabla}$. For more details and information about Riemannian extensions,
see \cite{broz,calvino2,GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo,gar} and references therein. For instance, it is known, in \cite{broz, calvino2} and references therein, that a Walker metric is a triple $(M,g,\mathcal{D})$, where $M$ is an $n$-dimensional manifold, $g$ is a pseudo-Riemannian metric on $M$ and $\mathcal{D}$ is an $r$-dimensional parallel null distribution ($r>0$). In \cite{calvino2}, the authors showed that any four-dimensional Riemannian extension is necessarily a self-dual Walker manifold, but for some particular cases, they proved that the converse holds.
|
\section{Introduction}
A family $(M_t)_{t\in (0,T)}$ of hypersurfaces of $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$ is said to move by mean curvature flow if there is a map $X\colon M\times (0,T)\to \mathbb{R}^{n+1}$ such that $X(\cdot,t)$ is an immersion for all $t\in (0,T)$ with $X(M,t)=M_t$ and $X$ solves
\[
\frac{d}{dt}X(p,t)= -H(p,t)\, \nu(p,t),
\]
where $M$ is a $n$-dimensional manifold, $H(\cdot,t)$ is the mean curvature of $M_t$ and $\nu(\cdot,t)$ its normal, such that $-H\nu$ is the mean curvature vector.
If $M_t=\graph u(\cdot,t)$ for a family of functions $u(\cdot,t)\colon \Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^n \to \mathbb{R}$, then $M_t$ moves by mean curvature flow if and only if $u$ solves the graphical mean curvature flow equation, which is the parabolic partial differential equation
\begin{equation} \label{eq GMCF} \tag{GMCF}
\frac{d}{dt}u = \sqrt{1+|Du|^2}\,\divergence\left(\frac{Du}{\sqrt{1+|Du|^2}}\right).
\end{equation}
Graphical mean curvature flow was studied in \cite{E+H} by Ecker and Huisken. They proved long-time existence for the mean curvature flow of entire graphs and showed that the solution stays graphical for all time.
More recently, S\'{a}ez Trumper and Schn\"urer proved in \cite{MCF without Singularities} a long-time existence result for complete graphs. Starting from an open set $\Omega_0$ and a proper function $u_0\colon \Omega\to \mathbb{R}_+$, they showed the existence of a solution $u$ to graphical mean curvature flow with initial data $u_0$, where $u(\cdot,t)$ is defined on an open set $\Omega_t$ for $t\geq 0$. This solution will not develop singularities on a finite level but it can disappear to infinity forming a singularity at infinity-level. It was observed that the sets $\partial \Omega_t$ can be interpreted as a weak solution to mean curvature flow, starting from $\partial \Omega_0$, and that it coincides almost everywhere with the level-set flow as long as the latter does not fatten (Fig.\,\ref{GraphBall}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\setlength{\unitlength}{1cm}
\begin{picture}(10,5)
\put(2,0){\includegraphics[height=5cm]{GraphOverBall.pdf}}
\put(5.5,4){graph}
\put(5.6,0.4){shadow}
\end{picture}
\caption{A rotationally symmetric ``shadowflow'' where we consider a graph over a ball. The graph moves by mean curvature flow and the shadow evolves by mean curvature flow too, but in a weak sense. In this setting the graph will disappear to infinity in finite time, while the shadow develops a point singularity. Generally, any singularity occuring on the shadow-level will happen at infinity on the graph-level.}
\label{GraphBall}
\end{figure}
In \cite{Q_k} and \cite{K^alpha} existence results analogous to that of S\'{a}ez and Schn\"urer are proven for some fully nonlinear flows of non-compact convex surfaces.
In this article we consider graphical mean curvature flow with a Dirichlet boundary condition.
The existence result of this article reads as follows.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm existence}
Let $\Omega\subset \mathbb{R}^n$ be open, smooth, and mean convex, that is, its boundary $\partial \Omega\in C^\infty$ has nonnegative mean curvature $H[\partial \Omega]\geq 0$.
Let $u_0\colon \ol{\Omega} \to [-\infty,\infty]$ be continuous and assume $u_0$ is locally Lipschitz in the set $\{x\in \ol{\Omega}\colon |u_0(x)|<\infty\}$ and $u_0|_{\partial \Omega}$ is of class $C^2$ in $\{x\in \partial\Omega \colon |u_0(x)|<\infty\}$.
Then there is a continuous function $u\colon \ol{\Omega}\times [0,\infty) \to [-\infty,\infty]$ which is smooth on $\big(\Omega\times (0,\infty)\big)\cap\{|u|<\infty\}$ and solves
\[
\begin{cases}
\dot{u}= \sqrt{1+|Du|^2}\, \divergence\left(\frac{Du}{\sqrt{1+|Du|^2}}\right)
& \text{in } \big(\Omega\times (0,\infty)\big)\cap\{|u|<\infty\},\\
u(x,t)= u_0(x)
& \text{for } (x,t)\in \mathcal{P}(\Omega\times (0,\infty)),
\end{cases}
\]
where $\mathcal{P}(\Omega\times (0,\infty)):= (\Omega\times \{0\})\cup (\partial \Omega\times [0,\infty))$.
\end{theorem}
The condition of nonnegative mean curvature for the boundary $\partial \Omega$ is necessary to expect longtime existence for the graphical mean curvature flow when considering the Dirichlet problem for general boundary data. Otherwise, the gradient of $u$ may become unbounded in finite time and the flowing surface may cease to be graphical.
Note that for $\Omega= \mathbb{R}^n$ Theorem \ref{thm existence} is a generalization of the result in \cite{MCF without Singularities} because we do not need the assumptions $u_0$ proper and $u_0\geq 0$.
The proof of Theorem \ref{thm existence} is the subject of Section \ref{sec existence}. It involves an approximation of the problem by bounded auxiliary problems and uses an Arzel\`{a}-Ascoli-argument and a priori estimates to pass to a limit.
In Section \ref{sec shadow-flow}, we define the ``shadow'' at time $t$ to be the set $$\{x\in \mathbb{R}^n \colon |u(x,t)|<\infty\},$$ and interpret this as a weak solution to mean curvature flow of hypersurfaces in $\Omega$ with Dirichlet boundary condition on $\partial \Omega$ using the notion of avoidance principle as defined in Section \ref{sec shadow-flow}. Roughly, the definition of weak solution implies that any classical solution starting inside the shadow stays inside and any classical solution starting outside stays outside.
An intersection of two smooth open sets is in general not smooth at the intersection of the boundaries.
In Section \ref{sec smoothing} we provide a lemma to locally mollify intersections of smooth open sets at the intersections of their boundaries while preserving certain curvature conditions.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm smoothing}
Let $A,B\subset \mathbb{R}^n$ be open, $\partial A,\partial B \in C^\infty$ and suppose $A\cap B\neq \emptyset$ is bounded.
Then for any ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is an open set $\Omega$ with $\partial \Omega \in C^\infty$ such that
\[
(A\cap B)\setminus(\partial A\cap \partial B)_{\varepsilon} \subset \Omega \subset A\cap B,
\]
where $(\partial A\cap \partial B)_{\varepsilon}:= \{x\in \mathbb{R}^n\colon \dist(x,\partial A \cap \partial B)<{\varepsilon}\}$.
Moreover, if the principal curvatures at every point of $\partial A$ and $\partial B$ lie in a symmetric, open or closed, convex cone $\Gamma\subset \mathbb{R}^{n-1}$ which contains the positive cone $\Gamma_+\subset \Gamma$, then $\Omega$ can be chosen such that the principal curvatures at any point of $\partial \Omega$ lie in $\Gamma$, too. Here symmetric means invariant when interchanging $\kappa_i\leftrightarrow \kappa_j$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{example}
Choosing $\Gamma= \{ (\kappa_1,\ldots,\kappa_{n-1})\colon \kappa_i\geq 0 \text{ for all }i\}$ corresponds to convex subsets.
Choosing $\Gamma= \{ (\kappa_1,\ldots,\kappa_{n-1})\colon \sum \kappa_i\geq 0\}$ corresponds to mean-convex domains. This is what we use in Section \ref{sec existence}.
\end{example}
The problem of mollifying inside convex curvature cones was an open problem from the problem section of the conference {\it Geometric evolution equations} which took place in Konstanz in 2011.
The proof uses distance functions to the boundaries and a mollified version of the minimum of these.
It can be read independently of the other sections and is applied most noteably in Section \ref{sec existence} in the approximation process.
The author expects that this result is of great use and will be widely applicable.
This article emerged from the author's master thesis and is meant to gather the main results. The author wishes to thank Oliver Schn\"urer for supervising the thesis and for his great support. The author also likes to thank Ben Lambert for helpful advice.
\section{Existence} \label{sec existence}
We prove the existence result Theorem \ref{thm existence} by approximating by auxiliary problems and using a priori estimates.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm existence}]
We cut off the initial function $u_0$ in height by considering
\[ \ol{u}_{0,R}:= \widetilde{\max}\left(\widetilde{\min}(u_0,R),-R\right)\]
for $R>0$, where $\widetilde{\max}$ and $\widetilde{\min}$ are mollified versions of $\max$ and $\min$ respectively (defined analogously to \eqref{eq def of mollified min} setting $\delta=1/2$ there).
Next, we cut off the domain of definition $\Omega$ by intersecting with a ball $B_{2R}\equiv B_{2R}(0)$ and using Theorem \ref{thm smoothing}. This gives smooth open sets $\Omega\cap B_R \subset \Omega_R \subset \Omega\cap B_{2R}$ whose boundaries have nonnegative mean curvature $H[\partial \Omega_R]\geq 0$.
Finally, we restrict the functions $\ol{u}_{0,R}$ to $\Omega_R$ and take a mollification to find smooth functions $u_{0,R}$ defined on $\Omega_R$ satisfying $\|u_{0,R}-\ol{u}_{0,R}\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_R)}<R^{-1}$ and $\|u_{0,R}-\ol{u}_{0,R}\|_{C^2(\partial \Omega\cap B_R)}< R^{-1}$.
Now define $u_R$ as the solution of the auxiliary problem
\[
\begin{cases}
\dot{u}_R= \sqrt{1+|Du_R|^2}\, \divergence\left(\frac{Du_R}{\sqrt{1+|Du_R|^2}}\right)
& \text{in } \Omega_R\times (0,\infty),\\
u_R(x,t)= u_{0,R}(x)
& \text{for } (x,t)\in \mathcal{P}(\Omega_R\times (0,\infty)).
\end{cases}
\]
By \cite[Theorem 2.1]{Hui}, $u_R$ is well-defined and satisfies
\begin{align*}
& u_R\in C^{0}(\ol{\Omega_R}\times [0,\infty))\cap C^\infty(\Omega_R \times (0,\infty))\\
\text{and} \hspace{1cm} & Du_R\in C^0(\ol{\Omega_R}\times [0,\infty)).
\end{align*}
(By de Giorgi-Nash-Moser-estimates the spatial derivative $Du_R$ is even H\"older-continuous for some exponent.)
To be able to utilize the Arzel\`{a}-Ascoli-Theorem and to pass to a limit and obtain a solution of the initial problem, we are going to need local a priori estimates.
These estimates will be local in space, time, and height: Due to the unboundedness in height we can only expect estimates at points $(x,t)$ depending on $|u_R(x,t)|$.
Since by Lemma \ref{lem gradient bounds} and Lemma \ref{lem sup bound} we have local gradient bounds at the boundary, local gradient estimates easily follow from the results of Section 2 in \cite{E+H}.
Using spheres as barriers we obtain H\"older-estimates in time with exponent $1/2$ (cf. Section 6 of \cite{MCF without Singularities}). This is sufficient to apply an Arzel\`{a}-Ascoli argument.
To use Arzel\`{a}-Ascoli for unbounded functions, simply compose with a homeomorphism $\Phi\colon [-\infty,\infty]\to [-1,1]$ which is smooth on $(-\infty,\infty)$. Then the gradient and H\"older-in-time estimates give locally uniform estimates for $\Phi\circ u_R$ where $\Phi\circ u_R\in (-1+{\varepsilon},1-{\varepsilon})$, which is sufficient: Locally in space-time there is for any ${\varepsilon}>0$ a $\delta>0$ such that for almost all $R\in \mathbb{N}$ we have
\[
|(x,t)-(y,s)|<\delta \Rightarrow |\Phi\circ u_R(x,t)-\Phi\circ u_R(y,s)|<{\varepsilon}.
\]
By Arzel\`{a}-Ascoli a subsequence of $(\Phi \circ u_R)_{R\in \mathbb{N}}$ converges locally uniformly to a continuous function on $\ol{\Omega}\times [0,\infty)$ as $R\to \infty$. This correspondes to pointwise convergence of a subsequence of $(u_R)$ to a continuous function $u\colon \ol{\Omega}\times [0,\infty) \to [-\infty,\infty]$ and locally uniform convergence on $\ol{\Omega}\times [0,\infty) \cap \{|u|<\infty\}$.
Then, using the interior estimates for higher derivatives in \cite{E+H}, one has locally smooth convergence on $\Omega\times (0,\infty) \cap \{|u|<\infty\}$ and we see that $u$ solves the same differential equation there as the $u_R$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
Now we are going to establish the a priori estimates. Most importantly we need
\begin{lemma}[local gradient estimates at the boundary] \label{lem gradient bounds}
Let $\Omega$ be as in the statement of Theorem \ref{thm existence}, $x_0\in \partial \Omega$, $r,T>0$, $B_r := B_r(x_0)\cap \Omega$ and $\Gamma_r:= \partial \Omega\cap B_r(x_0)$.
Let $u\in C^{2;1}(B_{2r}\times (0,T))\cap C^0(\ol{B_{2r}}\times [0,T])$ be a solution of
\[
\begin{cases}
\dot{u}= \sqrt{1+|Du|^2}\,\divergence\left( \frac{Du}{\sqrt{1+|Du|^2}} \right) & \mbox{in } B_{2r}\times (0,T),\\
u(x,0)= u_0(x)& \mbox{for } x\in B_{2r},\\
u(x,t)= {\varphi}(x) & \mbox{for } x\in \Gamma_{2r},\, t>0.
\end{cases}
\]
For the initial- and boundary data assume $u_0\in \operatorname{Lip}(\ol{B_{2r}})$ and ${\varphi}\in C^2(\ol{B_{2r}})$. Assume $Du\in C^0(\ol{B_{2r}}\times [0,T])$.
Then on $\Gamma_r\times [0,T]$ we have
\[
|Du|\leq C\left(n,\|u\|_{L^\infty(B_{2r}\times (0,T))}, \|u_0\|_{\operatorname{Lip}(B_{2r})}, \|{\varphi}\|_{C^2(\ol{B_{2r}})},
r, \Gamma_{3r}\right).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
A nonlocal version of this result can be found, for example, in \cite[Chapter 1.4]{Giusti}. There, one uses the barriers
\[
w^{\pm}:= {\varphi} \pm \delta \log(1+\sigma d),
\]
where $d$ is the signed distance function to $\partial \Omega$ and the constants are chosen like $\delta \ll 1 \ll \sigma(\delta)$. This barrier works on an ${\varepsilon}$-neighbourhood of $\partial \Omega$, where ${\varepsilon}$ is chosen as $\sigma^{-1/2}$ and so small, that we are in a tubular neighbourhood.
Because of $w^{\pm}={\varphi}$ on the boundary we find the desired gradient bound on the boundary by the comparison principle for Dirichlet boundary conditions.
To obtain a local version simply add $\pm (\|u\|_{L^\infty}+\|{\varphi}\|_{L^\infty})\cdot \eta$ to the barriers, where $\eta\in C^\infty (\ol{B_{2r}})$ satisfies $0\leq \eta \leq 1$, $\eta\equiv 0$ on $B_r$ and $\eta\equiv 1$ on $B_{2r}\setminus B_{3r/2}$. The proof then works as in the nonlocal case but the choice of $\delta$ and $\sigma$ depends additionally on $r$ because the bounds on derivatives of $\eta$ depend on $r$.
\end{proof}
To apply Lemma \ref{lem gradient bounds} we need local $L^\infty$-estimates on $u$. For this purpose we have the following
\begin{lemma}[$L^\infty$-estimates near the boundary]\label{lem sup bound}
Let $\Omega$ be as before, $R,T>0$ and $x_0$, $B_R$ and $\Gamma_R$ defined as in Lemma \ref{lem gradient bounds}.
Let $u\in C^{2;1}(B_R\times (0,T))\cap C^0(\ol{B_R}\times [0,T])$ be a solution of \eqref{eq GMCF} on $B_R\times (0,T)$.
Then there exists $r>0$ dependent on $B_R,\Gamma_R$ and $T$, such that
\[
\sup_{B_r\times (0,T)} |u| \leq C,
\]
where $C>0$ depends on the same quantities as $r$ and additionally depends on $\sup_{(B_R\times \{0\})\cup (\Gamma_R \times (0,T))}|u|$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality we may assume $x_0=0$ and that the inner normal to $\partial \Omega$ at $x_0$ is $e_n=(0,\ldots,0,1)$.
We are going to write the boundary locally as a graph:
There is an open ball $B$ in $\mathbb{R}^{n-1}$ with center at the origin and $s>0$, such that
\[
B_R\cap (B\times (-s,s))= \{(\hat{x},x^n)\in B\times (-s,s)\colon h(\hat{x})<x^n\}
\]
and $\Gamma_R\cap (B\times (-s,s)) = \graph h$ for some function $h\in C^\infty(\ol{B})$.
Because of $H[\partial \Omega]\geq 0$, $h$ satisfies the differential inequality
\[
\divergence \left( \frac{Dh}{\sqrt{1+|Dh|^2}} \right) \geq 0.
\]
Take $0\leq \eta \in C^\infty_0(B)$, $\eta\neq 0$, such that $v_0:= h+\eta$ fulfils $|v_0|<s$.
Finally, define $v\in C^\infty(B\times (-1,T+1))\cap C^0(\ol{B}\times [-1,T+1])$ to be the solution of
\[
\begin{cases}
\dot{v}=\sqrt{1+|Dv|^2}\divergence \left(\frac{Dv}{\sqrt{1+|Dv|^2}}\right)
& \mbox{in } B \times (-1,T+1),\\
v(\hat{x},t)=v_0(\hat{x})& \mbox{for } (\hat{x},t)\in \mathcal{P}(B\times (-1,T+1)).
\end{cases}
\]
This way we have $v\in C^\infty(\ol{B}\times [0,T])$. By the maximum principle we also have $|v|<s$, and by the strong maximum principle $h(\hat{x})<v(\hat{x},t)$ holds for all $x\in B$ and $t>-1$.
Define $Q$ by
\[
Q:= \{(\hat{x},x^n,t)\in B\times (-s,s)\times (0,T)\colon h(\hat{x})<x^n<v(\hat{x},t)\},
\]
and choose $r>0$ from our assertion such that $B_r\times (0,T)\subset Q$ and $B_r\times (0,T)$ has positive distance to $\graph v$.
Now we construct a barrier on $Q$ with the aid of the function $v$. On $Q$ define
\[ w(x,t):= \left(v(\hat{x},t)-x^n\right)^{-1}\equiv \left(v(x,t)-x^n\right)^{-1}, \]
setting $v(x,t)\equiv v(\hat{x},t)$ for $(x,t)\in Q$.
One easily verifies that the level-sets of $w$ move by mean curvature, so that $w$ solves
\[
\dot{w}-\left(\delta^{ij}-\frac{w^i w^j}{|Dw|^2}\right) w_{ij} = 0.
\]
Using this fact we calculate
\begin{align*}
&\dot{w}-\sqrt{1+|Dw|^2}\,\divergence\left(\frac{Dw}{\sqrt{1+|Dw|^2}}\right)= \dot{w}-\left(\delta^{ij}-\frac{w^i w^j}{1+|Dw|^2}\right)w_{ij}\\
&\hspace{2em} = -\frac{w^i w^j}{|Dw|^2\left(1+|Dw|^2\right)}w_{ij}
\\
& \hspace{2em} = \frac{1}{1+|Dw|^2}
\left(\frac{v_{ij}w^i w^j}{(v-x^n)^2|Dw|^2}
-2|Dw|^2(v-x^n)\right)
\\
&\hspace{2em} \geq
-\frac{\|D^2v\|_{L^\infty(Q)}}{|Dw|^2(v-x^n)^2}-2(v-x^n)
\geq
-4s^2\|D^2v\|_{L^\infty(Q)}-4s
\\
& \hspace{2em} \geq -c
\end{align*}
where $c>0$ is a constant that ultimately only depends on $B_R, \Gamma_R$ and $T$ through the above construction.
Finally,
\[
w^{\pm} := \pm \left(w+ct+\sup_{(B_R\times \{0\})\cup(\Gamma_R\times (0,T))} |u|\right)
\]
are upper and lower barriers for $u$ on $Q$ respectively. Observe
\[w(y,t) \to \infty \mbox{ for } y\to x\in \mathcal{P} (Q)\setminus \left[ \big(B_R \times \{0\})\cup (\Gamma_R \times(0,T)\big)\right].\]
Now, on $B_r\times [0,T]$, $w^{\pm}$ and therefore $|u|$ are bounded by a constant as in the assertion.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
It is worth pointing out the solution is not unique in general:
Consider two so called \emph{grim reaper curves} lying next to each other, i.\,e.\ the graph of the function
\[
u_0(x):= -\log |\sin x| \hspace{0.6cm} \text{for } 0\neq x\in (-\pi,\pi).
\]
We can write down a translating solution to \eqref{eq GMCF} with initial data $u_0$:
\[
\hat{u}(x,t):= t-\log |\sin x| \hspace{0.6cm} \text{for } 0\neq x\in (-\pi,\pi),\; t\in \mathbb{R}.
\]
But the solution $u$ we have constructed in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm existence} differs from this translating solution $\hat{u}$: The two grim reapers get connected at infinity.
This is because we cut off the function $u_0$ at some height $R$ in the approximation process. To see that the approximating solutions $u_R$ do not converge to $\hat{u}$ we may consider the integral of the difference:
\[
\frac{d}{dt} \int\limits_{-\pi}^{\pi} \hat{u}(\cdot,t)-u_R(\cdot,t)
= \int\limits_{\graph \hat{u}(\cdot,t)} \hat{K} \hspace{0.3cm}- \int\limits_{\graph u_R(\cdot,t)} K_R \,
\geq 2\pi - \pi = \pi,
\]
where $\hat{K}, K_R$ are the respective curvatures. By the maximum principle the convergence $u_R \to u$ is monotone and thus $\int u_R(\cdot,t)\to \int u(\cdot,t)$ as $R \uparrow \infty$.
We conclude $\int (\hat{u}-u)(\cdot,t) \geq \pi t$ and therefore $u\neq \hat{u}$.
\end{remark}
\section{The Shadow-flow} \label{sec shadow-flow}
In this section we are going to investigate the projections/shadows of graphical mean curvature flow, that is the sets $\{|u|<\infty\}$ where $u$ is as in Theorem \ref{thm existence}.
We show that this shadow is a weak solution of mean curvature flow, where we use the following notion of weak solution which is based on the avoidance principle.
For this section we do not need to assume constant Dirichlet boundary values.
Let $\Omega$ be as in the last section.
\begin{definition}[Weak solutions]
A family $(A_t)_{t\in [0,\infty)}$ of open subsets of $\ol{\Omega}$ is called
\begin{itemize}
\item a supersolution to mean curvature flow if the following holds:
For any family $(B_t)_{t\in [a,b]}$ of open sets, such that $B_t\Subset \Omega$ with $\partial B_t\in C^\infty$, and such that $(\partial B_t)_{t\in [a,b]}$ is a classical solution to mean curvature flow, we have
\[
\ol{B_a}\subset A_a \; \Rightarrow \; B_b\subset A_b.
\]
\item a subsolution to mean curvature flow, if $(\ol{\Omega}\setminus \ol{A_t})_{t\in [0,\infty)}$ is a supersolution.
\item a weak solution of mean curvature flow, if $(A_t)_{t\in [0,\infty)}$ is both a super- and subsolution.
\end{itemize}
We shall call $(\partial \Omega \cap A_t)_{t\in [0,\infty)}$ the boundary values of $(A_t)_{t\in [0,\infty)}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
In the above setting in the definition of supersolution we even have $\ol{B_t}\subset A_t$ for all $t\in [a,b]$, when $(A_t)_t$ is a supersolution. To see that the closure is contained one can use, for instance, the translation invariance of classical flows.
If $(A_t)$ is a family of open subsets of $\ol{\Omega}$ such that $(\partial A_t)$ is a classical solution to mean curvature flow, then, by the avoidance principle, $(A_t)$ is a weak solution.
Let $x\in \partial A_t \cap \Omega$ and suppose that $\partial A_t$ is smooth in a ball $B_r(x)\subset \mathbb{R}^n$. If $(A_t)$ is a weak solution and $\partial A_t$ is smooth in a spacetime-neighbourhood of $(x,t)$, then $(\partial A_t)$ solves mean curvature flow at $(x,t)$ classically.
\begin{proof}
We may assume, that $\partial A_t \cap B_r(x)$ is the graph of a smooth function. Using the result of the next section we find two smooth open sets, one lying inside $A_t \cap B_r$, the other inside $B_r(x)\setminus A_t$, and such that their boundaries coincide in a neighbourhood of $x$ with $\partial A_t$. Taking $r$ to be small enough, small translations of these two open sets away from $\partial A_t$ serve as barriers. This way it can be seen, that the normal velocity of $\partial A_t$ at $(x,t)$ coincides with the mean curvature at that point.
\end{proof}
Similar weak notions of mean curvature flow are the set-theoretic subsolutions of Ilmanen (\cite{Ilmanen}) or more generally the barriers of De Giorgi. Both of them were compared to the level-set flow (see \cite{Belletini Novaga} for a comparison of De Giorgi's barriers to level-set flow). (See \cite{Topology Change} for a definition of set-theoretic subsolutions including boundary values.)
Note that our definition of weak solutions is not very useful where $\partial A_t \subset \partial \Omega$ (taking the boundary $\partial A_t$ relative to $\ol{\Omega}$). This is because there is no space left for a classical solution, that could possibly push $\partial A_t$ inwards into $\Omega$. To circumvent this, one could compare with classical solutions with boundary values that may not be written as the boundary of an open set and which can intersect $\partial A_t$. But this would cause trouble in the methods we are going to use next. Another way would be to compare $\partial A_t$ not only with classical solutions in $\Omega$ but with classical solutions that are boundaries of open subsets in $\mathbb{R}^n$ and which do not intersect the boundary values. This viewpoint has the disadvantage of not being intrinsically in $\ol{\Omega}$. The methods presented in the following also work if one adopts this definition for weak solutions.
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition}
For any open set $A\subset \Omega$ there exists a weak solution of mean curvature flow $(A_t)_{t\in [0,\infty)}$ with $A_0= A$. Furthermore there is a smallest such weak solution $(A_t)_{t\in [0,\infty)}$: For any weak solution $(A'_t)_{t\in [0,\infty)}$ with $A\subset A'_0$ we have $A_t\subset A'_t$ for all $t\in [0,\infty)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal{B}_0$ be the set of all families $(B_t)_{t\in [0,b]}$ of open sets such that $\ol{B_0}\subset A$ and $\partial B_t\in C^\infty$ fulfils mean curvature flow. Define
\[
A^{(0)}_t:= \bigcup \{B_t\colon (B_{t'})_{t'\in [0,b]}\in \mathcal{B}_0 \text{ with } t\in [0,b]\}.
\]
Then inductively define $\mathcal{B}_k$ and $A^{(k)}$ by setting $\mathcal{B}_k$ to be the set of all families $(B_t)_{t\in [a,b]}$ of open sets such that $\ol{B_a}\subset A^{(k-1)}_a$ and $\partial B_t\in C^\infty$ fulfils mean curvature flow. Then set
\[
A^{(k)}_t:= \bigcup \{B_t\colon (B_{t'})_{t'\in [a,b]}\in \mathcal{B}_k \text{ with } t\in [a,b]\}.
\]
Finally define the open sets $A_t:= \bigcup_{k\in \mathbb{N}} A^{(k)}_t$. Note that $A^{(k)}_t$ is a nondecreasing sequence of open sets. As a union of subsolutions $(A_t)$ is again a subsolution. To see that $(A_t)$ is a supersolution let $(B_t)_{t\in [a,b]}$ be a classical solution and let $\ol{B_a}\subset A_a$. Then by compactness $\ol{B_a}\subset A^{(k)}_a$ for some $k\in \mathbb{N}$. Therefore $\ol{B_b}\subset A^{(k+1)}_b\subset A_b$ and hence $(A_t)$ is a supersolution.
The second assertion is obvious from the construction.
\end{proof}
The following lemma concerning weak solutions will be useful. The result is trivial for classical solutions.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem weak cylinder}
Suppose $(A_t)_{t\in [0,\infty)}$ is a family of open subsets of $\ol{\Omega}$, such that $(A_t\times \mathbb{R})_t$ is a weak solution of mean curvature flow in $\ol{\Omega}\times \mathbb{R}$.
Then $(A_t)_t$ is a weak solution of mean curvature flow in $\ol{\Omega}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We only show, that $(A_t)$ is a supersolution using the fact that $(A_t\times \mathbb{R})$ is a supersolution.
Let $(B_t)_{t\in [a,b]}$ be a family of open sets such that $\partial B_t\in C^\infty$ fulfils mean curvature flow, and $\ol{B_a}\subset A_a$. We need to show $B_b\subset A_b$.
In fact we prove $B_b\times \mathbb{R} \subset A_b\times \mathbb{R}$.
For this we approximate $B_a\times \mathbb{R}$ by bounded sets.
For $R>0$ take $\hat{K}^R$ to be a smoothed intersection of $B_a\times \mathbb{R}$ with $\{|x^{n+1}|<2R\}$ containing $B_a\times [-R,R]$ (use Theorem \ref{thm smoothing}). We may take the same closing ends for different $R>1$, to give curvature bounds on $\partial \hat{K}^R$ independent of $R$. Then define $K^R:= \{x\in \hat{K}^R\colon \dist(x,\partial \hat{K}^R)>R^{-1}\}$. Then we still have uniform curvature bounds for $R>R_0$ sufficiently large. Thus, by Proposition 4.1 of \cite{E+H} there are classical solutions $(M^R_t)_{t\in [a,a+\tau]}$ of mean curvature flow with $M^R_a=\partial K^R$ for some $\tau >0$ independent of $R$. These solutions $(M^R_t)$ are written as graphs over the $\partial \hat{K}^R$, which contain $\partial B_a\times [-R,R]$.
By interior estimates of \cite{E+H} and the uniqueness of the limit (see below) we find for $R\to \infty$ local convergence as graphs over $\partial B_a\times \mathbb{R}$. This gives a solution of mean curvature flow which is written as a graph over $\partial B_a\times \mathbb{R}$ and starts from there. Hence it coincides with $(\partial B_t \times \mathbb{R})_{t\in [a,a+\tau]}$.
(To see the uniqueness for smooth cylinders write a non-cylindrical solution as a graph over the initial cylinder. By the strong maximum principle the difference to the ordinary cylindrical solution attains no interior maximum. Then translate the non-cylindrical solution along the cylinder and again use interior estimates to find convergence to a new solution, and do the translation in such a way that the difference of the limit to the cylindrical solution attains an interior maximum. This contradicts the strong maximum principle.)
Thus, we have shown that the corresponding flows $(K^R_t)_{t\in [a,a+\tau]}$ of the open sets starting from $K^R$ satisfy
\[
\bigcup_{R>1} K^R_t = B_t \times \mathbb{R}, \hspace{0.5cm} \text{for } t\in [a,a+\tau].
\]
Let $(W_t)_{t\in [a,b]}$ be the smallest weak solution in $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$ with $W_a= B_a\times \mathbb{R}$. The argument above has shown $W_t=B_t\times \mathbb{R}$ for $t\in [a,a+\tau]$. The same argument shows, that the maximal time-interval on which $(W_t)$ and $(B_t\times \mathbb{R})$ coincide is open. It is easy to see that this maximal interval is also closed: Suppose $W_t=B_t\times \mathbb{R}$ for $t<t_0$. Since $(W_t)$ is the smallest solution $W_{t_0}\subset B_{t_0}\times \mathbb{R}$. To show the reverse inclusion let $x\in B_{t_0}\times \mathbb{R}$. Since $\bigcup_{t\in (a,b)} B_t\times \mathbb{R} \times \{t\}$ is open we find a ball-solution of mean curvature flow centred at $x$ that is contained in $(B_t\times \mathbb{R})_t$ and contains $(x,t_0)$. This shows $x\in W_{t_0}$ since $W_t=B_t\times \mathbb{R}$ for $t<t_0$ and $W_t$ is a supersolution and hence contains the ball-solution.
Summarizing we find $W_t=B_t\times \mathbb{R}$ for all $t\in [a,b]$, i.\,e. the smallest weak solution starting from $B_a\times \mathbb{R}$ is $(B_t\times \mathbb{R})_t$. As $A_t\times \mathbb{R}$ is a supersolution with $B_a\times \mathbb{R}\subset A_a\times \mathbb{R}$ we conclude $B_b\times \mathbb{R} \subset A_b\times \mathbb{R}$.
\end{proof}
A shadowflow is a weak solution:
\begin{theorem}
Let $u\colon \ol{\Omega}\times [0,\infty)\to [-\infty,\infty]$ be continuous and smooth in the set $\{(x,t)\in \Omega\times (0,\infty)\colon |u(x,t)|<\infty\}$ and suppose $u$ satisfies \eqref{eq GMCF} in this set.
Define $A_t$ to be the projection of $\graph u(\cdot,t) \cap \mathbb{R}^{n+1}$ onto $\ol{\Omega}$, that is $$A_t= \{x\in \ol{\Omega}\colon |u(\cdot,t)|<\infty\}.$$
Then $(A_t)_{t\in [0,\infty)}$ is a weak solution of mean curvature flow with boundary values $(\{x\in \partial \Omega \colon |u(x,t)|<\infty\})_{t\in [0,\infty)}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lem weak cylinder} it suffices to show that $A_t\times \mathbb{R}$ is a weak solution.
First we prove that $(A_t\times\mathbb{R})_t$ is a subsolution, which is slightly easier to see.
So let $(B_t)_{t\in [a,b]}$ be a family of open bounded subsets of $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$ such that the boundaries $(\partial B_t)_{t\in [a,b]}$ form a smooth solution of mean curvature flow.
Suppose $\ol{B_a}\subset (\Omega\setminus \ol{A_a})\times \mathbb{R}$. Assume for contradiction that there is $X\in B_b$ such that $X \notin (\Omega\setminus \ol{A_b})\times \mathbb{R}$. By openness of $B_b$ we may assume $X\in A_b\times \mathbb{R}$. Taking a vertical translation of $(B_t)$ we may further assume $X\in \graph u(\cdot,b)$. This contradicts the avoidance principle.
Now to see that $(A_t\times \mathbb{R})_t$ is a supersolution, suppose $\ol{B_a}\subset A_a\times \mathbb{R}$ and assume for contradiction that there is $X\in B_b$ such that $X\notin A_b\times \mathbb{R}$.
W.\,l.\,o.\,g. we assume $u(X_1,\ldots,X_n,b)=+\infty$ and taking a vertical translation of $(B_t)$ we may assume $u(Y_1,\ldots,Y_n,a)<Y_{n+1}$ for all $Y\in \ol{B_a}$, i.\,e. $\ol{B_a}$ is above $\graph u(\cdot,a)$. But then by the avoidance principle $\ol{B_b}$ would be above $\graph u(\cdot,b)$ which leads to a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\section{Smoothing intersections while respecting curvature conditions} \label{sec smoothing}
We observe the following
\begin{lemma}\label{lem convex}
Let $\Gamma\subset \mathbb{R}^{n}$ be an open or closed, symmetric and convex cone which contains the positive cone.
Then the set of real symmetric $n\times n$-matrices with eigenvalues in $\Gamma$ is convex.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Gamma$ be open. (The case of closed $\Gamma$ is handled similar.) Let $f\colon \mathbb{R}^{n}\to \mathbb{R}$ be the signed distance function to $\partial \Gamma$ (which we assume to be nonempty) such that $\lambda\in \Gamma \iff f(\lambda)>0$. By the convexity of $\Gamma$, $f$ is concave. By the symmetry of $\Gamma$, $f$ is symmetric. And because $\Gamma$ contains the positive cone $f$ is increasing in each component of its argument. Then $F(A):= f(\lambda(A))$ is a concave function on the set of symmetric matrices, where $\lambda(A)$ denotes the eigenvalues of $A$ (see e.\,g. \cite[end of §3]{CNS}). Thus $\{A\colon F(A)>0\}$ is a convex subset of the symmetric matrices, which finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm smoothing}]
The idea is to use distance functions and take a mollified version of $\min$ (denoted $\widetilde{\min}$) and to define $$\Omega:= \{\widetilde{\min}(\dist_{\partial A},\dist_{\partial B})>0\}$$ though we will not directly use the distance functions.
{\bf 1.\ Altered distance functions and reference neighbourhoods.}
First note that since $A\cap B$ is bounded it suffices to consider everything in a large ball. Let $d_A\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^n)$ be such that $d_A<0$ in $\mathbb{R}^n\setminus \ol{A}$ and in our large ball we have $d_A>0$ in $A$ and $d_A$ coincides with the signed distance function in a tubular neighbourhood of $\partial A$.
Let $g\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ be such that $g(0)=0,\,1\leq g'\leq 2$ and $g''(s)\leq -C$ for $|s|<{\varepsilon}(C)$, where we choose $C>0$ later, and set $a:= g\circ d_A$.
We derive
\begin{align*}
Da&= g'(d_A)\,Dd_A,\\
D^2a&= g''(d_A)\,Dd_A \otimes Dd_A + g'(d_A)\,D^2d_A.
\end{align*}
In a tubular neighbourhood (in our large ball) $Da$ is an eigenvector of $D^2 a$ with eigenvalue $g''(d_A)$. The remaining eigenvalues are $g'(d_A)$ times the eigenvalues of $D^2 d_A$ which are
\[
\frac{-\kappa_i \circ \pi}{1-d_A\cdot \kappa_i\circ \pi} \hspace{0.5cm} (i=1,\ldots,n-1).
\]
Here $\kappa_i$ are the principal curvatures at the boundary and $\pi$ denotes the closest point projection onto the boundary.
Note that inside $\ol{A}$ these eigenvalues of $D^2 d_A$ are not greater than the negated principle curvatures of the boundary. Because $\Gamma$ contains the positive cone, we find the negation of the eigenvalues of $D^2 a$ which correspond to eigenvectors orthogonal to $Da$ lie in $\Gamma$.
Now choose $C>0$ from above such that the eigenvalue of $D^2 a$ which corresponds to the eigenvector $Da$ is the smallest (largest in absolute value) eigenvalue of $D^2 a$ in a neighbourhood of $\partial A$ (still restricted to a large ball). We refer to this neighbourhood restricted to $\ol{A}$ as the reference neighbourhood of $\partial A$ (in our large ball). In the reference neighbourhood the negations of the eigenvalues of $D^2 a|_V$ are in $\Gamma$ for any $(n-1)$-dimensional hyperplane $V$.
Analogously we define $b$ with respect to $\partial B$ and the reference neighbourhood of $\partial B$.
{\bf 2.\ Construction.}
Let $f\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ be a function with the following properties
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $\min\{s,0\}-1 < f(s)<\min\{s,0\}$ for $|s|<1$,
\item $f(s)= \min \{s,0\}$ for $|s|\geq 1$,
\item $0\leq f' \leq 1$,
\item $f''\leq 0$.
\end{enumerate}
Define
\begin{equation} \label{eq def of mollified min}
\begin{split}
\Phi \colon (0,1) \times \mathbb{R}^n &\to \mathbb{R}, \\
(\delta,x) & \mapsto
\delta f \left(\frac{a(x)-b(x)}{\delta}\right)+b(x).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
This is a mollified version of $\min(a,b)$ with parameter $\delta$. In fact
\begin{equation}
\min\{a(x),b(x)\}-\delta < \Phi(\delta,x)\leq \min\{a(x),b(x)\}
\label{eq Phi and min}
\end{equation}
for all $x\in \mathbb{R}^n$ and $\delta \in (0,1)$. We will choose $\Omega$ from the assertion of the form
$$\Omega_\delta :=\{x\in \mathbb{R}^n \colon \Phi(\delta,x)>0\}$$
for an appropriate choice of $\delta$.
{\bf 3.\ Inclusions}. Because of $A\cap B = \{\min(a,b)>0\}$ it is obvious from \eqref{eq Phi and min} that $\Omega_\delta \subset A\cap B$ holds for all $\delta\in (0,1)$. To check the other inclusion let $x\in A\cap B\setminus (\partial A\cap \partial B)_{\varepsilon}$.
By continuity there is $0<\delta_1=\delta_1({\varepsilon})$ independent of $x$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq delta_1}
\max\{a(x),b(x)\}>\delta_1.
\end{equation}
Now choose $\delta \leq \delta_1/2$ and distinguish two cases: Suppose $|a(x)-b(x)|>\delta$. Then by property (ii) of $f$ we find
\[
\Phi(\delta,x)= \min\{a(x),b(x)\}>0.
\]
If on the other hand $|a(x)-b(x)|\leq \delta$ then by \eqref{eq Phi and min}, \eqref{eq delta_1}, and $\delta\leq \delta_1/2$
\[
\Phi(\delta,x)> \min\{a(x),b(x)\}-\delta \geq \delta_1-2\delta \geq 0.
\]
In summary we find the claimed inclusions, provided that $\delta$ is sufficiently small.
{\bf 4.\ Smoothness.}
We compute
\[
D\Phi= \left (f\left (\frac{a-b}{\delta}\right )
-f'\left (\frac{a-b}{\delta}\right )\frac{a-b}{\delta},
\, f'\left (\frac{a-b}{\delta}\right )(Da-Db)+Db \right ).
\]
Assuming $\Phi=0$ implies
\[ f\left (\frac{a-b}{\delta}\right )=-\frac{b}{\delta},\]
and therefore
\[
\partial_\delta \Phi= 0
\iff
b+\underbrace{f'\left (\frac{a-b}{\delta}\right )}_{\in [0,1]}(a-b)
=0.
\]
This occurs only if one of the following is true (note that $\Phi=0$ already implies $a,b\geq 0$, by \eqref{eq Phi and min})
\begin{enumerate}[(I)]
\item $a=0$ and $b=0$
\item $a=0$ and $f'(\tfrac{a-b}{\delta})=1$
\item $b=0$ and $f'(\tfrac{a-b}{\delta})=0$.
\end{enumerate}
(I) implies $\Phi\neq 0$, a contradiction. In case (II) we find $\partial_x \Phi= Da \neq 0$, because $Da \neq 0$ on $\partial A$, which is where $a=0$ holds.
Case (III) is treated analogously to case (II).
Summarizing we obtain $D \Phi \neq 0$ where $\Phi=0$.
The implicit function theorem shows, that $\Phi^{-1}(0)$ is a smooth $n$-dimensional submanifold of $(0,1)\times \mathbb{R}^n$ with normal $\frac{D\Phi}{|D\Phi|}$.
By applying Sard's theorem to the mapping $\Phi^{-1}(0)\to (0,1), \, (\delta,x)\mapsto \delta$ one can show, that for almost all $\delta\in (0,1)$, $\partial_x \Phi(\delta,\cdot)\neq 0$ where $\Phi(\delta,\cdot)=0$, so that by the implicit function theorem again $\Omega_\delta$ is smooth for almost all $\delta \in (0,1)$ and $\partial \Omega_\delta = \{x\in \mathbb{R}^n\colon \Phi(\delta,x)=0\}.$
We choose $\Omega:= \Omega_{\delta_0}$ for such an $\delta_0\in (0,1)$ sufficiently small, that the asserted inclusions hold.
{\bf 5.\ Curvature condition.}
Let $x_0\in \partial \Omega$ and assume without loss of generality $x_0=0$ and further assume that the tangent space of $\partial \Omega$ at $x_0=0$ is orthogonal to $e_n$. We identify the tangent space and $\mathbb{R}^{n-1}\equiv \{(\hat{x},x^n)\in \mathbb{R}^n\colon x^n=0\}$. Locally $\partial \Omega$ is a graph over the tangent space at $x_0$: Let $w\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^{n-1})$ and $r>0$ with
\[
B_r (0)\cap \Omega = B_r (0)\cap
\{(\hat{x},x^n)\in \mathbb{R}^n \colon w(\hat{x})<x^n\}.
\]
We write $\Phi_{\delta_0}\equiv \Phi(\delta_0,\cdot)$ and $\hat{D}$ for differentiation with respect to the first $n-1$ components.
The following holds in a neighbourhood of $0\in \mathbb{R}^{n-1}$:
\begin{align}
\Phi_{\delta_0}(\hat{x},w(\hat{x}))&=0, \label{eq Phi=0}\\
\hat{D}w(0)&=0, \label{eq Dw=0}\\
\partial_n\Phi_{\delta_0}(0)&= |D\Phi_{\delta_0}(0)|. \label{eq p_n Phi}
\end{align}
Differentiating \eqref{eq Phi=0} twice and using \eqref{eq Dw=0} and \eqref{eq p_n Phi} we obtain
\[
\hat{D}^2 w(0)
=-\frac{\hat{D}^2\Phi_{\delta_0}(0)}{|D\Phi_{\delta_0}(0)|}
\]
Note that the eigenvalues of $\hat{D}^2 w(0)$ are the principle curvatures of $\partial \Omega$ at $x_0$. Hence, it remains to prove that the negated eigenvalues of $\hat{D}^2 \Phi_{\delta_0}(0)$ lie in $\Gamma$.
We compute
\begin{equation} \label{eq 2nd derivative Phi}
\begin{split}
\hat{D}^2 \Phi_{\delta_0}
&= \frac{1}{\delta_0}f''\left(\frac{a-b}{\delta_0}\right)
(\hat{D}a-\hat{D}b)\otimes(\hat{D}a-\hat{D}b)\\
&\quad + f'\left(\frac{a-b}
{\delta_0}\right)\left(\hat{D}^2a-\hat{D}^2b\right)+\hat{D}^2b.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The matrix $(\hat{D}a-\hat{D}b)\otimes(\hat{D}a-\hat{D}b)$ is positive semi-definite and $f''\leq 0$ (property (iv)). Since $\Gamma$ contains the positive cone it suffices to consider the second term in \eqref{eq 2nd derivative Phi}. We distinguish three cases, below. But first we observe the following: We may assume that ${\varepsilon}>0$ is so small that $(\partial A\cap \partial B)_{\varepsilon} \cap (A\cap B)$ is contained in the intersection of the reference neighbourhoods of $\partial A$ and $\partial B$. Then $x_0=0\in \partial \Omega$ is in $\partial A$ or $\partial B$ or in the reference neighbourhoods of both $\partial A$ and $\partial B$.
\begin{enumerate}[(I)]
\item
$a(0)-b(0)\geq \delta_0$: Then
\[
f'\left(\frac{a(0)-b(0)}{\delta_0}\right)=0.
\]
The term in question becomes $\hat{D}^2 b$. Moreover, in this case $0=\Phi_{\delta_0}(0)=b(0)$ holds. That is why we are in the reference neighbourhood of $\partial B$, where the negations of the eigenvalues of $\hat{D}^2 b$ lie in $\Gamma$.
\item
$a(0)-b(0)\leq -\delta_0$: This case is treated similiar.
\item
$|a(0)-b(0)|<\delta_0$: Here, by property (i) of $f$, $0\notin \partial A,\partial B$. Therefore $0$ must be in the reference neighbourhoods of $\partial A$ and $\partial B$.
As a convex combination of two matrices, whose negated eigenvalues lie in $\Gamma$, the negated eigenvalues of
\[
f'\left(\frac{a-b}
{\delta_0}\right)\left(\hat{D}^2a-\hat{D}^2b\right)+\hat{D}^2b,
\]
the matrix in question, are in $\Gamma$ by Lemma \ref{lem convex}.
\end{enumerate}
In any case, the principal curvatures of $\partial \Omega$ at the point $x_0=0$ lie in $\Gamma$.
\end{proof}
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{section:intro}
Radio-mode AGN feedback is widely thought to play a key role in the evolution of hot gas and massive elliptical galaxies in groups and clusters of galaxies, suppressing cooling flows and the associated growth of massive galaxies (e.g., \citealt{mcnamara07}; \citealt{mcnamara12}; \citealt{yuan14}). One compelling evidence comes from numerous detections of kpc-sized surface brightness depressions in X-ray images of galaxy groups and clusters, the so-called ``X-ray cavities". Many cavities are associated with radio jets and spatially coincident with radio lobes (e.g., \citealt{boehringer93}; \citealt{fabian02}; \citealt{birzan04}; \citealt{croston11}), indicating that they are evolved from the interaction of AGN jets with the intracluster medium (ICM).
AGN jets are accelerated near the vicinities of accreting supermassive black holes (SMBHs), extracting energy from either SMBHs' spin energy \citep{bz77} or accretion disks \citep{bp82}. While they are often observed to have relativistic speeds on pc and smaller scales \citep{shklovskii64}, AGN jets in galaxy groups and clusters often decelerate significantly to form kpc-sized X-ray cavities on kpc to tens-of-kpc scales \citep{mcnamara07}. Some old ghost cavities even seem to rise buoyantly in the ICM, without any signatures of sustaining influence of initial jet momentum (e.g., in the Perseus cluster; \citealt{fabian00}).
The whole process of jet acceleration, propagation, and deceleration from black hole vicinities (the Schwarzschild radius $\sim 10^{-4}$ pc $M_{\rm bh}/10^{9}M_{\sun}$) to tens of kpc scales is far from clear, involving a radial dynamic range too large to be studied self-consistently in numerical simulations. A related issue is the dominant composition within AGN jets and X-ray cavities, which are quite unclear either (e.g., \citealt{croston14}). State-of-the-art simulations of AGN jets in galaxy clusters typically use spatial resolutions of hundreds pc to few kpc, and often adopt kinetic-energy-dominated jets (the so-called ``mechanical feedback"; e.g., \citealt{gaspari11} and \citealt{yang16}). These jets are supersonic with respect to both the ambient ICM and the internal jet plasma, depositing a large amount of their energy to large distances with relatively low efficiencies in heating cool cluster cores (the ``dentist drill" effect; \citealt{vernaleo06}).
Recent simulations often invoke jet precession with an angle of around $10^{\circ}$-$25^{\circ}$ to remedy this problem (\citealt{gaspari12}; \citealt{li15}; \citealt{yang16}; \citealt{nawaz16}). Jets with even larger precession angles ($30^{\circ}$-$70^{\circ}$; \citealt{sternberg08a}), wide jets (outflows) with large opening angles (\citealt{sternberg07}; \citealt{gilkis12}; \citealt{prasad15}; \citealt{hillel16}), cosmic-ray-dominated jets \citep{guo11}, and internally transonic jets (\citealt{mendygral12}; \citealt{li14}) have also been studied. Recent observations by \citet{randall15} suggest that shock waves induced by AGN outbursts can heat the ICM roughly isotropically, while theoretical studies have proposed mixing (\citealt{gilkis12}; \citealt{hillel16}), turbulent heating \citep{zhura14}, sound waves \citep{ruszkowski04} as the main channel of transferring the jet energy to the ICM.
Without resolving the jet propagation on sub-pc scales, kpc-scale properties of AGN jets adopted in numerical simulations may play a key role in predicting the coupling between the jet energy and cool cluster cores. In \citet{guo15}, we used a suite of hydrodynamic simulations to study the connection between jet properties and the shapes of young X-ray cavities, identifying two key jet parameters affecting the cavity shape: density contrast ($\eta\equiv \rho_{\rm jet}/\rho_{\rm amb}$, where $\rho_{\rm jet}$ and $\rho_{\rm amb}$ are the densities of the jet plasma and ambient ICM at the jet base $\sim 1$ kpc) and the internal Mach number ($M_{\rm int} \equiv v_{\rm jet}/c_{\rm s,jet}$, where $v_{\rm jet}$ and $c_{\rm s,jet}$ are the jet speed and the sound speed in the jet interior). The former classifies AGN jets into two types -- internally subsonic ($M_{\rm int} <1$) and internally supersonic ($M_{\rm int} >1$) jets, while the latter may separate jets into three different types: \emph{heavy} ($\eta>1$), \emph{light} ($0.01<\eta<1$), and \emph{very light} ($\eta<0.01$) jets.
In this paper, we further argue for the physical importance of very-light internally-subsonic AGN jets in radio-mode AGN feedback, with the main purpose of drawing attention of computationalists who almost always adopt light internally-supersonic jets in simulations of AGN feedback in galaxy clusters. In Section 2, we summarize the shapes of young X-ray cavities in our idealized jet simulations, and by comparing with observations, we provide evidence for a potential dichotomy of internally-subsonic and internally-supersonic jets in real galaxy clusters. We then further study the long-term evolution of four representative types of AGN jets in the ICM in Section 3, arguing that very light jets indeed exist in real clusters. In Section 4, we discuss the potential importance of very-light internally-subsonic AGN jets in radio-mode AGN feedback. We summarize and discuss our results in Section 5.
\section{Evidence for Internally Subsonic Jets from Young X-ray Cavities}
\label{section2}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\plotone{f1.eps}
\caption{Sketch of an X-ray cavity (yellow-shaded region) in a galaxy cluster. We characterize the cavity shape with two parameters: radial elongation $\tau\equiv d_{\rm j}/d_{\rm p}$ and top wideness $b\equiv d_{\rm w}/d_{\rm j}$. The value of $\tau$ depends sensitively on the projection effect, while $b$ does not.}
\label{plot1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\plotone{f2.eps}
\caption{Sketch of young X-ray cavities produced by AGN jets with various values of density contrast $\eta$ and internal Mach number $M_{\rm int}$. The shapes of young X-ray cavities are summarized from hydrodynamical jet simulations in \citet{guo15} and an addition simulation R5 (to produce the right-bottom cavity). The cluster center is assumed to be an arbitrary point below each cavity along its symmetry axis.}
\label{plot2}
\end{figure}
The properties of AGN jets strongly affect their propagation and the associated formation of X-ray cavities in galaxy clusters. Using a suite of hydrodynamic jet simulations, \citet{guo15} demonstrates that the shapes of X-ray cavities during and shortly after their formation (thereafter referred as ``young X-ray cavities") are strongly affected by two key jet parameters on kpc scales -- density contrast $\eta$ and the internal Mach number $M_{\rm int}$, while the shapes of old X-ray cavities are further affected by the ICM viscosity. In this section, we further argue that the shapes of young X-ray cavities can be used to probe $M_{\rm int}$, and suggest that at least some AGN jets may be internally subsonic.
\subsection{Probing Jet Properties with the Shapes of Young X-ray Cavities}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\plottwo{f3a.eps} {f3b.eps}
\caption{Temporal jet evolution in four representative simulations, shown from left to right: a very-light, internally-subsonic jet in the non-viscous ICM (run R1) and viscous ICM (run R1-visc2; $\mu_{\rm visc}=100$ g cm$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$), and a light internally-supersonic jet in the non-viscous ICM (run R4) and viscous ICM (run R4-visc2). Each panel shows gas density in the logarithmic scale, with arrows denoting gas velocity in the linear scale.}
\label{plot3}
\end{figure*}
We investigated jet evolution in a suite of two-dimensional axisymmetric simulations in cylindrical coordinates. The setup of our simulations was presented in detail in \citet{guo15}. We initiate a uniform, well-collimated jet at a distance of around kpc from the cluster center, and follow its evolution in the well-observed Virgo cluster. The jet is active constantly for a period of $t=t_{\rm jet}$, and we focus on the shapes of resulting young X-ray cavities at $t=1.5t_{\rm jet}$ and their long-term evolution in the ICM. Key jet parameters and the ICM dynamic viscosity coefficient ($\mu_{\rm visc}$) in the simulations presented in the paper are listed in Table 1. The jet duration $t_{\rm jet}=5$ Myr and radius $r_{\rm jet}=1$ kpc are the same in all these simulations.
The shapes of X-ray cavities may be characterized by two geometrical parameters, as shown in Figure \ref{plot1}. Radial elongation $\tau\equiv d_{\rm j}/d_{\rm p}$ is defined as the ratio of the cavity axis along the jet direction ($d_{\rm j}$) to that along the direction perpendicular to the jet direction ($d_{\rm p}$). The other parameter, top wideness $b$, represents the relative location in the jet axis of the cavity's widest size along the perpendicular direction, $b\equiv d_{\rm w}/d_{\rm j}$, where $d_{\rm w}$ is the distance from the cavity bottom to the location of its widest size in the perpendicular direction. From the observational point of view, $b$ is more useful to probe jet properties, as it does not depend on the inclination of the cavity with respect to the line of sight, while the value of $\tau$ is strongly affected by the projection effect. According to the value of $b$, an X-ray cavity can be top-wide ($b>0.5$), center-wide ($b\sim0.5$), or bottom-wide ($b<0.5$).
The dependence of the shapes of young X-ray cavities on $M_{\rm int}$ and $\eta$ is summarized in Figure \ref{plot2}, based mostly on a suite of simulations presented in \citet[see Fig. 2, Fig. 4, and Table 1]{guo15}. The left-top and left-middle panels are based on runs Rv2 and Rv1 in \citet{guo15} respectively, while the left-bottom panel is drawn from results of runs R1 and R2. The right-top and right-middle panels are based on runs R4 and R3 in \citet{guo15} respectively. The right-bottom panel corresponds to a new simulation (denoted as run R5) with $\eta=0.1$ and $M_{\rm int}=0.48$. The setup of run R5 is the same as in run R4, except that the jet energy density is increased by a factor of $\eta_{\rm e}=100$, resulting in a larger sound speed and a smaller Mach number within the jet. The resulting X-ray cavity can be seen in the top-left panel of Figure \ref{plot4}, which shows the synthetic X-ray surface brightness map in run R5 at $t=1.5t_{\rm jet}$.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{150mm}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\thempfootnote}
\caption{Key Parameters of AGN Jets and the ICM viscosity in the Simulations }
\vspace{0.1in}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccccccccc}
\hline
& {$\eta$\footnote{$\eta=\rho_{\rm jet}/\rho_{\rm amb}$ is the initial jet density normalized by the ambient ICM gas density at the jet base.} }&$M_{\rm int}$& {$\eta_{\rm e}$\footnote{$\eta_{\rm e}=e_{\rm th}/e_{\rm amb}$ is the initial jet thermal energy density normalized by the ambient ICM energy density at the jet base.} } &
$v_{\rm jet}$& $\mu_{\rm visc}$&$\dot{M}_{\rm jet}$\footnote{$\dot{M}_{\rm jet}=\rho_{\rm jet}\pi r_{\rm jet}^{2}v_{\rm jet}$ is the mass deposition rate that each jet injects into the ICM at the jet base.}&{$P_{\rm ki}$\footnote{$P_{\rm ki}=\rho_{j} v_{\rm jet}^{3}\pi r_{\rm jet}^{2}/2$ is the kinetic power of each jet.}}& {$P_{\rm th}$\footnote{$P_{\rm th}=e_{ \rm j} v_{\rm jet}\pi r_{\rm jet}^{2}$ is the thermal power of each jet.}}& {$P_{\rm tot}$\footnote{$P_{\rm tot}=P_{\rm ki}+P_{\rm th}$ is the total power of each jet.}} \\ Run&
& &&($10^{9}$cm/s)&($\text{ g cm}^{-1}\text{ s}^{-1}$)&M$_{\sun}$/yr &($10^{44}$erg/s)&($10^{44}$erg/s)&($10^{44}$erg/s) \\ \hline
R1 &$0.001$&0.15&$10$& 1 &0&0.0673 &0.02&1.65&1.67 \\
R3 &$0.1$&1.5&$10$& 1 &0& 6.73&2.14&1.65&3.79 \\
R4& $0.1$&4.8& $1$ & 1&0& 6.73&2.14 &0.165 &2.30 \\
R5& $0.1$&0.48& $100$ & 1&0&6.73 &2.14&16.53&18.67 \\
R1-visc2 &$0.001$&0.15&$10$& 1 &100&0.0673 &0.02&1.65&1.67 \\
R4-visc2& $0.1$&4.8& $1$ & 1&100& 6.73&2.14 &0.165 &2.30 \\
Rv1-visc2 &$0.001$&2.2&$1$& 4.64 &100&0.31 &2.13&0.77&2.90 \\
R5-visc2& $0.1$&0.48& $100$ & 1&100&6.73 &2.14&16.53&18.67 \\
\hline
\label{table1}
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
Figure \ref{plot2} clearly shows the potential of using the shapes of young X-ray cavities, particularly the top wideness, to probe the internal Mach number of AGN jets. Bottom-wide cavities are always produced by internally-subsonic jets, while internally-supersonic jets tend to produce non-bottom-wide cavities, including cylindrical cavities (by very light jets), center-wide and top-wide cavities (by light jets). This result is very robust, and is not affected by the projection effect. As shown in \citet{guo15}, additional jet parameters, e.g., the jet radius and duration, only affect radial elongation of young X-ray cavities, but not top wideness. Combining with deep X-ray observations of galaxy groups and clusters, we encourage X-ray observers to use Figure \ref{plot2} as a guidance to investigate the properties of AGN jets and radio-mode AGN feedback.
Figure \ref{plot3} shows jet evolution in four representative simulations at three representative times $t=3$, $7.5$, and $60$ Myr. The left two columns show the evolution of a very-light internally-subsonic jet in the non-viscous and viscous ICM, while the right two columns show the evolution of a light internally-supersonic jet in the non-viscous and viscous ICM. As expected, the jets in non-viscous runs R1 and R4 produce backflows, and thus form vortices within the cavities. In comparison, the very light jet in run R1 produces stronger backflows, leading to significant side expansion at the bottom of the resulting cavity, and thus resulting in a bottom-wide cavity. Viscosity tends to dissipate velocity shears, and the impact of viscosity on the flow structure is more significant for very light jets ($\partial {\bf v}/\partial t\propto \mu_{\rm visc}/\rho$). As discussed in more detail in \citet{guo15}, for both very light and light jets, viscosity at the level of $\mu_{\rm visc}=100$ g cm$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$ does not affect the shapes of young X-ray cavities, but significantly affect the long-term cavity evolution by suppressing the development of torus-like structures seen in non-viscous runs.
\subsection{Internally Subsonic Jets and A Dichotomy in Radio-mode AGN Feedback}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\plotone{f4.eps}
\caption{Left panels: A typical bottom-wide X-ray cavity produced by an internally-subsonic jet in the simulation R5 (top) and two inner bottom-wide X-ray cavities (enclosed in dotted lines) in the {\it Chandra} image of Perseus in the 0.5-7 keV energy band (bottom; adapted from Fig. 1 of \citealt{fabian00}). Right panels: A center-wide X-ray cavity produced by an internally-supersonic jet in the simulation R3 (top) and a center-wide X-ray cavity (enclosed in the green dotted line) in the Chandra image of Cygnus A in the 0.5-8 keV energy band (bottom; adapted from Fig. 2 of \citealt{reynolds15}). The contours show the \citet{perley84} 6 cm radio map, which helps determine the East edge of the cavity, while the West edge is determined from the X-ray map directly. The other cavity in the opposite direction is likely also center-wide, though its edge is less clear. The top panels show synthetic X-ray surface brightness maps in our simualtions. The dashed line in the bottom-left panel encloses an old X-ray cavity, while that in the bottom-right panel encloses a circle of 30-kpc radius.}
\label{plot4}
\end{figure*}
As indicated in Figure \ref{plot2}, internally-subsonic and internally-supersonic jets produce young X-ray cavities with different shapes in the hot ICM. Two representative examples of young X-ray cavities produced in our simulations are shown in top panels of Figure \ref{plot4}, which shows synthetic X-ray surface brightness maps (line of sight projections of the gas cooling rate along an arbitrary direction perpendicular to the jet axis in units of $10^{-4}$ erg cm$^{-2}$) at $t=1.5t_{\rm jet}=7.5$ Myr. The top-left panel contains a bottom-wide cavity produced by a light, internally-subsonic jet in run R5. Bottom-wide young cavities can also be produced by very light, internally-subsonic jets, as shown in Figure \ref{plot3} (runs R1 and R1-visc2). The top-right panel contains a center-wide cavity produced by a light, internally-supersonic jet in run R3.
The dichotomy of internally-subsonic and internally-supersonic jets in our simulations may also exist in real galaxy clusters. Here we discuss two archetypical AGN feedback events in Perseus and Cygnus A. The bottom-left panel of Figure \ref{plot4} shows the Chandra 0.5-7 keV image of Perseus \citep{fabian00}, which clearly indicates two bottom-wide X-ray cavities enclosed in dotted lines near the center. These two cavities are relatively young, radiating 1.4 GHz radio emissions \citep{fabian00}. According to our scenario (Fig. 2), these two bottom-wide cavities were potentially produced by internally-subsonic jets, which could be light or very light. It was previously argued by \citet{sternberg07} that these two cavities could be produced by wide internally-supersonic jets with a half-opening angle larger than $50^{\circ}$.
On the other hand, the bottom-right panel of Figure \ref{plot4} shows the Chandra X-ray image of Cygnus A \citep{reynolds15}, superposed with two radio lobes (6 cm emission in contours; \citealt{perley84}). The green dotted line encloses a center-wide cavity, whose East (left) edge is constrained from the corresponding radio lobe, while whose West (right) edge is determined from the contrast in X-ray surface brightness. The other cavity in the opposite direction seems also to be center-wide, though its edge is less clear. According to our numerical results (Fig. 2), these center-wide cavities were produced by light, internally-supersonic jets, which can still be seen now in radio \citep{perley84} and X-rays \citep{wilson06}.
The jets in Cygnus A were previously modeled in \citet{carvalho05} as very-light ($\eta\sim10^{-4}$) internally-supersonic jets. However, \citet{carvalho05} adopted a constant-density atmosphere, while in realistic cluster atmospheres, our simulations \citep{guo15} demonstrated that very-light internally-supersonic jets produce cylindrical cavities, as also seen in \citet{krause05}. The radio lobes in Cygnus A were also studied with cosmic-ray hydrodynamic simulations in \citet{mathews10} and \citet{mathews12}, which however did not directly model jet evolution (but instead using two ``phantom hotspots" to inject cosmic rays).
Thus, Figure 4 suggests that there are two different types of AGN jets in real galaxy clusters: internally subsonic and internally supersonic jets. The internal Mach number $M_{\rm int}$ points to the energy content of AGN jets. The value of $M_{\rm int}$ is connected with the ratio of the jet's kinetic energy density ($e_{\rm kin}=\rho_{\rm jet} v_{\rm jet}^{2}/2$) to thermal energy density ($e_{\rm th}$):
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{e_{\rm kin}}{e_{\rm th}}=\frac{\gamma(\gamma-1)}{2}M_{\rm int}^{2}{\rm ~,} \label{eq1}
\end{eqnarray}
which is derived from the definition of $M_{\rm int}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{\rm int}\equiv \frac{v_{\rm jet}}{c_{\rm s,jet}}=\frac{v_{\rm jet}}{\sqrt{\gamma P_{\rm jet}/\rho_{\rm jet}}}{\rm ~.} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent
Here $P_{\rm jet}=(\gamma-1)e_{\rm th}$ denotes the pressure within the jet, and $\gamma$ is the adiabatic index of the jet material ($\gamma=5/3$ for ideal thermal gas). Thus internally supersonic jets roughly correspond to jets energetically dominated by the kinetic energy, while internally subsonic jets are jets energetically dominated by non-kinetic energy, such as thermal energy, cosmic rays (\citealt{guo08a}; \citealt{guo11}), or magnetic fields \citep{xu08}.
A dichotomy of radio-mode AGN feedback has also been previously seen in radio observations, i.e., Fanaroff-Riley (FR) type I and II radio sources \citep{fr74}. It would be very interesting to investigate the connection between the jet dichotomy suggested in our current study and the FR dichotomy inferred from radio observations, and the origins of both dichotomies. While FR I radio sources seem to prevail over FR II sources in galaxy clusters, an observational study on the relative frequency of internally subsonic and supersonic jets may shed new insights onto radio-mode AGN feedback.
\section{Possible Evidence for Very light Jets from Old X-ray Cavities}
\label{section:old}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\plottwo{f5a.eps} {f5b.eps}
\caption{Long term evolution of four different types of AGN jets in hydrodynamic simulations, shown from left to right: a very-light, internally-subsonic jet (run R1-visc2), a light internally-supersonic jet (run R4-visc2), a very-light, internally-supersonic jet (run Rv1-visc2), and a light, internally-subsonic jet (run R5-visc2). With color bars chosen to maximize the cavity contrast, the images show synthetic X-ray surface brightness maps in the logarithmic scale at $t=60$ Myr (top panels) and $100$ Myr (bottom panels), while the jet is only active for the first $t_{\rm jet}=5$ Myr.}
\label{plot5}
\end{figure*}
Studies of young X-ray cavities in the previous section suggest that there are two different types of AGN jets according to their internal Mach number. How do they evolve differently in the ICM and what do we learn by comparing their evolution in numerical simulations with observations? This is a more difficult question to probe, as additional physics, such as shear viscosity (\citealt{kaiser05}; \citealt{reynolds05}; \citealt{guo12b}; \citealt{guo15}) and magnetic tension (\citealt{kaiser05}; \citealt{jones05}; \citealt{ruszkowski07}), may play a significant role in the long-term jet evolution. Pure hydrodynamic simulations of initially-static cavities predict that cavities are quickly disrupted by Rayleigh-Taylor (RT) and Kelvin-Helmholtz (KH) instabilities \citep{reynolds05}, while more realistic simulations of cavities directly inflated by AGN jets show that they are more stable to these interface instabilities (\citealt{pizzolato06}; \citealt{sternberg08}), possibly due to strong vortices formed in cavities as seen in Figure \ref{plot3}. In addition, Figure \ref{plot3} further shows that associated with the vortex formation, the major body of the cavity tends to evolve into a torus-like structure, while if a significant level of shear viscosity is present, the torus-like feature is significantly suppressed.
Assuming that viscosity is not strongly suppressed in the ICM and adopting a constant dynamic viscosity coefficient $\mu_{\rm visc}=100$ g cm$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$, here we investigate the long-term jet evolution in four representative simulations: R1-visc2 (a very-light, internally-subsonic jet), R4-visc2 (a light, internally-supersonic jet), Rv1-visc2 (a very-light, internally-supersonic jet), and R5-visc2 (a light, internally-subsonic jet). The jet parameters in these runs are listed in Table 1, and the results are presented in Figure 5. With this level of viscosity (a significant fraction of the Braginskii viscosity $\sim156(\text{ln}\Lambda/37)^{-1}(T/2\text{ keV})^{2.5}$ g cm$^{-1}$ s$^{-1}$), RT and KH instabilities are effectively suppressed and cavities do not evolve into prominent torus-like structures seen in non-viscous simulations (e.g., \citealt{reynolds05} and \citealt{guo15}).
As shown in Figure 5, the shapes of old X-ray cavities produced by these four types of AGN jets show some subtle differences. Old cavities in runs R1-visc2 and Rv1-visc2 appear to be flattened and elongated along the direction perpendicular to the jet direction, while cavities in runs R4-visc2 and R5-visc2 are more spread along the jet direction. This is probably because the jets in the former two runs are very light ($\eta=0.001$), losing momentum in the ICM more quickly than light jets ($\eta=0.1$) in the latter two runs. Interestingly, the outer northwestern X-ray cavity in Perseus (ghost cavity enclosed in the dashed line in the left-bottom panel of Fig. 4) is also significantly flattened (pancake-shaped), bearing morphological similarity to old X-ray cavities produced by very light jets in runs R1-visc2 and Rv1-visc2 at $t=100$ Myr. While the pancake-shaped ghost cavity in Perseus was previously argued to be attributed to RT instabilities \citep{soker02}, in our scenario it instead provides tentative evidence for the existence of very light AGN jets in galaxy clusters.
Both light and very light AGN jets may exist in real clusters, as we argued above that the outer cavity in Perseus was produced by a very light jet, while the jets in Cygnus A are light (see Sec. 3). Previous simulations of radio-mode AGN feedback usually adopted light AGN jets (e.g., \citealt{gaspari11} and \citealt{yang16}), while very few studies explored very light jets (e.g., \citealt{krause03}; \citealt{krause05}; \citealt{guo11}). It is possible that very light jets play an important role in radio mode AGN feedback, as further discussed in the following section.
\section{Potential Importance of Very-light Internally-subsonic Jets in AGN Feedback}
\label{section:4}
In the previous two sections, we provide evidence for the existence of both internally subsonic jets and very light jets in galaxy clusters, based on the shapes of young and old X-ray cavities, respectively. Which further suggests that very-light internally-subsonic jets may exist in real clusters. While light internally-supersonic jets, which may indeed exist in some clusters (as possibly in Cygnus A), have often been adopted in numerical investigations of radio-mode AGN feedback, very-light internally-subsonic jets may play a more important role.
Among various types of AGN jets classified based on density contrast and the internal Mach number, very-light internally-subsonic jets contain the lowest momentum density for a given total energy density $e_{\rm tot}=e_{\rm kin}+e_{\rm th}$. The momentum density of a jet $p_{\rm jet}=\rho_{\rm jet} v_{\rm jet}=(2\rho_{\rm jet} e_{\rm kin})^{1/2}$ may be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
p_{\rm jet}=(2\rho_{\rm jet} e_{\rm tot})^{1/2} \left[1-\frac{2}{2+\gamma(\gamma-1)M_{\rm int}^{2}}\right]^{1/2} {\rm ~,}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used Equation (\ref{eq1}). For a fixed value of $e_{\rm tot}$, a jet with smaller values of $\rho_{\rm jet}=\eta \rho_{\rm atm}$ and $M_{\rm int}$ has a lower momentum density $p_{\rm jet}$, and thus very-light internally-subsonic jets have lower momentum density compared to very-light internally-supersonic, light internally-subsonic, or light internally-supersonic jets.
Due to lower density and momentum, very-light internally-subsonic jets are expected to decelerate faster in the ICM. As seen in Figure 5, the cavity produced by a very-light internally-subsonic jet in run R1-visc2 rises slowest, and its average distance to the cluster center at $t=100$ Myr is around $25$ kpc, corresponding to an average rising speed of $245$ km/s. This speed is substantially smaller than the sound speed in the Virgo's ICM $c_{\rm s}=726(k_{\rm B}T/2 {\rm ~keV})^{1/2}$ km/s, which is often adopted as the cavity rising speed in observational studies (e.g., \citealt{rafferty06}). It is also slightly smaller than the buoyancy rising speed $0.5v_{\rm s}$ estimated by \citet{churazov01}, possibly due to the additional effect of viscosity in our simulation (as also seen in Fig. 7 in \citealt{guo15}).
In particular, very-light internally-subsonic jets rise much slower in the ICM than light internally-supersonic jets often adopted in numerical simulations of radio-mode AGN feedback (e.g., \citealt{gaspari11} and \citealt{yang16}). They spend longer time in inner regions of galaxy clusters, possibly having a higher efficiency of coupling their energy to cool cluster cores (through shock heating, turbulent heating, or mixing) and alleviating the problem of low coupling efficiencies associated with light internally-supersonic jets seen in previous studies \citep{vernaleo06}. A detailed study of this speculation is out of the scope of the present paper.
\section{Summary and Discussion}
\label{section:discussion}
The evolution of hot gas and massive galaxies in galaxy groups and clusters depends strongly on the energy input from central SMBHs via radio-mode AGN feedback, whose effectiveness is potentially affected by the properties of AGN jets on kpc scales. Previous studies have been usually focused on light internally-supersonic jets (e.g., \citealt{gaspari11} and \citealt{yang16}). In this paper, we provide evidence for the existence of both internally subsonic jets and very light jets in real galaxy clusters, by comparing observations of the shapes of young and old X-ray cavities with a series of jet simulations. We further argue for the first time that there may be a dichotomy of radio-mode AGN feedback in galaxy clusters originated from internally-subsonic and internally-supersonic AGN jets, and discuss the potential importance of very-light internally-subsonic jets in AGN feedback.
The shapes of young kpc-sized X-ray cavities resulted from jet interaction with the ICM may be used to probe jet properties. From a suite of ideal jet simulations, we conclude that top-wideness of X-ray cavities is a good indicator of the internal Mach number of AGN jets. Internally subsonic jets produce bottom-wide cavities, while internally supersonic jets tend to produce non-bottom wide cavities, including center-wide, top-wide, or cylindrical cavities. This result is very robust, as projection effect, jet size and duration do not affect top-wideness appreciably.
We looked at two archetypical radio-mode AGN feedback events in Perseus \citep{reynolds15} and Cygnus A \citep{fabian00}. The two X-ray cavities in Cygnus A appear to be center-wide, suggesting that they were produced by light internally-supersonic jets. On the other hand, the two inner cavities in Perseus are bottom-wide, indicating that they were possibly produced by internally subsonic jets. These two examples suggest that internally subsonic AGN jets indeed exist and there may be two different types of AGN jets in galaxy clusters divided by the internal Mach number.
Our simulations show that there are subtle differences in the long-term evolution of different types of AGN jets. Very light jets tend to evolve into old cavities significantly elongated along the direction perpendicular to the jet direction (i.e., ``pancakes" described in \citealt{churazov01}), while light jets evolve into old cavities more spread along the jet direction. The outer northwestern X-ray cavity (ghost cavity) in Perseus appears to be a ``pancake" viewed edge-on, suggesting that it was produced by a very light jet. Another possible example of pancake-shaped old cavities is the outer 8-shaped radio lobes in M87 \citep{owen00}, which do not appear to be cavities in deep X-ray maps \citep{million10}. This is not consistent with the picture of double spherical radio lobes, which would have appeared as two clear cavities in X-ray maps. On the other hand, this mystery may be easily explained if the radio lobes are pancakes viewed close to face-on, which produce much less depressions in X-ray surface brightness.
Recent simulations of jet-mode AGN feedback (e.g., \citealt{yuan15}; \citealt{yang16}) often assume that most or all of the material accreted by the central SMBH is ejected in AGN jets, which tends to trigger light or possibly even heavy jets in simulations (though not explicitly stated in these studies). However, this assumption is not consistent with detailed MHD simulations of black hole hot accretion flows, which instead found that almost all the accreted material is ejected in winds (\citealt{yuan15}; also see \citealt{yuan12a} and \citealt{yuan12b}). AGN jets were predicted in these studies to only carry away a small fraction of the accreted mass, and very light jets may be common.
We further point out that very-light internally-subsonic jets may be present in real galaxy clusters, and play an important role in radio-mode AGN feedback. Compared to light internally-supersonic jets often adopted in previous numerical studies, very-light internally-subsonic jets decelerate faster and rise much slower in the ICM, possibly depositing a larger fraction of jet energy to cool cluster cores and thus alleviating the problem of low coupling efficiencies \citep{vernaleo06} without invoking precessing jets or wide jets proposed recently (e.g., \citealt{yang16}; \citealt{hillel16}).
In our simulations of long-term jet evolution, a significant level of shear viscosity is adopted to suppress interface instabilities and the formation of torus-like structures. Viscosity has also been invoked in the ICM to explain the coherent structure of cold filaments often observed in cool-core galaxy clusters, which would otherwise have been easily disrupted by turbulence (\citealt{fabian03}). A substantial viscosity level in the ICM is also consistent with the stability of cold fronts observed in some galaxy clusters (e.g., \citealt{zuhone14}).
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by Chinese Academy of Sciences through the Hundred Talents Program and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11643001). F.G. acknowledges generous support by the Zwicky Prize Fellowship from Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich during the early stages of this project. F.G. thanks Eugene Churazov for the suggestion of making Fig. 2 and Christine Jones for encouragements during the 2015 Snowcluster meeting. F.G. also thanks the referee for a prompt and insightful report.
|
\section*{Introduction}
By a Lie ring we mean a Lie algebra over $\mathbb Z.$ Any Lie algebra can be considered as a Lie ring. By definition the identities $[x_1,x_2]+[x_2,x_1]=0$ and $[x_1,x_2,x_3]+[x_2,x_3,x_1]+[x_3,x_1,x_2]=0$ hold in any Lie ring, where $[x_1,\dots,x_n]$ denotes the left-normed bracket.
Moreover, it is easy to check that there is one more identity that holds in any Lie ring: $[x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4]+[x_2,x_1,x_4,x_3]+[x_4,x_3,x_2,x_1]+[x_3,x_4,x_1,x_2]=0.$ This motivates the following definition.
A subset $T$ of the symmetric group $S_n$ is said to be {\it Jacobi} if the following identity holds in any Lie ring
\begin{equation}\label{id_T}
\sum_{\sigma\in T} [x_{\sigma(1)},\dots,x_{\sigma(n)}]=0.
\end{equation}
The paper is devoted to investigation of Jacobi subsets.
A family of Jacobi subsets $T_{k,l,n}\subseteq S_n,$ where $k+l\leq n,$ was constructed (Theorem \ref{Theorem1}). Moreover, a `vector space of all relations between left-normed brackets' was constructed and a basis of the space induced by the subsets $T_{k,1,n}$ was found (Theorem \ref{Theorem2}). The most interesting identities come from the Jacobi subsets $T_{k,l}:=T_{k,l,k+l}.$ Here we give some examples of identities that hold in any Lie ring and come from the sets $T_{k,l}:$
\begin{itemize}
\item $T_{1,1}: \hspace{0.5cm} [x_1,x_2]+[x_2,x_1] = 0;$
\item $T_{1,2}: \hspace{0.5cm} [x_1,x_2,x_3]+[x_2,x_3,x_1]+[x_3,x_1,x_2] = 0;$
\item $T_{2,2}:\hspace{0.5cm} [x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4]+[x_2,x_1,x_4,x_3]+[x_3,x_4,x_1,x_2]+[x_4,x_3,x_2,x_1] = 0;$
\item $T_{1,3}: \hspace{0.5cm}[x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4]+[x_3,x_1,x_2,x_4]+[x_4,x_1,x_2,x_3]+[x_1,x_4,x_3,x_2]+[x_2,x_3,x_4,x_1] = 0;$
\item
$T_{2,3}: \hspace{0.5cm}$
\begin{minipage}{11cm}
$[x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5]+[x_2,x_1,x_4,x_3,x_5]+[x_2,x_1,x_5,x_3,x_4]+$ \\
$[x_1,x_2,x_5,x_4,x_3]+[x_3,x_4,x_5,x_1,x_2]+[x_4,x_3,x_5,x_2,x_1] = 0;$
\end{minipage}
\item
$T_{3,3}:\hspace{0.5cm}$
\begin{minipage}{13cm}$
[x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5,x_6]+[x_2,x_1,x_3,x_5,x_4,x_6]+[x_2,x_1,x_3,x_6,x_4,x_5]+$\\
$[x_1,x_2,x_3,x_6,x_5,x_4]+
[x_4,x_5,x_6,x_1,x_2,x_3]+[x_5,x_4,x_6,x_2,x_1,x_3]+$ \\
$[x_5,x_4,x_6,x_3,x_1,x_2]+[x_4,x_5,x_6,x_3,x_2,x_1] = 0.$
\end{minipage}
\end{itemize}
There are several simple operations over Jacobi subsets that allow to obtain new Jacobi subsets (Lemma \ref{Lemma_properties_of_Jacobi}). Using this we can obtain a big amount of Jacobi subsets from the sets $T_{k,l,n}$ but not all of them. For example, the following identity
$$[x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4]+[x_3,x_1,x_2,x_4]+[x_4,x_1,x_2,x_3]+[x_1,x_4,x_3,x_2]+[x_4,x_3,x_2,x_1]+[x_2,x_4,x_3,x_1] = 0$$
holds in any Lie ring but the corresponding subset of $S_4$ can not be obtained from the sets $T_{k,l,4}$ using these operations.
Another object of our interest is the set of $2$-Jacobi subsets. A subset $T\subseteq S_n$ is said to be $2$-Jacobi if the identity \eqref{id_T} holds in any Lie algebra over a field of characteristic $2$. Of course, any Jacobi subset is 2-Jacobi. But there are a lot of 2-Jacobi subsets which are not Jacobi subsets. For example, $\{(),(123), (13)\}.$ Moreover, it is easy to check that for $n=3$ the number Jacobi subsets is $10$ but the number of $2$-Jacobi subsets is $16.$ The advantage of 2-Jacobi subsets is that it is easier to investigate them. For example, we do not know the number of Jacobi subsets of $S_n$ but we know the number of 2-Jacobi subsets: $2^{(n-1)!\cdot (n-1)}$ (Corollary \ref{Corollary_number_2-Jacobi}).
It was proved that, in contrast to the class of usual Jacobi subsets, the class of $2$-Jacobi
subsets is closed under symmetric difference, which makes it a $\mathbb Z/2$-vector space. Moreover, it was proved that any $2$-Jacobi subset can be obtained as a symmetric difference of several Jacobi subsets.
The paper is organised as follows: in Section \ref{section_Results} we present all definitions, constructions and results without proofs; in Section \ref{section_Proofs} we give all proofs.
\section{Results}\label{section_Results}
The left normed Lie bracket of elements $a_1,\dots a_n$ of a Lie ring $L$ is defined by recursion $[a_1,\dots a_n]:=[[a_1,\dots, a_{n-1}],a_n],$ where $[a_1]=a_1.$
By $S_n$ we denote the symmetric group on $\{1,\dots,n\}.$ If $n\leq m$ we denote by
$$\iota_{n,m}:S_n\hookrightarrow S_m$$
the canonical embedding.
\subsection{Jacobi subsets}
A subset $T$ of the symmetric group $S_n$ is said to be {\it Jacobi} if the following identity holds in any Lie ring
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\sigma\in T} [a_{\sigma(1)},\dots,a_{\sigma(n)}]=0.
\end{equation}
It is easy to see that $\{(),(1,2)\}$ and $\{ (),(1,2,3), (1,3,2) \}$ are Jacobi subsets of $S_n$ for any $n\geq 3.$ The following Lemma gives more examples of Jacobi subsets.
\begin{Lemma}\label{Lemma_properties_of_Jacobi} Let $T,T'$ be Jacobi subsets of $S_n$ and $H\subseteq G$ be subgroups of $S_n.$ Then the following holds.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $T\cap T'=\emptyset,$ then $T\cup T'$ is Jacobi.
\item $\sigma T$ is Jacobi for any $\sigma\in S_n$.
\item $T (1,2)$ is Jacobi, where $(1,2)\in S_n$ is the transposition.
\item If $n\leq m$, then $\iota_{n,m}(T)$ is a Jacobi subset of $S_m$.
\item If $H$ is Jacobi, then $G$ is Jacobi.
\item If $n\geq 2$ and $(1,2)\in G,$ then $G$ is Jacobi.
\item If $n\geq 3$ and $(1,2,3)\in G,$ then $G$ is Jacobi.
\end{enumerate}
\end{Lemma}
Let $\mathbb Z\langle x_1,\dots, x_n \rangle$ be the free associative ring generated by elements $x_1,\dots,x_n.$ We denote by $\gamma_n$ the additive subgroup of $\mathbb{Z}\langle x_1,\dots,x_n\rangle$ generated by the monomials $x_{\sigma(1)}\dots x_{\sigma(n)}$ where $\sigma$ runs over $S_n.$ It is easy to see that $\gamma_n$ is a free abelian group of rank $n!$ and
the monomials $x_{\sigma(1)}\dots x_{\sigma(n)}$ form its basis. Define a homomorphism $\beta_n:\gamma_n\to \gamma_n$ on the basis by the formula
$$\beta_n(x_{\sigma(1)}\dots x_{\sigma(n)})=[x_{\sigma(1)},\dots ,x_{\sigma(n)}].$$
For a subset $T\subseteq S_n$ we set $${\sf Sum}(T)=\sum_{\sigma\in T} x_{\sigma(1)}\dots x_{\sigma(n)}\ \in \gamma_n.$$
\begin{Lemma}\label{Lemma_equivalent_Jacobi}
A subset $T\subseteq S_n$ is Jacobi if and only if ${\sf Sum}(T) \in {\rm Ker}(\beta_n).$
\end{Lemma}
\subsection{Shuffles and sets $T_{k,l,n}$}
An {\it $(s,t)$--shuffle} is a pair $(\alpha,\beta)$ such that $\alpha:\{1,\dots,s\} \to \{1,\dots, s+t\}$ and $\beta:\{1,\dots,t\} \to \{1,\dots, s+t\}$ are strictly monotonic functions with disjoint images. The set of all $(s,t)$--shuffles is denoted by ${\sf Sh}(s,t)$. The set of all $(s,t)$--shuffles such that $\alpha(1)=1$ is denoted by ${\sf Sh}^1(s,t).$
\begin{Proposition}\label{Proposition_bracket_shaffles} Let $L$ be a Lie ring and $a,a_1,\dots a_n \in L.$ Then
$$[a,[a_{1}, \ldots, a_{n}]] = \sum\limits_{i=0}^{n-1}\sum\limits_{(\alpha, \beta)}(-1)^i \left[a, a_{\beta(i)},\dots, a_{\beta(1)},a_{\alpha(1)}, \dots, a_{\alpha(n-i)}\right],$$
where the second sum is taken over all shuffles $(\alpha,\beta) \in {\sf Sh}^1(n-i,i)$.
\end{Proposition}
Let $k,l\geq 1$ be natural numbers, $0\leq i\leq l-1$ and $(\alpha, \beta)\in {\sf Sh}^1(l-i,i)$. Consider the following permutations of $S_{k+l}$
$$\tilde{\sigma}_{\alpha,\beta,k,l} = \left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccc}
1 & \cdots & k & k+1 & \cdots & k+i & k+i+1 & \cdots & k+l \\
1 & \cdots & k & k+\beta(i) & \cdots & k+\beta(1) & k+\alpha(1) & \cdots & k+\alpha(l-i)
\end{array}\right).$$
and $\sigma_{\alpha,\beta, k,l} = \tilde{\sigma}_{\alpha,\beta,k,l}\circ (1,2)^i.$
The set of all such permutations $\sigma_{\alpha,\beta,k,l}$ with fixed $k$ and $l$ is denoted by
$$C_{k,l}=\{ \sigma_{\alpha,\beta,k,l}\mid 0\leq i\leq l-1, (\alpha,\beta)\in {\sf Sh}^1(l-i,i) \}.$$
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemma_bracket_sum} For any $k,l\geq 1$ the equation $$[[x_1,\dots,x_k],[x_{k+1},\dots,x_{k+l}]]=\beta_{k+l}({\sf Sum}(C_{k,l}))$$
holds in $\mathbb Z\langle x_1,\dots,x_{k+l} \rangle$.
\end{Lemma}
For natural numbers $k$ and $l$ we consider a permutation $\Phi_{k,l}\in S_{k+l}$ given by
$$\Phi_{k,l}(i)=\begin{cases}
i+k, & \text{ if } i\leq l,\\
i-l, & \text{ if } i>l.
\end{cases}$$
Roughly speaking, $\Phi_{k,l}$ shifts the interval $\{1,\dots,l\}$ on the place of the interval $\{k+1,\dots, k+l\}$ and shifts the interval $\{l+1,\dots,k+l\}$ on the place of the interval $\{1,\dots, k\}. $
\begin{Corollary}\label{Corollary_bracket_sum} For any $k,l\geq 1$ the equation $$[[x_{k+1},\dots,x_{k+l}],[x_{1},\dots,x_{k}]]=\beta_{k+l}({\sf Sum}(\Phi_{k,l}C_{l,k}))$$
holds in $\mathbb Z\langle x_1,\dots,x_{k+l} \rangle$.
\end{Corollary}
For $k,l\geq 1$ and $k+l\leq n$ we set
$$T_{k,l}:=C_{k,l} \cup (\Phi_{k,l} C_{l,k}), \hspace{1cm} T_{k,l,n}:=\iota_{k+l,n}(T_{k,l}).$$
\begin{Lemma}\label{Lemma_do_not_intersect} For $k,l\geq 1$ the subsets $C_{k,l}$ and $\Phi_{k,l}C_{l,k}$ do not intersect.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{Theorem}\label{Theorem1} For $k,l\geq 1$ and $k+l\leq n$ the set $T_{k,l,n}$ is a Jacobi subset of $S_n.$
\end{Theorem}
\begin{Theorem}[{cf. 8.6.7 of \cite{Reutenauer}}]\label{Theorem2} For any $n\geq 2$ the set $$\{{\sf Sum}(\sigma T_{k,1,n}) \mid \sigma\in S_n, \ \sigma(k+1)=1,\ 1\leq k \leq n-1 \}$$
is a basis of the free abelian group ${\sf Ker}(\beta_n).$ In particular, the rank of ${\sf Ker}(\beta_n)$ equals to \hbox{$(n-1)!\cdot (n-1).$}
\end{Theorem}
\subsection{2-Jacobi subsets}
A subset $T$ of the symmetric group $S_n$ is said to be {\it 2-Jacobi} if the identity \eqref{id_T} holds in any Lie algebra over the field $\mathbb Z/2$ (equivalently, over a field of characteristic 2). Of course, any Jacobi subset is 2-Jacobi. But there are a lot of 2-Jacobi subsets which are not Jacobi subsets. For example, $\{(),(123), (13)\}.$ Moreover, it is easy to check that for $n=3$ the number Jacobi subsets is $10$ but the number of $2$-Jacobi subsets is $16.$ The advantage of 2-Jacobi subsets is that it is easier to investigate them. For example, we do not know the number of Jacobi subsets of $S_n$ but we know the number of 2-Jacobi subsets: $2^{(n-1)!\cdot (n-1)}.$
\begin{Proposition}\label{Proposition_2-Jacobi} The set of 2-Jacobi subsets of $S_n$ is closed under symmetric difference. Moreover, the set of 2-Jacobi subsets of $S_n$ is a vector space over $\mathbb Z/2$ with respect to the symmetric difference with a basis is given by $$\{\sigma T_{k,1,n} \mid \sigma\in S_n, \ \sigma(k+1)=1,\ 1\leq k \leq n-1 \}.$$
\end{Proposition}
\begin{Corollary}\label{Corollary_number_2-Jacobi} The number of 2-Jacobi subsets of $S_n$ equals to $2^{(n-1)!\cdot (n-1)}.$
\end{Corollary}
\begin{Corollary}
Any 2-Jacobi subset can be presented as a symmetric difference of several Jacobi subsets.
\end{Corollary}
\section{Proofs}\label{section_Proofs}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma_properties_of_Jacobi}] (1) Obvious.
(2) Since $T$ is Jacobi, we have $\sum_{\tau \in T} [a_{\tau(1)},\dots,a_{\tau(n)}]=0$ for any elements $a_1,\dots, a_n$ of any Lie ring $L.$ Set $a_i=b_{\sigma(i)}.$ Then $0=\sum_{\tau \in T} [a_{\tau(1)},\dots,a_{\tau(n)}]=\sum_{\tau \in T} [b_{\sigma\tau(1)},\dots,b_{\sigma\tau(n)}]=\sum_{\tau \in \sigma T} [b_{\tau(1)},\dots,b_{\tau(n)}]$ for any elements $b_1,\dots,b_n$ of any lie ring $L.$ Then $\sigma T$ is Jacobi.
(3) $\sum_{\tau \in T(1,2)} $
$ [a_{\tau(1)},a_{\tau(2)}, \dots,$
$a_{\tau(n)}]$
$=$
$\sum_{\tau \in T} $
$[a_{\tau(2)}, a_{\tau(1)}\dots,$
$a_{\tau(n)}]$
$=$
$-(\sum_{\tau \in T} $
$[a_{\tau(1)}, a_{\tau(2)}\dots,$
$a_{\tau(n)}])$
$=$
$0.$
(4) Consider any elements $a_1,\dots,a_n, \dots , a_m.$ Then $\sum_{\tau \in T} [a_{\tau(1)},\dots,a_{\tau(n)}]=0,$
and hence $0$
$=$
$[[\sum_{\tau \in T}$
$[a_{\tau(1)},\dots,a_{\tau(n)}]$
$,$
$a_{n+1}, \dots , a_{m} ] $
$=$
$\sum_{\tau \in T}$
$[a_{\tau(1)},\dots,a_{\tau(n)},$
$a_{n+1},\dots,a_m]$
$=$
$\sum_{\tau \in \iota_{n,m}(T)}$
$[a_{\tau(1)},\dots,a_{\tau(n)}]. $
(5) By (2) we get that all cosets $gH$ are Jacobi for any $g\in G$, and by (1) we obtain that their union is Jacobi.
(6) and (7) follow from (5).
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma_equivalent_Jacobi}]
Denote by $L(x_1,\dots,x_n)$ the Lie subring of $\mathbb Z\langle x_1,\dots,x_n \rangle$ generated by $x_1,\dots,x_n.$ The Lie ring $L(x_1,\dots,x_n)$ is the free Lie ring on $x_1,\dots,x_n$ \cite[Theorem 0.5]{Reutenauer}. Then for any elements $a_1,\dots,a_n$ of a Lie ring $L$ there exist a unique Lie algebra homomorphism $f:L(x_1,\dots,x_n)\to L$ such that $f(x_i)=a_i.$ It follows that $T\subseteq S_n$ is Jacobi if and only if $\sum_{\sigma\in T}[x_{\sigma(1)},\dots, x_{\sigma(n)}]=0$ in $\mathbb Z\langle x_1,\dots x_n \rangle.$ Then the statement follows from the equality
$\beta_n({\sf Sum}(T))=\beta_n(\sum_{\sigma \in T} a_{\sigma(1)}\dots a_{\sigma(n)})=\sum_{\tau \in T} [a_{\tau(1)},\dots,a_{\tau(n)}]$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{Proposition_bracket_shaffles}]
First we prove the following statement that seems to be known but we can not find a good reference.
Let $R$ be an associative ring and $a_1,\dots,a_n\in R$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq_sh_com_assotiative}
[a_1,\dots, a_n]=\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \ \sum_{(\alpha,\beta)} (-1)^i a_{\beta(i)}\dots a_{\beta(1)}a_{\alpha(1)}\dots a_{\alpha(n-i)},
\end{equation}
where the second sum is taken $(\alpha,\beta)\in {\sf Sh}^1(n-i,i).$ The prove is by induction. For $n=2$ it is obvious. Assume that the formula holds for $[a_1,\dots,a_n]$ and prove it for $[a_1,\dots,a_{n+1}].$ The element $[a_1,\dots,a_{n+1}]$ is the sum of elements
$$(-1)^i a_{\beta(i)}\dots a_{\beta(1)}a_{\alpha(1)}\dots a_{\alpha(n-i)}a_{n+1}+(-1)^{i+1} a_{n+1}a_{\beta(i)}\dots a_{\beta(1)}a_{\alpha(1)}\dots a_{\alpha(n-i)},$$
where sum is taken over $0\leq i<n$ and $(\alpha,\beta)\in {\sf Sh}(n-i,i).$ Any $(n+1-i,i)$-shuffle $(\alpha(1),\dots,\alpha(n+1-i);\beta(1),\dots, \beta(i))$ is equal to either $(\alpha'(1),\dots,\alpha'(n-i),n+1;\beta(1),\dots, \beta(i))$ for a $(n-i,i)$-shuffle $(\alpha,\beta')$ or $(\alpha(1),\dots,\alpha(n+1-i);\beta'(1),\dots, \beta'(i-1),n+1)$ for a $(n+1-i,i-1)$-shuffle $(\alpha,\beta').$ The assertion follows.
Now we use the formula \eqref{eq_sh_com_assotiative} to prove the proposition. Fix a Lie ring $L.$ For an endomorphism $\varphi \in {\sf End}(L)$ and $a\in L$ we set $a.\varphi=\varphi(a).$ For any two endomorphisms $\varphi,\psi \in {\sf End}(L)$ we write $\varphi * \psi =\psi \circ \varphi.$ Then $(a.\varphi) . \psi=a.(\varphi * \psi).$ The commutator of $\varphi$ and $\psi$ with respect to $*$ is denoted by $[\varphi,\psi]_*=\varphi*\psi - \psi*\varphi.$ We consider ${\sf End}(L)$ as a ring with the operation $*$ which is opposite to the composition. Consider the map ${\sf ad}':L \to {\sf End}(L)$ given by ${\sf ad}'(a)(b)=[b,a].$ Then ${\sf ad}'$ is a homomorphism of Lie algebras i.e. ${\sf ad}'([a,b])=[{\sf ad}'(a),{\sf ad}'(b)]_*.$ Let $a_1,\dots,a_n$ be elements of $L.$ Set ${\bar a}_i={\sf ad}'(a_i).$ The equation \eqref{eq_sh_com_assotiative} implies that
$$[{\bar a}_1,\dots, {\bar a}_n]_*=\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \ \sum_{(\alpha,\beta)} (-1)^i {\bar a}_{\beta(i)}*{\dots} *{\bar a}_{\beta(1)}*{\bar a}_{\alpha(1)}*{\dots} *{\bar a}_{\alpha(n-i)},$$
where the second sum is taken $(\alpha,\beta)\in {\sf Sh}^1(n-i,i).$ If we apply $a.-$ to both parts of the equality, we obtain the required formula.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma_bracket_sum}]
Proposition \ref{Proposition_bracket_shaffles} implies that $[[x_1,\dots,x_k],[x_{k+1},\dots,x_{k+l}]]$ equals to the sum of elements
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&(-1)^i[x_1,\dots,x_k,x_{k+\beta(i)},\dots,x_{k+\beta(1)},x_{k+\alpha(1)},\dots,x_{k+\beta(n-i)}]= \\
& (-1)^i[x_{\tilde \sigma_{\alpha,\beta,k,l}(1)}, \dots ,x_{\tilde \sigma_{\alpha,\beta,k,l}(k+l)}]=
\\
& [x_{ \sigma_{\alpha,\beta,k,l}(1)}, \dots ,x_{ \sigma_{\alpha,\beta,k,l}(k+l)}].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma_do_not_intersect}] Consider cases.
Let $k\geq 2$ and $l\geq 1.$ Then for any $\sigma\in C_{k,l}$ we have $\sigma(\{1,2\})=\{1,2\}$ and for any $\tau\in \Phi_{k,l} C_{l,k}$ we have $k+1 \in \tau(\{1,2\}).$ Then $C_{k,l}\cap \Phi_{k,l}C_{l,k}=\emptyset.$
Let $k=1$ and $l\geq 2.$ Then $C_{l,k}=C_{l,1}=\{()\},$ and hence $\Phi_{1,l}C_{l,1}=\{\Phi_{1,l}\}$. For any $\sigma\in C_{1,l}$ we have $1\in \sigma(\{1,2\})$ but $\Phi_{1,l}(\{1,2\})=\{2,3\}.$ Then $C_{1,l}\cap \Phi_{1,l}C_{l,1}=\emptyset.$
Let $k=1$ and $l=1.$ Then $C_{1,1}=\{()\}$ and $\Phi_{1,1}C_{1,1}=\{(1,2)\}.$
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem1}]
Since $C_{k,l}$ and $\Phi_{k,l} C_{l,k}$ are disjoint, we get $\beta_n({\sf Sum}(T_{k,l}))$ $=$ $\beta_n({\sf Sum}(C_{k,l}))$ $+$ $\beta_n({\sf Sum}(\Phi_{k,l}C_{l,k}))$ $=$ $[[x_1,\dots,x_k] , [x_{k+1},\dots, x_{k+l}]]$ $+$ $[[x_{k+1},\dots , x_{k+l}] , [x_1,\dots,x_k]]$ $=$ $0.$
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Theorem2}]
It is proved in \cite{Blessenohl-Laue} (see also \cite[p. 211]{Reutenauer}) that the set $\{\sigma \theta_{j,n} \mid \sigma(j)=1, 2\leq j \leq n \}$ is a basis of ${\rm Ker}(\beta_n)$, where
$$\theta_{j,n}=x_1\dots x_n + x_j[x_1,\dots,x_{j-1}]x_{j+1}\dots x_n.$$
Prove that $\theta_{j,n}={\sf Sum}(T_{j-1,1,n}).$ Since $\theta_{j,n}$ is the image of $\theta_{j,j},$ it is sufficient to prove it for $j=n.$ Note that ${\sf Sum}(T_{n-1,1,n})={\sf Sum}(C_{n-1,1}) +{\sf Sum}(\Phi_{n-1,1}C_{1,n-1}) $ and $C_{n-1,1}=\{()\}.$ It follows that
\begin{align*}
&{\sf Sum}\left(T_{n-1, 1, n}\right) = x_1 x_2 \dots x_{n} + \sum_{i=0}^{n-2}\sum_{(\alpha, \beta)}(-1)^i x_n x_{\beta(i)} \dots x_{\beta(1)} x_{\alpha(1)} \dots x_{\alpha(n-1-i)} =\\
&\ \hspace{-0.5cm}= x_1 x_2 \dots x_{j} + x_n\sum_{i=0}^{n-2}\sum_{(\alpha, \beta)}(-1)^i x_{\beta(i)} \dots x_{\beta(1)} x_{\alpha(1)} \dots x_{\alpha(n-1-i)} =\theta_{n,n}.
\end{align*}
where the second sum is taken over all shuffles $(\alpha,\beta) \in {\sf Sh}^1(n-1-i,i)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{Proposition_2-Jacobi}]
Set
$$\gamma_n^{2}=\gamma_n\otimes \mathbb Z/2, \hspace{1cm} \beta_n^{2}=\beta_n\otimes {\sf id}_{\mathbb Z/2}, \hspace{1cm} {\sf Sum}^{2}(T)={\sf Sum}(T)\otimes 1 \in \gamma_n^2$$ for any $T\subseteq S_n.$ Similarly to Lemma \ref{Lemma_equivalent_Jacobi} one can prove that a subset $T\subseteq S_n$ is 2-Jacobi if and only if $\beta^2_n({\sf Sum}^2(T))=0.$ The set of subsets $\mathcal P(S_n)$ of the symmetric group $S_n$ is a vector space over $\mathbb Z/2$ with respect to the symmetric difference. Moreover, it is easy to see that the map ${\sf Sum}^2:\mathcal P(S_n) \to \gamma^2_n$ is an isomorphism of vector spaces over $\mathbb Z/2$. Hence the set of 2-Jacobi subsets is the kernel of the homomorphism $\beta^2_n\circ {\sf Sum}^2.$ It follows that 2-Jacobi subsets are closed under the symmetric difference. Moreover, ${\sf Sum}^2$ induces an isomorphism between the vector space of 2-Jacobi subsets and ${\rm Ker}(\beta^2_n).$ Theorem \ref{Theorem2} implies that $\{{\sf Sum}^2(\sigma T_{k,1,n}) \mid \sigma\in S_n, \ \sigma(k+1)=1,\ 1\leq k \leq n-1 \}$ is a basis of $\gamma^2.$ Thus $\{\sigma T_{k,1,n} \mid \sigma\in S_n, \ \sigma(k+1)=1,\ 1\leq k \leq n-1 \}$ is a basis of the vector space of 2-Jacobi subsets.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
As advertising on the web becomes more mature,
\emph{ad exchanges} (AdX) play a growing role as a platform for selling
advertisement slots from publishers to advertisers~\cite{KorulaMN15}.
Following the Yahoo! acquisition
of Right Media in 2007, all major web companies, such as Google, Facebook, and
Amazon, have created or acquired their own ad exchanges.
Other major ad exchanges are provided by the Rubicon
Project, OpenX, and AppNexus.
Every time a user visits a web page, the publisher
of that web page can ask an ad exchange to auction off the ad slots on this page.
Thus, the goods traded at an ad exchange are {\em ad impressions}.
This process is also known as \emph{real-time bidding} (RTB).
A web page might contain multiple ad slots, which are currently modeled to be
sold separately in individual auctions.
Individual advertisers typically do not directly participate in these auctions
but entrust some ad network to bid on their behalf.
When a publisher sends an ad impression to an exchange,
the exchange usually contacts several ad networks and runs a (variant of a) second-price auction~\cite{MansourMN2012} between them,
potentially with a reserve price under which the impression is not sold.
An ad network (e.g. Google's Display Network~\cite{GDN}) might then run
a second, ``local'' auction to determine the allocation of the
ad slot among its advertisers. We study this
interaction of a \emph{central auction} at the exchange and \emph{local
auctions} at the ad networks.\footnote{In this work an auction is an
algorithm to determine prices of items and their allocation to bidders.}
We develop a game-theoretic model that considers the
incentives of the following three parties: (1) the ad exchange, (2) the ad networks,
and (3) the advertisers.
As the ad exchange usually charges a fixed percentage of the revenue and hands
the rest to the publishers, the ad exchange and the publishers have the same objective
and can be modeled as one entity.
We then study equilibrium concepts of this new model of a three-party exchange.
Our model is described as an ad exchange, but it may also model other scenarios
with mediators that act between bidders and sellers, as noted already by
Feldman~et~al.~\cite{FeldmanMMP2010}.
The main differences between our model and earlier models (discussed in detail
at the end of this section) are the following:
(a) We consider the incentives of all three parties {\em simultaneously}.
(b) While most approaches in prior work use Bayesian assumptions, we apply {\em worst-case analysis}.
(c) We allow auctions with {\em multiple heterogeneous items}, namely combinatorial
auctions, in contrast to the single-item auctions studied so far.
Multiple items arise naturally when selling ad slots on a per-impression basis,
since there are usually multiple advertisement slots on a web page.
To motivate the incentives of ad networks and exchanges, we
compare next their short and long-term revenue considerations, following Mansour~et~al.~\cite{MansourMN2012} and Muthukrishnan~\cite{Muthukrishnan2009}.
Ad exchanges and ad networks generate revenue as follows:
(1) An ad exchange usually receives some percentage of the price paid by the winner(s) of
the central auction.
(2) An ad network can charge a higher price to
its advertisers than it paid to the exchange or it can be paid via direct
contracts with its advertisers.
Thus both the ad exchange and the ad networks (might) profit from higher prices in their auctions.
However, they also have a motivation not to charge too high
prices as (a) the advertisers could stick to alternative advertising channels such
as long-term contracts with publishers, and
(b) there is a significant competition between
the various ad exchanges and ad networks, as advertisers can easily switch to
a competitor.
Thus, lower prices (might) increase advertiser participation and,
hence, the long-term revenue of ad exchanges and ad networks.
We only consider a single auction (of multiple items)
and leave it as an open question to study changes over time.
We still take the long-term considerations outlined above into account by
assuming that the ad exchange aligns its strategic behavior with its long-term
revenue considerations and only desires for each central auction
to sell {\em all} items.\footnote{Our model and results can be adapted to include
reserve prices under which the ad exchange is not willing to sell an item.}
In our model the incentive of an ad network to participate in the exchange
comes from the opportunity to purchase some items at a low price and then
resell them at a higher price. However, due to long-term considerations,
our model additionally requires
the ad networks to ``satisfy their advertisers'' by faithfully representing
the advertisers' preferences towards the exchange, while still allowing the
ad networks to extract revenue from the competition between the advertisers
in their network.\footnote{We implicitly assume that the central auction prices are
accessible to the advertisers such that they can verify whether an ad
network represented their preferences correctly. Informally, we suggest that if
one ad network ``satisfies its advertisers'' then, over time, all ad networks
have to follow this behavior to keep their advertisers.}
An example for this kind of restriction for an ad network is
Google's Display Network~\cite{GDN} that guarantees its advertisers that
each ad impression is sold via a second-price auction, independent of whether
an ad exchange is involved in the transaction or not~\cite{MansourMN2012}.
To model a \emph{stable} outcome in a three-party exchange,
we use the equilibrium concept of
\emph{envy-freeness} for all three types of participants. A participant is
envy-free if he receives his most preferred set of items under the current prices.
Envy-freeness for all participants is a natural notion to express stability in a market,
as it implies that no coalition of participants would strictly profit from deviating
from the current allocation and prices (assuming truthfully reported preferences).
Thus an envy-free equilibrium supports stability in the market prices, which
in turn facilitates, for example, revenue prediction for prospective participants
and hence might increase participation and long-term revenue.
For only two parties,
i.e., sellers and buyers, where the sellers have no intrinsic value for the
items they sell, envy-freeness for all participants is equal to a \emph{competitive}
or \emph{Walrasian} equilibrium~\cite{Walras1874}, a well established notion in economics
to characterize an equilibrium in a market where demand equals supply.
We provide a generalization of this equilibrium concept to three parties.
\paragraph*{Our Contribution}
We introduce the following model for ad exchanges.
A {\em central seller} wants to sell $k$ \emph{items}. There are $m$ \emph{mediators}
$\M_i$, each with her own $n_i$ \emph{bidders}. Each bidder has a valuation function over all subsets of the items.
In the ad exchange setting, the central seller is the ad exchange, the items are
the ad slots shown to a visitor of a web page, the mediators are the ad networks,
and the bidders are the advertisers. A bidder does not have any direct
``connection'' to the central seller. Instead, all communication is done
through the mediators. A mechanism
for allocating the items to the bidders is composed of a \emph{central
auction} with mediators acting as bidders, and then
\emph{local auctions}, one per mediator, in which every mediator allocates the set of items she
bought in the central auction; that is, an auction where the bidders of that mediator are
the only participating bidders and the items that the mediator received in the
central auction are the sole items.
The prices of the items obtained in the central auction
provide a lower bound for the prices in the local auctions, i.e., they act as
reserve prices in the local auctions.
We assume that the central seller and the bidders have quasi-linear utilities,
i.e., utility
functions that are linear in the price, and that their incentive is to maximize
their utility. For the central seller
this means that his utility from selling a set of slots is just the sum of
prices of the items in the set.
The utility of a bidder on receiving a set of items~$S$ is his value for~$S$
minus the sum of the prices of the items in~$S$.
The incentive of a mediator, however, is not so
straightforward and needs to be defined carefully.
In our model, to ``satisfy'' her bidders, each mediator guarantees her bidders that the outcome of the local auction
will be \emph{minimal envy free}, that is, for the final local price
vector, the item set that is allocated to any bidder is one of his most desirable sets over \emph{all} possible item sets
(even sets that contain items that were not allocated to his mediator, i.e., each
bidder is not only {\em locally}, but {\em globally envy-free})
and there is no (item-wise) smaller price vector that fulfills this requirement.
We assume that each mediator wants to maximize her revenue\footnote{For the
purpose of this paper, the terms revenue and utility are interchangeable.} and
define the revenue of a mediator for a set of items~$S$ as the difference
between her earnings when selling~$S$ with this restriction and the price she
has to pay for~$S$ at the central auction.
For this model we define a new equilibrium concept, namely the
\emph{three-party competitive equilibrium}.
At this equilibrium all three types of participants are envy-free. Envy-free
solutions for the bidders always exist, as one can set the
prices of all items high enough so that no bidder will demand any item.
Additionally, we require that there is no envy for the central seller,
meaning that all items are sold. If there were no mediators, then a two-party envy-free
solution would be exactly a \emph{Walrasian equilibrium}, which for certain
scenarios can be guaranteed~\cite{KelsoCr1982}.
However, with mediators it is not a-priori
clear that a three-party competitive equilibrium exists as,
additionally, the mediators have to be envy-free.
We show that for our definition of a mediator's revenue (a) the above requirements
are fulfilled and (b) a three-party competitive equilibrium
exists whenever a Walrasian equilibrium for the central auction exists
or whenever a two-party equilibrium exists for the bidders and the central seller
without mediators.
Interestingly, we show that for gross-substitute bidder valuations the incentives
of this kind of mediator can be represented with an {\OR}-valuation over
the valuations of her bidders.
This then leads to the following result:
{\em For {gross-substitute} bidder valuations a three-party competitive equilibrium
can be computed in polynomial time.} In particular, we will show how to compute the
three-party competitive equilibrium with minimum prices.
\paragraph*{Related Work}
The theoretical research on ad exchanges was initialized by a survey
of Muthukrishnan~\cite{Muthukrishnan2009} that lists several interesting research directions.
Our approach specifically addresses his 9th problem, namely to enable the
advertisers to express more complex preferences that arise when multiple
advertisement slots are auctioned off at once as well as to design suitable
auctions for the exchange and the ad networks to determine allocation
and prices given these preferences.
The most closely related work with respect to the model of the ad exchange
is Feldman~et~al.~\cite{FeldmanMMP2010}. It is similar to our work in two aspects: (1) The mediator bids on behalf
of her bidders in a central auction and the demand of the mediator as well as
the tentative allocation and prices for reselling to her bidders are
determined via a local auction. (2)
The revenue of the mediator is the price she can obtain from reselling minus
the price she paid in the central auction. The main differences are:
(a) Only one item is auctioned
at a time and thus the mediator can determine her valuation with a single
local auction.
(b) Their work does not consider the incentives of the bidders, only of the mediators and the central seller.
(c) A Bayesian setting is used where the mediators and
the exchange know the probability distributions of the bidders' valuations.
Based on this information, the mediators and the exchange choose reserve
prices for their second-price auctions to maximize their revenue. The work
characterizes the equilibrium strategies for the selection of the reserve
prices.
Mansour~et~al.~\cite{MansourMN2012} (mainly) describe the auction at the DoubleClick
exchange. Similar to our work, advertisers use ad networks as mediators for
the central auction. They observe that if mediators that participate in a
single-item, second-price
central auction are only allowed to submit a single bid, then it is not possible
for the central auction to correctly implement a second-price auction over
{\em all} bidders as the bidders with the highest and the second highest value
might use the same mediator. Thus they introduce the
\emph{Optional Second Price} auction, where every mediator is allowed
to optionally submit the second highest bid with the highest bid. In such an
auction each mediator can guarantee to her bidders that if one of them is
allocated the item, then he pays the (global) second-price for it. For the
single-item setting, the bidders in their auction and in our auction pay the
same price. If the mediator of the winning bidder did \emph{not} specify an optional
second price, then her revenue will equal the revenue of our mediator. If she
did, her revenue will be zero and the central seller will receive the gain
between the prices in the local and the central auction.
Stavrogiannis~et~al.~\cite{StavrogiannisGP2013} consider a game between bidders and mediators,
where the bidders can select mediators (based on Bayesian assumptions of
each other's valuations) and the mediators can set the reserve prices in the
second-price local auction. The work presents mixed Nash equilibrium strategies
for the bidders to select their mediator. In~\cite{StavrogiannisGP2014} the same
authors compare different single-item local auctions with respect to the achieved
social welfare and the revenue of the mediators and the exchange.
Balseiro~et~al.~(2015) introduced a setting that
does {\em not} include mediators~\cite{BalseiroBW15}.
Instead, they see the ad exchange as a game between publishers, who select
parameters such as reserve prices for second-price auctions, and advertisers,
whose budget constraints link different auctions over time. They introduced
a new equilibrium concept for this game and used this to analyze the impact
of auction design questions such as the selection of a reserve price.
Balseiro~et~al.~(2014)~\cite{BalseiroFMM14} and Dvo{\v r}{\' a}k and Henzinger~\cite{DvorakH14}
studied a publisher's trade-off between using an ad exchange versus fulfilling long-term contracts with advertisers.
Equilibria in trading networks (such as ad exchanges) are also
addressed in the ``matching with contracts'' literature.
Hatfield and Milgrom~\cite{HatfieldMi2005} presented a new model where instead of
bidders and items there are \emph{agents} and \emph{trades} between pairs of
agents. The potential trades are modeled as edges in a graph where the
agents are represented by the nodes.
Agent valuations are then defined over the potential trades and assumed to be
monotone substitute. They proved the existence of an (envy-free) equilibrium when
the agent-trades graph is bipartite. Later this was improved to directed
acyclic graphs by Ostrovsky~\cite{Ostrovsky2008} and to arbitrary
graphs by Hatfield~et~al.~\cite{HatfieldKoNiOsWe2013}.
They did not show (polynomial-time) algorithms to reach equilibria.
Our model can be reduced to this model, hence a three-party equilibrium exists when
all bidders are monotone gross substitute.
However, we are not aware of a reduction that is polynomial in the
number of bidders and items.
\paragraph*{Outline}
We formally define
our model for ad exchanges in Section~\ref{sec:model}.
In Section~\ref{sec:alg} we present our main results for gross-substitute bidders,
including a polynomial-time algorithm to
compute a three-party competitive equilibrium.
Finally we conclude and suggest future directions in Section~\ref{sec:discuss}.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:prelim}
Let $\Omega$ denote a set of $k$ items.
A \emph{price vector} is an assignment of a non-negative price to every element
of $\Omega$. For a price vector $p = (p_1, ..., p_k)$ and a set $S \subseteq
\Omega$ we use $p(S) = \sum_{j \in S} p_j$.
For any two price vectors $p, r$ an inequality such as $p \ge r$ as well
as the operations $\min(p,r)$ and $\max(p,r)$ are meant item-wise.
We denote with $\langle \Omega_b\rangle = \langle \Omega_b\rangle_{b\in \B}$ an \emph{allocation} of the items in
$\Omega$ such that for all bidders $b \in \B$ the set of
items allocated to $b$ is given by $\Omega_b$ and we have
$\Omega_b \subseteq \Omega$
and $\Omega_b \cap \Omega_{b'} = \emptyset$ for $b' \ne b$, $b' \in \B$.
Note that some items might not be allocated to any bidder.
A \emph{valuation} function $v_b$ of a bidder~$b$ is a function from
$2^{\Omega}$ to~$\R$, where $2^{\Omega}$ denotes the set of all subsets
of~$\Omega$. We assume throughout the paper $v_b(\emptyset) = 0$.
Unless specified otherwise, for this work we assume \emph{monotone} valuations, that is, for $S\subseteq T$ we have $v_b(S)\leq v_b(T)$.
This assumption is made for ease of presentation.
We use $\{v_b\}$ to denote a collection of valuation functions.
The \inshort{(quasi-linear) }\emph{utility} of a bidder~$b$ from a set $S \subseteq \Omega$ at prices $p \ge 0$ is defined
as $u_{b,p}(S) = v_b(S) - p(S)$. \infull{Such utility functions are often called
\emph{quasi-linear}, i.e., linear in the price.}
The \emph{demand} $D_b(p)$ of a bidder $b$ for prices $p \ge 0$ is the set of subsets
of items $S \subseteq \Omega$ that maximize the bidder's utility at prices~$p$.
We call a set in the demand a \emph{demand representative}. Throughout the
paper we omit subscripts if they are clear from the context.
\begin{definition}[Envy free]
An allocation $\langle \Omega_b\rangle$ of items $\Omega$ to bidders $\B$ is
envy free \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)} for some prices $p$ if for all bidders $b \in \B$, $\Omega_b\in D_b(p)$.
We say that prices $p$ are envy free \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)} if there
exists an envy-free allocation \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)} for these prices.
\end{definition}
There exist envy-free prices for any valuation functions of the
bidders, e.g., set all prices to $\max_{b, S} v_b(S)$. For these prices
the allocation which does not allocate any item is envy free.
Thus also minimal envy-free prices always exist, but are in general not unique.
\begin{definition}[Walrasian equilibrium \textup{(}\we{}\textup{)}]
A Walrasian equilibrium \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)} is an envy-free allocation $\langle
\Omega_b\rangle$ \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)} with prices $p$ such that all prices are non-negative
and the price of unallocated items is zero. We call the allocation
$\langle \Omega_b\rangle$ a Walrasian allocation \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)}
and the prices $p$ Walrasian prices \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)}.
\end{definition}
We assume that the central seller has a value of zero for every subset of the
items; thus (with quasi-linear utility functions) selling all items makes the
seller envy free.
In this case a Walrasian equilibrium can be seen as an \emph{envy-free
two-party equilibrium}, i.e., envy free for the buyers and the seller.
Note that for a Walrasian price vector there might exist multiple
envy-free allocations.
\subsection{Valuation Classes}
\ignore{
Monotone valuation functions are valuation functions for which for every
$S \subseteq T \subseteq \Omega$ it holds that $v(S) \le v(T)$.
We explicitly do \emph{not} assume
monotonicity of the valuation functions in general, while many known results
rely on this property.}
A \emph{unit demand} valuation assigns a value to every item and defines the value
of a set as the \emph{maximum} value of an item in it.
An \emph{additive} valuation also assigns a value to every item but defines
the value of a set as the \emph{sum} of the values of the items in the set.
Non-negative unit demand and non-negative additive valuations both have the
gross-substitute property (defined below) and are by definition monotone.
\begin{definition}[Gross substitute \textup{(}\gs{}\textup{)}]
A valuation function is \emph{gross substitute} if for every two price vectors
$p^{(2)} \ge p^{(1)} \ge 0$ and every set $D^{(1)} \in D(p^{(1)})$, there exists a set
$D^{(2)} \in D(p^{(2)})$ with $j \in D^{(2)}$ for every $j \in D^{(1)}$ with $p^{(1)}_j = p^{(2)}_j$.
\end{definition}
For \emph{gross-substitute} valuations of the bidders a Walrasian equilibrium
is guaranteed to exist in a two-sided market~\cite{KelsoCr1982} and can be
computed in polynomial time~\cite{NisanS2006,PaesLeme2014}. Further, gross
substitute is the maximal valuation class containing the unit demand class for
which the former holds~\cite{GS1999}.
Several equivalent definitions are known for this
class~\cite{GS1999,PaesLeme2014}.
We will further use that for gross-substitute valuations the
Walrasian prices form a complete lattice~\cite{GS1999}.
We define next an $\OR$-valuation.
Lehmann~et~al.~\cite{LehmannLeNi2006} showed that the $\OR$ of
gross-substitute valuations is gross substitute.
\begin{definition}[$\OR$-player]\label{def:OR}
The $\OR$ of two valuations $v$ and $w$ is defined as
$(v\;\OR\; w)(S) = \max_{R, T \subseteq S, R \cap T = \emptyset}(v(R) + w(T))$.
Given a set of valuations $\{v_b\}$ for bidders $ b \in \B$,
we say that the $\OR$-player is a player with valuation
$v_{\OR}(S) = \max_{\langle S_b\rangle}
\sum_{b \in \B} v_b(S_b)\,.$
\end{definition}
\section{Model and Equilibrium} \label{sec:model}
There are $k$ items to be allocated to $m$ mediators. Each mediator $\M_i$
represents a set $\B_i$ of bidders, where $|\B_i|=n_i$. Each bidder
is connected to a unique mediator. Each bidder has a valuation function over
all subsets of the items and a quasi-linear utility function.
A \emph{central auction} is an
auction run on all items with mediators as bidders. After an allocation $\langle \Omega_i\rangle$
and prices $r$ at
the central auction are set, another $m$ \emph{local auctions} are conducted, one by
each mediator. In the
local auction for mediator $\M_i$ the items $\Omega_i$ that were allocated to
her in the central auction are the sole
items and the bidders $\B_i$ are the sole bidders. A solution
is an assignment of central-auction and local-auction prices to items and
an allocation of items to bidders and hence,
by uniqueness, also to mediators. We define next a three-party equilibrium
based on envy-freeness.
\begin{definition}[Equilibrium]
A \emph{three-party competitive equilibrium} is an allocation of items to bidders
and a set of $m+1$ price vectors $r,p^1,p^2,\ldots,p^m$ such that the
following requirements hold.
For $1 \le i \le m$
\begin{enumerate}
\item every mediator\footnote{Independent of how the demand of a mediator is
defined.} $\M_i$ is allocated a set $\Omega_i$ in her demand at price $r$,
\item every item $j$ with non-zero price $r$ is allocated to a mediator,
\item the price $p^i$ coincides with $r$ for all items not in $\Omega_i$\label{rq},
\item and every bidder $b\in \B_i$ is allocated a subset of $\Omega_i$ that is in his demand at price $p^i$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
In other words, the allocation to the bidders in $\B_i$ with prices $p^i$ must be
envy-free for the bidders, the allocation to the mediators with
prices $r$ must be envy free for the mediators and for the central seller, i.e.,
must be a Walrasian equilibrium; and the prices $p^i$ must be equal
to the prices $r$ for all items not assigned to mediator $\M_i$.
Note that the allocation of the items to the mediators and prices~$r$ are the
outcome of a \emph{central} auction run by the central seller, while the allocation
to the bidders in $\B_i$ and prices~$p^i$ correspond to the outcome of a \emph{local}
auction run by mediator~$\M_i$. These auctions are connected by the demands
of the mediators and Requirement~\ref{rq}.
We next present our mediator model.
The definition of an Envy-Free Mediator, or $\m$-mediator for short,
reflects the following idea:
To determine her revenue for a set of items $S$ at central auction prices $r$,
the mediator simulates the local auction she would run if she would obtain
the set $S$ at prices $r$. Given the outcome of this ``virtual auction'',
she can compute her potential revenue for $S$ and $r$ as the difference between the
virtual auction prices of the items sold in the virtual auction
and the central auction prices for the items in $S$.
However, as motivated in the introduction, the mediator is required to represent the preferences of her
bidders and therefore not every set $S$ is ``allowed'' for the mediator,
that is, for some sets the revenue of the mediator is set to $-1$.
The sets that maximize the revenue are then in the demand of the mediator at
central auction prices $r$.
To make the revenue of a mediator well-defined and to follow our motivation
that a mediator should satisfy her bidders, the virtual auctions specifically
compute minimal envy-free price vectors.
\begin{definition}[Envy-Free Mediator]\label{def:mediator}
An $\m$-mediator $\M_i$ determines her demand for a price vector $r \ge 0$ as follows. For
each subset of items $S \subseteq \Omega$ she runs a virtual auction with items
$S$, her bidders $\B_i$,
and reserve prices $r$. We assume that the virtual auction computes minimal
envy-free prices $p^S \ge r$ and a corresponding envy-free allocation $\langle S_b\rangle$.\inshort{\footnote{If there
are multiple envy-free allocations on $S$ for the prices $p^S$, the mediator
chooses one that maximizes $\sum_{b \in \B_i} p^S(S_b)$.}}
We extend the prices $p^S$ to all items in $\Omega$ by setting $p^S_j = r_j$
for $j \in \Omega \setminus S$,
and define the revenue $R_{i,r}(S)$ of the mediator for a set $S$ as follows.
If the allocation $\langle S_b\rangle$ is envy free for the bidders $\B_i$ and prices $p^S$ on
$\Omega$, then $R_{i,r}(S) = \sum_{b \in \B_i} p^S(S_b) - r(S)$;
otherwise, we set $R_{i,r}(S) = -1$.\infull{\footnote{For the results of this paper this could
be any negative value including $-\infty$.}}
The demand $D_{i}(r)$ of $\M_i$ is the set
of all sets $S$ that maximize the revenue of the mediator for the reserve prices $r$.
The local auction of $\M_i$ for a set $\Omega_i$ allocated to her
in the central auction at prices $r$ is equal to her virtual auction for $\Omega_i$
and $r$.
\end{definition}
\infull{Note that for a set $S$ with $R_{i,r}(S) = \sum_{b \in \B_i} p^S(S_b) - r(S)$
the revenue of an $\m$-mediator $\M_i$ is maximal if the envy-free allocation
on $S$ is such that $\sum_{b \in \B_i} p^S(S_b)$ is as high as possible. Thus if there
are multiple envy-free allocations on $S$ for the prices $p^S$, the mediator
chooses one that maximizes $\sum_{b \in \B_i} p^S(S_b)$.}
\ignore{\footnote{
We need this assumption in our proof that for \gs{} valuations
of the bidders a three-party competitive equilibrium exists. However,
in this case the assumption can easily be satisfied within a mechanism
that computes such an equilibrium by the way an $\m$-mediator can then determine
a set in her demand.}}
Following the above definition, we say that a price vector
is \emph{locally envy free} if it is envy free for the bidders $\B_i$ on
the subset $\Omega_i \subseteq \Omega$ assigned to mediator $\M_i$ and
\emph{globally envy free} if it is envy free for the bidders $\B_i$ on $\Omega$.
Note that if $p^S$ is envy free on $\Omega$, then it is minimal envy free
$\ge r$ on $\Omega$ for the bidders $\B_i$.
An interesting property of $\m$-mediators is that every
Walrasian equilibrium in the central auction can be combined with the
outcome of the local auctions of $\m$-mediators to form a three-party
competitive equilibrium.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:mediator}
Assume all mediators are $\m$-mediators. Then a Walrasian equilibrium in the
central auction with allocation $\langle \Omega_i \rangle$ together with
the allocation and prices computed in the local auctions of the mediators $\M_i$
on their sets $\Omega_i$ \textup{(}not necessarily Walrasian\textup{)} form a three-party competitive equilibrium.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
A Walrasian equilibrium in the central auction is a price vector $r \ge 0$ and
an allocation $\langle \Omega_i \rangle$ of items to mediators such that
every item with strictly positive price is allocated to a mediator and
every mediator is allocated a set in her demand $D_{i}(r)$.
By the definition of $D_{i}(r)$, the virtual auction for every
set $S \in D_{i}(r)$ computes an
allocation of the items in $S$ to her bidders and envy-free prices $p^i \ge r$
(on $\Omega$) such that every bidder in $\B_i$ is allocated a set in his demand at
prices $p^i$ and $p^i_j = r_j$ for all items $j \notin S$. Thus all requirements
of a three-party competitive equilibrium are satisfied.
\end{proof}
Further, with $\m$-mediators a three-party competitive equilibrium exists whenever a
Walrasian equilibrium exists for the bidders and items without the mediators.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:exist}
Assume all mediators are $\m$-mediators and a Walrasian equilibrium exists for the
set of bidders and items \textup{(}without mediators\textup{)}. Then there exists
a three-party competitive equilibrium.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
A Walrasian equilibrium is a price vector $r \ge 0$ and
an allocation $\langle \Omega_b \rangle$ of items to bidders such that
every bidder is envy-free and all items with non-zero price are allocated
to a bidder. This equilibrium induces a trivial three-party competitive
equilibrium where all price vectors are identical to $r$ and the allocation to
mediators is uniquely determined by the allocation~$\langle \Omega_b \rangle$
to bidders. To see this note that the allocation $\langle \Omega_b
\rangle$ with prices $r$ is globally envy-free for all bidders and thus for a
mediator $\M_i$ the minimal locally envy-free prices $\ge r$ are equal to $r$ for
the set of items allocated to $\B_i$. The revenue of all mediators under this
equilibrium is zero and for each mediator the set allocated to her is in her
demand.\footnote{The above proof also holds for
any other mediator definition that prohibits mediators to gain other revenue
than from the competition between her bidders in the local auction. This is
because there is no competition in
the local auction when the allocation and prices in the central auction are
determined by a Walrasian equilibrium between bidders and items.}
\end{proof}
The proof of Theorem~\ref{th:exist} only shows the existence of trivial
three-party equilibria
that basically ignores the presence of mediators. However, three-party equilibria
and $\m$-mediators allow for richer outcomes that permit the mediators to
gain revenue from the competition between their bidders while still representing
the preferences of their bidders towards the central seller.
In the next section we show how to find such an equilibrium provided that the
valuations of all bidders are gross substitute. Recall that gross-substitute
valuations are the most general valuations that include unit demand valuations
for which a Walrasian equilibrium exists~\cite{GS1999}; and that efficient
algorithms for finding a Walrasian equilibrium are only known for this valuation class.
\section{An Efficient Algorithm for Gross-substitute Bidders}\label{sec:alg}
In this section we will show how to find, in polynomial time, a three-party
competitive equilibrium if the valuations of all bidders are gross substitute.
The prices the bidders have to pay at equilibrium, and thus the utilities
they achieve, will be the same as in a Walrasian equilibrium (between bidders
and items) with minimum prices
(Section~\ref{sec:minWEprices}). The price
the bidders pay is split between the mediators and the exchange. We show
how to compute an equilibrium where this split is best for the mediators
and worst for the exchange. In turn the computational load can be split
between the mediators and the exchange as well.
The algorithm will be based on existing algorithms to compute Walrasian
equilibria for gross-substitute bidders.
The classical (two-party) \emph{allocation problem} is the following:
We are given $k$~items and $n$~valuation functions and we should find
an equilibrium allocation (with or without equilibrium prices) if one exists.
Recall that in general a valuation function has a description of size
exponential in~$k$. Therefore, the input valuation functions can only be
accessed via an \emph{oracle}, defined below.
An \emph{efficient} algorithm runs in time polynomial in $n$ and $k$ (where
the oracle access is assumed to take constant time).
Given an algorithm that computes a Walrasian allocation for gross-substitute
bidders, by a result of Gul and Stacchetti~\cite{GS1999} minimum Walrasian
prices can be computed by solving the allocation problem
$k+1$~times. A Walrasian allocation can be combined with any
Walrasian prices to form a Walrasian equilibrium~\cite{GS1999}.
Thus we can assume for gross-substitute valuations
that a polynomial-time algorithm for the allocation problem also returns a
vector of minimum prices that support the allocation.
Two main oracle definitions that were considered in the literature are the
\emph{valuation oracle}, where a query is a set of items~$S$ and the oracle
replies with the exact value of~$S$; and the \emph{demand oracle}, where a
query is a price vector~$p$ and the oracle replies with a demand
representative~$D$~\cite{AGT}.
Note that in the literature the answer of a demand oracle is sometimes defined
to be all sets in the demand, however this cannot be assumed to be of
polynomial size even for gross-substitute valuations.
It is known that a demand oracle is strictly
stronger than a valuation oracle, i.e., a valuation query can be
simulated by a polynomial number of demand queries but not vice versa.
For gross-substitute valuations, however, these two query models are polynomial-time equivalent,
see Paes~Leme~\cite{PaesLeme2014}.
The two-party allocation problem is efficiently solvable for gross-substitute
valuations~\cite{NisanS2006,PaesLeme2014}.
For other valuations efficient algorithms are not known even in the demand
query model.
We define the \emph{three-party allocation problem} in the same manner.
We are given $k$ items, $n$ valuation functions over the subsets of items
and $m$ mediators,
each associated with a set of unique bidders. We are looking for
a three-party equilibrium allocation (and equilibrium prices) if one exists.
We will assume that the input valuations are given through a valuation oracle.
An efficient algorithm runs in time polynomial in $n$ and $k$ (hence also in $m \leq n$).
The algorithm will be based on the following central result: For gross
substitute valuations of the bidders an $\m$-mediator
and an $\OR$-player over the valuations of the same bidders are
equivalent with respect to their demand and their allocation of items to
bidders. Thus in this case $\m$-mediators can be considered as if they have a
gross-substitute valuation.
Note that for general valuations this equivalence does not hold.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:equal}
If the valuation functions of a set of bidders $\B_i$ are gross substitute,
then the demand of an $\m$-mediator for $\B_i$ is equal to the demand of an
$\OR$-player for $\B_i$.
Moreover, the allocation in a virtual auction of the $\m$-mediator for reserve
prices $r$ and a set of items $S$ in the demand is an optimal allocation for the
$\OR$-player for $S$ and $r$ and vice versa.
\end{theorem}
To this end, we will first show for the virtual (and local) auctions that a modified Walrasian
equilibrium, the \newwe{}, exists for gross-substitute valuations with reserve prices.
For this we will use yet another reduction to a (standard) Walrasian equilibrium
without reserve prices but with an additional additive player\footnote{Such a player
was introduced by Paes~Leme~\cite{PaesLeme2014} to find
the demand of an $\OR$-player (with a slightly different definition of $\OR$).}.
\begin{definition}[Walrasian equilibrium with reserve prices $r$
\textup{(}\newwe{}\textup{)}~\cite{GuruswamiHaKaKeKeMc2005}]
A Walrasian equilibrium with reserve prices $r \ge 0$ \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)} is an
envy-free allocation $\langle \Omega_b\rangle$ \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)} with prices
$p$ such that $p\geq r$,
and the price of$\ $every unallocated item is equal to its reserve price,
i.e., $p_j = r_j$ for $j \not\in \cup_b \Omega_b$. We say that $\langle \Omega_b\rangle$
is a \newwe{} allocation \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)} and $p$ are \newwe{} prices \textup{(}on $\Omega$\textup{)}.
\end{definition}
\subsection{Properties of Walrasian Equilibria with Reserve Prices}\label{sec:we}
In this section we generalize several results about Walrasian equilibria
to Walrasian equilibria with reserve prices. Similar extensions were shown
for unit demand valuations in~\cite{GuruswamiHaKaKeKeMc2005}.
We first define a suitable linear program. The \newlp{}, shown below, is a
linear program obtained from a reformulation of the dual of the LP-relaxation
of the welfare maximization integer program after adding reserve prices $r \ge 0$.
\newlength{\suml}
\settowidth{\suml}{$\scriptstyle b \in \B,\, S \mid j \in S$}
\newlength{\maximize}
\settowidth{\maximize}{subject to}
\begin{IEEEeqnarray*}{0s"l}
maximize & \sum_{b \in \B,\, S \subseteq \Omega}
x_{b,S} v_b(S) + \sum_{j \in \Omega}
\left(1-\sum_{b \in \B,\, S \mid j \in S} x_{b, S}\right) r_j
\\
\\
subject to &
\begin{IEEEeqnarraybox}[][t]{cRCl"lL}
\sum_{b \in \B,\, S \mid j \in S} & x_{b, S} & \le & 1 & \forall j & \in \Omega\\
\sum_{S \subseteq \Omega} & x_{b, S} & \le & 1 & \forall b & \in \B\\
& x_{b,S} & \ge & 0 & \forall b &\in \B,\, S\subseteq \Omega
\end{IEEEeqnarraybox}
\end{IEEEeqnarray*}
We now show how the \newlp{} is obtained.
It is well known that for any collection $\{v\}$ of valuations a Walrasian
equilibrium (\we{}) exists if and only if the linear programming relaxation
of the welfare maximization problem (\lp{}), given below, has an integral
solution. The integral solution combined with optimal dual prices yields a Walrasian
equilibrium and vice versa (see e.g.~\cite{BikhchandaniMa1997} for monotone
valuations and~\cite{MWG1995} for more general valuations).
\begin{IEEEeqnarray*}{0s"l}
maximize & \sum_{b \in \B,\, S \subseteq \Omega} x_{b,S} v_b(S)
\IEEEyesnumber \ztag{\lp} \label{LP}
\\
subject to &
\begin{IEEEeqnarraybox}[][t]{cRCl"lL}
\sum_{b \in \B,\, S \mid j \in S} & x_{b, S} & \le & 1 & \forall j & \in \Omega\\
\sum_{S \subseteq \Omega} & x_{b, S} & \le & 1 & \forall b & \in \B\\
& x_{b,S} & \ge & 0 & \forall b & \in \B,\, S\subseteq \Omega
\end{IEEEeqnarraybox}
\end{IEEEeqnarray*}
The dual is as follows.
\begin{IEEEeqnarray*}{0s"l}
minimize & \sum_{b \in \B} u_b + \sum_{j \in \Omega} p_j \\
subject to &
\begin{IEEEeqnarraybox}[][t]{RCl"lL}
u_b + \sum_{j \in S} p_j & \ge & v_b(S) &
\forall b & \in \B,\, S \subseteq \Omega\\
u_b & \ge & 0 & \forall b & \in \B\\
p_j & \ge & 0 & \forall j & \in \Omega
\end{IEEEeqnarraybox}
\end{IEEEeqnarray*}
We will think of the dual variables $p_j$s as prices of items and of
$u_b$s as maximum utilities for the bidders. Note that the dual objective is
a function of the $p$s as the $u$s are determined by them.
Now consider the effect of reserve prices, i.e., for all $j \in \Omega$ a
lower bound $r_j \ge 0$ for the dual variables $p_j$.
\begin{IEEEeqnarray*}{0s"l}
minimize & \sum_{b \in \B} u_b + \sum_{j \in \Omega} p_j \\
subject to &
\begin{IEEEeqnarraybox}[][t]{RCl"lL}
u_b + \sum_{j \in S} p_j & \ge & v_b(S) &
\forall b & \in \B,\, S \subseteq \Omega\\
u_b & \ge & 0 & \forall b & \in \B\\
p_j & \ge & r_j & \forall j & \in \Omega
\end{IEEEeqnarraybox}
\end{IEEEeqnarray*}
We can reformulate this linear program by a variable transformation with $q_j = p_j - r_j$
for all $j \in \Omega$. The term $\sum_{j \in \Omega} r_j$ is part of the input and thus
can be omitted from the objective value.
\begin{IEEEeqnarray*}{0s"l}
minimize & \sum_{b \in \B} u_b + \sum_{j \in \Omega} q_j
+ \sum_{j \in \Omega} r_j \\
subject to &
\begin{IEEEeqnarraybox}[][t]{RCl"lL}
u_b + \sum_{j \in S} q_j & \ge & v_b(S) - \sum_{j\in S} r_j &
\forall b & \in \B,\, S \subseteq \Omega\\
u_b & \ge & 0 & \forall b & \in \B\\
q_j & \ge & 0 & \forall j & \in \Omega
\end{IEEEeqnarraybox}
\end{IEEEeqnarray*}
With this reformulation we obtain the following primal, which we call
\newlp{}. Again $\sum_{j \in \Omega} r_j$ can be omitted from the objective value
without changing the set of solutions.
\begin{IEEEeqnarray*}{0s"l}
maximize & \sum_{b \in \B,\, S \subseteq \Omega}
x_{b,S} \left(v_b(S) - \sum_{j\in S} r_j\right) + \sum_{j \in \Omega} r_j
\IEEEyesnumber \ztag{\newlp} \label{qLP}
\\
\\
subject to &
\begin{IEEEeqnarraybox}[][t]{cRCl"lL}
\sum_{b \in \B,\, S \mid j \in S} & x_{b, S} & \le & 1 & \forall j & \in \Omega\\
\sum_{S \subseteq \Omega} & x_{b, S} & \le & 1 & \forall b & \in \B\\
& x_{b,S} & \ge & 0 & \forall b &\in \B,\, S\subseteq \Omega
\end{IEEEeqnarraybox}
\end{IEEEeqnarray*}
The objective value of the \newlp{} can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:add}
\sum_{b \in \B,\, S \subseteq \Omega}
x_{b,S} v_b(S) + \sum_{j \in \Omega} \left(1-\sum_{b \in \B,\, S \mid j \in S} x_{b, S}\right) r_j \,.
\end{equation}
For an integral solution to the \newlp{} we can interpret this reformulation
as a solution to a \lp{} with an additional additive player whose value for
an item is equal to that item's reserve price. We will use this interpretation
to extend known results for Walrasian equilibria to Walrasian equilibria with
reserve prices. The results are summarized in Theorem~\ref{th:reserve} below.
We use the following definition.
\begin{definition}[additional additive player]\label{def:additive}
Let $\{v_b\}$ be a set of valuation functions over $\Omega$ for
bidders $b \in \B$, and let $r \ge 0$ be reserve prices for the items
in $\Omega$. Let $\{v'_{b'}\}$ be the set of valuation functions when
an additive bidder~$a$ is added, i.e., for the bidders
$b' \in \B' = \B \cup \set{a}$ with $v'_{b'}(S) = v_{b'}(S)$ for ${b'} \ne a$
and $v'_a(S) = \sum_{j \in S} r_j$ for all sets $S \subseteq \Omega$.
For an allocation $\langle \Omega_b \rangle_{b \in \B}$ we define $\langle
\Omega'_{b'} \rangle_{b' \in \B'}$ with $\Omega'_{b'} = \Omega_{b'}$ for
${b'} \ne a$ and $\Omega'_a = \Omega \setminus \cup_b \Omega_b$.
\end{definition}
Theorem~\ref{th:reserve} will be used in the next section to characterize the
outcome of the virtual auctions of an $\m$-mediator. It also provides a
polynomial-time algorithm to compute a \newwe{} when the bidders in~$\B$ have
gross-substitute valuations, given a polynomial-time algorithm for a \we{} for
gross-substitute bidders.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:reserve}
\textup{(}a\textup{)}
The allocation $\langle \Omega_b \rangle$ and the prices $p$ are a \newwe{}
for $r \ge 0$ and bidders~$\B$ if and only if the allocation
$\langle \Omega'_{b'} \rangle$ and prices $p'$ are a \we{} for the bidders~$\B'$, where we have $p_j = p'_j$ for $j \in \cup_{b \in \B} \Omega_b$ and
$p_{j'} = r_{j'}$ for ${j'} \in \Omega \setminus \cup_{b \in \B} \Omega_b$
\textup{(}a1\textup{)}.
The allocation $\langle \Omega_b \rangle$ is a \newwe{} allocation if and only
if $\langle \Omega_b \rangle$ is an integral solution to the \newlp{} \textup{(}a2\textup{)}.
\textup{(}b\textup{)} If the valuations~$\{v\}$ are gross
substitute, then \textup{(}b1\textup{)} there exists a \newwe{} for~$\{v\}$
and \textup{(}b2\textup{)} the \newwe{} price vectors form a complete lattice.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{th:reserve}]
(a1) $\Rightarrow$: Let $\langle \Omega_b \rangle$ and prices $p$ be a
\newwe{} for bidders~$\B$. Then $\langle \Omega_b \rangle$ is an envy-free
allocation at prices $p \ge r$, and all unallocated items $j$ have price
$p_j = r_j$. Let $\Omega_0$ denote the set of unallocated items.
A \we{} for the bidders $\B'$ is given by prices $p$ and allocation
$\langle \Omega'_{b'} \rangle$ with $\Omega'_{b'} = \Omega_{b'}$ for $b' \ne a$
and $\Omega'_a = \Omega_0$. All items are allocated in $\langle \Omega'_{b'}
\rangle$. The allocation for the bidders $b' \ne a$ clearly is envy-free as
neither allocation nor prices were changed. Bidder $a$ is envy-free because
$p \ge r$ and $p_j = r_j$ for $j \in \Omega'_a$.
$\Leftarrow$: Let $\langle \Omega'_{b'} \rangle$ and prices $p'$ be a \we{}
for the bidders~$\B'$. Then $\langle \Omega'_{b'} \rangle$ is an envy-free
allocation and all unallocated items have a price of zero. For bidder $a$ to
be envy-free it must hold that all items~$j$ not allocated to~$a$ have a
price $p_j \ge r_j$ and all items~$j'$ allocated to~$a$ have $p_{j'} \le r_{j'}$.
We construct a \newwe{} for the bidders $\B$ as follows. For all items allocated
to bidders in $\B$ in $\langle \Omega'_{b'} \rangle$ allocation and prices remain
the same. For all other items $j$ their price is set to $r_j$ and they are left
unallocated. The allocation for the bidders $\B$ remains envy-free because
the prices of the now unallocated items were only increased.
(a2): First note that for bidders $\B'$ in a \we{}, and therefore in an
integral solution to the \lp{}, we can assume w.l.o.g.\ that all items are
allocated because we have $r \ge 0$ and therefore all otherwise unallocated
items can be allocated to the additive player~$a$.
The objective value of the \lp{} for an integral solution
$\langle \Omega'_{b'} \rangle$ for bidders $\B'$
can be written as $\sum_{b \in \B} v_b(\Omega_b) + r(\Omega'_a)$, which
is, w.l.o.g., equal to $\sum_{b \in \B} v_b(\Omega_b) + r(\Omega \setminus \cup_{b
\in \B} \Omega_b)$. The latter is equivalent to Equation~\eqref{eq:add} for
the allocation $\langle \Omega_{b} \rangle$. Thus there is (w.l.o.g.)
a one-to-one correspondence between integral solutions to the \lp{} for
bidders~$\B'$ and integral solutions to the \newlp{} for bidders~$\B$. Hence,
$\langle \Omega'_{b'} \rangle$ is an optimal solution to the \lp{} for $\B'$
if and only if $\langle \Omega_{b} \rangle$ is an optimal solution to the
\newlp{} for $\B$. Note that the corresponding constraints are satisfied as both
$\langle \Omega'_{b'} \rangle$ and $\langle \Omega_{b} \rangle$ are allocations,
respectively. To complete the proof, consider the following chain of ``iff'' statements.
{
\begin{align*}
(\langle \Omega_b \rangle, p) \text{ is a \newwe{} for } \B &\Longleftrightarrow
(\langle \Omega'_b \rangle, p') \text{ is a \we{} for } \B' \,,\\
(\langle \Omega'_b \rangle, p') \text{ is a \we{} for } \B'
&\Longleftrightarrow
(\langle \Omega'_b \rangle) \text{ solves \lp{} for } \B'\,,\\
(\langle \Omega'_b \rangle) \text{ solves \lp{} for } \B'
&\Longleftrightarrow
(\langle \Omega_b \rangle) \text{ solves \newlp{} for } \B\,,\\
\text{and thus} &\\
(\langle \Omega_b \rangle, p) \text{ is a \newwe{} for } \B &\Longleftrightarrow
(\langle \Omega_b \rangle) \text{ solves \newlp{} for } \B\,.
\end{align*}}
(b1): The valuations $\set{v}$ of the bidders in $\B$ are gross substitute
if and only if the valuations $\set{v'}$ of the bidders in $\B'$ are gross
substitute, as the only difference between $\B$ and $\B'$ is the additive
bidder $a$ whose value for an item $j$ is equal to its reserve price $r_j \ge 0$.
Recall that every (non-negative) additive valuation is gross substitute.
The claim then directly follows from (a1) and the existence of a \we{}
for $\set{v'}$.
(b2): To show that the \newwe{} price vectors form a complete lattice, we
have to show that for any two \newwe{} price vectors $p_1$ and $p_2$ the
price vectors $\min(p_1, p_2)$ and $\max(p_1, p_2)$, where the $\min$ and the
$\max$ is meant element-wise, are \newwe{} price vectors as well. We will
use (a1) and that for gross-substitute valuations \we{} price vectors form
a complete lattice. The latter implies that for two \we{} price vectors $q'_1$
and $q'_2$, we have that $q'_\text{min} = \min(q'_1, q'_2)$ and $q'_\text{max} =
\max(q'_1, q'_2)$ are \we{} price vectors as well. Recall the relation of
$p'$ and $p$ in (a1), i.e., $p = \max(p', r)$. By (a1) we
have that (i) $p'_1$ and $p'_2$ are \we{} price vectors for $\B'$
and (ii) $q_\text{min}$ and $q_\text{max}$ are \newwe{} price vectors for $\B$.
Let $q'_1 = p'_1$ and let $q'_2 = p'_2$. The claim follows from
$\min(p_1, p_2) = q_\text{min}$ and $\max(p_1, p_2) = q_\text{max}$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The Equivalence of the EF-mediator and the OR-player for
Gross-substitute Valuations}\label{sec:equal}
In this section we prove Theorem~\ref{th:equal}, that is,
the equivalence, for gross-substitute bidders, between the demand of
an $\m$-mediator $\M_i$ and the demand of an $\OR$-player and, for the sets in
the demand, the equivalence of the \emph{allocations}
of items to bidders of an $\OR$-player and an $\m$-mediator in the sense that
the allocation implied by the $\OR$-player could be used
by the $\m$-mediator and vice versa.
If the valuations of the bidders in $\B_i$ are
all gross substitute, by Theorem~\ref{th:reserve}~(b) a \newwe{}
with minimum prices exists for all reserve prices $r\ge 0$.
We will use this several times in this section.
We phrase all the statements in this section for
gross-substitute valuations of the bidders,
although they all hold as long as all minimal envy-free prices that respect
the reserve prices are equal to the minimum \newwe{} prices.
The proof proceeds as follows. We first characterize the demand of an
$\m$-mediator for bidders with gross-substitute valuations. As a first
step we show that for such bidders an $\m$-mediator actually computes a
\newwe{} with minimum prices in each of her virtual auctions. The minimality
of the prices implies that whenever
the virtual auction prices for an item set $S$ are globally envy-free, they are
also minimum \newwe{} prices for the set of all items $\Omega$ and the bidders in $\B_i$. Thus, given reserve
prices~$r$, all virtual auctions of an $\m$-mediator result in the same
price vector $p$ as long as they are run on a set $S$ with non-negative
revenue. With the help of some technical lemmata, we then completely
characterize the demand of an $\m$-mediator and show that the mediator
does not have to run \emph{multiple} virtual auctions to determine her demand;
it suffices to run \emph{one} virtual auction on $\Omega$ where the set
of allocated items is a set in the demand of the $\m$-mediator.
Thus for gross-substitute bidders the mediator can efficiently
answer demand queries and compute the outcome of her local auction.
Finally we compare the utility function of the $\OR$-player to the optimal
value of the \newlp{} to observe that they have to be equal (up to an
additive constant) for item sets that are in the demand of the $\OR$-player.
Combined with the above characterization
of the demand of the mediator, we can then relate both demands at central
auction prices $r$ to optimal solutions of the \newlp{} for $r$ and $\Omega$
and hence show the equality of the demands for these two
mediator definitions for gross-substitute valuations of the bidders.
Recall that an $\OR$-player over gross-substitute valuations has a
gross-substitute valuation~\cite{LehmannLeNi2006}. Thus in this case we can
regard the $\m$-mediator as having a gross-substitute
valuation. This implies that a Walrasian equilibrium for the central
auction exists and, with the efficient demand oracle defined above, can be
computed efficiently when all bidders have gross-substitute valuations and all
mediators are $\m$-mediators.
We start the proof of Theorem~\ref{th:equal} with showing that the mediator
computes in every virtual auction a \newwe{} with minimum prices.
The proof of this lemma is given in the next subsection.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:efminef}
If the valuations of an $\m$-mediator's bidders are gross
substitute, then the $\m$-mediator computes minimum \newwe{} prices
in her virtual auctions, i.e., items not allocated in a virtual auction
have a price equal to their reserve price.
\end{lemma}
This lemma implies that whenever for a set of items $S$ a virtual auction computes
globally envy-free prices~$p^S$, these prices have
to be equal to the minimum \newwe{} prices on $\Omega$.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:priceeq}
If the valuation functions of all bidders $b \in \B_i$ are gross
substitute,
then for reserve prices $r\ge 0$ and all sets $S \subseteq \Omega$ such that
$R_{i,r}(S) \ne -1$ the virtual auction prices $p^S$ are equal to
$p^{\Omega}$ for all items in $\Omega$.
\end{corollary}
It follows that an item $j$ with $p^{\Omega}_j > r_j$ must be in all sets with
$R_{i,r}(S) \ne -1$ and thus in all demand representatives of the mediator.
This implies that two sets $S$ and $S'$ with $R_{i,r}(S) \ne -1$
and $R_{i,r}(S') \ne -1$ can only differ in items $j$ with $p^{\Omega}_j = r_j$.
Thus if for both $S$ and $S'$ all items are allocated in the virtual auction,
then $R_{i,r}(S) = p^S(S) - r(S) = p^{S'}(S') - r(S') = R_{i,r}(S')$.
Furthermore if for a set $S''$ with $R_{i,r}(S'') \ne -1$ an item $j \in S''$
with $r_j > 0$ is not allocated in the virtual auction, then
$R_{i,r}(S'') < R_{i,r}(S)$.
Hence, if for a set $S$ with $R_{i,r}(S) \ne -1$ all items
are allocated in the virtual auction, then $R_{i,r}(S) = \max_{S'} R_{i,r}(S')$
and thus $S$ is in the demand of the mediator. Note that by
Definition~\ref{def:mediator}, if there are multiple \newwe{} allocations
on $S$ for the prices $p^S$, the mediator chooses the one that maximizes
$\sum_{b \in \B_i} p^S(S_b)$, i.e., if the mediator can allocate all items in $S$,
she will.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:SinD}
Assume that the valuation functions of all bidders $b \in \B_i$ are gross
substitute. Let $r \ge 0$ be some reserve prices.
If for some set $S$ with $R_{i,r}(S) \ne -1$ all items with strictly positive
reserve price can be allocated in the virtual auction of the mediator,
then $S$ is in $D_i(r)$.
\end{corollary}
To completely characterize demand and allocation of the $\m$-mediator,
we first show a useful technical result.
We compare the minimum \newwe{} prices for a set
$T \subseteq \Omega$ with the minimum \newwe{} prices for a subset
$S \subseteq T$. For this we will use the following well-known
result for Walrasian equilibria by Gul and Stacchetti~\cite{GS1999} that by
Theorem~\ref{th:reserve}~(a1) also holds with reserve prices.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{GS1999}]\label{lem:combine}
Any Walrasian price vector combined with any Walrasian allocation yields a
Walrasian equilibrium.
\end{lemma}
\begin{corollary}[of Lemma~\ref{lem:combine} and Theorem~\ref{th:reserve}]
\label{cor:combine}
For $r \ge 0$ a \newwe{} price vector combined with any \newwe{} allocation
yields a \newwe{}.
\end{corollary}
The following lemma shows that, for suitable sets $S$ and $T$ with $S \subseteq T$,
the minimum prices in a \newwe{} on $S$ are equal for items in $S$ to the
corresponding prices in $T$.
Part~(a) of the lemma was shown for monotone gross-substitute
valuations without reserve prices in~\cite{GS1999}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:lessitems}
Assume the valuation functions of all bidders $b \in \B_i$ are gross
substitute.
Let $T \subseteq \Omega$ be a set of items and let $S$ be a subset of $T$.
For fixed reserve prices $r \ge 0$, let
$(\langle T_b \rangle, p^T)$ be a \newwe{} with minimum prices on $T$ and let $(\langle S_b \rangle, p^S)$ be a \newwe{} with minimum prices on $S$.
Then \textup{(}a\textup{)} $p^T_j \le p^S_j$ for all $j \in S$ and
\textup{(}b\textup{)} if $\cup_b T_b \subseteq S$, then $p^T_j = p^S_j$ for all
$j \in S$ and $(\langle T_b \rangle, p^S)$ is a \newwe{} with minimum prices
on $S$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(a) Let $V$ be the maximal valuation of any bidder, i.e.,
$\max_{b, T' \subseteq \Omega} v_b(T')$. Let $p'_j = p^S_j$ for $j \in S$
and let $p'_j = \max(V, r_j)$ for $j \in T \setminus S$.
Then $(\langle S_b \rangle, p')$
is envy-free for all bidders on $T$ and $p' \ge r$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:minef} the prices $p^T$ are the minimum envy-free
prices $ \ge r$ on $T$. Thus $p^T_j \le p'_j$
for all $j \in T$ and hence $p^T_j \le p^S_j$ for all $j \in S$.
(b) If the set $S$ contains all items in $\cup_b T_b$, then the prices $p^T$
restricted to the set $S$ with the allocation $\langle T_b \rangle$ are
a \newwe{} on $S$. Thus by the minimality of the prices $p^S$, we have
$p^T_j \ge p^S_j$ for all $j \in S$. Combined with (a) this shows $p^T_j = p^S_j$
for all $j \in S$.
The allocation $\langle T_b \rangle$ with prices $p^T$ restricted to $S$
are a \newwe{} on $S$ and the prices $p^T$ restricted to the set $S$ are
equal to the minimum \newwe{} prices $p^S$ on $S$.
Hence by Corollary~\ref{cor:combine} $(\langle T_b \rangle, p^S)$
is a \newwe{} with minimum prices on $S$.
\end{proof}
To characterize the demand of the mediator, we further need that the maximum
revenue the mediator can obtain is non-negative for all reserve prices $r \ge 0$.
To compare the demand $D_i(r)$ of an $\m$-mediator to the demand of an
$\OR$-mediator, we further use that for \emph{every} set in $D_i(r)$ all items with
positive reserve price are allocated in the local auction.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:revenue}\label{lem:partition}
Assume the valuation functions of all bidders $b \in \B_i$ are gross
substitute and let $r \ge 0$ be any reserve price vector.
\upbr{a} There exists a \upbr{potentially empty} set $S\subseteq \Omega$ such that
the revenue $R_{i,r}(S)$ of an $\m$-mediator $\M_i$ is non-negative.
\upbr{b} For a set $T \in D_i(r)$ with virtual auction allocation
$\langle T_b \rangle$ all items $j \in T$ with $r_j > 0$ are allocated.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(a) Let $(\langle \Omega_b \rangle, p)$ be the outcome of the virtual auction of an
$\m$-mediator for $\Omega$. Take $S = \cup_b \Omega_b$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:efminef} and
Lemma~\ref{lem:lessitems}~(b) $(\langle \Omega_b \rangle, p)$ is not only envy-free
on $\Omega$ but further is a \newwe{} with minimum prices for
the virtual auction of an $\m$-mediator for the set $S$.
Thus the mediator can allocate all items in $S$ in her virtual auction for $S$.
Thus by $p \ge r$ the revenue $R_{i,r}(S) = \sum_b p(\Omega_b) - r(S) = p(S) - r(S)$
of the mediator for the set $S$ is non-negative.
(b) By (a) we have $R_{i,r}(T) \ge 0$ and thus $R_{i,r}(T) = \sum_b p^T(T_b) - r(T)$. Consider the set $T' = \cup_b T_b$. Assume by contradiction some items with
$r_j > 0$ are not allocated in $\langle T_b \rangle$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:efminef} $p^T_j = r_j$ for all items $j \in \Omega \setminus T'$. For the virtual auction prices $p^{T'}$ for $T'$ we have by definition
$p^{T'}_j = r_j$ for $j \in \Omega \setminus T'$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:lessitems}~(b) $p^{T'}_j = p^T_j$ for all $j \in T'$ and thus
$p^{T'}_j = p^T_j$ for all $j \in \Omega$. Thus $(\langle T_b \rangle, p^{T'})$
is envy-free on the whole set of items $\Omega$, i.e., $R_{i,r}(T') \ne -1$.
The mediator can allocate all items in $T'$; hence, $R_{i,r}(T') = p(T') - r(T')
> R_{i,r}(T) = p(T') - r(T)$, a contradiction to $T \in D_i(r)$.
\end{proof}
This proof gives us immediately an efficient way to determine a set $S$
with $R_{i,r}(S) \ge 0$: Run the virtual auction on $\Omega$ with reserve prices $r$
and return the set $S$ of allocated items. Combined with
Corollary~\ref{cor:priceeq}, this procedure
actually yields not only a set with non-negative revenue but even a set in the
demand of the mediator.
Before we continue, we observe a relation
between the utility of the $\OR$-player for reserve prices $r$ and the $\OR$
over modified valuation functions\footnote{The valuations $\set{\widetilde{v}}$
might be non-monotone even if the valuations $\set{{v}}$ are monotone. This is not relevant here.} $\set{\widetilde{v}}$ with $\widetilde{v}_b(S) =
v_b(S) - r(S)$ for all $S \subseteq \Omega$. Note that $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) +
r(S)$ equals the optimal value of the \newlp{} on $S$
as long as an optimal integral solution exists.
This relation gives a characterization of the demand of the $\OR$-player
with reserve prices.
\begin{observation}\label{obs:or}
The utility of the $\OR$-player at prices $r$ is given by
$$u_{\OR,r}(S) = \max_{\langle S_b\rangle} \left(
\sum_{b \in \B_i} v_b(S_b) \right) - r(S) = \max_{\langle S_b\rangle} \left(
\sum_{b \in \B_i} v_b(S_b) - r(S_b) \right) - r(S \setminus \cup_b S_b)\,$$
The $\OR$ of the valuation functions $\widetilde{v}_b(S) = v_b(S) - r(S)$
is given by
$$\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) = \max_{\langle S_b \rangle} \sum_{b \in \B_i}
\widetilde{v}_b(S_b) = \max_{\langle S_b\rangle} \left( \sum_{b \in \B_i}
v_b(S_b) - r(S_b)\right)\,$$
By definition we have $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) \ge u_{\OR,r}(S)$
\textup{(}1\textup{)}.\\
Let the allocation $\langle S^*_b\rangle$ be $\argmax_{\langle S_b \rangle}
\sum_{b \in \B_i} \widetilde{v}_b(S_b)$ for the set $S$ and let
$S^* = \cup_b S^*_b \subseteq S$. Then $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) = \widetilde{v}_{\OR}
(S^*) = u_{\OR,r}(S^*)$ \textup{(}2a\textup{)}. Thus $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) >
u_{\OR,r}(S)$ iff $u_{\OR,r} (S^*) > u_{\OR,r}(S)$ iff $S \notin D_{\OR}(r)$ \textup{(}2b\textup{)}.
\end{observation}
The following two lemmata finally show that the demand of an $\m$-mediator
is equal to the demand of an $\OR$-player for any central auctions prices $r \ge 0$
and gross-substitute valuations of the bidders. The proofs combine the
results obtained so far to relate both demands to an optimal solution of
the \newlp{} for reserve prices $r$ and the items in $\Omega$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:MtoOR}
If the valuation functions of all bidders $b \in \B_i$ are gross
substitute, then for any reserve prices
$r \ge 0$ every set~$S$ in the demand of an $\m$-mediator is in the demand of the $\OR$-player.
Additionally, the $\OR$-player could use the $\m$-mediator's
allocation of the items in $S$ to the bidders in $\B_i$ to maximize her utility.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $S$ be a set in the demand $D_i(r)$ of an $\m$-mediator $\M_i$ for some reserve
prices $r \ge 0$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:revenue}~(a) there exists a set $S'$ with
$R_{i,r}(S') \ge 0$, thus for $S$ in the demand we have $R_{i,r}(S) \ge
R_{i,r}(S') \ge 0$. Let $(\langle S_b \rangle, p)$ be the outcome of the virtual
auction of $\M_i$ for the set $S$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:efminef}
$(\langle S_b \rangle, p)$ is a \newwe{} with minimum prices on
the item set $S$. Since $R_{i,r}(S) \ge 0$, the
allocation $\langle S_b \rangle$ is envy-free on $\Omega$. As
the prices $p$ are \newwe{} prices for $S$ and are extended with $p_j = r_j$ for
$j \in \Omega \setminus S$, the allocation $\langle S_b \rangle$ and prices $p$
are also a \newwe{} for the item set $\Omega$. Hence by Theorem~\ref{th:reserve}~(a2)
the allocation $\langle S_b \rangle$ is an integral solution to the \newlp{} and
thus maximizes the objective value of the \newlp{} for both the item sets $S$
and $\Omega$. Since the value of the \newlp{} only depends on the allocated sets,
the two objective values are the same. Note that by the definition of
$\widetilde{v}_{\OR}$ in Observation~\ref{obs:or} the objective value of the
\newlp{} is given by $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(\Omega) + r(\Omega)$ with
$\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(\Omega) = \max_{S' \in \Omega}\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S')$.
Thus we have $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) = \widetilde{v}_{\OR}(\Omega) = \max_{S' \in \Omega}\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S')$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:partition}~(b) we can assume that all items $j \in S$ with
$r_j > 0$ are allocated in $\langle S_b \rangle$, which implies that
$\sum_{b \in \B_i} r(S_b) = r(S)$ and thus $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) = u_{\OR,r}(S)$.
Since we have $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S') \ge u_{\OR,r}(S')$
for all $S' \subseteq \Omega$ by Observation~\ref{obs:or}~(1), this implies
$u_{\OR,r}(S) \ge \max_{S' \in \Omega} u_{\OR,r}(S')$. Since $S \subseteq \Omega$,
it also holds that $u_{\OR,r}(S) \le \max_{S' \in \Omega} u_{\OR,r}(S')$, implying
that $u_{\OR,r}(S) = \max_{S' \in \Omega} u_{\OR,r}(S')$. Thus, $S$ is in the
demand $D_{\OR}(r)$ of the $\OR$-player for reserve prices $r$ and the
$\OR$-player could use the allocation $\langle S_b \rangle$ to maximize her utility.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:ORtoM}
If the valuation functions of all bidders $b \in \B_i$ are gross
substitute, then for any reserve prices $r \ge 0$
every set~$S$ in the demand of the $\OR$-player is in the demand of an $\m$-mediator.
Additionally, the $\m$-mediator could use the
$\OR$-player's allocation of the items in $S$ to the bidders in $\B_i$ to maximize
his revenue.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $S$ be a set in the demand $D_{\OR}(r)$ of the $\OR$-player for some reserve
prices $r \ge 0$. Let $\langle S_b \rangle$ be the allocation of the $\OR$-player for the set $S$. By Observation~\ref{obs:or}~(2b) we have $u_{\OR,r}(S)
= \widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S)$. Recall that $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) + r(S)$ is
equal to the objective value of the \newlp{} for the set $S$.
Furthermore $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) = \widetilde{v}_{\OR}(\Omega)$ because otherwise by
Observation~\ref{obs:or}~(2a) there would be some allocation
$\langle \Omega_b \rangle$ with $S' = \cup_b \Omega_b$ s.t.\ $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(\Omega)
= \widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S') = u_{\OR,r}(S')$ and thus the utility of the
$\OR$-player for the set $S'$ would be higher than for the set $S$, contradicting
$S \in D_{\OR}(r)$. Hence the allocation $\langle S_b \rangle$ of the
$\OR$-player is an integral solution to the \newlp{}
on $S$ as well as on~$\Omega$.
Let $p$ be the minimum \newwe{} prices~$p$
such that $(\langle S_b \rangle, p)$ is a \newwe{} on~$\Omega$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:lessitems}~(b) we know that $(\langle S_b \rangle, p)$,
with the prices~$p$ restricted to~$S$, is also a \newwe{} with
minimum prices on~$S$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:efminef} the
virtual auction of an $\m$-mediator $\M_i$ for the set~$S$ computes the same
unique minimum prices~$p$.
Further $\widetilde{v}_{\OR}(S) = u_{\OR,r}(S)$ implies that all items with
strictly positive reserve price are allocated in $\langle S_b \rangle$.
Thus $\M_i$ could allocate all items in~$S$ with strictly positive reserve price
by using the allocation $\langle S_b \rangle$. The allocation $\langle S_b \rangle$
is envy-free at prices $p$ on $S$. Thus the revenue of the
mediator for the set~$S$ is not set to~$-1$. Hence by Corollary~\ref{cor:SinD}
the set~$S$ is in the demand of the $\m$-mediator.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:efminef}} \label{sec:proofminef}
Lemma~\ref{lem:efminef} is a corollary to the following, more general, lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:minef}
Consider all envy-free outcomes with prices $p \ge r$ for a set of
valuations $\{v\}$ and reserve prices $r \ge 0$.
If the valuations $\{v\}$ are gross substitute,
then the minimum \newwe{} prices are minimum envy-free prices $p$ with
$p \ge r$ among all envy-free outcomes with $p \ge r$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{th:reserve}~(b2) all \newwe{} price vectors form a lattice. Let
$p^*$ be the minimum price in this lattice. Recall that every \newwe{} price vector
is also an envy-free price vector. Assume by contradiction there exists
an envy-free price $p$ such that $p^* \not\leq p$. Let $J = \{j \mid p_j < p^*_j\}$,
let $\delta = \min_{j\in J}{\{p^*_j - p_j\}}$ be the \emph{min-gap} and
$p^{*-\delta J} = p^* - \delta_J$ where $\delta_J$ is
the vector with value $\delta$ to each item in $J$ and $0$ otherwise. Note that by
assumption $J\neq \emptyset,\ \delta>0$ and by minimality of $p^*$ no \newwe{} allocation
exists for $p^{*-\delta J}$.
Let $w_b(q)$ denote the maximum utility of a bidder $b$ for a price
vector $q$, i.e., $w_b(q) = u_{b,q}(D)$ for some $D\in D_b(q)$.
Following Gul and Stacchetti~\cite{GulSt2000} and Ben-Zwi~et~al.~\cite{Ben-ZwiLaNe2013}, we define a requirement function
and use Ben-Zwi~et~al.~\cite{Ben-ZwiLaNe2013}'s extension of (one direction of) Hall's Theorem.
\begin{definition}[requirement function]
Define for a set $S$, a bidder $b$, and prices $q$ the requirement function
$f_{b,q}(S) = \min_{D \in D_b(q)} \{\lvert D \cap S \rvert\}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{observation}[compare Lemma~$2.10$ in~\cite{Ben-ZwiLaNe2013}]\label{obs:req}
For a set $S$, a bidder $b$, and prices $q$,
we have $f_{b,q}(S) \ge (w_{b}(q) - w_{b}(q+\delta_S)) / \delta$.
\end{observation}
\begin{proof}
Let $D' = \argmin_{D \in D_b(q)} \{\lvert D \cap S \rvert\}$.
Then $ w_{b}(q+\delta_S) \ge u_{b,q+\delta_S}(D') = u_{b,q}(D') - \delta f_{b,q}(S)
= w_{b}(q) - \delta f_{b,q}(S)$,
that is, $\delta f_{b,q}(S) \ge w_{b}(q) - w_{b}(q+\delta_S)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{observation} [Observation $3.2$ in~\cite{Ben-ZwiLaNe2013}]\label{obs:overdemanded}
If for a price vector~$q$ there exists~$S$ such that $\sum_b{f_{b,q}(S)} > |S|$,
then $q$ is not envy free. In this case we call $S$ \emph{over-demanded} at
prices~$q$.
\end{observation}
\begin{proof}
In any envy-free allocation of $S$, bidder $b$ must receive a set from his demand,
thus $b$ must receive at least $f_{b,q}(S)$ many items of $S$.
As each item of $S$ is allocated to at most one bidder, it follows that at least $\sum_b f_{b,q}(S) > |S|$ many items of $S$ are
allocated in any envy-free allocation. Contradiction.
\end{proof}
Note that the utilities $w_b(q)$ and prices $q$ are a feasible solution to the
dual of the \newlp{} for any prices with $q \ge r$. Further note that any
optimal solution to the dual of the \newlp{} implies that there exists a
corresponding \newwe{}.
By optimality of $p^*$ and the assumption that no \newwe{} allocation exists
for the prices $p^{*-\delta J}$, the objective value of the dual for $p^{*-\delta J}$ is
strictly greater than the objective of the dual for $p^*$, i.e.,
$\sum_b{w_b(p^{*-\delta J})} + p^{*-\delta J}(\Omega) > \sum_b{w_b(p^*)} + p^*(\Omega)$.
Now by definition of $p^{*-\delta J}$ we know that $p^{*-\delta J}(\Omega) + \delta|J| = p^*(\Omega)$,
hence together we have that $\sum_b{w_b(p^{*-\delta J})} - \sum_b{w_b(p^*)} > \delta|J|$.
With $\sum_b{f_{b,p^{*-\delta J}}(J)} \ge \left(\sum_b{w_b(p^{*-\delta J})} -
\sum_b{w_b(p^*)}\right) / \delta$ by Observation~\ref{obs:req} we have that
$\sum_b{f_{b,p^{*-\delta J}}(J)} > \lvert J \rvert$ and thus the set $J$
is over-demanded at $p^{*-\delta J}$ by Observation~\ref{obs:overdemanded}.
Next we use the following theorem by Gul and Stacchetti~\cite{GulSt2000}
to show that this implies $\sum_b{f_{b,p}(J)} > |J|$, i.e., a contradiction
to the assumption that the prices $p$ are envy-free. By another result of
Gul and Stacchetti~\cite{GS1999}, monotone valuations that are gross substitute
also satisfy the single improvement property.
\begin{theorem} [Theorem $2$ in~\cite{GulSt2000}]
Let $q^{(1)},q^{(2)}$ be two price vectors such that $q^{(1)}\leq q^{(2)}$ and $S$ a set with $\forall j\in S,\ q^{(1)}(j)=q^{(2)}(j)$.
Then for a bidder $b$ that fulfills the single improvement property the following apply
\begin{enumerate}
\item $f_{b,q^{(1)}}(S) \leq f_{b,q^{(2)}}(S)$
\item $f_{b,q^{(1)}}(\Omega\setminus S) \geq f_{b,q^{(2)}}(\Omega\setminus S)$
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
Recall that by the definition of $J$ and $p^{*-\delta J}$,
we have $p_j \le p^{*-\delta J}_j$ for $j \in J$ and $p_j \ge p^{*-\delta J}_j$ for $j \not\in J$.
Now if we take $q^{(1)} = p^{*-\delta J}$ and take $q^{(2)}_j = p^{*-\delta J}_j \text{ if }j\in J$ and
$q^{(2)}_j = p_j \text{ if }j\notin J$, then $q^{(1)} \le q^{(2)}$ and thus by the first
part of the theorem we get that $f_{b,q^{(2)}}(J) \ge f_{b,p^{*-\delta J}}(J)> |J|$, i.e., the
set $J$ is over-demanded at prices $q^{(2)}$. On the other hand, if we take
$q^{(3)} = p$ and the same $q^{(2)}$, then $q^{(3)} \le q^{(2)}$ and $q^{(3)}_j = q^{(2)}_j$ for
$j \not\in J$, and hence by the second part of the theorem with
$S = \Omega \setminus J$ and thus $\Omega \setminus S = J$ we have that
$f_{b,p}(J) \ge f_{b,q^{(2)}}(J)> |J|$. This shows that the set $J$ is over-demanded
at $p$ as well and thus there cannot be an envy-free allocation for prices
$p$ by Observation~\ref{obs:overdemanded}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Computing an Equilibrium}\label{sec:algdesc}
The basic three-party auction is simple: First run the central
auction at the exchange, then the local auctions at the mediators.
In this section we summarize the details and analyze the time needed to
compute a three-party competitive equilibrium.
We assume that all bidders have gross-substitute valuations and that
their valuations can be accessed via a demand oracle. We assume, for
simplicity, that there are $m$ $\m$-mediators,
each with $n/m$ distinct bidders.
We will use known polynomial-time auctions for the two-party allocation
problem, see~\cite{PaesLeme2014} for a recent survey.
Theorem~\ref{th:reserve} shows how such an auction can be modified to yield
a \newwe{} instead of a Walrasian equilibrium.
Let~$A$ be a polynomial-time algorithm that can access
$n$~gross-substitute valuations over subsets of $k$~items~$\Omega$
via a demand oracle
and outputs a Walrasian price vector $p\in \R^k$ and a Walrasian allocation
$\langle \Omega_i \rangle_{i\in [n]}$.
Let the runtime of $A$ be $T(n,k) = O(n^{\alpha}k^{\beta})$
for constants $\alpha$, $\beta$.
Although we can assume oracle access to the bidders' valuations,
we cannot assume it for the mediators' (gross-substitute) valuations, as they are not part of the
input.
However, as outlined in the previous section, a mediator can determine
a set in her demand by running a single virtual auction to compute a \newwe{},
i.e., there is an efficient demand oracle for the mediators.
Hence, solving the
allocation problem for the central auction can be done in time
$T(m,k) \cdot T(n/m,k) = O(n^{\alpha}k^{2\beta})$.
Further, the local auctions for all mediators take time $O(m \cdot T(n/m,k))$
and thus the total time to compute a three-party competitive equilibrium is
$O(n^{\alpha}k^{2\beta})$.
Note that the computation at the exchange takes only $T(m,k)$ time and
that the mediators are assumed to be separated, that is, the computation
at the mediators can be done in parallel.
\subsubsection{Small Number of Items}\label{sec:fewitems}
In the context of ad exchanges it is
natural to assume that the number of items is very small and independent of the
number of bidders. In the following we discuss the computation of an equilibrium in
this case. The results on this section will hold as long as the number
of items $k$ is $o(\log{n})$.
When the number of items is that small, bidders' valuations can be represented
as complete lists. More than that, given a bidder valuation oracle, it takes
only $2^k$ queries to compile such a list. In order to find the valuation
lists of all the mediators as well, we have to solve the allocation
problem of each mediator $2^k$ times, i.e., compute the $\OR$ of the bidder
valuations for all subsets.
Given the valuations of the mediators, the central auction is equivalent
to solving the two-party allocation problem for the mediators.
Let $T'(n, k)$ be the runtime of algorithm $A$ when valuations are accessed
via a valuation oracle. Then the overall running time to determine a
three-party competitive equilibrium with this approach is
$\widehat{T}(n,m,k) = m \cdot 2^k \cdot T'(n/m,k) + T'(m,k)$.
We show next how this approach can be extended to an almost linear time
algorithm for such a small number of items by artificially introducing
mediators of mediators (and recurse).
Assume for simplicity $T'(n,k) = O(n^{\alpha}\cdot f(k))$ where $f(\cdot)$ is at most exponential in $k$ and $\alpha = 1 + \gamma$ for some $\gamma
> 0$.\footnote{Current methods have $\alpha = 6$ and thus $\gamma = 5$.} By choosing $m = n^{1/2}$
we obtain a running time of
\begin{align*}
\widehat{T}(n,n^{1/2},k)
&= n^{1/2} \cdot 2^k \cdot
n^{\alpha/2} \cdot f(k) + n^{\alpha/2} \cdot f(k)\,,\\
&= \left(2^k n^{1+\gamma/2} +
n^{1/2 + \gamma / 2}\right) \cdot f(k)\,,\\
&\le c \cdot n^{\alpha/2+1/2}\cdot 2^{2k}\,,
\end{align*}
for some constant $c \ge 0$.
Let us add one level of recursion:
\begin{align*}
\widehat{T}(n,n^{1/2},k) &=
2^k \cdot n^{1/2} \cdot \widehat{T}(n^{1/2}, n^{1/4},k) \\&\phantom{=}+
\widehat{T}(n^{1/2}, n^{1/4},k) \,,\\
&\le c \cdot 2^{3k} \cdot n^{1/2} \cdot
(n^{1/2})^{\alpha/2 + 1/2} \\
&\phantom{=}+ c \cdot 2^{2k} \cdot (n^{1/2})^{\alpha/2 + 1/2}\,,\\
&\le c \cdot 2^{3k} \cdot ( n^{1/2 + 1/4 + \gamma/4 + 1/4} \\
&\phantom{=}+ n^{1/4 + \gamma / 4 + 1 / 4} ) \,,\\
&\le c \cdot 2^{3k} \cdot n^{(\alpha/2 + 1/2)/2 + 1/2} \,.
\end{align*}
For $t$ levels of mediators we obtain $\widehat{T}(n,n^{1/2},k) \le
c \cdot 2^{(t+1)k} \cdot n^{\alpha_t/2 + 1/2}$ where $\alpha_0=\alpha$ and
$\alpha_t = \frac{\alpha_{t-1}}{2}+\frac{1}{2} = \frac{\gamma}{2^t} + 1$.
Since for constant $\delta = 1/(t+1)$ we have that $k = o(\log{n})$ implies $ k =
o(\log{n^{\delta}})$ and $\alpha$ is constant, we can choose $t$ to
achieve a runtime of $O(n^{1+\epsilon+o(1)})$ for any fixed $\epsilon > 0$.
An almost linear time algorithm to solve the
two-party allocation problem when $k = o(\frac{\log{n}}{\log\log{n}})$
can be obtained by reducing the problem to unit-demand valuations in the following
way.
Assume there are $n$ bidders and $k = o(\frac{\log{n}}{\log\log{n}})$ items
$\Omega$. The following method computes in almost linear time an allocation
between bidders and items that maximizes social welfare (i.e., $\sum_b
v_b(\Omega_b)$), which is
equal to a Walrasian allocation if it exists. Consider all possible
partitions of the $k$ items from which there are $O(k^k) = O(2^{k\log k})$ many. For a partition $P$
let the sets in the partition be the new items and let the value of the bidders
for a new item be their value for the set. Define a unit-demand valuation
function for each bidder based on these values. Then solve the allocation problem
for the new items and the unit-demand valuations. The resulting allocation
maximizes social welfare for the given partition. Over all possible partitions the
one with maximum social welfare yields the desired solution. For unit-demand
valuations the allocation problem is equivalent to the maximum weight bipartite
matching problem that can be solved with the Hungarian method in
time~$O(nk^2)$~\cite{Frank2005}. Thus the total time is $O(nk^{k + 2})$.
\subsection{Relation to Minimum Walrasian Prices}\label{sec:minWEprices}
The following lemma shows that the prices the bidders have to pay at the computed
three-party equilibrium, and thus the utilities they achieve,
are the same as in a Walrasian equilibrium between bidders and items with
minimum prices.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:minWE}
Let allocation $\langle \Omega_\beta \rangle$ and prices~$q$ be a Walrasian
equilibrium with minimum prices for gross-substitute bidders~$\B$ and items
$\Omega$. Let each bidder be connected to exactly one of $m$ $\m$-mediators and let
$\B_i$ denote the set of bidders connected to mediator~$\M_i$.
Let $r, p^1, p^2, \dotsc, p^m$ be the price vectors of a three-party equilibrium
for the mediators and bidders and let
$\langle \Omega_i \rangle$ be the equilibrium allocation of items to mediators and
$\langle \Omega_b \rangle$ the equilibrium allocation of items to bidders.
Let $r$ and $\langle \Omega_i \rangle$ be a Walrasian equilibrium with minimum
prices for the mediators and let $p_j = \max_i(p^i_j)$ for all items $j$. Then $p = q$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As $\langle \Omega_b \rangle$ and $p$ form a Walrasian equilibrium for bidders
$\B$ and items $\Omega$, we have $p \ge q$. Recall $p \ge r$. Further $\langle
\Omega_\beta \rangle$,
$\langle \Omega'_i = \cup_{\beta \in \B_i} \Omega_\beta \rangle$, and $r' =
p^{1\prime} = \dotsb = p^{m\prime} = q$ form a three-party equilibrium
(compare Theorem~\ref{th:exist}) and
$\langle \Omega'_i \rangle$ and $q$ provide a Walrasian equilibrium
for the mediators. Thus by the minimality of $r$ we have $q \ge r$.
Assume by contradiction that there exists an item $j$ with $p_j > q_j$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:efminef} and Corollary~\ref{cor:priceeq} each price
vector~$p^i$ is the minimum envy-free price vector $\ge r$ for the
bidders~$\B_i$. Thus at prices $q \not\ge p$ there is no allocation that is
envy-free for all bidders~$\B$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\section{Discussion and Future Directions}\label{sec:discuss}
We proposed a new model for auctions at ad exchanges. Our model is more
general than previous models in the sense that it takes the incentives of all
three types of participants into account and that it allows to express
preferences over multiple items.
Interestingly, at least when gross-substitute valuations are considered,
this generality does not come at the cost of tractability,
as shown by our polynomial-time algorithm.
Note that this is the most general
result we could expect in light of the classical (two-sided) literature
on combinatorial auctions.
We considered the special case of a small number of items for which
we showed that existing polynomial-time
algorithms for two-party equilibria can be sped-up by adding mediators.
In our model, with gross-substitute bidders, the revenue of the mediators
only comes from decreasing the central seller's profit (stated formally in
Section~\ref{sec:minWEprices}). This explains the willingness of the bidders to use
mediators. The central seller experiences a decrease in its workload
with the introduction of mediators, which may partially describe its own
inclination for participating in the market.
Since our model tries to capture a single ``user-impression-of-a-web-page'' sold at an ad exchange, a natural
follow up work will try to model what happens over time.
This direction should take into account the change in
the environment, as the bidders and their valuations as well as the mediators and their connections to bidders can be different for each user impression.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\noindent We wish to thank Noam Nisan for helpful discussions.
This work was funded by the Vienna
Science and Technology Fund (WWTF) through project ICT10-002.
Additionally the research leading to these results has received funding from
the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme
(FP/2007-2013) / ERC Grant Agreement no. 340506.
\printbibliography[heading=bibintoc]
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Two-particle angular correlations have been widely used in the field of relativistic heavy-ion physics to provide information on particle production mechanisms in various collisional systems.
Away-side jet suppression and collective flow, both distinctive features of nuclear collisions, have been observed through two-particle correlations at RHIC~\cite{STAR:2PC,PHENIX:Flow}.
At the LHC, the observation of a near-side ridge structure in pp~\cite{Khachatryan:2010gv} and the discovery of a double-ridge structure in p--Pb collisions~\cite{ALICE:2PC:pPb,Aad:2012gla,CMS:2012qk} have opened a new debate on the origin of these structures.
Throughout, event-mixing procedures have been considered as a standard technique for the pair acceptance correction in two-particle correlation analysis.
However, a few recent papers have pointed out shortcomings of the conventional correction with event-mixing, and proposed new methods using single-particle efficiency$\times$acceptance functions~\cite{Method:Fuqiang} and multi-dimensional weights~\cite{Method:Pruneau:2}.
In this article, finite-acceptance effects ---as distinguished from detector efficiency effects--- in two-particle angular correlation analyses are discussed in detail, and alternative correction methods for finite-acceptance effects are derived and tested.
The derivations are obtained by comparison to the ideal case without finite-acceptance effects, which ensures mathematical completeness, assuming translational invariance of the signal.
Angular correlation studies involve measuring the distributions of the relative azimuthal angle $\Delta \varphi$ or relative pseudo-rapidity $\Delta \eta$ between particle pairs consisting of a trigger particle in a certain transverse momentum, $p_{\rm T, trig}$, interval and an associated particle in a $p_{\rm T, assoc}$ interval.
For $x$ being the coordinate with finite acceptance, a general correction method in $(x_{\text{t}},\, \Delta x)$ space is first discussed, where $x_{\text{t}}$ and $\Delta x$ correspond to the trigger particle $x$ and difference between trigger particle and associated particle $x$, respectively.
New methods in $\Delta x$ space are obtained by making assumptions on the properties of the signal:
uniform signal distribution in $x$ and, for jet-like correlations, a $\delta$-function-like distribution of the trigger particle with respect to the jet axis.
The validity of these methods depends on the similarity of the signal characteristics in data to the assumed conditions.
The method assuming a uniform signal distribution is suitable for the correlation analyses using particles measured at midrapidity in symmetric nucleus-nucleus collisions. The method assuming a $\delta$-function-like trigger particle distribution is suitable for the study of near-side jet--hadron or high $p_{\text{T}}$-triggered hadron--hadron correlations.
While the correction with the event-mixing technique is equivalent to producing a normalized ratio function of correlated and uncorrelated particle production, the new methods are independent of the uncorrelated background.
We apply the new methods to Monte Carlo simulations to test their validity, and point out problems of the conventional mixed-event technique.
The Monte Carlo simulations contain well-defined correlation signals: fragmentation of a dijets generated with PYTHIA event generator or a global correlation of all partices with a common symmetry plane in a toy model.
The article is organized as follows: Section \ref{Sec:Def} defines the mathematical notation of correlation function and per-trigger normalized associated particle yield, and describes finite-acceptance effects in two-particle correlation analysis. The new methods are introduced in Section \ref{Sec:AM}, and tested with Monte Carlo simulation in Section \ref{Sec:MC}. In Section \ref{Sec:Sum}, we summarize our results. Appendix \ref{Sec:App} provides details on the derivation of the new methods.
\section{Definitions}
\label{Sec:Def}
\subsection{Correlation function and per-trigger yield}
Two-particle correlation studies are based on the simultaneous measurement of pairs of particles in each event. The results might be affected by various particle production and transport processes, such as radial flow, elliptic flow, resonance decays, jets and others~\cite{Method:Pruneau:1}. Mathematically, trigger and associated single-particle densities are denoted as functions of azimuthal angle and pseudorapidity, $\rho_{\text{t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})$ and $\rho_{\text{a}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}})$, where the subscript ``t''~(``a'') stands for trigger~(associated) particles. Following the same notation, the two-particle density of trigger and associated particle pairs is denoted by $\rho_{\text{a,t}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}};\varphi_{\text{t}},\eta_{\text{t}})$~\cite{Method:Pruneau:2,Method:Vechernin}. Trigger and associated particles are most commonly selected by either transverse momentum ($p_{\text{T}}$) or particle species. The density functions are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{\text{t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})=\frac{\text{d}^2N_{\text{t}}}{\text{d}\varphi_{\text{t}}\,\text{d}\eta_{\text{t}}} \; \text{,} \qquad \rho_{\text{a}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}})=\frac{\text{d}^2N_{\text{a}}}{\text{d}\varphi_{\text{a}}\,\text{d}\eta_{\text{a}}}\; \text{,} \nonumber \\
\rho_{\text{a,t}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}};\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})=\frac{\text{d}^4N_{\text{a,t}}}{\text{d}\varphi_{\text{a}}\,\text{d}\eta_{\text{a}}\;\text{d}\varphi_{\text{t}}\,\text{d}\eta_{\text{t}}} \; \text{.}
\end{eqnarray}
Typically, the definition of correlation function, $C_{2,\text{R}}(\eta_{\text{a}}\,\eta_{\text{t}};\varphi_{\text{a}}\,\varphi_{\text{t}})$, is
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{2,\text{R}}(\varphi_{\text{a}},\varphi_{\text{t}};\eta_{\text{a}},\eta_{\text{t}}) &=& \frac{\rho_{\text{a,t}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}};\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})-\rho_{\text{a}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}})\,\rho_{\text{t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})}{\rho_{\text{a}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}})\,\rho_{\text{t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})}\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{\rho_{\text{a,t}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}};\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})}{\rho_{\text{a}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}})\,\rho_{\text{t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})}-1\; \text{,}
\end{eqnarray}
where ``R'' stands for ratio.
Assuming rotational invariance in azimuth, one can write
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{\text{t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})=\frac{\rho_{\text{t}}(\eta_{\text{t}})}{2\pi} \; \text{,} \qquad \rho_{\text{a}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}})=\frac{\rho_{\text{a}}(\eta_{\text{a}})}{2\pi} \; \text{,} \nonumber\\
\rho_{\text{a,t}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}};\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}}) = \frac{\rho_{\text{a,t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}-\varphi_{\text{a}}; \eta_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{t}})}{(2\pi)^{2}} \; \text{,}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{2,\text{R}}(\varphi_{\text{a}},\varphi_{\text{t}};\eta_{\text{a}},\eta_{\text{t}}) &=& C_{2,\text{R}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}-\varphi_{\text{a}}; \eta_{\text{a}},\eta_{\text{t}}) \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{\rho_{\text{a,t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}-\varphi_{\text{a}}; \eta_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{t}})}{\rho_{\text{a}}(\eta_{\text{a}})\;\rho_{\text{t}}(\eta_{\text{t}})} -1 \; \text{.}
\end{eqnarray}
Experimentally, a simpler correlation function is often used. The correlation function $C_{\text{R}}(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ with $\Delta\varphi = \varphi_{\text{t}} - \varphi_{\text{a}}$ and $\Delta\eta = \eta_{\text{t}} - \eta_{\text{a}}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
C_{\text{R}}(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)= \frac{S(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)}{B(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)}-1\;\text{,}
\label{CrEq}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
S(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)=\frac{\text{d}^2N_{\text{pair}}}{\text{d}\Delta\varphi\,\text{d}\Delta\eta}
\end{equation}
is the two-particle distribution in the same events, while $B(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ is constructed from two particles from different events and corresponds to uncorrelated particle production.
The definition of $C_{\text{R}}(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ can be interpreted to inherently assume the translational invariance of the correlated signal in $\eta$ in addition to $\varphi$, or as an average of $\Delta\eta$ structure within the considered $\eta$ range.
In general, this involves loss of information such as the $\eta_{\text{t}}$ dependence, but $C_{\text{R}}$ provides a simpler representation of the correlation.
Using $(\eta_{\text{a}},\eta_{\text{t}})$ instead of $\Delta\eta$ is suggested in \cite{Method:Pruneau:2}, and used \textit{e.g.}\ in \cite{Alver:2010rt}.
Instead, the present article focuses on the use of $\Delta\eta$, which is technically simpler and has a statistical benefit compared to the one based on $(\eta_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{t}})$.
Another correlation observable~\cite{STAR:2005ph,PHENIX:2005ee,PHENIX:2008ae,CMS:2PC} used instead of the above is the per-trigger normalized associated particle yield (per-trigger yield),
\begin{equation}
C_{\text{yield}}(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)=\frac{1}{N_{\text{trig}}}\frac{\text{d}^2N_{\text{pair}}}{\text{d}\Delta\phi\,\text{d}\Delta\eta}\;\text{,}
\label{CptrigY}
\end{equation}
and it is generally approximated by
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{N_{\text{trig}}}\frac{\text{d}^2N_{\text{pair}}}{\text{d}\Delta\phi\,\text{d}\Delta\eta} \simeq C_{\text{trig,R}}=B(0,0)\,\frac{S(\Delta\varphi,\,\Delta\eta)}{B(\Delta\varphi,\,\Delta\eta)}
\label{CtrigR}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
S(\Delta\varphi,\,\Delta\eta)=\frac{1}{N_{\text{trig}}^{\text{same}}}\frac{\text{d}^2N^{\text{\text{same}}}}{\text{d}\Delta\varphi\,\text{d}\Delta\eta}\;\text{,}\qquad B(\Delta\varphi,\,\Delta\eta)=\frac{1}{N_{\text{trig}}^{\text{mixed}}}\frac{\text{d}^2 N^{\text{\text{mixed}}}}{\text{d}\Delta\varphi\,\text{d}\Delta\eta}\;\text{,}
\end{equation}
within specific $\eta$-acceptance ranges.
Essentially, $C_{2,\text{R}}$, $C_{\text{R}}$, and $C_{\text{trig,R}}$ contain the same information, namely how much the correlated production differs from the uncorrelated production, and they depend on a ratio between these two.
This is indicated by the common index ``R''.
In $C_{\text{trig,R}}$, it is often assumed that the division by $B(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ represents a correction for pair-acceptance effects~\cite{STAR:2005ph,PHENIX:2005ee,PHENIX:2008ae,ALICE:2PC:pPb,CMS:2012qk}.
However, we claim that $C_{\text{trig,R}}$ is not corrected properly for the finite-acceptance effects, and the normalized ratio function is only an approximation of the intended per-trigger yield.
As will be discussed in more detail throughout the article, the extraction of yields or $\Delta\varphi$-projections are affected by distortions inherent to $C_{\text{trig,R}}$.
In the following, $C$ represents the per-trigger yield, not defined by a ratio, and exact correction methods for finite-acceptance effects will be discussed.
\subsection{Finite-acceptance effects}
\label{sec:FAeffects}
Finite-acceptance effects in a two-particle correlation analysis should be distinguished from detector efficiency effects.
In recent correlation analyses, single-particle efficiency effects are corrected by the corresponding efficiency obtained with event generators followed by detector simulations at the moment when $(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ bins of per-trigger yields are filled~\cite{ALICE:2PC:pPb,Aad:2012gla,CMS:2012qk}.
What is done to correct for finite-acceptance effects is to divide the same-event function by the normalized mixed-event function, producing a ratio function as described in the previous section.
It is easier to demonstrate the complication of finite-acceptance effects in two-particle correlations with a 1-dimensional example.
Considering a case where the detector acceptance range is $[a_{1}, a_{2}]$ in $x$, we assume translational invariance of the correlated signal in $x$, which makes it possible to use $\Delta x=x_{\text{t}}-x_{\text{a}}$, instead of $(x_{\text{a}}, x_{\text{t}})$.
Then $X$, $f_{\text{t}}(x-X)$, $f_{\text{a}}(x-X)$, and $g(X)$ are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
X &\equiv& \text{Common reference point of the trigger and associated particle distributions} \nonumber \\
&&\text{for each correlated signal, where $X$ denotes the center of trigger and associated} \nonumber \\
&&\text{particle distributions for convenience;} \nonumber \\
f_{\text{t}}(x-X) &\equiv& \text{Trigger particle distribution in a correlated signal with respect to } x=X \text{ in}\nonumber \\
&&\text{the range } -b < x-X < b\text{, where } 2b \text{ corresponds to the size of a correlated}\nonumber \\
&&\text{signal in } x \text{;}\nonumber \\
f_{\text{a}}(x-X) &\equiv& \text{Associated particle distribution in a correlated signal with respect to } x=X \nonumber \\
&&\text{ in the range } -b < x-X < b\text{;} \nonumber \\
g(X) &\equiv& \text{Distribution of }X\text{ over all events.}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The definitions assume that the trigger and associated particle distributions have a common reference point, $X$, in $x$ for each correlated signal in addition to the translational invariance. For example, this is most relevant to particle correlations in a jet and the reference point corresponds to the jet axis.
In the definitions, $b$ can be an arbitrarily large value as far as it includes the correlated signal, as dependence on $b$ will be eliminated in the new methods.
For infinite acceptance in $x$, the per-trigger yield from a single correlated signal for a given $X$, $C_{\text{inf,single}}$, with $f_{\text{a}}$ and $f_{\text{t}}$ is mathematically defined by the cross-correlation\footnote{Cross-correlation: $(f\star g)(\Delta x) = \int f(x - \Delta x)\,g(x)\,\text{d}x$},
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{\text{inf,single}}(\Delta x) &=& \frac{1}{(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf,single}}}(f_{\text{a}}\star f_{\text{t}})_{\text{inf,single}} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{1}{(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf,single}}}\int_{-\infty}^\infty f_{\text{a}}(x-X-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,\text{d}x \nonumber\\
&=& \frac{1}{(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf,single}}}\int_{\max(X-b, X-b+\Delta x)}^{\min(X+b, X+b+\Delta x)}f_{\text{a}}(x-X-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,\text{d}x \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{1}{(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf,single}}}\int_{\max(-b, -b+\Delta x)}^{\min(b, b+\Delta x)}f_{\text{a}}(x'-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{t}}(x')\,\text{d}x' \;\text{,}
\label{CidealSingle}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf,single}} &=& \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,\text{d}x = \int_{X-b}^{X+b} f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,\text{d}x \nonumber \\
&=& \int_{-b}^{b} f_{\text{t}}(x')\,\text{d}x'\;\text{.}
\end{eqnarray}
We note that $(f_{\text{a}}\star f_{\text{t}})_{\text{inf,single}}$ and $(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf,single}}$ do not depend on $X$, as expected from the assumption of the translational invariance. With infinite acceptance, the per-trigger yield over all events with all signals should be the same as the above $C_{\text{inf,single}}(\Delta x)$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf}} &=& \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}g(X)\,\left(\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,\text{d}x\right)\,\text{d}X \nonumber \\
& = & (N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf,single}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}g(X)\,\text{d}X \;\text{,}
\label{Nideal}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x) &=& \frac{1}{(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf}}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}g(X)\,\left(\int_{-\infty}^\infty f_{\text{a}}(x-X-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,\text{d}x\right)\,\text{d}X \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{1}{(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf,single}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}g(X)\,\text{d}X}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}g(X)\,\text{d}X\left(\int_{-\infty}^\infty f_{\text{a}}(x-X-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,\text{d}x\right)\nonumber \\
&=& \frac{1}{(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{inf,single}}}\int_{-\infty}^\infty f_{\text{a}}(x-X-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,\text{d}x \nonumber\\
&=& C_{\text{inf,single}}(\Delta x)\; \text{.}
\label{Cideal}
\end{eqnarray}
If we consider the case for finite acceptance, $[a_{1}, a_{2}]$ in $x$, parts of $f_{\text{t}}$ and $f_{\text{a}}$ cannot be detected depending on $X$ of the signal. For instance, for a signal with $X=a_{1}$, only the positive part of $f_{\text{t}}$ and $f_{\text{a}}$ (where $x-X>0$) can contribute to the per-trigger yield. If the whole range of the correlated signal is within $[a_{1}, a_{2}]$, no finite-acceptance effects are involved. Finite-acceptance effects mean that pairs are not counted depending on the correlated particle positions, and must be corrected for. The per-trigger yield in a single event with given $X$ and finite acceptance can be written as
\begin{equation}
C_{\text{single}}(\Delta x)= \frac{1}{(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{single}}}\int_{-\infty}^\infty f_{\text{a}}(x-X-\Delta x)\,A_{\text{a}}(x-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,A_{\text{t}}(x)\,\text{d}x \; \text{,}
\label{1DCrEq_single}
\end{equation}
where we have introduced an acceptance operator
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{\text{t}}(x) =
\begin{cases}
1 & \text{if } a_{1\text{,t}} < x < a_{2\text{,t}} \\
0 & \text{otherwise }
\end{cases}\;\text{,}\qquad
A_{\text{a}}(x) =
\begin{cases}
1 & \text{if } a_{1\text{,a}} < x < a_{2\text{,a}} \\
0 & \text{otherwise }
\end{cases}\;\text{,}
\label{AccEq}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{equation}
(N_{\text{trig}})_{\text{single}}=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,A_{\text{t}}(x)\,\text{d}x \;\text{.}
\end{equation}
By treating separately $A_{\text{a}}$ and $A_{\text{t}}$ as Eq.~(\ref{AccEq}), following formalism can be applied to cases where the correlation between different $x$ ranges of trigger and associated particles is studied~\cite{Adamczyk:2015qy,PHENIX:2006hi}.
Then considering all events,
\begin{equation}
C(\Delta x) = \frac{1}{N_\text{trig}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{-\infty}^\infty g(X)\,f_{\text{a}}(x-X-\Delta x)\,A_{\text{a}}(x-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,A_{\text{t}}(x)\,\text{d}x\,\text{d}X\;\text{,}
\label{1DCrEq}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
N_{\text{trig}}=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} g(X)\,f_{\text{t}}(x-X)\,A_{\text{t}}(x)\,\text{d}x\,\text{d}X\;\text{.}
\label{1DNtrig}
\end{equation}
There is no general formula to relate $C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x)$ and $C(\Delta x)$, as the integrand of Eq.~(\ref{Cideal}) is multiplied by acceptance operators in Eq.~(\ref{1DCrEq}).
In the following section, we will discuss the correction of finite-acceptance effects at $(x, \Delta x)$ space before the integration in Eq.~(\ref{1DCrEq}) is performed.
Also, exact formulas which connect $C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x)$ and $C(\Delta x)$ will be derived under specific assumptions of the correlated signal.
These formulas might be used as approximations in realistic cases to correct for finite-acceptance effects.
\section{Alternative methods}
\label{Sec:AM}
Without loss of generality we restrict the following discussion of the correction for finite-acceptance effects to measurements as a function of one variable, $x$.
Actual measurements are performed typically as a function of $\Delta\varphi$ and $\Delta\eta$.
Note that because of azimuthal symmetry, all assumptions made in the following about the dependence of the signal on $x$ and $\Delta x$ are realized for $x=\varphi$ and the corrections are exact in case of full azimuthal acceptance, whereas for $x=\eta$, they are approximate.
Since these correction methods also preserve the additivity of signal and uncorrelated background, it is irrelevant whether one performs the background subtraction~\cite{STAR:2005ph,PHENIX:2005ee,PHENIX:2008ae,Aggarwal:2010rf,ALICE:2PC:pPb,CMS:2PC,Ajitanand:2005jj,Trainor:2009gj} before or after the acceptance correction.
Hence, we can also restrict our discussion to the correction of the signal only.
\subsection{Correction methods and scope of applicability\label{ch3-1}}
$C_{\text{single}}(\Delta x)$ in Eq.~(\ref{1DCrEq_single}) can be considered as a weighted average of $C_{\text{single}}(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$, per-trigger yield in $(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ space, over $x_{\text{t}}$ as $x$ in the integral corresponds to the $x$ of trigger particles.
The integrand is equivalent to $C_{\text{single}}(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)\,N_{\text{trig,single}}(x_{\text{t}})$, where $N_{\text{trig,single}}(x_{\text{t}}) = f_{\text{t}}(x_{\text{t}}-X)\,A_{\text{t}}(x_{\text{t}})$ corresponds to the weight of the average.
$C_{\text{single}}(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ and its weighted average over $x_{\text{t}}$ for given $X$ can be free of finite-acceptance effects under certain conditions, such as trigger (associated) particle distribution being within the trigger (associated) particle acceptance, larger associated particle acceptance range than trigger particle acceptance range, and more generally when
\begin{equation}
a_{2\text{,t}} - a_{2\text{,a}}< \Delta x < a_{1\text{,t}} - a_{1\text{,a}}\;\text{.}
\end{equation}
One realistic example is near-side per-trigger yield from jet-hadron correlation, with trigger particle acceptance $[-\frac{a}{2}, \frac{a}{2}]$ and associated particle acceptance $[-a, a]$.
In this case, both $C_{\text{single}}(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ and $C_{\text{single}}(\Delta x)$ do not experience finite-acceptance effects for $\Delta x$ within $[-\frac{a}{2}, \frac{a}{2}]$.
Eq.~(\ref{1DCrEq}) is the weighted average of $C_{\text{single}}(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ over $x_{\text{t}}$ and $X$, and equivalent to the weighted average of single per-trigger yields, $C_{\text{single}}(\Delta x)$, over $X$ where the yield is weighted with $g(X)$.
As $C_{\text{single}}(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ is free of finite-acceptance effects with certain conditions, $C(\Delta x)$ can also be free of them when the average over $x_{\text{t}}$ and $X$ is selectively performed with only $C_{\text{single}}(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ with no finite-acceptance effects.
Although restricting trigger-particle acceptance range may cause lower statistics in real analysis, this certainly is one way to avoid finite-acceptance effects in two-particle correlation analysis.
An additional benefit of considering per-trigger yield in $(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$-space is the possibility that the assumption of translational invariance of the signal can be explicitly checked.
If one can find a form that can relate $C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x)$ and $C(\Delta x)$, this form is simply interpreted as a correction form of finite-acceptance effects.
But more generally, the correction procedure is interpreted as restoring the shape of two-particle correlation signal with finite-acceptance effects at $(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ space and averaging the corrected $C(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ over $x_{\text{t}}$.
In the formulation of the correction form of finite-acceptance effects, comparing $C(\Delta x)$ with $C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x)$ automatically assumes the restoration of distorted correlation signal shapes from finite-acceptance effects.
Meanwhile, directly applying the second interpretation, one can consider the correction in $(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ space by copying the shape of correlated signal without finite-acceptance effects within certain $x_{\text{t}}$ and ${\Delta x}$ ranges into the distorted signals with finite-acceptance effects in other $x_{\text{t}}$, assuming translational invariance of the signal.
After the correction in $(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ space, corrected $C(\Delta x)$ can be estimated by averaging $C(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ over $x_{\text{t}}$ with weight, $N_{\text{trig}}(x_{\text{t}})$.
In addition to the general correction procedures in $(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ space, the correction factor can be factorized out under certain conditions and possibly performed after averaging $C(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ over $x_{\text{t}}$ without correction for the finite-acceptance effects.
In this case, one does not have to generate $C(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ and consider $x_{\text{t}}$ and $\Delta x$ ranges, which should be used as the bases of the restoration of the distorted signals, but only needs to generate uncorrected $C(\Delta x)$.
Continuing from Eq.~(\ref{1DCrEq}), where there is a single common reference point between trigger and associated particle distributions such as near-side ($\Delta\varphi\approx0$) jet-like correlations, we can find two simple relations between $C_{\text{inf}}$ and $C$ under specific assumptions. Detailed derivations can be found in Appendix \ref{Sec:App}, and only the final formulas and their applicability will be given and discussed in the current section. If the distribution of the signal, $g(X)$, is constant, then
\begin{eqnarray}
C(\Delta x) = \frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{\Delta_{\text{t}}}\,C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x)\; \text{,}
\label{Method2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Delta_{\text{t}}=a_{2\text{,t}}-a_{1\text{,t}}$ is the size of trigger particle acceptance. In other words, the measured per-trigger yield in case of constant signal distribution can be corrected back to the case without finite-acceptance effects by dividing by $\frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{\Delta_{\text{t}}}$.
Another condition when the exact formula can be derived is when $f_{\text{t}}$ is a $\delta$-function. This is similar to the near-side jet-hadron correlations in a jet or high $p_{\text{T}}$-triggered hadron-hadron correlations. In this case,
\begin{eqnarray}
C(\Delta x) = \frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star n_{\text{trig}}A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{N_{\text{trig}}}\,C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x)\; \text{,}
\label{Method3}
\end{eqnarray}
where $n_{\text{trig}}(x)$ is a measured trigger particle distribution in $x$ within the acceptance. As a result, we can correct the measured per-trigger yield back to the per-trigger yield with infinite acceptance by dividing by $\frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star n_{\text{trig}}A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{N_{\text{trig}}}$.
Besides a single common reference point case as discussed up to now, we can also consider a different type of correlation signal, which has two reference points between trigger and associated particle distributions in each event. This case is most relevant to the particle correlations in back-to-back di-jet events where each jet represents a reference point. If two reference points are $X$ and $Y$, the correlation formula between trigger and associated particle with respect to the same reference point $X$($Y$) has already been derived. However, the correlation between the trigger particle distribution with respect to the reference point $X$($Y$) and the associated particle distribution with respect to the reference point $Y$($X$) should be dealt with a different way. In di-jet events, these cross terms correspond to the away-side structure near $\Delta\varphi = \pi$, and are distinguished from correlations in a single jet. If we assume a case with infinite acceptance,
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x) &=& \frac{1}{N_\text{trig,inf}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}x\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}Y\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}X\,g(X,Y)\Big( f_{\text{1,a}}(x-Y-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{2,t}}(x-X)\nonumber \\
&&+f_{\text{1,t}}(x-Y)\,f_{\text{2,a}}(x-X-\Delta x)\Big) \text{,}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
N_\text{trig,inf} = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}x\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}X\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}Y\,g(X,Y)\,\Big(f_{\text{1,t}}(x-Y) + f_{\text{2,t}}(x-X)\Big)\text{,}
\end{eqnarray}
where $g(X,Y)$ represents the distribution of two reference points over all events. With finite acceptance as defined in Eq.~(\ref{AccEq}),
\begin{eqnarray}
C(\Delta x) &=& \frac{1}{N_\text{trig}}\left(\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}x\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}Y\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}X\,g(X,Y)\,A_{\text{a}}(x-\Delta x)\,A_{\text{t}}(x) \Big( \right.\nonumber \\
&&\left.f_{\text{1,a}}(x-Y-\Delta x)\,f_{\text{2,t}}(x-X)\,+ f_{\text{1,t}}(x-Y)\,f_{\text{2,a}}(x-X-\Delta x)\,\Big)\right) \text{,}
\label{2RefCtrig}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
N_\text{trig} = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}x\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\text{d}X\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dY\,g(X,Y)\,A_{\text{t}}(x)\Big(f_{\text{1,t}}(x-Y) + f_{\text{2,t}}(x-X)\Big)\text{.}
\label{2RefNtrig}
\end{eqnarray}
Like the derivation for a single common reference correlation, there is no general formula by which we can relate the measured per-trigger yield to the per-trigger yield without finite-acceptance effects. However, an approximate relation can be found in simple cases. First of all, it is reasonable to assume that $f_{\text{1,t}} = f_{\text{2,t}}=f_{\text{t}}$ and $f_{\text{1,a}} = f_{\text{2,a}}=f_{\text{a}}$. Since two reference points are indistinguishable, we know that $g(X,Y)=g(Y,X)$. Then $g(X,Y)$ can be rewritten as $g(X-Y, X+Y)$, and the simplest assumption for $g(X-Y,X+Y)$ is that this function only depends on the distance between $X$ and $Y$, which is $|X-Y|$. This formula includes constant $g(X,Y)$ case. Then we can write,
\begin{equation}
g(X-Y,X+Y) = G(|X-Y|) = G(X-Y)\;\text{,}
\label{2RefCond}
\end{equation}
as $G(X-Y) = G(Y-X)$, and assume without loss of generality that $G(X-Y)$ has only values if $-c<X-Y<c$ with sufficiently large $c$ compared to $2b$, the range of $f_{\text{t}}$ and $f_{\text{a}}$. Then
\begin{eqnarray}
C(\Delta x) = \frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{\Delta_{\text{t}}}\,C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x)\; \text{.}
\label{Method2A}
\end{eqnarray}
This is the same result as for the constant $g(X)$ case in the single common reference correlation, Eq.~(\ref{Method2}). Also, if
\begin{equation}
g(X,Y) = h(X)F(X-Y)\;\text{,}
\label{2RefBias}
\end{equation}
with $g(X,Y) = g(Y,X)$ and $f_{\text{t}}$ is a $\delta$-function as in jet-hadron correlations,
\begin{eqnarray}
C(\Delta x) = \frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star n_{\text{trig}}A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{N_{\text{trig}}}\,C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x)\; \text{.}
\label{Method3A}
\end{eqnarray}
This is the same result as Eq.~(\ref{Method3}).
To recap, we can avoid finite-acceptance effects by manipulating trigger particle acceptance and $\Delta x$ regions, or correct for the finite-acceptance effects in $(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ space by selectively copying the signal shape within certain region before averaging over $x_{\text{t}}$, assuming translational invariance of the signal. Although there is no general formula which relates the measured per-trigger yield and the per-trigger yield without finite-acceptance effects directly in $\Delta x$ space, we have found two exact formulas under specific conditions. If these methods in $\Delta x$ space are applied to the real analysis, we first generate the per-trigger yield, $C(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$, with certain trigger and associated particle conditions from every event, not concerning finite-acceptance effects. For the near-side structure, (1) if trigger particle distribution is constant, we can divide $C(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ by $\frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{\Delta_{\text{t}}}$, or (2) if the trigger particle distribution is $\delta$-function-like, such as jet-hadron correlations, by $\frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star n_{\text{trig}}A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{N_{\text{trig}}}$. Under the additional assumptions that $g(X,Y)$ depends only on $X-Y$ or $g(X,Y)$ is decomposed into $h(X)F(X-Y)$, the same methods can be applied for the away-side correlations. These new methods in $\Delta x$ space can be regarded as approximate formulas for more general cases and the validity depends on how close the correlated signal is to the assumed conditions, including translational invariance assumption.
Coming back to $C_{\text{R}}$ and $C_{\text{trig,R}}$ from Eq.~(\ref{CrEq}) and (\ref{CtrigR}), we know that they are only different by a normalization factor and addition of a constant. What is intended from the ratio, $\frac{S(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)}{B(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)}$, used in both formulations is that it corresponds to $\frac{\rho_{\text{a,t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}-\varphi_{\text{a}}; \eta_{\text{t}}- \eta_{\text{a}})}{\rho_{\text{a}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}})\,\rho_{\text{t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})}$. However, $S(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ and $B(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ are equivalent to $\rho_{\text{a,t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}-\varphi_{\text{a}}; \eta_{\text{t}}- \eta_{\text{a}})$ and $\rho_{\text{a}}(\varphi_{\text{a}}, \eta_{\text{a}})\,\rho_{\text{t}}(\varphi_{\text{t}}, \eta_{\text{t}})$ with finite-acceptance effects, respectively. If finite-acceptance effects are factorized by the same function from $S(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ and $B(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$, we can get $C_{\text{R}}$ correctly since finite-acceptance effects are canceled in the numerator and denominator. But these factorizability and cancellation in numerator and denominator do not hold in general cases. As we have shown, finite-acceptance effects depend on signal types and they may be non-factorizable. Thus, $C_{\text{R}}$ is merely an approximation of the intended correlation function. $C_{\text{trig,R}}$ should also be distinguished from its intended meaning, per-trigger yield. If $S(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ in Eq.~(\ref{CtrigR}) consists of correlated signal and uncorrelated background, dividing by the mixed-event function may get rid of the uncorrelated background shape, but simultaneously distorts the correlated signal shape.
\subsection{Discussion on true per-trigger yield}
\label{sec:TargetFunc}
So far, the derivations of the new methods are based on a few assumptions, such as translational and azimuthal invariance of the correlated signal, and the comparison with $C_{\text{inf}}$. In other words, $C_{\text{inf}}$ is considered as the true per-trigger yield, which is intended to be recovered by the finite-acceptance correction of the measured per-trigger yield.
Although the assumptions used for the derivations may not be satisfied in reality, the advantage of our formalism is to ensure mathematical completeness. The corrected result by design is free from finite-acceptance effects, but at the same time we need information outside of actual acceptance for the measurement.
Thus, the validity of considering $C_{\text{inf}}(\Delta x)$ as a true per-trigger yield is closely related to the validity of translational invariance assumption.
If translational invariance is assumed to hold only for the trigger acceptance range, a per-trigger yield $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$, which is defined with finite acceptance for the trigger particles and infinite acceptance for the associated particles,
can be considered, especially in the case of near-side jet-like correlations.
Mathematically, $C_{\text{fin.trig,single}}$ and $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ can be written in a similar way to Eq.~(\ref{CidealSingle}) and Eq.~(\ref{Cideal}), but there is no exact formula to relate these two. Even though associated particle acceptance is infinite, there are still finite-acceptance effects in $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$. This is obvious when part of trigger particle distribution is within acceptance and others are not. However, $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ will be considered in the Monte Carlo comparisons in the following section.
\section{Test of alternative methods with Monte Carlo simulations}
\label{Sec:MC}
In the present section, we will apply the derived methods in $\Delta x$ space to Monte Carlo simulations and compare the results with $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$, per-trigger yield evaluated with finite acceptance for the trigger particles and infinite acceptance for the associated particles.
For convenience, we denote the correction method using
\begin{itemize}
\item the standard mixed-event technique~(Eq.~(\ref{CtrigR})) as Method~1,
\item the constant-signal ansatz with $\frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{\Delta_{\text{t}}}$~(Eq.~(\ref{Method2}) and (\ref{Method2A})) as Method~2,
\item and the $\delta$-function ansatz with $\frac{(A_{\text{a}}\star n_{\text{trig}}A_{\text{t}})(\Delta x)}{N_{\text{trig}}}$~(Eq.~(\ref{Method3}) and Eq.~(\ref{Method3A})) as Method~3
\end{itemize}
throughout the section.
Two sets of simulated data are analyzed: A simulation of di-jet events using PYTHIA~\cite{Sjostrand:2001yu} to test the methods on jet-like correlations (section~\ref{sec:MCPYTHIA}) and a simple MC toy model that creates a global correlation of all particles to an event plane to test the methods on flow-like correlations (section~\ref{sec:MCColl}).
\begin{table}[b!f] \centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|}
\hline
PYTHIA (ver. 6.205) Di-jet process\\
\hline
Proton beam energy = 2.76 TeV \\
$10^7$ events \\
No initial gluon radiation \\
Intrinsic $k_{\text{T}} = 0$ \\
Minimum jet $p_{\text{T}} = 10$ GeV/$c$ \\
No vertex smearing \\
Structure function $=$ CTEQ4L \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:Pythia} Settings used for the PYTHIA generator-level simulation.}
\end{table}
\subsection{PYTHIA simulation}
\label{sec:MCPYTHIA}
To test the applicability of the correction methods in the case of jet-like correlations, PYTHIA di-jet events are generated which contain back-to-back jets with the same $p_{\text{T}}$.
Details of the PYTHIA Monte Carlo configurations can be found in Table~\ref{tab:Pythia}. To have clean back-to-back jet correlation signal, each event is set to have two jets with jet $p_{\text{T}}$, defined as $p_{\text{T}}$ of the hard scattered parton at the origin of the jet, larger than 10 GeV/$c$ and intrinsic transverse momentum ($k_{\text{T}}$) equal 0. We have assumed two different $\eta$-acceptances, $[-2, 2]$ and $[0,4]$, to test the new methods and estimated $C_{\text{inf}}$ and $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$, not applying any $\eta$-cut and applying $\eta$-cut to the trigger particles, respectively.
There are many possible choices for trigger and associated particle conditions, such as $p_{\text{T}}$ and particle species. For our examples, we choose to use every final-state particle with $2.0 \text{ GeV}/c < p_{\text{T, trig}} < 50.0 \text{ GeV}/c$ and $1.0 \text{ GeV}/c < p_{\text{T, assoc.}} < 2.0 \text{ GeV}/c$ for the current analysis. This means that the Method~3 only holds approximately because low-$p_{\text{T}}$ trigger particles are not aligned with the jet axis and the trigger particle $\eta$ distributions might contain a contribution from soft particle production. Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_eta} shows normalized $\eta$-distributions of trigger and associated particles for two $\eta$-acceptances, and we can see that they are not uniform within the acceptances. Trigger (associated) particle distribution is normalized by the number of trigger (associated) particles. Hence, also Method~2 can only be considered an approximation, since it is derived for the case of a uniform signal distribution.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_22_eta.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_04_eta.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:pythia_eta} $\eta$-distribution of associated particles ($1.0 \text{ GeV}/c < p_{\text{T, assoc.}} < 2.0 \text{ GeV}/c$) and trigger particles ($2.0 \text{ GeV}/c < p_{\text{T, trig}} < 50.0 \text{ GeV}/c$) with the (a)~$\eta$-acceptance $[-2,2]$ and (b)~$\eta$-acceptance $[0, 4]$.}
\end{figure}
As described in section~\ref{sec:TargetFunc}, $C_{\text{inf}}$ and $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ are different especially when translational invariance assumption is not fully satisfied.
Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_finvsinf} shows comparisons between $C_{\text{inf}}$ and $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ with $\Delta\eta$-projections of
\begin{equation}
\frac{C_{\text{fin.trig}} - C_{\text{inf}}}{C_{\text{inf}} }
\end{equation}
for near and away side for two acceptances.
For the near side the $-\pi/18 < \Delta\varphi < \pi/18$ region, and for the away side the $(1-1/18)\pi < \Delta\varphi < (1+1/18)\pi$ region is projected onto the $\Delta\eta$-axis.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_finvsinf_Near_22.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_finvsinf_Away_22.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_finvsinf_Near_04.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_finvsinf_Away_04.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:pythia_finvsinf} $\Delta\eta$ projections of $(C_{\text{fin.trig}} - C_{\text{inf}})/C_{\text{inf}}$ on (a)~near and (b)~away side with $\eta$-acceptance $[-2, 2]$ and (c)~near and (d)~away side with $\eta$-acceptance $[0,4]$.}
\end{figure}
In PYTHIA events, jets located at large $|\eta|$ are expected to have narrower fragmented particle distribution.
$C_{\text{inf}}$ includes these jets at large $|\eta|$ in the estimation, while $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ does not.
This results in larger value of $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ than $C_{\text{inf}}$ on the near side especially at large $|\Delta\eta|$.
In the case of $[0,4]$ $\eta$-acceptance, away-side structure of $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ is expected to be asymmetric with respect to $\Delta\eta=0$, while $C_{\text{inf}}$ is symmetric.
This intrinsic difference by definition is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pythia_finvsinf}~(d).
In the following, corrected per-trigger yields will be compared to $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ as the difference between $C_{\text{inf}}$ and $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ is understood.
Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_22_2D} shows the $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ and per-trigger yields from three correction methods after subtraction of a scaled mixed-event function as described before in Section~\ref{ch3-1} for an $\eta$ acceptance of $[-2,2]$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_22_t3a2_fintrig.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_22_t3a2_M.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_22_t3a2_A.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_22_t3a2_B.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:pythia_22_2D} (a)~$C_{\text{fin.trig}}$; (b)~per-trigger yield from Method~1~(standard), (c)~Method~2~(uniform), and (d)~Method~3~($\delta$-function) for an $\eta$-acceptance of $[-2,2]$.}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_22_Ratio} shows the $\Delta\eta$ projections of
\begin{equation}
\frac{C_{\text{corrected}} - C_{\text{fin.trig}}}{C_{\text{fin.trig}} }
\end{equation}
for near and away side, while the same $\Delta\varphi$ regions as Fig.~\ref{fig:pythia_finvsinf} are used for $\Delta\eta$-projections.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_22_NearRatio_FinT_Proj.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_22_AwayRatio_FinT_Proj.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:pythia_22_Ratio} $\Delta\eta$ projections of $(C_{\text{corrected}} - C_{\text{fin.trig}})/C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ on (a)~near and (b)~away side for the comparison of the per-trigger yields presented in Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_22_2D}.}
\end{figure}
From Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_22_Ratio}, we conclude that results from three methods do not significantly deviate from $C_{\text{fin.trig}}$ on the near side, unlike on the away side, where for larger $\Delta\eta$ ranges significant deviations become apparent.
In particular, the discrepancy on the away side is related to the violation of the initial assumptions, such as $g(X,Y)=G(X-Y)$ or $h(X)F(X-Y)$, and $\delta$-function trigger-particle distribution.
However, we note that finite-acceptance corrections with Method~2 and Method~3 do not depend on the shape of mixed-event function, which attempts to describe the corresponding shape of the uncorrelated particle production.
It is generally expected that the corrections are more accurate at regions of smaller $|\Delta\eta|$ than the acceptance window, as less finite-acceptance effects are involved.
Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_04_2D} and Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_04_Ratio} correspond to Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_22_2D} and Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_22_Ratio}, respectively, but with $\eta$-acceptance $[0, 4]$ instead of $[-2, 2]$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_04_t3a2_fintrig.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_04_t3a2_M.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_04_t3a2_A.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_04_t3a2_B.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:pythia_04_2D} (a)~Per-trigger yield evaluated with infinite $\eta$ acceptance; (b)~per-trigger yield from Method~1~(standard), (c)~Method~2~(uniform), and (d)~Method~3~($\delta$-function) for an $\eta$-acceptance of $[0,4]$.}
\end{figure}
Particle distributions in $\eta$ in this case are asymmetric within the acceptance as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_eta}~(b), which is also the case for proton--nucleus collisions.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_04_NearRatio_FinT_Proj.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Pythia_04_AwayRatio_FinT_Proj.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:pythia_04_Ratio} $\Delta\eta$ projections of (a)~near and (b)~away side for the comparison of the per-trigger yields presented in Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_04_2D}.}
\end{figure}
From Figure~\ref{fig:pythia_04_Ratio}, we observe that Method~3 roughly recovers the symmetry of near-side jet shape while the other two methods produce more asymmetric shapes.
The asymmetry in shape is due to the asymmetric trigger distribution, and Method~3 is intended to reduce this effect.
Asymmetric deviations are more obvious at large $\Delta\eta$.
\subsection{Collective MC simulation}
\label{sec:MCColl}
In flow analyses, $v_2$ is an important observable and there are many approaches to evaluate $v_2$ from various collision systems~\cite{Ollitrault:1992bk,Poskanzer:1998yz}. To reduce non-flow effects, subtraction of the lowest multiplicity class from a higher multiplicity class is used under the assumption that per-trigger yields in the lowest multiplicity class are dominated by the non-flow signal and this signal is independent to the centrality class, or only large $\Delta\eta$ parts of per-trigger yields are considered where non-flow signal on the near-side cannot reach~\cite{ALICE:2PC:pPb}. However, due to the statistics, $v_2$ is commonly evaluated after per-trigger yields or correlation functions are projected into the $\Delta\varphi$ axis in a two-particle correlation analysis. In other words, after projecting the $C(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ onto the $\Delta\varphi$ axis, the azimuthal anisotropy harmonics are extracted from a Fourier decomposition,
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{N_{\text{trig}}}\frac{\text{d}N_{\text{pair}}}{\text{d}\Delta\varphi}=\frac{N_{\text{assoc.}}}{2\pi}\left[1+\sum\limits_{n}2V_{n\Delta}\cos(n\Delta\varphi)\right] \;\text{,}
\end{equation}
and $v_2$ is calculated from $V_{2\Delta}$.
To evaluate the influence of finite-acceptance effects and the correction methods on the extracted $v_2$, a toy Monte Carlo model is used.
In every event, the $\eta$ distribution of particles is required to follow a common Gaussian function ($\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}\eta\sim\text{exp}(-\eta^2/(2\sigma^2))$) with $\sigma=3$.
The $\varphi$ distribution is different from the common flow toy Monte Carlo simulation, which uses $\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}\varphi\sim\big(1 + 2\,v_2\,\text{cos}(2(\varphi - \varphi_0))\big)$ with constant $v_2$.
To introduce a $\Delta\eta$ dependence in $v_2$, we randomly choose one particle in each event, and denote its $\eta$ value as $\eta_{\text{ref}}$. Then the $\varphi$ distribution of that event follows $\sim\big(1 + 2\,a_2(\eta)\,\text{cos}(2(\varphi - \varphi_0))\big)$, with
\begin{eqnarray}
a_{2}(\eta) =
\begin{cases}
0.3\,\frac{|\eta - \eta_{\text{ref}}|}{2} & \text{ if } |\eta - \eta_{\text{ref}}| \le 2 \\
0 & \text{ otherwise } \\
\end{cases}\;\text{.}
\end{eqnarray}
In this toy Monte Carlo simulation, no distinction on the $p_T$ or species of particles is used.
When evaluating the per-trigger yield with correction methods, the symmetric $\eta$ acceptance, $[-2, 2]$, as in the previous PYTHIA simulation is used. Since new correction methods are not derived under this type of correlation, validity of the correction is not ensured. But this example will show the importance of finite-acceptance correction for several observables.
Figure~\ref{fig:flow_22_2D} shows the per-trigger yields from infinite acceptance and three correction methods with finite acceptance. One obvious observation is that the per-trigger yield from Method~1 has larger relative yields at large $\Delta\eta$ than others.
\begin{figure}[tb!f]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Flow_varying_true2D.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Flow_varying_22_M.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Flow_varying_22_A.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Flow_varying_22_B.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:flow_22_2D} (a)~Ideal per-trigger yield evaluated without $\eta$-cut; (b)~Per-trigger yield from Method~1; (c)~Method~2; (d)~Method~3; all with the $\eta$-acceptance $[-2,2]$.}
\end{figure}
The $v_2(\Delta\eta)$ extracted in each $\Delta\eta$ bin of the per-trigger yield is a relative quantity and does not depend on the finite-acceptance correction methods, since different methods only rescale the yield at each $\Delta\eta$ bin differently leaving the $\Delta\varphi$ shape intact. It also means that $v_2(\Delta\eta)$ of the same-event function ($S(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$) without any finite-acceptance correction should be the same. However, if we consider integrated $v_2$, which is evaluated after projecting per-trigger yields to the $\Delta\varphi$ axis, a discrepancy occurs depending on the method. In our example, the per-trigger yield from Method~1 has larger yields at $|\Delta\eta|\sim4$, which corresponds to the $v_2 = 0$ region. Although $v_2$ fluctuates in event by event basis, the integrated $v_2$ will be smaller than one from the per-trigger yield with infinite acceptance. In other words, the yield of each $\Delta\eta$ bin works as a weighting factor for the projection, and if $v_2$ depends on $\Delta\eta$, the integrated $v_2$ should depend on the finite-acceptance correction method. Integrated $v_2$ from three correction methods still agree with the one from $C_{\text{inf}}$ by 11\% in our example.
Some correlation analyses have not considered $(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$ space per-trigger yield, but have calculated $v_2$ based only on $\Delta\varphi$ space. This is equivalent to calculating $v_2$ from the same-event function, $S(\Delta\varphi, \Delta\eta)$, without any finite-acceptance correction and the integrated $v_2$ is dominated by the $v_2$ value at the $\Delta\eta$ bin with the largest yield of the same-event function. If $v_2$ varies depending on $\Delta\eta$, the integrated $v_2$ might be different from what is calculated from $\Delta\varphi$ space only.
\section{Summary and conclusion}
\label{Sec:Sum}
The commonly used method for calculating per-trigger normalized associated particle yield, which utilizes division by the normalized associated yields from mixed events, produces a normalized ratio function of correlated production and uncorrelated background~(Eq.~(\ref{CtrigR})). This ratio function differs from what is intended in the per-trigger yield, as it distorts the correlated signal shape and depends on the shape of the uncorrelated background. As a consequence, results of analyses using the $\Delta\varphi$ projection of per-trigger yield also depend on the shape of the uncorrelated background and may therefore differ from what they should be. To resolve this problem, we have discussed general correction procedure in $(x_{\text{t}}, \Delta x)$ space and derived new formulas for a correction in $\Delta x$ space that enable us to evaluate the per-trigger yield without dependence on the shape of the uncorrelated background. The formulas are derived under certain conditions and assumptions of correlated particle production, such as translational invariance of the signal, uniform correlated signal distribution~(Eq.~(\ref{Method2})) and jet-hadron-like correlations~(Eq.~(\ref{Method3})). They can be used as approximate corrections in more general cases. The validity of the new methods largely depends on the underlying mechanism that produces the correlated signals. We have tested the new methods using Monte Carlo simulations. A significant improvement with new methods was obtained in the case of an asymmetric signal distribution, (Fig.~\ref{fig:pythia_04_Ratio}) compared to the conventional method using event-mixing. The correction method with Eq.~(\ref{Method2}) is intended to be used in particles correlation analyses with midrapidity particles in symmetric nucleus-nucleus collisions where particles distribution is flat within the acceptance, while the other method with Eq.~(\ref{Method3}) is for jet-hadron or high $p_{\text{T}}$-triggered hadron-hadron two-particle correlations.
It is difficult to precisely correct for finite-acceptance effects if the signal is a mixture of many physical mechanisms or if the type of the correlation is very different from the type that was assumed in the derivation of the new methods.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The work of C.\ Loizides is supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy,
Office of Science, Office of Nuclear Physics, under contract number DE-AC02-05CH11231.
The work of S.\ Oh is supported by the US Department of Energy under Grant number DE-SC004168.
\bibliographystyle{utphys}
|
\section{Introduction}
The conservation of angular momenta between itinerant electrons and localized magnetizations in magnetic materials leads to the fascinating concept of spin-transfer torque (STT)\cite{stt};
the spin angular momentum of the electrons can be transferred to the magnetization via their mutual exchange coupling, which enables to drive the dynamics of magnetization by charge current.
The STT in ferromagnets (FMs), providing a vital information-writing technology, has been driving the explosive growth of the field of spintronics up until now.\cite{stt_review}
In textured FMs, the efficiency of the STT (in the unit of velocity) can be defined by
\begin{equation}
{\bm u} = \frac{ g \mu_B P}{ 2 e M_{\rm S} } {\bm j}_{\rm c} ,
\label{u} \end{equation}
with $g$ the g factor, $\mu_B$ the Bohr magneton, $e$ the elementary charge, $M_{\rm S}$ the saturation magnetization, ${\bm j}_{\rm c}$ the charge current density, and $P$ the net spin polarization carried by the charge current.
Recently, antiferromagnets (AFMs) are generating more attention due to their potential to become a key player in technological applications where AFMs play active roles.\cite{afm_review}
If Eq.~(\ref{u}) is directly applied to AFMs, one would conclude that there can be no STT in AFMs where $P$ becomes zero or vanishingly small;
recent research has been confirming that this is of course not the case.
The study of STTs involving AMF materials was started by investigation of current-driven effects in spin valves or multi-layer systems where each AFM layer carries a single domain.\cite{macdonald,urazhdin,helen,linder,saidaoui,cheng_valve,xu}
Theoretical studies have unveiled an important role of the STT also in textured AFMs as in textured FMs\cite{xu,duine,hals,cheng,tveten,barker};
Xu {\it et al.}\cite{xu} examined the current-driven dynamics of a domain wall (DW) in a two-sublattice AFM metal by {\it ab initio} calculations.
Swaving and Duine\cite{duine} formulated a STT in a one-dimensional bipartite AFM, based on the Landau-Lifshitz (LL) equations for the sublattice-magnetizations in the continuous limit.
Hals {\it et al.}\cite{hals} derived the possible forms of STTs that are allowed by symmetry argument.
The dynamics of AFM textures driven by spin-polarized current has been also studied\cite{helen,cheng}
Thus far, however, it still remains an open question how the STT efficiency, the counterpart of Eq.~(\ref{u}), can be defined for general AFM magnetic textures.\cite{duine,barker}
Finding the STT efficiency would guide us to how to control the STTs in AFMs for designing more prominent STT effects.
In this work, we develop a formalism of current-driven dynamics of two-sublattice AFM textures, where the STT efficiency is provided in terms of unambiguous material parameters.
A challenge in deriving the STT in the AFMs comes from the fact that the electron spin dynamics is not as obvious as in FMs at all, because in the AFM there are two exchange fields corresponding to the two sublattice-magnetizations, that the electron spin can respect.
We formulate the STT in two regimes where the analytical expressions for the electron spin are available;
when the inter-sublattice electron dynamics is dominant over the electron-magnetization exchange coupling, and the opposite.
We find that the STT mechanism that governs its efficiency can quite differ in those two regimes.
In the limit of large exchange coupling, the STT can be generated due to spatial variation of the antiferromagnetic order.
In the opposite limit, on the other hand, the STT requires a sufficiently large canting between the sublattice-magnetizations.
These predictions can be quantified by studying the response of AFM spin waves to the charge current.
In the limit of large exchange coupling, the charge current inevitably causes the spin-wave Doppler shift, whereas, in the opposite limit, it can modify the spin-wave spectrum only when there exists a pronounced sublattice-canting.
Our results demonstrate quantitatively that the STT effects in an AFM highly depend on which class of AFM we consider.
\section{Formalism}
\subsection{Model}
We consider an itinerant AFM composed of two sublattices (1 and 2) with equal saturation magnetization $M_{\rm S}$.
In order to treat the magnetization classically, the coarse graining for the magnetic channel is performed.\cite{neel}
The classical vector ${\bm m}_1 ({\bm r},t)$ $(|{\bm m}_1({\bm r},t)|=1)$ is a continuous function in space that represents the local magnetization direction in the sublattice 1, with a similar definition for ${\bm m}_2({\bm r},t)$;
here the lattice structure is smeared out and the magnetizations of both sublattices are defined at every point in space.
This classical treatment is allowed when the spatial variation of each magnetization is sufficiently slow compared to the atomistic length scale.
The dynamics of the magnetizations are assumed to obey the coupled LL equations with the Gilbert-type damping term\cite{gurevich};
\begin{equation}
\partial_t {\bm m}_i = - \gamma {\bm m}_i \times {\bm H}_i
+ \alpha {\bm m}_i \times \partial_t {\bm m}_i
+ \bm{{\cal T}}_i ,
\quad \left( i = 1 , 2 \right) ,
\label{llg} \end{equation}
where $\gamma$ is the gyromagnetic ratio and $\alpha$ is the damping constant, which are assumed for simplicity to be sublattice independent.
${\bm H}_i = - ( 1 / \mu_0 M_{\rm S} ) \delta w / \delta {\bm m}_i$ are the effective magnetic fields with $w$ being the magnetic energy density, and $\bm{{\cal T}}_i$ are the STTs to be determined.
For the conduction electron channel we employ the following four-band Hamiltonian density\cite{yamane};
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal H} &=& \left( \begin{array}{cc} t_{11} ( {\bm p} ) & t_{12} ( {\bm p} ) \\ t_{21} ( {\bm p} ) & t_{22} ( {\bm p} ) \end{array} \right)
+ \left( \begin{array}{cc} J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m}_1 ( {\bm r} , t ) & 0 \\ 0 & J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m}_2 ( {\bm r} , t ) \end{array} \right) \nonumber \\
&=& \gamma_0 J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} + \left( t_{11} + J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} \right) + \gamma_5 t_{12} ,
\label{h} \end{eqnarray}
a derivation of which starting from an atomistic tight-binding model is discussed in Appendix A.
The upper-left (bottom-right) bands correspond to the sublattice 1 (2).
In the first equality of Eq.~(\ref{h}), the first matrix is the kinetic energy tensor where the diagonal and off-diagonal components describe the intra- and inter-sublattice electron dynamics, respectively, with ${\bm p}$ being the momentum operator of the electron, whereas the second matrix represents the exchange interaction with $J$ being the exchange coupling energy and ${\bm \sigma}$ the Pauli matrices indicating the electron spin operator.
In the second equality, we set $t_{11} = t_{22}$ and $t_{12} = t_{21}$ reflecting the sublattice symmetry, use the tensor product representation of the sublattice and spin spaces with the Dirac matrices
\begin{equation}
\gamma_0 = \sigma_z \otimes I , \qquad
\gamma_5 = \sigma_x \otimes I ,
\end{equation}
and define the net moment and the N\'{e}el-order vector by
\begin{equation}
{\bm m} = \frac{ {\bm m}_1 + {\bm m}_2 }{ 2 } , \qquad
{\bm n} = \frac{ {\bm m}_1 - {\bm m}_2 }{ 2 } .
\end{equation}
The AFM coupling between ${\bm m}_1$ and ${\bm m}_2$ is the leading energy scale so that $| {\bm m} | \ll 1$ and $| {\bm n} | \simeq 1$.
We regard $J$ and $\langle t_{12} \rangle$ as parameters, where $\langle ... \rangle$ denotes the expectation value at the Fermi surface.
The expressions for $\bm{{\cal T}}_i$ are to be derived in the two limiting cases;
the parameter regimes where $\langle t_{12} \rangle / J \ll 1$ (the exchange-dominant regime hereafter) and where $\langle t_{12} \rangle / J \gg 1$ (the mixing-dominant regime hereafter).
The explicit forms of $t_{11}$ and $t_{12}$ can be determined based on an atomistic tight-binding model, as discussed in Appendix A.
\subsection{Exchange-dominant regime}
The condition $\langle t_{12} \rangle/J \ll1$ can be met in AFMs where the inter-sublattice electron dynamics is relatively unfavorable;
e.g., layered AFMs with the c axis being longer than the other axes (Fig.~2b in Appendix A).
To expand ${\cal H}$ in powers of $J^{-1}$, we perform the unitary transformation\cite{yamane}
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}_J \equiv e^{ S_J } \left( {\cal H} + i \hbar \partial_t \right) e^{ - S_J } ,
\label{hj} \end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
S_J = \frac{ t_{12} {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} }{ 2 J } \gamma_0 \gamma_5 .
\label{sj} \end{equation}
Because the kinetic energy operators, $t_{11}$ and $t_{12}$, in general do not commute with ${\bm m}$ and ${\bm n}$, there appear in Eq.~(\ref{hj}) terms that contain their commutators.
These terms and the last term in Eq.~(\ref{hj}) can be ignored when the spatiotemporal variations of the magnetizations are sufficiently slow (see Appendix B for quantitatively more accurate discussion).
With this condition the expression for ${\cal H}_J$ can be reduced to
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}_J = \left( \begin{array}{cc} t_{11} + J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m}_1 & 0 \\ 0 & t_{11} + J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m}_2 \end{array} \right) + {\cal O} \left( J^{ - 2 } \right) .
\label{hj2} \end{equation}
Eq.~(\ref{hj2}) proves that the inter-sublattice band-mixing can be neglected up to the order of $J^{-1}$ in the certain condition.
In this rotated frame, the conduction electrons only couple to either ${\bm m}_1$ or ${\bm m}_2$, whereas it is important to note that these sublattice moments are mutually coupled.
Therefore, the spin gauge fields for the itinerant electrons that reside in the $i$-th sublattice are determined by ${\bm m}_i$ and the STTs $\bm{{\cal T}}_i$ in Eq.~(\ref{llg}) are derived as
\begin{equation}
\bm{{\cal T}}_i = \left( {\bm u}_J \cdot \nabla \right) {\bm m}_i
- \beta_J {\bm m}_i \times \left( {\bm u}_J \cdot \nabla \right) {\bm m}_i ,
\label{stt_j} \end{equation}
where $\beta_J$ is a dimensionless parameter\cite{zhang-li} and the STT efficiency ${\bm u}_J$ is given by
\begin{equation}
{\bm u}_J = \frac{ g \mu_B P_{\rm sub} }{ 2 e M_{\rm S} } {\bm j}_{\rm c} ,
\label{uj} \end{equation}
with $P_{\rm sub}$ representing the spin polarization of the conduction electrons in each sublattice.
We remark here that Eqs.~(\ref{hj2}) and (\ref{stt_j}) cannot be obtained just by assuming the condition $\langle t_{12} \rangle / J \ll 1$;
if the magnetizations change their directions in time and space fast enough, it can cause considerable inter-sublattice band mixing even in the exchange-dominant regime (see Appendix B).
But still, one should point out that this formal result does justify ignoring the interband hopping and translating things as the STT in each sublattice to be fairly independent.
\subsection{Mixing-dominant regime}
The inter-sublattice electron dynamics may be predominant as $\langle t_{12} \rangle / J \gg 1$ in, e.g., bipartite AFMs where the nearest-neighbor atomic sites connect the different sublattices (Fig.~2a in Appendix A).
We show here that the expressions for STTs in this parameter regime quite differ from Eq.~(\ref{stt_j}).
Let us first perform the following unitary transformation on the sublattice space of Eq.~(\ref{h});
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}_t \equiv U {\cal H} U = \gamma_0 t_{12} + \left( t_{11} + J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} \right) + \gamma_5 J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
U = ( \sigma_x \otimes I + \sigma_z \otimes I) / \sqrt{2} .
\end{equation}
In the new framework $t_{12}$ comes in the diagonal components, while $J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n}$ is in the off-diagonal components.
The upper-left (bottom-right) part of ${\cal H}_t$ corresponds to the anti-bonding (bonding) electron states formed by the two sublattice-states.
Then we perform another unitary transformation to expand ${\cal H}_t$ in powers of the operator $t_{12}^{-1}$;
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}_t' \equiv e^{ S_t } \left( {\cal H}_t + i \hbar \partial_t \right) e^{ - S_t } ,
\label{ht2}\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
S_t = \frac{ t_{12}^{-1} J ( {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ) }{ 2 } \gamma_0 \gamma_5 .
\label{st} \end{equation}
Assuming the sufficiently slow and smooth variation in the directions of magnetizations, we can express ${\cal H}_t'$ as (see Appendix C for quantitatively more accurate discussion)
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}_t' = \gamma_0 t_{12} + \left( t_{11} + J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} \right) + {\cal O} \left( t_{12}^{-2} \right) .
\label{ht3} \end{equation}
Here we have succeeded in block-diagonalizing ${\cal H}_t$ up to the order of $t_{12}^{-1}$.
In the mixing-dominant regime with the Hamiltonian~(\ref{ht3}), the conduction electron spins only see the net moment ${\bm m}$ regardless of the sublattice degree of freedom.
In AFMs, ${\bm m}$ can emerge due to several origins such as external magnetic fields, the Dzyaloshinsky-Moriya interaction (DMI), and the spatiotemporal variations in the magnetizations.\cite{andreev,papa}
The magnitude of the net moment $|{\bm m}|$ ($\ll1$) generally varies in both time and space.
This fact makes it difficult to obtain analytical expressions for the STTs for general cases.
In the perfect compensation, i.e., when $| {\bm m} | \rightarrow 0$, the electron-magnetization interaction in Eq.~(\ref{ht3}) vanishes and no STTs arise.
When $| {\bm m} |$ becomes as large as $J | {\bm m} | / \hbar \gg | \partial_t ( {\bm m} / | {\bm m} | ) |$ and $J | {\bm m} | / \hbar \gg | {\bm v}_F \cdot \nabla ( {\bm m} / | {\bm m} | ) |$ over the relevant sample region, it can induce the net spin polarization where the majority (minority) electron spins adiabatically follow the direction of $- {\bm m}$ ($+ {\bm m}$).
In this latter case, $\bm{{\cal T}}_i$ in Eq.~(\ref{llg}) are given by (see Appendix D for a derivation)
\begin{equation}
\bm{{\cal T}}_i = - {\bm m}_i \times \left[ \hat{{\bm m}} \times \left( {\bm u}_t \cdot \nabla \right) \hat{{\bm m}}
+ \beta_t \left( {\bm u}_t \cdot \nabla \right) \hat{{\bm m}}
\right] ,
\label{stt_t} \end{equation}
where $\hat{{\bm m}} = {\bm m} / | {\bm m} |$, $\beta_t$ is a phenomenological parameter, and the STT efficiency ${\bm u}_t$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
{\bm u}_t = \frac{ g \mu_B P_m }{ 2 e M_{\rm S} | {\bm m} | } {\bm j}_{\rm c} .
\label{ut} \end{equation}
Here, $P_m$ is the net spin polarization of the conduction electrons with respect to ${\bm m}$.
Notice that Eq.~(\ref{stt_t}) clearly differs from Eq.~(\ref{stt_j});
both ${\bm m}_1$ and ${\bm m}_2$ enter the STTs $\bm{{\cal T}}_i$ in Eq.~(\ref{stt_t}), in the contrast that each of ${\bm m}_i$ appears in Eq.~(\ref{stt_j}).
\section{Spin-wave Doppler shift}
Here let us study the effects of the STTs on the spin-wave dispersions of the two systems shown in Fig.~1;
an easy-axis (EA) AFM with external dc magnetic field applied along the easy axis, and an easy-plane (EP) AFM with external dc field applied in the easy-plane.
We take the magnetic energy density as\cite{bogdanov}
\begin{equation}
w = A_0 {\bm m}_1 \cdot {\bm m}_2 + A_1 \sum_{ \mu = x , y , z } \left[ ( \partial_\mu {\bm m}_1 )^2 + ( \partial_\mu {\bm m}_2 )^2 - 2 \partial_\mu {\bm m}_1 \cdot \partial_\mu {\bm m}_2 \right] - K ( m_{1z}^2 + m_{2z}^2 ) + \mu_0 {\bm H} \cdot ( {\bm m}_1 + {\bm m}_2 ),
\label{w} \end{equation}
where $A_0$ and $A_1$ characterize the homogeneous and inhomogeneous exchange couplings, $K$ is the uniaxial anisotropy constant along the $z$ axis, and ${\bm H}$ is the external magnetic field.
In the case of EA-AFM ($K > 0$), both ${\bm m}_1$ and ${\bm m}_2$ lie in the $z$ direction at equilibrium (Fig.~1a) when the external dc field ${\bm H}_{\rm dc}\parallel\hat{{\bm z}}$ is in the range of $0<\omega_H<\sqrt{(2\omega_E+\omega_K)\omega_K}$\cite{gurevich}, where
\begin{equation}
\omega_H \equiv \gamma | {\bm H}_{\rm dc} |, \qquad
\omega_E \equiv \frac{ \gamma A_0 }{ \mu_0 M_{\rm S} } , \qquad
\omega_K \equiv \frac{ 2 \gamma K }{ \mu_0 M_{\rm S} } .
\end{equation}
In the absence of charge current, the low-energy spin-wave dispersions of this EA-AFM are given by
\begin{equation}
\omega^{\rm EA}_{{\bm q},\pm} = \sqrt{ ( \Lambda {\bm q}^2 + \omega_K ) ( 2 \omega_E + \omega_K ) } \pm \omega_H,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Lambda \equiv \frac{ 4 \gamma A_1 }{ \mu_0 M_{\rm S} } .
\end{equation}
For the EP-AFM ($K < 0$), the parallel component of the magnetizations with respect to the dc field is determined by\cite{gurevich} (Fig.~1c)
\begin{equation}
\sin\varphi_p = \frac{ \omega_H }{ 2 \omega_E } .
\end{equation}
The low-energy spin-wave dispersions are
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega^{\rm EP}_{{\bm q},1} &=& \sqrt{ \omega_H^2 \{ 1+ ( | \omega_K | / 2 \omega_E ) \}
+ \Lambda {\bm q}^2 ( 2 \omega_E + | \omega_K | ) \cos^2\varphi_p
} , \\
\omega^{\rm EP}_{{\bm q},2} &=& \sqrt{ 2 \omega_E | \omega_K | \cos^2\varphi_p
+ ( \Lambda {\bm q}^2 \sin\varphi_p )^2
+ \Lambda {\bm q}^2 ( 2 \omega_E \cos^2\varphi_p + | \omega_K | \sin^2\varphi_p )
}.
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm,bb=0 0 884 760]{fig01.png}
\caption{ {\bf a}. Schematic of the easy-axis (EA) AMF.
{\bf b}. The spin-wave dispersions of the EA-AFM in the absence ($\omega^{\rm EA}_{ {\bm q}, \pm }$) and presence ($\omega^{\rm EA}_{ {\bm q} {\bm u}_J, \pm }$) of charge current.
The horizontal axis indicates the parallel component of ${\bm q}$ with respect to the charge current.
These modes are affected by the charge current only in the exchange-dominant regime.
The inset magnifies the area indicated by the dotted box, clearly showing the shift of the spectrum around the ${\bm q}=0$ point.
{\bf c}. Schematic of the easy-plane (EP) AMF.
{\bf d}. The spin wave dispersions of the EP-AFM in the absence ($\omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q}, 1 }$ and $\omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q}, 2 }$) and presence ($\omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q} {\bm u}_J, 1 }$, $\omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q} {\bm u}_J , 2}$, and $\omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q} {\bm u}_t, 1 }$) of charge current.
In the mixing-dominant regime, only the $\omega^{\rm EP}_{{\bm q},1}$-mode couples to the charge current.
In {\bf a} and {\bf c}, the arrows ${\bm m}_1^{\rm e}$ and ${\bm m}_2^{\rm e}$ indicate the equilibrium configurations of ${\bm m}_1$ and ${\bm m}_2$.
}
\label{fig01}
\end{figure}
Let us examine the STT effects on the above eigenfrequencies.
In the exchange-dominant regime, Eq.~(\ref{stt_j}) indicates that, in the small dissipation limit with $\alpha\rightarrow0$ and $\beta_J\rightarrow0$, applying the charge current is to replace the partial derivative $\partial_t$ in Eq.~(\ref{llg}) by the Lagrange derivative;
\begin{equation}
{\cal D}_t \equiv \partial_t - {\bm u}_J \cdot \nabla ,
\end{equation}
implying the Galilean invariance of the system with respect to the electron flow.
In systems with the Galilean invariance being respected, the spin-wave spectrum exhibits the current-induced Doppler shift\cite{duine,doppler};
the spin-wave dispersions change as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
& \omega^{\rm EA}_{ {\bm q} {\bm u}_J , \pm} \equiv \omega^{\rm EA}_{{\bm q},\pm} + {\bm u}_J \cdot {\bm q} , \\
& \omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q} {\bm u}_J , 1(2)} \equiv \omega^{\rm EP}_{{\bm q},1(2)} + {\bm u}_J \cdot {\bm q} ,
\end{split}
\quad \left( \langle t_{12} \rangle / J \ll 1 \right) .
\label{eigen_ea-j} \end{equation}
In the mixing-dominant regime, the analytic form for the STTs in Eq.~(\ref{stt_t}) requires the net moment ${\bm m}$ to be large enough to satisfy the condition discussed in the previous section.
For the $\omega^{\rm EA}_{ {\bm q}, \pm }$-modes of the EA-AFM, ${\bm m}$ is mostly vanishingly small and thus tangible STT effects cannot be expected.
For the EP-AFM, on the other hand, there exists the canting moment ${\bm m}$ that can satisfies the above-mentioned condition when the dc field is sufficiently large.
It is shown from Eqs.~(\ref{llg}) and (\ref{stt_t}) that the spin-wave Doppler shift takes place in the $\omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q}, 1 }$-mode but not in the $\omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q}, 2 }$-mode;
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q} {\bm u}_t, 1 } \equiv \omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q}, 1 } + {\bm u}_t \cdot {\bm q} , \\
&\omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q} {\bm u}_t, 2 } \equiv \omega^{\rm EP}_{ {\bm q}, 2 } ,
\end{split}
\quad \left( \langle t_{12} \rangle / J \gg 1 \right) .
\end{equation}
This distinct feature arises because in the mixing-dominant regime the charge current couples only to ${\bm m}$;
the excitation in the $\omega^{\rm EP}_{{\bm q},2}$-mode is the precession of $(n_x, n_z)$, whereas it is the precession of $(m_x , m_z)$ in the $\omega^{\rm EP}_{{\bm q},1}$-mode.
In Fig.~1b and d compared are the spin-wave dispersions of the EA- and EP-AFMs with and without charge current.
For the material parameters, values in the typical range for AFMs are employed\cite{gurevich}: $A_0 = 2 \times 10^7$ J/m$^3$, $A_1 = 3 \times 10^{-12}$ J/m, $K = 2 \times 10^4$ J/m$^3$, $M_{\rm S} = 8 \times 10^5$ A/m, and $\gamma = 2.215 \times 10^5$ s$^{-1}$/(A/m).
The magnitude of dc field is set to $| {\bm H}_{\rm dc} | = 2 \times 10^5$ A/m and $2.4\times10^6$ A/m for the EA- and EP-AFMs, respectively.
For the ratio of the STT efficiencies, $| {\bm u}_J | / | {\bm u}_t | = 1$ is assumed for simplicity, with $| {\bm u}_J | = | {\bm u}_t | = 300$ m/s.
These results demonstrate the important role played by the inter-sublattice electron dynamics;
the reaction of an AFM to the charge current qualitatively differs depending on the ratio $\langle t_{12} \rangle / J$.
The spin-wave Doppler shift offers a way to quantify the STT in the stationary condition in both time and space.\cite{doppler}
\section{Discussions and Conclusions}
Let us compare our results with existing literature.
For this purpose, we rewrite Eq.~(\ref{llg}) in terms of $({\bm m},{\bm n})$.
In the exchange-dominant regime, this leads to the closed equation of motion for ${\bm n}$;
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bm n} &\times& \left[ ( {\cal D}^2_t - \Lambda \omega_E \nabla^2) {\bm n} + \gamma^2 ( {\bm n} \cdot {\bm H}_0 ) {\bm H}_0
+ \gamma {\bm n} \times {\cal D}_t {\bm H}_0
- 2 \gamma ({\bm n} \cdot {\bm H}_0 ) {\bm n} \times {\cal D}_t {\bm n}
\right. \nonumber \\ && \left.
-2 \omega_E \omega_K n_z \hat{{\bm z}}
+ 2 \omega_E ( \alpha \partial_t - \beta_J {\bm u}_J \cdot\nabla ) {\bm n} \right]= 0 ,
\label{n}\end{eqnarray}
while ${\bm m}$ is determined as a slave function of ${\bm n}$;
\begin{equation}
{\bm m} = - \frac{1}{2\omega_E} {\bm n} \times \left( {\cal D}_t{\bm n}
+ \gamma {\bm n} \times {\bm H}_0 \right) ,
\label{m} \end{equation}
where the condition $| {\bm m} | \ll 1$ has been used.
The charge current enters Eqs.~(\ref{n}) and (\ref{m}) through the Lagrange derivative ${\cal D}_t$ (except for the dissipation part), being consistent with the previous discussion regarding the Galilean invariance.
In the absence of charge current, Eqs.~(\ref{n}) and (\ref{m}) reproduce the well-known equations of motion for ${\bm n}$ and ${\bm m}$ under magnetic fields.\cite{andreev}
In the mixing-dominant regime, the $({\bm m},{\bm n})$-representation of Eq.~(\ref{llg}) is generally not as compact as Eqs.~(\ref{n}) and (\ref{m}).
When we limit ourselves to the special case where ${\bm m}$ and ${\bm n}$ are always in a single plane, however, the Galilean invariance is restored in the strict manner, and Eqs.~(\ref{n}) and (\ref{m}) hold with ${\bm u}_J$ and $\beta_J$ replaced by ${\bm u}_t$ and $\beta_t$, respectively.
This condition can be met when, e.g., a DW is formed in a nanowire that possesses a homogeneous DMI with its DMI vector pointing out-of-plane.\cite{bary}
The DW motion predicted by Eq.~(\ref{n}) is consistent with the results in literature (see Appendix E).\cite{duine,hals,tveten}
Eq.~(\ref{n}) contains the STT terms predicted in Ref.~[\onlinecite{hals}] by symmetry argument, whereas the phenomenologically introduced coefficients are now explicitly given by the STT efficiency ${\bm u}_J$.
Since the newly-added terms in Eq.~(\ref{n}) are higher order in terms of the field and derivatives, they were discarded in the previous work.
Eq.~(\ref{n}) not only makes clear that there is the Galilean-invariant nature in the AFMs, but also predicts the cross terms of magnetic field and charge current, which we will investigate elsewhere.
The main focus of Ref.~[\onlinecite{duine}] is on the one-dimensional bipartite AFM where $\langle t_{12} \rangle / J \gg 1$.
They conjectured the nonequilibrium electron spin density proportional to ${\bm n} \times ( {\bm v} \cdot \nabla ) {\bm n}$ with ${\bm v}$ being a parameter in the unit of velocity.
We found that, however, the electron spins predominantly couple to ${\bm m}$ in this parameter regime.
This fact leads to the difference in the results obtained by the two approaches.
While our STT in the mixing-dominant regime is of the first order of $P_m \propto J$, their STT in Ref.~[\onlinecite{duine}] is of higher order as $\propto J^3$.
In conclusion, we have derived the STT efficiency in the two-sublattice AFMs when the inter-sublattice kinetic energy of the conduction electrons is dominant/negligible compared to the exchange coupling energy.
In reality, many of AFM materials should be somewhere in between the two extremes, where numerical approaches will become more powerful.
Our theory demonstrates quantitatively that the STTs in AFMs can, in contrast to in FMs, highly depend on the nature of kinetic energy of the electrons.
These predictions may be tested by studying the spin-wave Doppler shift in the presence of charge current.
The authors are grateful to K. Yamamoto, K. Kubo, and M. Mori, for fruitful discussions.
This research was supported by Research Fellowship for Young Scientists from Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (No.~24740247, 26247063, 16K05424) from MEXT, Japan, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, the Ministry of Education of the Czech Republic (Grant No. LM2011026) and the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic (Grant No. 14-37427).
\section{Appendices}
\subsection{Derivation of Eq.~(\ref{h}) from a tight-binding model}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm,bb=0 0 865 768]{fig02.png}
\caption{
{\bf a} and {\bf b}. Schematics of the AFMs with bipartite and layered sublattice structures, respectively.
The dotted boxes indicate the $j$-th unit cells, where the sublattice 1 (2) contributes the magnetization ${\bm m}_{j_1}$ (${\bm m}_{j_2}$).
$t$ and $t'$ represent the nearest-neighbor hopping parameters between intra- and inter-sublattice sites, respectively.
{\bf c}. Schematic of the coarse-grained model in Eq.~(\ref{h}), where both of the sublattice-magnetizations ${\bm m}_1$ and ${\bm m}_2$ are continuous and defined at every point in space.
Such as the atomistic lattice structures and the electron hopping natures are reflected in the kinetic energy tensor of the electron.
}
\label{fig02}
\end{figure}
Here let us start from an atomistic model for the AFM metal.
The presence of two sublattices leads to unit cells that contain two sites;
the $j$-th unit cell consists of the $j_1$ site that belongs to the first sublattice and the $j_2$ site from the second sublattice, on which the magnetizations ${\bm m}_{j_1}$ and ${\bm m}_{j_2}$ are located, respectively (Fig.~2a and b).
The tight-binding Hamiltonian for the conduction electron is given by
\begin{equation}
{\rm H} = t \sideset{}{'}\sum_{ \langle j j' \rangle \sigma } ( c^\dagger_{j_1 \sigma} c_{j'_1 \sigma} + c^\dagger_{j_2 \sigma} c_{j'_2 \sigma} )
+ t' \sum_{ \langle j j' \rangle \sigma } ( c^\dagger_{j_1 \sigma} c_{j'_2 \sigma} + {\rm c.c.} )
+ J \sum_{ j \sigma \sigma' } ( c^\dagger_{j_1 \sigma} {\bm \sigma}_{\sigma \sigma'} c_{j_1 \sigma'} \cdot {\bm m}_{j_1}
+ c^\dagger_{j_2 \sigma} {\bm \sigma}_{\sigma \sigma'} c_{j_2 \sigma'} \cdot {\bm m}_{j_2}
) .
\label{h_tight} \end{equation}
Here, $c_{j_1\sigma}$ ($c^\dagger_{j_1 \sigma}$) is the annihilation (creation) operator of an electron with spin $\sigma = \uparrow \downarrow$ at the $j_1$ site, and similarly for $c_{j_2 \sigma}$ ($c^\dagger_{j_2 \sigma}$).
The first and second terms are the kinetic energies, where $t$ ($t'$) represents the nearest-neighbor hopping parameter between intra-(inter-)sublattice sites (Fig.~2a and b).
The sum $\sideset{}{'}\sum$ in the first terms only takes into account the nearest-neighbor intra-sublattice pairs, i.e., $j\neq j'$, whereas the second terms include pairs within unit cells, i.e., $j=j'$.
The third terms describe the on-site exchange coupling.
Introducing the four-component field operator $\Psi_j = ( c_{j_1\uparrow} , c_{j_1\downarrow} , c_{j_2\uparrow} , c_{j_2\downarrow} )^{\rm T}$ and its Fourier transformation by $\Psi_{\bm p} = ( c_{1{\bm p}\uparrow} , c_{1{\bm p}\downarrow} , c_{2{\bm p}\uparrow} , c_{2{\bm p}\downarrow} )^{\rm T} \equiv V^{-1/2} \sum_j \Psi_j e^{-i{\bm p}\cdot{\bm r}_j/\hbar}$, with $V$ being the sample volume and ${\bm r}_j$ indicating the position vector of the $j$-th unit cell, Eq.~(\ref{h_tight}) can be rewritten into $4\times4$ fashion as
\begin{equation}
{\rm H} = \sum_{{\bm p}} \Psi^\dagger_{\bm p} \left( \begin{array}{cc} t_{\bm p} & t'_{\bm p} \\ t'_{\bm p} & t_{\bm p} \end{array} \right) \Psi_{\bm p}
+ J \sum_j \Psi^\dagger_j \left( \begin{array}{cc} {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m}_{j_1} & 0 \\ 0 & {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m}_{j_2} \end{array} \right) \Psi_j .
\label{h_tight2} \end{equation}
Here, $t_{\bm p} \equiv t \sum_{\bm \delta} e^{i{\bm p}\cdot {\bm \delta}/\hbar }$ and $t'_{\bm p} \equiv t' \sum_{{\bm \delta}'} e^{i{\bm p}\cdot {\bm \delta}' /\hbar }$, where ${\bm \delta}$ and ${\bm \delta}'$ denote, respectively, the vectors connecting the intra- and inter-sublattice nearest-neighbor sites.
The explicit forms of $t_{\bm p}$ and $t'_{\bm p}$ are given, e.g., in the bipartite AFM by
\begin{equation}
t_{\bm p} = - 4 t a^2 {\bm p}^2 / \hbar^2 , \qquad
t'_{\bm p} = -t' a^2 {\bm p}^2 / \hbar^2 ,
\label{t_bip} \end{equation}
and in the layered AMF by
\begin{equation}
t_{\bm p} = -t b^2 ( p_x^2 + p_y^2) / \hbar^2 , \qquad
t'_{\bm p} = -t' c^2 p_z^2 / \hbar^2 .
\label{t_lay} \end{equation}
Here $a$ is the lattice constant in the bipartite AFM, and $b$ and $c$ are, respectively, the lattice constants within and between the FM-ordered layers in the layered AFM.
The ${\bm p}$-independent terms have been neglected in Eqs.~(\ref{t_bip}) and (\ref{t_lay}).
By taking the continuous limit in the real space for the second term of Eq.~(\ref{h_tight2}) and moving to the first-quantized representation, we arrive at Eq.~(\ref{h}) where $t_{11}({\bm p})$ and $t_{12}({\bm p})$ are identified with $t_{\bm p}$ and $t'_{\bm p}$, respectively, with ${\bm p}$ read as the quantum operator.
\subsection{Derivation of Eq.~(\ref{hj2})}
To expand ${\cal H}$ in Eq.~(\ref{h}) in powers of $J^{-1}$, we perform the unitary transformation in Eq.~(\ref{hj}) or
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal H}_J &\equiv& e^{ S_J } \left( {\cal H} + i \hbar \partial_t \right) e^{ -S_J } \nonumber\\
&=& {\cal H} + [ S_J , {\cal H} ] + \frac{[ S_J, [ S_J, {\cal H} ] ]}{2} + ... + i \hbar \partial_t S_J + ... ,
\label{hj_ap} \end{eqnarray}
with $S_J$ given in Eq.~(\ref{sj}).
The terms in Eq.~(\ref{hj_ap}) are computed up to the first order of $J^{-1}$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
[ S_J, {\cal H} ] &=& - \gamma_5 \left( t_{12} + \frac{ [ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} }{ 2 } \right)
+ \frac{ \gamma_0 }{ J } \left( t_{12}^2 {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} - \frac{ t_{12} [ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] }{ 2 } \right) \nonumber \\ &&
+ \gamma_0 \gamma_5 \left( - \frac{ t_{12} [ t_{11} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] }{ 2 J }
+ \frac{ [ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} ] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} + 2 i t_{12} {\bm \sigma} \cdot ( {\bm n} \times {\bm m} ) }{ 2 }
\right) ,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{ [ S_J, [ S_J, {\cal H} ] ] }{ 2 } &=& - \frac{ \gamma_0 }{ 2 J } \left( t_{12}^2 {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} - \frac{ t_{12} [ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] }{ 2 }
+ \frac{ \left\{ t_{12} {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} , [ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right\} }{ 4 } \right) \nonumber \\ &&
- \frac{ {\bm 1} }{ 2 J } \left( t_{12}^2 {\bm \sigma}\cdot{\bm m}
+ \frac{ \left[ t_{12} {\bm \sigma}\cdot{\bm n} , [ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma}\cdot{\bm m} ] {\bm \sigma}\cdot{\bm n} \right] }{ 4 }
+ i t_{12} \frac{ [ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot ( {\bm n} \times {\bm m} ) ] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n}
- [ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] {\bm \sigma} \cdot ( {\bm n} \times {\bm m} ) }{ 2 }
\right) \nonumber \\ &&
+ {\cal O} \left( J^{ - 2 } \right) .
\end{eqnarray}
The expression for ${\cal H}_J$ is thus given by
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}_J = \gamma_0 \left( J_{\bm n} {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} + {\cal F}_1 \right)
+ {\bm 1} \left( t_{11} + J_{\bm m} {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} + {\cal F}_2 \right)
+ \gamma_5 {\cal F}_3
+ \gamma_0 \gamma_5 {\cal F}_4
+ {\cal O} \left( J^{ - 2 } \right) ,
\label{hj2_ap} \end{equation}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
J_{\bm n} &\equiv& J \left( 1 + \frac{ t_{12}^2 }{ 2 J^2 } \right) , \qquad
J_{\bm m} \equiv J \left( 1 - \frac{ t_{12}^2 }{ 2 J^2 } \right) ,
\label{afm_jn-jm} \\
{\cal F}_1 &=& - \frac{1}{ 4 J } \left( t_{12} \left[ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right]
+ \frac{ \left\{ t_{12} {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} , \left[ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right\} }{ 2 }
\right) , \\
{\cal F}_2 &=& - \frac{ 1 }{ 4 J } \left( \frac{ \left[ t_{12} {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} , \left[ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} \right] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] }{ 2 }
+ i t_{12} \left\{ \left[ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot \left( {\bm n} \times {\bm m} \right) \right] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n}
- \left[ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] {\bm \sigma} \cdot \left( {\bm n} \times {\bm m} \right)
\right\}
\right) , \\
{\cal F}_3 &=& \frac{ \left[ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} }{ 2 } , \\
{\cal F}_4 &=& \frac{ t_{12} }{ 2 J } \left( - \left[ t_{11} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right]
+ i {\bm \sigma} \cdot \hbar \partial_t {\bm n}
\right)
+ \frac{ \left[ t_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} \right] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} + 2 i t_{12} {\bm \sigma} \cdot \left( {\bm n} \times {\bm m} \right) }{ 2 } .
\end{eqnarray}
${\cal F}s$ in Eq.~(\ref{hj2_ap}) can be neglected up to the first order of $J^{-1}$ when the spatiotemporal variations of the magnetizations are as slow as $ \langle \left[ t_{12} , \sigma \cdot {\bm n} \right] \rangle \ll \langle t_{12} \rangle^2 / J$, $ \langle \left[ t_{12} , \sigma \cdot {\bm m} \right] \rangle \ll \langle t_{12} \rangle^2 / J$, $\langle [ t_{11} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] \rangle \ll \langle t_{12} \rangle$, and $ \hbar | \partial_t {\bm n} | \ll \langle t_{12} \rangle$.
Approximating both $J_{\bm n}$ and $J_{\bm m}$ by $J$, we arrive at Eq.~(\ref{hj2}).
The commutators of the kinetic energy terms, $t_{11}$ and $t_{12}$, and ${\bm n}$ and/or ${\bm m}$ give rise to a spatial derivative of ${\bm n}$ and/or ${\bm m}$, because the kinetic energies are functions of ${\bm p}=-i\hbar\nabla$.
The expressions of the commutators are accessible by assuming the forms of $t_{11} = {\bm p}^2 / 2 m_{11}$ and $t_{12} = {\bm p}^2 / 2 m_{12}$, where the effective masses $m_{11}$ and $m_{12}$ can be deduced from, e.g., Eqs.~(\ref{t_lay}) in the case of the layered AFM.
Setting $\langle t_{12} \rangle / J = 0.1$ and $J=1$ eV, and employing the typical value for the Fermi wave number $k_{\rm F}$ of the conduction electrons in metals as $k_{\rm F} \sim 10^{10}$ m$^{-1}$, the above mentioned conditions are well met with the spatiotemporal variation of the magnetizations considered in Fig.~1.
\subsection{Derivation of Eq.~(\ref{ht3})}
Expand ${\cal H}_t$ in powers of the operator $t_{12}^{-1}$ by the unitary transformation in Eq.~(\ref{ht2}) or
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal H}_{t'} &\equiv& e^{ S_t } \left( {\cal H}_t + i \hbar \partial_t \right) e^{ - S_t } \nonumber \\
&=& {\cal H}_t + [ S_t , {\cal H}_t ] + \frac{ [ S_t , [ S_t , {\cal H}_t ] ] }{ 2 } + ...
+ i \hbar \partial_t S_t + ... ,
\label{ht'_ap} \end{eqnarray}
with $S_t$ given in Eq.~(\ref{st}).
Each term in Eq.~(\ref{ht'_ap}) is computed up to the first order of $t_{12}^{-1}$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
[ S_t , {\cal H}_t ] &=& - \gamma_5 J \left( {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} + \frac{ [ t^{-1}_{12} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] t_{12} }{ 2 } \right)
+ \gamma_0 J^2 \left( t_{12}^{-1} - \frac{ \left[ t_{12}^{-1} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} }{ 2 } \right) \nonumber \\ &&
- \gamma_0 \gamma_5 \frac{ J }{ 2 } \left\{ t_{12}^{-1} [ t_{11} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ]
- J [ t_{12}^{-1} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} ] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n}
- 2 i t_{12}^{-1} J {\bm \sigma} \cdot ( {\bm n} \times {\bm m} )
\right\} ,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{ [ S_t , [ S_t , {\cal H}_t ] ] }{ 2 }
&=& - \gamma_0 \frac{ J^2 }{ 2 } \left( t_{12}^{-1}
+ \frac{ {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} [ t_{12}^{-1} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] }{ 2 }
+ \frac{ \left\{ t_{12}^{-1} {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} , \left[ t_{12}^{-1} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] t_{12} \right\} }{ 4 }
\right)
+ {\cal O}(t_{12}^{-2}).
\end{eqnarray}
The expression for ${\cal H}_{t'}$ is thus given by
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}_{t'} = \gamma_0 \left( t'_{12} + {\cal Y}_1 \right)
+ {\bm 1} \left( t_{11} + J {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} \right)
- \gamma_5 {\cal Y}_2 + \gamma_0 \gamma_5 {\cal Y}_3 ,
\label{ht'2_ap} \end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
t'_{12} &\equiv& t_{12} \left( 1 + \frac{ t_{12}^{-2} J^2 }{ 2 } \right) , \\
{\cal Y}_1 &=& - \frac{ J^2 }{ 4 } \left( \left[ t_{12}^{-1} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n}
+ \frac{ \left\{ t_{12}^{-1} {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} , \left[ t_{12}^{-1} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] t_{12} \right\} }{ 2 }
\right)
, \\
{\cal Y}_2 &=& - \frac{ J \left[ t_{12}^{-1} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] t_{12} }{ 2 } , \\
{\cal Y}_3 &=& t_{12}^{-1} J \left( \frac{ - \left[ t_{11} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} \right] + {\bm \sigma} \cdot i \hbar \partial_t {\bm n} }{2}
+ i J {\bm \sigma} \cdot \left( {\bm n} \times {\bm m} \right)
\right)
+ \frac{ J^2 \left[ t_{12}^{-1} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm m} \right] {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} }{2} .
\end{eqnarray}
${\cal Y}$s is Eq.~(\ref{ht'2_ap}) can be neglected up to the first order of $t_{12}^{-1}$ when the spatiotemporal variations of the magnetizations are sufficiently slow that $ \langle [ t_{12}^{-1} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] t_{12} \rangle \ll t_{12}^{-2} J^2$, $ \langle [ t_{11} , {\bm \sigma} \cdot {\bm n} ] \rangle \ll t_{12}^{-1} J^2$, and $\hbar | \partial_t {\bm n} | \ll t_{12}^{-1} J^2$.
It can be shown by the similar discussion as in the Appendix B and setting $\langle t_{12} \rangle / J = 10$ and $J=0.1$ eV that these conditions are well satisfied in the systems considered in Fig.~1.
Approximating $t'_{12}$ by $t_{12}$, we arrive at Eq.~(\ref{ht3}).
\subsection{Derivation of Eq.~(\ref{stt_t})}
Under the adiabatic approximation where the majority (minority) electron spin adiabatically follows the direction of $-{\bm m}$ ($+{\bm m}$), the (normalized) expectation value ${\bm s}_\pm$ of the conduction electron spin can be represented by
\begin{equation}
{\bm s}_\pm \simeq \mp \hat{{\bm m}} + \delta {\bm s}_\pm ,
\label{e-spin} \end{equation}
where the upper (lower) sign corresponds to the majority (minority) electron, and $\delta {\bm s}_\pm ( | \delta {\bm s}_\pm | \ll 1)$ is the slight deviation from $\mp \hat{{\bm m}}$.
Assume that the electron spin obeys the following continuity equation;
\begin{equation}
\left( {\bm v}_\pm \cdot \nabla \right) {\bm s}_\pm = - \frac{ | {\bm m} | }{ \tau_{\rm ex} } {\bm s}_\pm \times \hat{{\bm m}}
- \frac{1}{ \tau_{\rm sf} } \delta {\bm s}_\pm ,
\label{eom-s} \end{equation}
where ${\bm v}_\pm$ denotes the average electron velocity, $\tau_{\rm ex} = \hbar / 2 J$, and $\tau_{\rm sf}$ is the relaxation time for the electron-spin flip.
By substituting Eq.~(\ref{e-spin}) into (\ref{eom-s}), the expression for $\delta {\bm s}_\pm$ is obtained as
\begin{equation}
\delta{\bm s}_\pm = \pm \frac{ \tau_{\rm ex} }{ | {\bm m} | } \left[ \hat{{\bm m}} \times \left( {\bm v}_\pm \cdot \nabla \right) \hat{{\bm m}}
+ \beta_t \left( {\bm v}_\pm \cdot \nabla \right) \hat{{\bm m}}
\right] ,
\end{equation}
where $\beta_t = \tau_{\rm ex} / \tau_{\rm sf}$.
The torques ${\bm T}_i$ that the electron spins exert on ${\bm m}_i$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bm T}_i &=& - \gamma {\bm m}_i \times \left[ - \frac{ 1 }{ \mu_0 M_{\rm S} } J \left( n_+ {\bm s}_+ + n_- {\bm s}_- \right) \right] \nonumber \\
&=& - \frac{ g \mu_B \left( n_+ - n_- \right) }{ 2 \tau_{\rm ex} M_{\rm S} | {\bm m} | } {\bm m}_i \times {\bm m}_{j\neq i}
- {\bm m}_i \times \left[ \hat{{\bm m}} \times \left( {\bm u}_t \cdot \nabla \right) \hat{{\bm m}}
+ \beta_t \left( {\bm u}_t \cdot \nabla \right) \hat{{\bm m}} \right] ,
\label{stt-t_ap} \end{eqnarray}
where $n_{ + ( - ) }$ is the majority (minority) electron density, and the STT efficiency ${\bm u}_t$ is given in Eq.~(\ref{ut}).
In the second equality of Eq.~(\ref{stt-t_ap}), $\gamma = g \mu_B \mu_0 / \hbar$ and ${\bm j}_{\rm c} = - e ( n_+ {\bm v}_+ + n_- {\bm v}_- )$ have been used.
Here, the spin polarization $P_m$ of the conduction electrons with respect to ${\bm m}$ is defined by $P_m {\bm j}_{\rm c} = - e ( n_+ {\bm v}_+ - n_- {\bm v}_- )$.
The first term in the second equality of Eq.~(\ref{stt-t_ap}) contributes the modulation to the AFM coupling between ${\bm m}_1$ and ${\bm m}_2$;
we absorb this first term into the definition of the AFM exchange coupling.
The second terms in the second equality of Eq.~(\ref{stt-t_ap}), which are Eq.~(\ref{stt_t}), are the STTs $\bm{{\cal T}}_i$ that act on textured AFMs.
\subsection{Domain wall motion}
Consider a one-dimensional AFM nanowire stretching in the $z$-axis with easy-axis anisotropy ($K>0$) along it.
An equilibrium AFM texture is determined by ${\bm n}$ and ${\bm m}$ at which the magnetic energy density $w$, which is given in Eq.~(\ref{w}), takes an extremal value.
In the absence of external field, a static DW solution satisfying the boundary condition $n_z(\pm\infty)=\mp1$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\theta &=& 2 \tan^{-1} [e^{(z-q)/\Delta} ] , \\
\varphi &=& 0 ,
\end{eqnarray}
where the polar angles are defined by ${\bm n}=(\sin\theta\cos\varphi,\sin\theta\sin\varphi,\cos\theta)$, $q$ represents the DW center position, and $\Delta=\sqrt{2A_1/K}$.
Apply a dc charge current in the $z$ direction, and examine the current-driven dynamics of the DW by using Eq.~(\ref{n}) for the exchange-dominant regime.
To obtain an analytical solution for the DW dynamics, we make the steady-motion approximation, where the DW maintains the equilibrium profile with $q$ being time dependent;
the DW exhibits a translational motion described by time evolution of the collective coordinate $q$.
By rewriting Eq.~(\ref{n}) into the equation of motion for $q$ by preforming the volume integral of the equation,\cite{tveten} one obtains
\begin{equation}
\left. \frac{dq}{dt} \right|_{t\rightarrow\infty} = - \frac{\beta_J}{\alpha} u_J
\end{equation}
As the dynamics of AFM textures in general has an inertia,\cite{andreev,bary} the above equation provides with the terminal velocity of the DW.
The dissipative process described by $\beta_J$ is required to drive the DW by the charge current.
As pointed in the Sec.~IV, the same argument applies to the mixing-dominant regime with $\beta_J$ and $u_J$ replaced by $\beta_t$ and $u_t$, respectively, when there exists a sufficiently large ${\bm m}$ over the relevant sample region and ${\bm n}$ and ${\bm m}$ lie in a single plane.
When, in the mixing-dominant regime, the magnitude and direction of ${\bm m}$ have some significant dependence on time and space that does not meet the above-mentioned conditions, it can make it difficult to obtain analytical expressions for the STT effects, which is beyond the scope of the present paper.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
The notions of quiver and their representation can be traced back to 1972 when they were introduced by Gabriel \cite{Gabriel}. Since then, it has been studied as a vibrant subject with a strong linkage with many other mathematics areas. This comes from the modern approach that quiver representations theory suggests. Due to its inherent combinatorial flavor, this theory has recently been largely studied as extremely important theory with connections to many theories, such as associative algebra, combinatorics, algebraic topology, algebraic geometry, quantum groups, Hopf algebras, tensor categories. Further, it bridges the gap between combinatorics and category theory, and this simply comes from the well-known fact that there is a forgetful functor, which has a left adjoint, from the category of small categories to the category of quivers. It turns out that it gives``new techniques, both of combinatorial, geometrical and categorical nature." \cite[p. ix]{Buan}.\\
The interaction area of quivers representation theory with other branches of mathematics can be significantly extended by introducing a generalization of this theory. However, suggesting a useful generalization needs to be done carefully because not all generalizations are capable of supporting our goal of finding a generalization that plays a successful role in developing this theory.\\
Furthermore, generalizing the notion of an object (or objects) with structures can be done with no compatibility condition between these structures, or with a compatibility condition between them. For instance, bitopological spaces can be regarded as a generalization of the notion topological spaces. A bitopological space, introduced by Kelly in \cite{Kelly}, is a triple $(X,\tau,\tau')$, where $X$ is a set equipped with two arbitrary topologies $\tau, \, \tau'$ \cite[p. ix]{Dvalishvili}. Obviously, this definition does not require any compatibility condition between $\tau, \, \tau'$. However, it is still very important, and indeed chapter $VII$ in \cite[p. 318-384]{Dvalishvili} is totally devoted for applications of bitopologies.\\
On the other hand, there is an another kind of generalization involved with compatibility condition. For example, the concept of corings is a generalization of that of coalgebras, and it involves certain compatibility conditions. The compatibility conditions are substantially helpful in characterizing and describing many notions. \\
The notion of $n$-representations of quivers can be introduced as a generalization with a compatibility condition. We start with $2$-representations of quivers and inductively define $n$-representations quivers. Then we mainly concentrate our study on $2$-representations of quivers because they roughly give a complete description of $n$-representations of quivers which can be established inductively. We alternatively and preferably call $2$-representations of quivers birepresentations of quivers.\\
Birepresentations of quivers are fundamentally different from representations of biquivers\footnote{A directed graph with usual and dashed arrows will be called a \textbf{biquiver}. Its \textbf{representation} is given by assigning to each vertex a complex vector space, to each usual arrow a linear mapping, and to each dashed arrow a semilinear mapping \cite[p. 237]{Sergeichuk}.} introduced by Sergeichuk in \cite[p. 237]{Sergeichuk}.\\
The main goal of this paper is to introduce the concept of $n$-representations of quivers and set up the basic notions of this concept. Further, we mainly establish the categories of $n$-representations of quivers and show that these categories are abelian. \\
As a part of our next paper, we will show that $n$-representations of quivers can be identified as representations of certain quivers. We will intentionally not use this observation in this paper since this allows us to explore a more explicit description and characterization for $n$-representations of quivers without using the categorical perspective description of being ``essentially the same".
The sections of this paper can be summarized in the following setting.\\
In Section 2, we give some detailed background on quiver representations and few categorical notions that we need for the next sections. \\
In Section 3, we introduce the notion of $n$-representations of quivers, we explicitly give concrete examples of birepresentations of quivers. In addition, we establish the categories of
$n$-representations of quivers. \\
In Section 4, we investigate the kernels and cokernels in the categories of $n$-representations of quivers. We also construct them in terms of kernels and cokernels in the usual categories of quiver representations corresponding to each component. \\
In Section 5, we show that the morphisms in the categories of $n$-representations of quivers have canonical decomposition. We also show that each hom set in these categories is equipped with a structure of an abelian group such that composition of morphisms is biadditive with respect to this structure. We end the paper by showing that the categories of $n$-representations of quivers are abelian.\\
\section{\textbf{Preliminaries}}\label{s.p}
Throughout this paper $k$ is an algebraically closed field, $n \geq 2$, and $Q, \,\, Q', \,\, Q_1, \,\, Q_2, ..., \,\, Q_n$ are quivers. We also denote $kQ$ the path algebra of $Q$. Unless otherwise specified, we will consider only finite, connected, and acyclic quivers. \\
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a (locally small) category and $A$, $B$ objects in $\mathcal{A}$. We denote by $\mathcal{A} (A,B)$ the set of all morphisms from $A$ to $B$. \\
Let $\mathcal{A}$, $\mathcal{B}$ be categories. Following \cite[p. 74]{McLarty}, the \textbf{product category }$\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B}$ is the category whose objects are all pairs of the form $(A,B)$, where $A$ is an object of $\mathcal{A}$ and $B$ an object of $\mathcal{B}$. An arrow is a pair $(f,g): (A,B) \rightarrow (A',B')$, where $f: A \rightarrow A'$ is an arrow of $\mathcal{A}$ and $g: B \rightarrow B'$ is an arrow of $\mathcal{B}$. The identity arrow for $\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B}$ is $(id_{\!_{A}},id_{\!_{B}})$ and composition is defined component-wise, so $(f,g)(f',g') = (ff',gg')$. There is a projective functor $P_1:\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B} \rightarrow \mathcal{A}$ defined by $P_1(A,B)= A $ and $P_1 (f,g) =f$. Similarly, we have a projective functor $P_2:\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B} \rightarrow \mathcal{B}$ defined by $P_2(A,B)= B $ and $P_2 (f,g) = g$. For the fundamental concepts of category theory, we refer to \cite{Leinster1}, \cite{Mac Lane1}, \cite{Awodey}, \cite{Rotman}, \cite{Adamek}, \cite{Borceux1}, \cite{Freyd}, \cite{Pareigis}, or \cite{Mitchell}.\\
Following \cite{Schiffler}, a \textbf{quiver} $Q = (\mathsf{Q}_{\!_{0}}, \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}, s,t)$ consists of
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathsf{Q}_{\!_{0}}$ a set of vertices,
\item $\mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}$ a set of arrows,
\item $s:\mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}} \rightarrow \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{0}}$ a map from arrows to vertices, mapping an arrow to its starting
point,
\item $t:\mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}} \rightarrow \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{0}}$ a map from arrows to vertices, mapping an arrow to its terminal point.
\end{itemize}
We will represent an element $\alpha \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}$ by drawing an arrow from its starting point $s(\alpha)$ to its endpoint $t(\alpha)$ as follows:
$s(\alpha) \xrightarrow{\alpha} t(\alpha)$.\\
A \textbf{representation} $M = (M_i,\varphi_{\alpha})_{i \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{0}}, \alpha \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}}$ of a quiver $Q$ is a collection of $k$-vector spaces $M_i$ one for each vertex $i \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{0}}$, and a collection of $k$-linear maps $\varphi_{\alpha}: M_{s(\alpha)} \rightarrow M_{t(\alpha)}$ one for each arrow $\alpha \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}$. \\
A representation $M$ is called \textbf{finite-dimensional} if each vector space Mi is finite-dimensional.\\
Let $Q$ be a quiver and let $M = (M_i,\varphi_{\alpha})$, $M' = (M'_i,\varphi'_{\alpha})$ be two representations of $Q$. A \textbf{morphism} of representations $f : M \rightarrow M'$ is a collection $(f_i)_{i \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{0}}}$ of $k$-linear maps $f_i : M_i \rightarrow M'_i$
such that for each arrow $s(\alpha) \xrightarrow{\alpha} t(\alpha)$ in
$\mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}$ the diagram
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq01}
\xymatrix{
M_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]^{\phi_{\alpha}} \ar[d]_{f_{s(\alpha)}} && M_{t(\alpha)} \ar[d]^{f_{t(\alpha)}}\\
M'_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]_(.5){\phi'_{\alpha}} && M'_{t(\alpha)}
}
\end{equation}
commutes. \\
A morphism of representations $f = (f_i): M \rightarrow M'$ is an isomorphism if each $f_i$ is bijective. The class of all representations that are isomorphic to a given representation $M$ is called the \textbf{isoclass} of $M$.\\
This gives rise to define a category $Rep_k(Q)$ of $k$-linear representations of $Q$. We denote by $rep_k(Q)$ the full subcategory of $Rep_k(Q)$ consisting of the finite dimensional representations.
Given two representations $M = (M_i,\phi_{\alpha})$ and $M' = (M'_i,\phi'_{\alpha'})$ of $Q$, the representation
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq001}
M \oplus M' \,\,\ = \,\,\ (M_i \oplus M'_i,\begin{bmatrix}
\phi_{\alpha} & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & \phi'_{\alpha} \\[0.3em] \end{bmatrix})
\end{equation}
is the \textbf{direct sum} of $M$ and $M'$ in $Rep_k(Q)$ \cite[p. 71]{Assem}. \\
A nonzero representation of a quiver $Q$ is said to be \textbf{indecomposable} if it is not isomorphic to a direct sum of two nonzero representations \cite[p. 21]{Etingof1}. \\
We will need the following propositions.
\begin{proposition} \label{p.1} \cite[p. 70]{Assem}
Let $Q$ be a finite quiver. Then $Rep_k(Q)$ and $rep_k(Q)$
are $k$-linear abelian categories.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition} \label{p.Equiv.Rep.Mod} \cite[p. 74]{Assem}
Let $Q$ be a finite, connected, and acyclic quiver. There
exists an equivalence of categories $Mod \, kQ \simeq Rep_k(Q)$ that restricts to an equivalence $mod \, kQ \simeq rep_k(Q)$, where $kQ$ is the path algebra of $Q$, $Mod \, kQ$ denotes the category of right $kQ$-modules, and $mod \, kQ$ denotes the full subcategory of $Mod \, kQ$ consisting of the finitely generated right $kQ$-modules.
\end{proposition}
This is a very brief review of the basic concepts involved with our work. For the basic notions of quiver representations theory, we refer the reader to \cite{Assem}, \cite{Schiffler}, \cite{Auslander1}, \cite{Barot}, \cite{Etingof1}, \cite{Benson}, \cite{Zimmermann}.\\
\vspace{.2cm}
\section{\textbf{$n$-representations of Quivers: Basic Concepts}}\label{s.n.rep.quivers}
Let $Q = (\mathsf{Q}_{\!_{0}}, \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}, s,t)$, $Q' = (\mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{0}}, \mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{1}}, s',t')$ be quivers.
\begin{definition} \label{def.1}
A \textbf{$2$-representation} of $(Q,Q')$ (or a \textbf{birepresentation} of $(Q,Q')$) is a triple $\bar{M} = ((M_i,\phi_{\alpha}),(M'_{i'},\phi'_{\beta}), (\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}))_{i \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{0}}, i' \in Q'_{\!_{0}}, \alpha \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}},\beta \in \mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{1}}}$, where $(M_i,\phi_{\alpha}),(M'_{i'},\phi'_{\beta})$ are representations of $Q,Q'$ respectively, and $(\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta})$ is a collection of $k$-linear maps $\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}: M_{t(\alpha)} \rightarrow M'_{s(\beta)} $, one for each pair of arrows $(\alpha,\beta) \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}} \times \mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{1}}$. \\
Unless confusion is possible, we denote a birepresentation simply by $\bar{M} = (M,M',\psi)$. Next, we inductively define $n$-representations for any integer $n \geq 2$. \\
For any $m \in \{2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$, let $Q_m = (\mathsf{Q}^{(m)}_{\!_{0}}, \mathsf{Q}^{(m)}_{\!_{1}}, s^{(m)},t^{(m)})$ be a quiver. A \textbf{$n$-representation} of $(Q_1, \,\, Q_2, \,\,... \,\, , Q_n)$ is $(2n-1)$-tuple $\bar{V} = (V^{(1)},V^{(2)},...,V^{(n)},\psi_{\!_{1}}, \psi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi_{\!_{n-1}})$, where for every $m \in \{1, \,\,2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$, $V^{(m)}$ is a representation of $Q_m$, and $(\psi_{\!_{m}\gamma^{(m-1)}}^{\gamma^{(m)}}) $ is a collection of $k$-linear maps
\begin{center}
•$\psi_{\!_{m}\gamma^{(m-1)}}^{\gamma^{(m)}}: V^{(m-1)}_{t^{(m-1)}(\gamma^{(m-1)})} \rightarrow V^{(m-1)}_{s^{(m)}(\gamma^{(m)})} $,
\end{center}
one for each pair of arrows $(\gamma^{(m-1)},\gamma^{(m)}) \in \mathsf{Q}^{(m-1)}_{\!_{1}} \times \mathsf{Q}^{(m)}_{\!_{1}}$ and $m \in \{2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$. \\
\end{definition}
\begin{remark} \label{r.inductive} \textbf{•}
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item When no confusion is possible, we simply write $s,t$ instead of $s',t'$ respectively, and for every $m \in \{1, \,\,2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$, we write $s,t$ instead of $s^{(m)},\,t^{(m)}$ respectively.
\item It is clear that if $(V^{(1)},V^{(2)},...,V^{(n)},\psi_{\!_{1}}, \psi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi_{\!_{n-1}})$ is an $n$-representation of $(Q_1, \,\, Q_2, \,\,... \,\, , Q_n)$, then $(V^{(1)},V^{(2)},...,V^{(n-1)},\psi_{\!_{1}}, \psi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi_{\!_{n-2}})$ is an $(n-1)$-representation of $(Q_1, \,\, Q_2, \,\,... \,\, , Q_{n-1})$ for every integer $n \geq 2$.
\item Part $(ii)$ implies that for any integer $n > 2$, $n$-representations roughly inherit all the properties and the universal constructions that $(n-1)$-representations have. Thus, we mostly focus on studying birepresentations since they can be regarded as a mirror in which one can see a clear decription of $n$-representations for any integer $n > 2$.\\
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
\begin{example} \label{ex.1}
Let $Q,Q'$ be the following quivers
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq06}
\xymatrix{
&&\\
Q: & 1 \ar[r]^{} & 2
}
\hspace{80pt}
\xymatrix{
&1 \ar[dr]^{} & &\\
Q':&&3 &4 \ar[l]^{}\\
&2 \ar[ur]^{} &&
}
\end{equation}
and consider the following:
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq07}
\xymatrix{
&k \ar[dr]^{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &\\
M &&k^2 &k \ar[l]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}}\\
&k \ar[ur]_{\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} &&
}
\hspace{70pt}
\xymatrix{
&&&\\
M' &k &k \ar[l]_{1}
}
\end{equation}
Then $M$ (respectively $M'$) is a representation of $Q$ ((respectively $Q'$) \cite{Schiffler}. The following are birepresentations of $(Q,Q')$.
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq08}
\xymatrix{
&k \ar[dr]^{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &\\
\bar{M} &&k^2 &k \ar[l]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &k \ar[ll]_{1} \ar@/_5pc/[llllu]_{1}
\ar@/^5pc/[lllld]^{1} &k \ar[l]_{1}\\
&k \ar[ur]_{\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} &&
}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq09}
\xymatrix{
&k \ar[dr]^{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &\\
\bar{N} &&k^2 &k \ar[l]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &k \ar[ll]_{1} \ar@/_5pc/[llllu]_{0}
\ar@/^5pc/[lllld]^{0} &k \ar[l]_{1}\\
&k \ar[ur]_{\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} &&
}
\end{equation}
\end{example}
\vspace{.1cm}
\begin{definition} \label{def.2}
Let $\bar{V} =(V,V',\psi), \,\, \bar{W} =(W,W',\psi')$ be birepresentations of $(Q,Q')$. Write
$ V = (V_i,\phi_{\alpha})$, $V'=(V'_{i'},\mu_{\beta})$,
$ W = (W_i,\phi'_{\alpha})$, $W'=,(W'_{i'},\mu'_{\beta})$. A morphism of birepresentations $ \bar{f}: \bar{V} \rightarrow \bar{W}$ is a pair $\bar{f} = (f,f')$, where $f=(f_i): (V_i,\phi_{\alpha}) \rightarrow (W_i,\phi'_{\alpha})$, $f'=(f'_{i'}): (V'_{i'},\mu_{\beta}) \rightarrow (W'_{i'},\mu'_{\beta})$ are morphisms in $Rep_k(Q)$, $Rep_k(Q')$ respectively such that the following diagram commutes.
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq010}
\xymatrix{
V_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]^{\phi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{f_{s(\alpha)}} && V_{t(\alpha)} \ar[dd]|\hole^(.3){\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{f_{t(\alpha)}}\\
& W_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi'_{\alpha}} && W_{t(\alpha)} \ar[dd]^(.32){\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta}}\\
&& V'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]|\hole|(.65){\mu_{\beta}} \ar[dr]_{f'_{s(\beta)}} &&
V'_{t(\beta} \ar[dr]^{f'_{t(\beta)}} \\
&&& W'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]_{\mu'_{\beta}} && W'_{t(\beta)}
}
\end{equation}
The composition of two maps $(f,f')$ and $(g,g')$ can be depicted as the following diagram.
\begin{equation} \label{def.eq011}
\xymatrix{
V_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]^{\phi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{f_{s(\alpha)}} && V_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole|!{[ddd];[dd]}\hole^(.5){\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{f_{t(\alpha)}}\\
& W_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi'_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{g_{s(\alpha)}}
&& W_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole^(.5){\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{g_{t(\alpha)}}\\
&& U_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi''_{\alpha}} && U_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|(.5){\psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \\
&& V'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]|\hole|(.65){\mu_{\beta}} \ar[dr]_{f'_{s(\beta)}} &&
V'_{t(\beta} \ar[dr]^{f'_{t(\beta)}} \\
&&& W'_{s(\beta)} \ar[dr]_{g'_{s(\beta)}} \ar[rr]|\hole^(.3){\mu'_{\beta}} && W'_{t(\beta)}\ar[dr]^{g'_{t(\beta)}}\\
&&&& U'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]_(.5){\mu''_{\beta}} && U'_{t(\beta)}
}
\end{equation}
In general, if $\bar{V} = (V^{(1)},V^{(2)},...,V^{(n)},\psi_{\!_{1}}, \psi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi_{\!_{n-1}})$, $\bar{W} = (W^{(1)},W^{(2)},...,W^{(n)},\psi'_{\!_{1}}, \psi'_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi'_{\!_{n-1}})$ are $n$-representations of $(Q_1, \,\, Q_2, \,\,... \,\, , Q_n)$, then a morphism of $n$-representations
$\bar{f}: \bar{V} \rightarrow \bar{W}$ is $n$-tuple $\bar{f}=(f^{\!^{(1)}}, f^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., f^{\!^{(n-1)}})$, where
\begin{center}
•$f^{\!^{(m)}} = (f^{\!^{(m)}}_{i^{(m)}}): (V_{{i^{(m)}}},\phi^{{i^{(m)}}}_{\gamma^{(m)}}) \rightarrow (W_{{i^{(m)}}},\mu^{{i^{(m)}}}_{\gamma^{(m)}})$,
\end{center}
is a morphism in $Rep_k(Q_m)$ for any $m \in \{2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$, and for each pair of arrows $(\gamma^{(m-1)},\gamma^{(m)}) \in \mathsf{Q}^{(m-1)}_{\!_{1}} \times \mathsf{Q}^{(m)}_{\!_{1}}$ the following diagram is commutative.
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq010.1}
\xymatrix{
V^{(m-1)}_{t^{(m-1)}(\gamma^{(m-1)})} \ar[rrr]^{\psi_{\!_{m}\gamma^{(m-1)}}^{\gamma^{(m)}}} \ar[dd]_{f^{(m-1)}_{t^{(m-1)}(\gamma^{(m-1)})}} &&& V^{(m)}_{s^{(m)}(\gamma^{(m)})} \ar[dd]^{f^{(m)}_{s^{(m)}(\gamma^{(m)})}} \\
&&&\\
W^{(m-1)}_{t^{(m-1)}(\gamma^{(m-1)})} \ar[rrr]_{{\psi'}_{\!_{m}\gamma^{(m-1)}}^{\gamma^{(m)}}} &&& W^{(m)}_{s^{(m)}(\gamma^{(m)})}
}
\end{equation}
for every $m \in \{2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$.
\vspace{.2cm}
A morphism of $n$-representations can be depicted as:
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq010.2}
\xymatrix{
& \ar[rr]&& \ar[dd]&& \ar[rr]\ar[dd]|\hole && \ar[dd] && \ar[rr] \ar[dd] && \ar[dd] &\\
\ar[ur] \ar[rr] && \ar[dd] \ar[ur]&& \ar[rr]\ar[dd] \ar[ur]&& \ar[dd] \ar[ur]&& \ar[rr] \ar[ur] \ar[dd]&& \ar[dd] \ar[ur]&\\
&&& \ar[rr]|\hole&& && \ar[rr]|\hole&& && \ar@{--}[r] &\\
&& \ar[rr]\ar[ur]&& \ar[ur]&& \ar[rr]\ar[ur]&& \ar[ur] & & \ar[ur] \ar@{--}[rr] &&
}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\vspace{.2cm}
\begin{remark} \label{r.1} \textbf{•}
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item The above definition gives rise to form a category $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ of $k$-linear birepresentations of $(Q,Q')$. We denote by $rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ the full subcategory of $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ consisting of the finite dimensional birepresentations. Similarly, it also creates a category $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$ of $n$-representations. We denote $rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$ the full subcategory of $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$ consisting of the finite dimensional $n$-representations.
\item For any $m \in \{2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$, let $Q_m = (\mathsf{Q}^{(m)}_{\!_{0}}, \mathsf{Q}^{(m)}_{\!_{1}}, s^{(m)},t^{(m)})$ be a quiver and fix $j \in \{2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$. Let $\Upsilon_{Rep_k(Q_j)}$ be the subcategory of $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$ whose objects are $(2n-1)$-tuples $\bar{X} = (0,0,...,V^{(j)},0,...,0,\psi_{\!_{1}}, \psi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi_{\!_{n-1}})$, where $V^{(j)}$ is a representation of $Q_j$, and $\psi_{\!_{m}\gamma^{(m-1)}}^{\gamma^{(m)}} = 0$ for every pair of arrows $(\gamma^{(m-1)},\gamma^{(m)}) \in \mathsf{Q}^{(m-1)}_{\!_{1}} \times \mathsf{Q}^{(m)}_{\!_{1}}$ and $m \in \{2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$. Then $\Upsilon_{Rep_k(Q_j)}$ is clearly a full subcategory of $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$. Notably, we have an equivalence of categories $\Upsilon_{Rep_k(Q_j)} \simeq Rep_k(Q_j)$, and thus by by Proposition (\ref{p.Equiv.Rep.Mod}), we have $Rep_k(Q_j) \simeq \Upsilon_{Rep_k(Q_j)} \simeq Mod \, kQ_j $. It turns out that the category $Rep_k(Q_j)$ and $ Mod \, kQ_j)$ can be identified as full subcategories of $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$. \\
The category $\Upsilon_{Rep_k(Q_j)}$ has a full subcategory $\Upsilon_{rep_k(Q_j)}$ when we restrict the objects on the finite dimensional representations. Therefore, we also have $rep_k(Q_j) \simeq \Upsilon_{rep_k(Q_j)} \simeq mod \, kQ_j $. \\
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{r.bicategory} \,\, Let $\mathcal{B}_0$ be the class of all quivers. One might consider the class $\mathcal{B}_0$ and full subcategories of the categories of birepresentations of quivers to build a bicategory. Indeed, there is a bicategory $\mathcal{B}$ consists of
\begin{itemize}
\item the objects or the $0$-cells of $\mathcal{B}$ are simply the elements of $\mathcal{B}_0$
\item for each $Q, Q' \in \mathcal{B}_0$, we have $\mathcal{B}(Q,Q') = Rep_k(Q) \times Rep_k(Q')$, whose objects are the $1$-cells of $\mathcal{B}$, and whose morphisms are the $2$-cells of $\mathcal{B}$
\item for each $Q, Q', Q'' \in \mathcal{B}_0$, \,\, a composition functor
\begin{center}
•$\mathcal{F}: Rep_k(Q') \times Rep_k(Q'') \,\,\, \times \,\,\, Rep_k(Q) \times Rep_k(Q') \rightarrow Rep_k(Q) \times Rep_k(Q'')$
\end{center}
defined by:\\
\begin{center}
•$\mathcal{F} ((N',N''),(M,M')) = (M,N''), \,\,\,\,\, \mathcal{F} ((g',g''),(f,f')) = (f,g'')$
on $1$-cells $(M,M'), (N',N'')$ and $2$-cells $(f,f'), (g',g'')$.
\end{center}
\item for any $Q \in \mathcal{B}_0$ and for each $(M,M') \in \mathcal{B}(Q,Q)$, we have $\mathcal{F} ((M,M'),(M,M)) = (M,M')$ \,\, and \,\, $\mathcal{F} ((M',M'),(M,M')) = (M,M')$. Furthermore, for any $2$-cell $(f,f')$, we have $\mathcal{F} ((f',f'),(f,f')) = (f,f')$ \,\, and \,\, $\mathcal{F} ((f,f'),(f,f)) = (f,f')$. Thus, the identity and the unit coherence axioms hold.
\end{itemize}
The rest of bicategories axioms are obviously satisfied. \,\, For each $Q, Q' \in \mathcal{B}_0$, let $\beth_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ be the full subcategory of $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ whose objects are the triples $(X,X',\Psi)$, where $(X,X') \in Rep_k(Q) \times Rep_k(Q')$ and $\Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} = 0$ for every pair of arrows $(\alpha,\beta) \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}} \times \mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{1}}$, and whose morphisms are usual morphisms of birepresentations between them. \,\, Clearly, \,\, $\beth_{\!_{(Q,Q')}} \cong Rep_k(Q) \times Rep_k(Q')$ for any $Q, Q' \in \mathcal{B}_0$. Thus, by considering the class $\mathcal{B}_0$ and the full subcategories described above of the birepresentations categories of quivers, we can always build a bicategory as above.\\
Obviously, \,\, the discussion above implies that for each $Q, Q' \in \mathcal{B}_0$, the product category $Rep_k(Q) \times Rep_k(Q')$ can be viewed as a full subcategory of $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$. Further, it implies that the product category $Rep_k(Q_1) \times Rep_k(Q_2) \times ...\times Rep_k(Q_n) $ can be viewed as a full subcategory of $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$, where $Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n \in \mathcal{B}_0$ and $n \geq 2$.\\
We also have the same analogue if we replace $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$, by $rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$, and $Rep_k(Q_1)$, $Rep_k(Q_2)$, ... , $Rep_k(Q_n) $ by $rep_k(Q_1), rep_k(Q_2)$, ... , $rep_k(Q_n) $ respectively. For the basic notions of bicategories, we refer the reader to \cite{Leinster2}. \\
\end{remark}
\begin{example} \label{ex.2}
Let $Q, \, Q'$ be the quivers defined in Example \ref{ex.1} and consider the following:\\
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq012}
\xymatrix{
&k \ar[dr]^{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &\\
V &&k^2 &k \ar[l]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}}\\
&k \ar[ur]_{\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} &&
}
\hspace{70pt}
\xymatrix{
&k \ar[dr]^{1} & &\\
W &&k &k \ar[l]_{1}\\
&k \ar[ur]_{1} &&
}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq013}
\xymatrix{
V' &k &k \ar[l]_{1}
}
\hspace{70pt}
\xymatrix{
W'&k &k \ar[l]_{1}
}
\end{equation}
\vspace{.2cm}
Then $V, \, V'$ (respectively $W, \, W'$) are representations of $Q$ (respectively $Q'$) \cite{Schiffler}. Furthermore, it is straightforward to verify that $Rep_k(Q)(V,W) \cong k^2$ and $Rep_k(Q)(V',W') \cong k$. We refer the reader to \cite{Schiffler} for more details. Consider the following.
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq014}
\xymatrix{
&k \ar[dr]^{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &\\
\bar{V} = (V,V',\psi) &&k^2 &k \ar[l]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &k \ar[ll]_{1} \ar@/_5pc/[llllu]_(.57){1} \ar@/^5pc/[lllld]^(.57){1} \ar[ll]_{1}
&k \ar[l]_{1} \\
&k \ar[ur]_{\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} &&&&&
}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq014.1}
\xymatrix{
&&&&&k \ar@/^1.pc/[ddr]^(.4){\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &\\
&&&&&&&\\
\underline{\bar{V}} = (V',V,\psi') && k
&k \ar[l]_{1} &&&k^2 \ar@/_3pc/[lll]_(.6){\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}}
\ar@/^3pc/[lll]^(.6){\begin{bmatrix}
0 & 1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}}
\ar[lll]_(.5){\begin{bmatrix}
0 & 0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}}
&k \ar[l]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &\\
&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&k \ar@/_1.pc/[uur]_{\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} &&&&&
}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq015}
\xymatrix{
&k \ar[dr]^{1} & &\\
\bar{W} = (W,W', \psi') &&k &k \ar[l]_{1} & &k \ar@/_3pc/[llllu]_(.57){0}
\ar@/^3pc/[lllld]^{0} \ar[ll]_{1}
&k \ar[l]_(.57){0} \\
&k \ar[ur]_{1} &&&&&
}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq015.1}
\xymatrix{
&&&&&k \ar@/^1.pc/[ddr]^(.4){1} & &\\
&&&&&&&\\
\underline{\bar{W}} = (W',W, \underline{\psi'}) && k
&k \ar[l]_{1} &&&k \ar@/_3pc/[lll]_(.6){1}
\ar@/^3pc/[lll]^(.6){1}
\ar[lll]_(.5){0}
&k \ar[l]_{1} & &\\
&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&k \ar@/_1.pc/[uur]_{1} &&&&&
}
\end{equation}
\vspace{.2cm}
Then $\bar{V}, \,\, \bar{W}$ are birepresentations of $(Q, Q')$, and $\underline{\bar{V}}, \,\, \underline{\bar{W}}$ are birepresentations of $(Q', Q)$.
To compute $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}(\bar{V},\bar{W})$, consider the following diagram.\\
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq016}
\xymatrix{
&&&k \ar@/_2pc/[dddddd]_{[a]} \ar[dr]^{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &\\
\bar{V}\ar[dddddd]_{} &&&&k^2 \ar@/^1pc/[dddddd]|{[c \,\,\,d]} &k \ar@/^1pc/[dddddd]|{[e]}\ar[l]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &k \ar@/^1pc/[dddddd]|{[l]}\ar[ll]_{1} \ar@/_5pc/[llllu]_{1}
\ar@/^5pc/[lllld]|(.35){1} &k \ar[l]_{1} \ar@/^1pc/[dddddd]|{[m]}\\
&&& k \ar@/_2pc/[dddddd]_{[b]}\ar[ur]_{\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\[0.3em]
1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} && \\
&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&\\
&&&&&&\\
&&&k \ar[dr]^{1} & &\\
\bar{W} &&&&k &k \ar[l]_{1} & &k \ar[ll]_{1} \ar@/_5pc/[llllu]|(.3){0}
\ar@/^5pc/[lllld]^{0} &k \ar[l]_{0}\\
&&&k \ar[ur]_{1} &&
}
\end{equation}
\vspace{.2cm}
The commuting squares give the relations
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq017}
a = c, \,\,\,\, b = d, \,\,\,\, c = d + e, \,\,\,\, l = 0, \,\,\,\, e = l, \,\,\,\,a = 0, \,\,\,\, b =0 .
\end{equation}
Hence, we obtain $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}(\bar{V},\bar{W}) \cong k$.\\
We leave it to the reader to compute $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}(\bar{W},\bar{V})$, $Rep_{\!_{(Q',Q)}}(\underline{\bar{V}},\underline{\bar{W}})$ and $Rep_{\!_{(Q',Q)}}(\underline{\bar{W}},\underline{\bar{V}})$.
\end{example}
\vspace{.2cm}
\begin{definition} \label{def.3}
Let $\bar{V} = (V,V',\psi)$, $\bar{W} = (W,W',\psi')$ be birepresentations of $(Q,Q')$.
Write $ V = (V_i,\phi_{\alpha})$, $V' = (V'_{i'},\phi'_{\beta})$,
$W = ((W_i,\mu_{\alpha})$, $W' = (W'_{i'},\mu'_{\beta})$. Then
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq018}
\bar{V} \oplus \bar{W} \,\,\ = \,\,\ ((V_i \oplus W_i,\begin{bmatrix}
\phi_{\alpha} & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & \mu_{\alpha} \\[0.3em] \end{bmatrix}), (V'_{i'} \oplus W'_{i'}, \begin{bmatrix}
\phi'_{\alpha} & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & \mu'_{\alpha} \\[0.3em] \end{bmatrix})
, \begin{bmatrix}
\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & \psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} \\[0.3em] \end{bmatrix}),
\end{equation}
where $(V_i \oplus W_i,\begin{bmatrix}
\phi_{\alpha} & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & \mu_{\alpha} \\[0.3em] \end{bmatrix})$, $(V'_{i'} \oplus W'_{i'}, \begin{bmatrix} \phi'_{\alpha} & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & \mu'_{\alpha} \\[0.3em] \end{bmatrix})$ are the direct sums of $(V_i,\phi_{\alpha}),\, (W_i,\mu_{\alpha})$ and $(V'_{i'}, \phi'_{\beta}) ,\, (W'_{i'}, \mu'_{\beta})$ in $Rep_k(Q)$, $Rep_k(Q')$ respectively, is a birepresentation of $(Q,Q')$ called the \textbf{direct sum} of $\bar{V}, \,\ \bar{W}$ (in $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$). \\
Similarly, direct sums in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$ can be defined. \\
\end{definition}
\begin{example} \label{ex.3}
Consider the birepresentations in Example \ref{ex.2}. Then the direct sum $\bar{V} \oplus \bar{W}$ is the birepresentation
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq019}
\xymatrix{
&k^2 \ar[drr]^{\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & 1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &\\
\bar{V}\oplus \bar{W} &&&k^3 &&k^2 \ar[ll]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\[0.3em]
1 & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & 1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} & &&k^2 \ar[lll]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & 1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} \ar@/_7.8pc/[lllllllu]_(.57){1} \ar@/^7.8pc/[llllllld]^(.57){1}
&&k^2 \ar[ll]_{\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & 0 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} \\
&k^2 \ar[urr]_{\begin{bmatrix}
0 & 0 \\[0.3em]
1 & 0 \\[0.3em]
0 & 1 \\[0.3em]
\end{bmatrix}} &&&&&
}
\end{equation}\\
\end{example}
\begin{definition} \label{def.4}
A birepresentation $\bar{V} \in Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ is called \textbf{indecomposable} if $\bar{M} \neq 0$ and $\bar{M}$ cannot be written as a direct sum of two nonzero birepresentations, that is,
whenever $\bar{M} \cong \bar{L} \oplus \bar{N}$ with $ \bar{L}, \bar{N} \in Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$, then $\bar{L} = 0 $ or $\bar{N} = 0$.
\end{definition}
\begin{example} \label{ex.4}
Consider the birepresentations in Example \ref{ex.2}. The birepresentation $\bar{V}$ is indecomposable, but the birepresentation $\bar{W}$ is not.
\end{example}
\vspace{.2cm}
The above example also shows that if $\bar{W} = ((W_i,\phi_{\alpha}),(W'_{i'},\phi'_{\beta}), (\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}))$ is birepresentation of $(Q,Q')$ such that the representations $(W_i,\phi_{\alpha})$ and $(W'_{i'},\phi'_{\beta})$ are indecomposable in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively, then $\bar{W}$ need not be indecomposable. The proof of the following proposition is straightforward.
\begin{proposition} \label{p.2}
Let $\bar{V} = ((V_i,\phi_{\alpha}),(V'_{i'},\phi'_{\beta}), (\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta})) \in Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ be an indecomposable birepresentation, then the representations $(W_i,\phi_{\alpha})$ and $(W'_{i'},\phi'_{\beta})$ are indecomposable in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\end{proof}
\vspace{.2cm}
\section{\textbf{Construction For Kernels and Cokernels in $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$}}\label{s.construction.kernels.cokernels}
Following \cite[p. 49]{Wisbauer}, let $\mathcal{C}$ be a category with zero object and $f : A \rightarrow B$ a morphism in $\mathcal{C}$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item A morphism $i : K \rightarrow A$ is called a \textbf{kernel} of $f$ if $if = 0$ and, for every morphism $g : D \rightarrow A$ with $gf = 0$, there is a unique morphism $h : D \rightarrow K$ with $hi = g$, i.e. the diagram is commutative.
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq019.1}
\xymatrix{
& & D \ar@{-->}[ddll]_{h} \ar[dd]^{g} && \\
&&&&\\
K \ar[rr]_{i} && A \ar[rr]_{f} && B
}
\end{equation}\\
\item A morphism $p : B \rightarrow C$ is called a \textbf{cokernel} of $f$ if $fp = 0$ and, for every $g : B \rightarrow D$ with $fg = 0$, there is a unique morphism $h : C \rightarrow D$ with $ph = g$, i.e. the diagram is commutative.
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq019.2}
\xymatrix{
A \ar[rr]_{f} && B \ar[dd]_{g} \ar[rr]_{p} && C \ar@{-->}[ddll]^{h} \\
&&&&\\
& & D & &
}
\end{equation}\\
\end{enumerate}
\begin{remark} \cite[p. 50]{Wisbauer} \label{r.2}
Let $R$ be a ring with unity and $R-Mod$ (resp $Mod-R$) be category of left $R$-modules (resp right $R$-modules), and let $f : M \rightarrow N$ be a homomorphism in $R-Mod$ (resp $Mod-R$). Then
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item The inclusion $i : Ker \,\ f \rightarrow M $ is a kernel of $f$ in $R-Mod$ (resp $Mod-R$) because if $g : L \rightarrow M $ is given with $fg = 0$, then $g(L) \subseteq Ker \,\ f$. Clearly, we can define $g' : L \rightarrow Ker \,\ f, \,\ x \mapsto g(x)$ to be the unique morphiism with $ig'=g$.
\item The projection $p : N \rightarrow Coker \,\ f = N/f(M)$ is a cokernel of $f$ in $R-Mod$ (resp $Mod-R$) because if $h : N \rightarrow L $ is given with $hf = 0$, then $ Im \,\ f \subseteq Ker \,\ h$. Thus, by using the First Isomorphism Theorem, we can define $h' : Coker \,\ f \rightarrow L, \,\ n + f(M) \mapsto h(n)$ to be the unique morphiism with $h'p=h$.\\
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
Let $\bar{f}=(f,f'): \bar{V} = (V,V',\psi) \rightarrow \bar{W} = (W,W',\psi')$ be a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$. From Proposition (\ref{p.1}), the kernels of $f,f'$ exist in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively. Let $(\kappa,\zeta), \,\ (\kappa',\zeta')$ be the kernels of $f,f'$ in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively. Write $\kappa=(\kappa_i,\chi_{\alpha}),\,\ \zeta = (\zeta_{\alpha}), \,\ \kappa'=(\kappa'_{i'},\nu_{\beta}),\,\ \zeta' = (\zeta'_{\beta})$ and consider the following diagram.
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq020}
\xymatrix{
\kappa_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]^{\chi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{\zeta_{s(\alpha)}} && \kappa_{t(\alpha)} \ar@{-->}[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole|!{[ddd];[dd]}\hole^(.5){\xi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{\zeta_{t(\alpha)}}\\
& V_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{f_{s(\alpha)}}
&& V_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole^(.5){\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{f_{t(\alpha)}}\\
&& W_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi'_{\alpha}} && W_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|(.5){\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \\
&& \kappa'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]|\hole|(.65){\nu_{\beta}} \ar[dr]_{\zeta'_{s(\beta)}} &&
\kappa'_{t(\beta} \ar[dr]^{\zeta'_{t(\beta)}} \\
&&& V'_{s(\beta)} \ar[dr]_{f'_{s(\beta)}} \ar[rr]|\hole^(.3){\mu_{\beta}} && V'_{t(\beta)}\ar[dr]^{f'_{t(\beta)}}\\
&&&& W'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]_(.5){\mu'_{\beta}} && W'_{t(\beta)}
}
\end{equation}
\vspace{.2cm}
For all $ \alpha \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}, \,\ \beta \in \mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{1}}$, define $\xi^{\alpha}_{\beta}: \kappa_{t(\alpha)} \rightarrow \kappa'_{s(\alpha)}$ to be the restriction of $\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}$. Then $\xi^{\alpha}_{\beta}$ is well defined for all $ \alpha \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}, \,\ \beta \in \mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{1}}$ since for all $x \in \kappa_{t(\alpha)}$, we have $f'_{s(\beta)} \psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}(x) = \psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} f_{t(\alpha)}(x) = 0$. Thus, $\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}(x) \in \kappa'_{s(\alpha)}$, and it follows that $\xi^{\alpha}_{\beta}$ is well defined. \\
Let $\bar{\kappa} = (\kappa,\kappa',\xi)$ and $\bar{\zeta} = (\zeta,\zeta')$. Then $\bar{\kappa} \in Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$, and we have the following proposition.
\begin{proposition} \label{p.3.ker}
The pair $(\bar{\kappa},\bar{\zeta})$ is the kernel of $\bar{f}$ in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $ \bar{\lambda} = (\lambda,\lambda'): \bar{N} = (N,N',\Psi) \rightarrow \bar{V} = (V,V',\psi)$ be a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ with $ \bar{f} \bar{\lambda} = \bar{0} $, where $\bar{0} $ is the zero object in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$. Consider the following diagram. \\
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq021}
\xymatrix{
& \kappa_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]^{\chi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{\zeta_{s(\alpha)}} && \kappa_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole|!{[ddd];[dd]}\hole^(.5){\xi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{\zeta_{t(\alpha)}}\\
& & V_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{f_{s(\alpha)}}
&& V_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole^(.5){\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{f_{t(\alpha)}}\\
N_{s(\alpha)} \ar@/^2pc/[uur]|(.5){\tau_{s(\alpha)}} \ar[urr]^(.5){\lambda_{s(\alpha)}} \ar[d]^{\delta_{\alpha}} & && W_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi'_{\alpha}} && W_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|(.5){\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \\
N_{t(\alpha)} \ar@/^10.6pc/[uuurrr]|(.6){\tau_{t(\alpha)}}
\ar@/_2.7pc/[uurrrr]|(.5){\lambda_{t(\alpha)}} \ar[d]_(.4){\Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} &&& \kappa'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]|\hole|(.65){\rho_{\beta}} \ar[dr]_{\zeta'_{s(\beta)}} &&
\kappa'_{t(\beta} \ar[dr]^{\zeta'_{t(\beta)}} \\
N'_{s(\beta)} \ar@/_2pc/[urrr]|(.5){\tau'_{s(\beta)}} \ar@/_2pc/[rrrr]|(.7){\lambda'_{s(\beta)}} \ar[d]_{\delta'_{\beta}} &&&& V'_{s(\beta)} \ar[dr]_{f'_{s(\beta)}} \ar[rr]|\hole|(.7){\mu_{\beta}} && V'_{t(\beta)} \ar[dr]^{f'_{t(\beta)}}\\
N'_{t(\beta)} \ar@/_7.3pc/[urrrrrr]|(.5){\lambda'_{t(\beta)}}
\ar@/_4.6pc/[uurrrrr]|(.5){\tau'_{t(\beta)}} &&&&& W'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]_(.5){\mu'_{\beta}} && W'_{t(\beta)}
}
\end{equation}\\
Since $(\kappa_i,\chi_{\alpha}),(\kappa'_{i'},\nu_{\beta})$ are the kernels of $f,f'$ in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively, there exist unique morphisms $\tau : N \rightarrow \kappa, \,\, \tau' : N' \rightarrow \kappa'$ in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively making their respective subdiagrams commutative. So all we need is to show that $\bar{\tau}= (\tau,\tau'): \bar{N} \rightarrow \bar{\kappa}$ is a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$. To check this, the constructions of the kernels of $f,f'$ in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively and Remark (\ref{r.2}) imply that $\tau (\underline{x}) = \lambda(\underline{x})$ and $\tau'(\underline{x}') = \lambda'(\underline{x}')$ for all $\underline{x} \in N$ and $\underline{x}' \in N'$ respectively. For any $x \in N_{t(\alpha)}$, $ \alpha \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}, \,\ \beta \in \mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{1}}$, we have \\
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
$\tau'_{s(\beta)} \Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}(x)$ & $= \tau'_{s(\beta)}( \Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}(x)) $\\
& $= \lambda'_{s(\beta)} (\Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}(x)) $\\
& (since $ \lambda'(\underline{x}') = \tau' (\underline{x}')$, for all $\underline{x}' \in N'$)\\
& $= \lambda'_{s(\beta)} \Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} (x) $\\
& $= \psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} \lambda_{t(\alpha)} (x) $\\
& (since $\bar{\lambda}$ is a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$)\\
\end{tabular}\\
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, & $= \psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} \tau_{t(\alpha)} (x) $\\
& (since $ \lambda(\underline{x}) = \tau (\underline{x})$, for all $\underline{x} \in N$)\\
& $= \psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} (\tau_{t(\alpha)} (x)) $\\
& $= \xi^{\alpha}_{\beta} (\tau_{t(\alpha)} (x)) $\\
& (by the definition of $\xi^{\alpha}_{\beta}$)\\
& $= \xi^{\alpha}_{\beta} \tau_{t(\alpha)} (x) $\\
\end{tabular}\\
\vspace{.2cm}
Therefore, $\bar{\tau}= (\tau,\tau'): \bar{N} \rightarrow \bar{\kappa}$ is a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$, and thus $(\bar{\kappa},\bar{\zeta})$ is the kernel of $\bar{f}$ in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$.\\
\end{proof}
\vspace{.2cm}
Using induction on $n$ and the same procedure used above, we can show that kernels exist in the category $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$, and they can similarly be constructed.\\ Explicitly, let $\bar{V} = (V^{(1)},V^{(2)},...,V^{(n)},\psi_{\!_{1}}, \psi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi_{\!_{n-1}})$, $\bar{W} = (W^{(1)},W^{(2)},...,W^{(n)},\psi'_{\!_{1}}, \psi'_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi'_{\!_{n-1}})$ be $n$-representations of $(Q_1, \,\, Q_2, \,\,... \,\, , Q_n)$, and let $\underline{f}: \bar{V} \rightarrow \bar{W}$ be a morphism of $n$-representations, where $\underline{f}=(f^{\!^{(1)}}, f^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., f^{\!^{(n)}})$. For any $m \in \{2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$, write
\begin{center}
•$f^{\!^{(m)}} = (f^{\!^{(m)}}_{i^{(m)}}): (V_{{i^{(m)}}},\phi^{{i^{(m)}}}_{\gamma^{(m)}}) \rightarrow (W_{{i^{(m)}}},\mu^{{i^{(m)}}}_{\gamma^{(m)}})$,
\end{center}
By induction, the kernel of $(f^{\!^{(1)}}, f^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., f^{\!^{(n-1)}})$ in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n-1})}}$ exists in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n-1})}}$. Let
\begin{center}
•$((\kappa^{(1)},\kappa^{(2)},...,\kappa^{(n-1)},\xi_{\!_{1}}, \xi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \xi_{\!_{n-2}}),(\zeta^{\!^{(1)}}, \zeta^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., \zeta^{\!^{(n-1)}}))$
\end{center}
be the kernel of $(f^{\!^{(1)}}, f^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., f^{\!^{(n-1)}})$ in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n-1})}}$.
For all $(\gamma^{(n-1)},\gamma^{(n)}) \in \mathsf{Q}^{(n-1)}_{\!_{1}} \times \mathsf{Q}^{(n)}_{\!_{1}}$, define
\begin{center}
•$\xi_{\!_{n}\gamma^{(n-1)}}^{\gamma^{(n)}}: \kappa^{(n-1)}_{t^{(n-1)}(\gamma^{(n-1)})} \rightarrow \kappa^{(n)}_{s^{(n)}(\gamma^{(n)})} $
\end{center}
to be the restriction of $\xi_{\!_{n-1}\gamma^{(n-2)}}^{\gamma^{(n-1)}}$. Then $\xi_{\!_{n}\gamma^{(n)}}^{\gamma^{(n-1)}}$ is well defined for all $(\gamma^{(n-1)},\gamma^{(n)}) \in \mathsf{Q}^{(n-1)}_{\!_{1}} \times \mathsf{Q}^{(n)}_{\!_{1}}$ by using similar argument used for the case $n=2$. \\
Let $\underline{\kappa} = (\kappa^{(1)},\kappa^{(2)},...,\kappa^{(n)},\xi_{\!_{1}}, \xi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \xi_{\!_{n-1}})$, $\underline{\zeta} = (\zeta^{\!^{(1)}}, \zeta^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., \zeta^{\!^{(n)}})$ and $\underline{f} = (f^{\!^{(1)}}, f^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., f^{\!^{(n)}})$, where $(\kappa^{(n)},\zeta^{\!^{(n)}})$ is the kernel of $f^{\!^{(n)}}$\,\,. Using similar argument used in Proposition (\ref{p.3.ker}) gives the following proposition. \\
\begin{proposition} \label{p.3.1.ker.n.rep}
The pair $(\underline{\kappa}, \underline{\zeta}))$ is the kernel of $\underline{f}$ in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n})}}$. \\
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\end{proof}
\vspace{.4cm}
Let $\bar{f}=(f,f'): \bar{V} = (V,V',\psi) \rightarrow \bar{W} = (W,W',\psi')$ be a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$. From Proposition (\ref{p.1}), the cokernels of $f,f'$ exist in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively.
Let $(K,\eta), \,\ (K',\eta')$ be the cokernels of $f,f'$ in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively. Write $K=(K_i,\phi'_{\alpha}),\,\ \eta = (\eta_{\alpha}), \,\ K'=(K_i,\mu'_{\beta}),\,\ \eta' = (\eta'_{\beta})$ and Consider the following diagram.\\
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq022}
\xymatrix{
V_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]^{\phi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{f_{s(\alpha)}} && V_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole|!{[ddd];[dd]}\hole^(.5){\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{f_{t(\alpha)}}\\
& W_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi'_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{\eta_{s(\alpha)}}
&& W_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole^(.5){\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{\eta_{t(\alpha)}}\\
&& K_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi''_{\alpha}} && K_{t(\alpha)} \ar@{-->}[ddd]|(.5){\psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \\
&& V'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]|\hole|(.65){\mu_{\beta}} \ar[dr]_{f'_{s(\beta)}} &&
V'_{t(\beta} \ar[dr]^{f'_{t(\beta)}} \\
&&& W'_{s(\beta)} \ar[dr]_{\eta'_{s(\beta)}} \ar[rr]|\hole^(.3){\mu'_{\beta}} && W'_{t(\beta)}\ar[dr]^{\eta'_{t(\beta)}}\\
&&&& K'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]_(.5){\mu''_{\beta}} && K'_{t(\beta)}
}
\end{equation}
For all $ \alpha \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}, \,\ \beta \in \mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{1}}$, define the $k$-linear map $\psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}: K_{t(\alpha)} \rightarrow K'_{s(\alpha)}$ by $\psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}(w + f_{t(\alpha)}(V_{t(\alpha)})) = \psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} (w) + f'_{s(\beta)}(V'_{s(\beta)})$ for all $w \in W_{t(\alpha)}$. Then $\psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}$ is well defined for all $ \alpha \in \mathsf{Q}_{\!_{1}}, \,\ \beta \in \mathsf{Q}'_{\!_{1}}$ since for all $a, b \in W_{t(\alpha)}$ with $a + f_{t(\alpha)} (V_{t(\alpha)}) = b + f_{t(\alpha)} (V_{t(\alpha)}) $, we have $a - b \in f_{t(\alpha)} (V_{t(\alpha)}) $. Thus $\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} (a) - \psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} (b)\,\ = \,\ \psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} (a - b) \in \psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} f_{t(\alpha)} (V_{t(\alpha)}) \,\ = \,\ f'_{s(\beta)} \psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} (V_{t(\alpha)}) \subseteq \,\ f'_{s(\beta)} (V'_{s(\alpha)})$. It follows that $\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} (a) + f'_{s(\beta)}(V'_{s(\alpha)}) = \psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} (b) + f'_{s(\beta)}(V'_{s(\alpha)})$, and hence $\psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}$ is well defined. \\
Let $\bar{K} = (K,K',\psi'')$ and $\bar{\eta} = (\eta,\eta')$. Then $\bar{K} \in Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ and We have the following proposition.
\begin{proposition} \label{p.4.coker}
The pair $(\bar{K},\bar{\eta})$ is the cokernel of $\bar{f}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $ \bar{\gamma}: \bar{W} = (W,W',\psi) \rightarrow \bar{L} = (L,L',\Psi)$ be a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ with $\bar{\gamma} \bar{f} = \bar{0} $ and consider the following diagram. \\
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq023}
\xymatrix{
& V_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]^{\phi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{f_{s(\alpha)}} && V_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole|!{[ddd];[dd]}\hole^(.5){\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{f_{t(\alpha)}}\\
& & W_{s(\alpha)} \ar[dll]_(.5){\gamma_{s(\alpha)}} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi'_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{\eta_{s(\alpha)}}
&& W_{t(\alpha)} \ar@/^2.5pc/[ddllll]|(.7){\gamma_{t(\alpha)}} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole^(.5){\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{\eta_{t(\alpha)}}\\
L_{s(\alpha)} \ar[d]_{\nu_{\alpha}} & && K_{s(\alpha)} \ar[lll]|(.5){\sigma_{s(\alpha)}} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi''_{\alpha}} && K_{t(\alpha)} \ar@/^3pc/[dlllll]|(.7){\sigma_{t(\alpha)}} \ar[ddd]|(.5){\psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \\
L_{t(\alpha)} \ar[d]_(.4){\Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} &&& V'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]|\hole|(.65){\mu_{\beta}} \ar[dr]_{f'_{s(\beta)}} &&
V'_{t(\beta} \ar[dr]^{f'_{t(\beta)}} \\
L'_{s(\beta)} \ar[d]_{\nu'_{\beta}} &&&& W'_{s(\beta)} \ar@/^2pc/[llll]|(.4){\gamma'_{s(\beta)}} \ar[dr]_{\eta'_{s(\beta)}} \ar[rr]|\hole^(.3){\mu'_{\beta}} && W'_{t(\beta)} \ar@/^4pc/[dllllll]|(.6){\gamma'_{t(\beta)}} \ar[dr]^{\eta'_{t(\beta)}}\\
L'_{t(\beta)} &&&&& K'_{s(\beta)} \ar@/^2pc/[ulllll]|(.5){\sigma'_{s(\beta)}} \ar[rr]_(.5){\mu''_{\beta}} && K'_{t(\beta)} \ar@/^4pc/[lllllll]|(.5){\sigma'_{t(\beta)}}
}
\end{equation}
\vspace{.2cm}
Since $(K_i,\phi_{\alpha}),(K'_{i'},\mu_{\beta})$ are the cokernels of $f,f'$ in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively, there exist unique morphisms $\sigma : K \rightarrow L, \,\, \sigma' : K' \rightarrow L'$ in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$ respectively making their respective diagrams commutative. So all we need is to show that $\bar{\sigma}= (\sigma,\sigma'): \bar{K} \rightarrow \bar{L}$ is a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$. To show this, the constructions of the cokernels of $f,f'$ in $ Rep_k(Q)$, $ Rep_k(Q')$, respectively, and Remark (\ref{r.2}) imply that $\sigma (x+f(V)) = \gamma(x)$ and $\sigma' ((x'+f'(V'))) = \gamma'(x')$ for all $x \in W$ and $x' \in W'$ respectively. For any $w \in W_{t(\alpha)}$, we have \\
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
$\sigma'_{s(\beta)} \psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}(w + f_{t(\alpha)}(V_{t(\alpha)}))$ & $= \sigma'_{s(\beta)} (\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} (w) + f'_{s(\beta)}(V'_{s(\beta)})) $\\
& (by the definition of $\psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}$)\\
& $= \gamma'_{s(\beta)} \psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta} (w)$\\
& (since $\sigma' ((x'+f'(V'))) = \gamma'(x')$ for all $x' \in W'$) \\
& $= \Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} \gamma_{t(\alpha)} (w) $\\
& (since $\bar{\gamma}$ is a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$) \\
& $= \Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} \sigma_{t(\alpha)} \eta_{s(\alpha)} (w)$ \\
& (since $\bar{\gamma}= \bar{\sigma} \bar{\eta}$) \\
& $= \Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta} \sigma_{t(\alpha)} (w + f_{t(\alpha)}(V_{t(\alpha)}))$ \\
& (by the definition of $\eta$)\\
\end{tabular}\\
\vspace{.2cm}
Therefore, $\bar{\sigma}: \bar{K} \rightarrow \bar{L}$ is a morphism in $ Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$, and thus $(\bar{K},\bar{\eta})$ is the cokernel of $\bar{f}$. \\
\end{proof}
\vspace{.2cm}
Using induction on $n$, one can use the same procedure used above to show that cokernels exist in the category $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_n)}}$, and they can similarly be constructed.\\ Explicitly, let $\bar{V} = (V^{(1)},V^{(2)},...,V^{(n)},\psi_{\!_{1}}, \psi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi_{\!_{n-1}})$, $\bar{W} = (W^{(1)},W^{(2)},...,W^{(n)},\psi'_{\!_{1}}, \psi'_{\!_{2}}, ..., \psi'_{\!_{n-1}})$ be $n$-representations of $(Q_1, \,\, Q_2, \,\,... \,\, , Q_n)$, and let $\underline{f}: \bar{V} \rightarrow \bar{W}$ be a morphism of $n$-representations, where $\underline{f}=(f^{\!^{(1)}}, f^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., f^{\!^{(n)}})$. For any $m \in \{2,\,\,..., \,\,n\}$, write
\begin{center}
•$f^{\!^{(m)}} = (f^{\!^{(m)}}_{i^{(m)}}): (V_{{i^{(m)}}},\phi^{{i^{(m)}}}_{\gamma^{(m)}}) \rightarrow (W_{{i^{(m)}}},\mu^{{i^{(m)}}}_{\gamma^{(m)}})$,
\end{center}
By induction, the cokernel of $(f^{\!^{(1)}}, f^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., f^{\!^{(n-1)}})$ in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n-1})}}$ exists in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n-1})}}$. Let
\begin{center}
•$((K^{(1)},K^{(2)},...,K^{(n-1)},\chi_{\!_{1}}, \chi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \chi_{\!_{n-2}}),(\eta^{\!^{(1)}}, \eta^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., \eta^{\!^{(n-1)}}))$
\end{center}
be the cokernel of $(f^{\!^{(1)}}, f^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., f^{\!^{(n-1)}})$ in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n-1})}}$.
For all $(\gamma^{(n-1)},\gamma^{(n)}) \in \mathsf{Q}^{(n-1)}_{\!_{1}} \times \mathsf{Q}^{(n)}_{\!_{1}}$, define
\begin{center}
•$\chi_{\!_{n}\gamma^{(n-1)}}^{\gamma^{(n)}}: K^{(n-1)}_{t^{(n-1)}(\gamma^{(n-1)})} \rightarrow K^{(n)}_{s^{(n)}(\gamma^{(n)})} $
\end{center}
by $\chi_{\!_{n}\gamma^{(n-1)}}^{\gamma^{(n)}}(w + f^{(n-1)}_{t^{(n-1)}(\gamma^{(n-1)})}(V^{(n-1)}_{t^{(n-1)}(\gamma^{(n-1)})})) = {\psi'}_{\!_{n}\gamma^{(n-1)}}^{\gamma^{(n)}} (w) + f^{(n)}_{t^{(n)}(\gamma^{(n)})}(V^{(n)}_{t^{(n)}(\gamma^{(n)})})$ for all $w \in W^{(n-1)}_{t^{(n-1)}(\gamma^{(n-1)})}$. Then $\chi_{\!_{n}\gamma^{(n-1)}}^{\gamma^{(n)}}$ is well defined for all $(\gamma^{(n-1)},\gamma^{(n)}) \in \mathsf{Q}^{(n-1)}_{\!_{1}} \times \mathsf{Q}^{(n)}_{\!_{1}}$ by using similar argument used for the case $n=2$. \\
Let $\underline{K} = (K^{(1)},K^{(2)},...,K^{(n)},\chi_{\!_{1}}, \chi_{\!_{2}}, ..., \chi_{\!_{n-1}})$, $\underline{\eta} = (\eta^{\!^{(1)}}, \eta^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., \eta^{\!^{(n)}})$ and $\underline{f} = (f^{\!^{(1)}}, f^{\!^{(2)}}, ..., f^{\!^{(n)}})$, where $(K^{(n)},\eta^{\!^{(n)}})$. Using similar argument used in Proposition (\ref{p.4.coker}) gives the following consequence. \\
\begin{proposition} \label{p.4.1.coker.n.rep}
The pair $(\underline{K}, \underline{\eta}))$ is the cokernel of $\underline{f}$ in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n})}}$. \\
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\end{proof}
\vspace{.2cm}
\section{\textbf{Canonical Decomposition of Morphisms in $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$}}\label{s.Factorization}
Following \cite[p. 2]{Etingof}, an \textbf{additive} category is a category $\mathcal{C}$ satisfying the following
axioms:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item Every set $\mathcal{C}(X,Y)$ is equipped with a structure of an abelian group (written additively) such that composition of morphisms is biadditive with respect to this structure.
\item There exists a zero object $0 \in \mathcal{C}$ such that $\mathcal{C}(0,0)=0$.
\item (Existence of direct sums.) For any objects $X,X' \in \mathcal{C}$, the direct sum $X \oplus X' \in \mathcal{C}$.
\end{enumerate}
Let $k$ be a field. An additive category $\mathcal{C}$ is said to be\textbf{ $k$-linear} if for any objects $X,Y \in \mathcal{C}(X,Y)$ is equipped
with a structure of a vector space over $k$, such that composition of morphisms is $k$-linear.\\
An \textbf{abelian} category is an additive category $\mathcal{C}$ in which for every morphism $f : X \rightarrow Y$ there exists a sequence
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq025}
\xymatrix{
K \ar[r]^{k} & X \ar[r]^{\iota} & I \ar[r]^{j} & Y \ar[r]^{c} & C
}
\end{equation} \\
with the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $ji = f$,
\item $(K,k) = Ker(f), \,\ (C, c) = Coker(f)$,
\item $(I, \iota) = Coker(k), \,\ (I, j) = Ker(c)$.\\
\end{enumerate}
A sequence (\ref{diag.eq025}) is called a \textbf{canonical decomposition} of $f$. \\
Let $\bar{f} =(f,f') : \bar{X} \rightarrow \bar{Y}$ be a morphism in $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$.
It follows that $f : X \rightarrow Y, \,\ f' : X' \rightarrow Y'$ are morphisms in $Rep_k(Q)$, $Rep_k(Q')$ respectively. From Proposition \ref{p.1}, $f : X \rightarrow Y, \,\ f' : X' \rightarrow Y'$ have the canonical decompositions
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq026}
\xymatrix{
K \ar[r]^{k} & X \ar[r]^{\iota} & I \ar[r]^{j} & Y \ar[r]^{c} & C
}
\hspace{70pt}
\xymatrix{
K' \ar[r]^{k'} & X' \ar[r]^{\iota'} & I' \ar[r]^{j'} & Y' \ar[r]^{c'} & C'
}
\end{equation}
in $Rep_k(Q)$, $Rep_k(Q')$ respectively. From Section \ref{s.construction.kernels.cokernels}, kernels and cokernels exist in $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$. It turns out that $\bar{f}$ has a canonical decomposition
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq025}
\xymatrix{
\bar{K} \ar[r]^{\bar{k}} & \bar{X} \ar[r]^{\bar{\iota}} & \bar{I} \ar[r]^{\bar{j}} & \bar{Y} \ar[r]^{\bar{c}} & \bar{C}
}
\end{equation}
in $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$, and this decomposition can explicitly be seen in the following commutative diagram.
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq028}
\xymatrix{
&K_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]^{\phi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]|{k_{s(\alpha)}} && K_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole|!{[ddd];[dd]}\hole^(.5){\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{k_{t(\alpha)}}\\
&& X_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi'_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]|{\iota_{s(\alpha)}}
&& X_{t(\alpha)} \ar[ddd]|!{[dd];[d]}\hole^(.5){\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{\iota_{t(\alpha)}}\\
&C_{s(\alpha)} \ar[dl]|{\varphi''_{\alpha}} &Y_{s(\alpha)} \ar[dl]|{\varphi'_{\alpha}} \ar[l]_{c_{s(\alpha)}}& I_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi''_{\alpha}} \ar[l]_{j_{s(\alpha)}} && I_{t(\alpha)} \ar@/_.35pc/[dllll]|(.7){j_{t(\alpha)}} \ar[ddd]|(.5){\psi''^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \\
C_{t(\alpha)} \ar@/_4pc/[ddr]_(.5){\Psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta}} &Y_{t(\alpha)} \ar@/^1pc/[ddr]^(.5){\Psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[l]_{c_{t(\alpha)}} & & K'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]|\hole|(.65){\mu_{\beta}} \ar[dr]_{k'_{s(\beta)}} & &
K'_{t(\beta} \ar[dr]^{k'_{t(\beta)}} \\
C'_{t(\beta)} & Y'_{t(\beta)} \ar[l]_(.5){c'_{s(\beta)}} &&& X'_{s(\beta)} \ar[dr]_{\iota'_{s(\beta)}} \ar[rr]|\hole^(.3){\mu'_{\beta}} && X'_{t(\beta)}\ar[dr]^{\iota'_{t(\beta)}}\\
&C'_{s(\beta)} \ar@/^0.7pc/[ul]|(.5){\nu'_{\beta}} & Y'_{s(\beta)} \ar@/^0.7pc/[ul]|(.5){\nu_{\beta}} \ar@/^1pc/[l]^(.5){c'_{t(\beta)}} & && I'_{s(\beta)} \ar@/^3.5pc/[lll]|(.5){j'_{t(\beta)}} \ar[rr]_(.5){\mu''_{\beta}} && I'_{t(\beta)} \ar@/^3.5pc/[ullllll]|(.5){j'_{t(\beta)}}
}
\end{equation}
\vspace{.2cm}
This implies that any morphism $\underline{f}: \bar{V} \rightarrow \bar{W}$ of $n$-representations has a canonical decomposition in $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n})}}$.\\
\begin{remark}
Let $\,\, \bar{f}, \,\, \bar{g}: \bar{V} \rightarrow \bar{W}$ be morphisms in $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$. Write $\bar{f} = (f,f'), \,\, \bar{g} = (g,g')$, $f=(f_i), \,\, g=(g_i)$, $f'=(f'_{i'}), \,\, g'=(g'_{i'})$, $\bar{V} = (V,V',\psi)$, $\bar{W} = (W,W',\psi')$. Define $\bar{f} + \bar{g} = (f+g,f'+g') = ((f_i + g_i), (f'_{i'} + g'_{i'}))$. Since $Rep_k(Q)$ and $Rep_k(Q')$ are abelian, the sets $Rep_k(Q)(V,W)$, $Rep_k(Q)(V',W')$ are equipped with a structure of an abelian group such that composition of morphisms is biadditive with respect to this structure \cite[p. 70]{Assem}.
Since $\,\, \bar{f}, \,\, \bar{g}$ are morphisms in $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ and since the category $Vec_k$ is abelian, we have the following commutative diagram.
\begin{equation} \label{diag.eq010}
\xymatrix{
V_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]^{\phi_{\alpha}} \ar[dr]_{f_{s(\alpha)} + g_{s(\alpha)}} && V_{t(\alpha)} \ar[dd]|\hole^(.3){\psi^{\alpha}_{\beta}} \ar[dr]^{f_{t(\alpha)} + g_{t(\alpha)}}\\
& W_{s(\alpha)} \ar[rr]|(.3){\phi'_{\alpha}} && W_{t(\alpha)} \ar[dd]^(.32){\psi'^{\alpha}_{\beta}}\\
&& V'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]|\hole|(.65){\mu_{\beta}} \ar[dr]_{f'_{s(\beta)} + g'_{s(\beta)}} &&
V'_{t(\beta} \ar[dr]^{f'_{t(\beta)} + g'_{t(\beta)}} \\
&&& W'_{s(\beta)} \ar[rr]_{\mu'_{\beta}} && W'_{t(\beta)}
}
\end{equation}
Thus, the set $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}(\bar{V},\bar{W})$ is equipped with a structure of an abelian group such that composition of morphisms is biadditive with respect to the above structure.\\
\end{remark}
We end the paper with the following crucial results.\\
\begin{theorem} \label{thm.Abelian1}
The category $Rep_{\!_{(Q,Q')}}$ is a $k$-linear abelian category. \\
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{thm.Abelian2}
The category $Rep_{\!_{(Q_1,Q_2,...,Q_{n})}}$ is a $k$-linear abelian category for any integer $n \geq 2$. \\
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\end{proof}
\vspace{.5cm}
\begin{center}
• \textbf{Acknowledgment}
\end{center}
I would like to thank my adivsor Prof. Miodrag Iovanov, who I learned a lot from him, for his support and his unremitting encouragement.\\
\vspace{.5cm}
|
\section{Introduction}
Solar model atmospheres based on three-dimensional (3D) radiation hydrodynamic simulations of near-surface convection have been central in the determination of element abundances in the solar photosphere for the last 15 years (see e.g. reviews by \citealp{2005ARA&A..43..481A, 2009LRSP....6....2N}). Further work in the field has included the introduction of non-local thermodynamic effects (non-LTE) in the modelling of atomic line formation. Together with improvements in atomic physics, these efforts have led to a reduction in the abundance of elements determined from the solar photospheric spectrum. CNO elements are particularly affected and recommended values \citep[AGSS09]{agss09} are 40\% lower than previous determinations \citep[GS98]{gs98}. Abundances of refractories, e.g. Mg, Si, Fe, have also been reduced, by smaller amounts, typically around 10\% \citep{Scott15a,Scott15b,Grevesse15}.
Standard solar models (SSMs) use the present-day solar photospheric composition, in the form of the metal-to-hydrogen abundance ratio $(Z/X)_\odot$, as one of the constraints that must be fulfilled by construction. The other two constraints are the solar luminosity ($L_\odot$) and radius ($R_\odot$). The SSM is the result of the evolution of a 1~M$_\odot$ stellar model from the pre-main sequence to the solar system age $\tau_\odot$. In order to match $(Z/X)_\odot$, $L_\odot$ and $R_\odot$, the initial helium ($Y_{\rm ini}$) and metal ($Z_{\rm ini}$) mass fractions and the mixing length parameter ($\alpha_{\rm MLT}$) are adjusted in the model. SSMs account for ``standard'' physics in stellar models, and avoid inclusion of physics that needs phenomenological calibration as much as possible; convection is the most important exception. SSMs used in this work are based on the same input physics as those in \citet{serenelli:2011}, except for the choice of solar composition.
$L_\odot$ and $R_\odot$ are well known, with very small uncertainties. The constraint on $(Z/X)_\odot$, which is less well measured, thus determines both the metallicity as well as the Sun's helium abundance; solar models constrained to fulfill GS98 (high-$Z$) or AGSS09 (low-$Z$) compositions show quite different internal structures. In particular, solar models based on the AGSS09 composition show strong discrepancies with helioseismic probes of the solar interior, whereas the older GS98 composition leads to quite nice agreement \citep[among many]{serenelli:2009}. This discrepancy is known as the ``solar modelling problem''. The seismic probes relevant to the solar modelling problem include: the profile of the solar sound speed, the depth of the convective envelope, the surface helium abundance and frequency separation ratios.
This solar modelling problem has been around for more than 10 years and, while there is no lack of proposed ideas, no definitive solution has yet been found.
It is well known that the comprehension of the solar abundance problem is intimately related to understanding
the role of opacity in solar modelling, since the effects produced by a modification of the radiative opacity are almost degenerate (with the notable
exception of CNO neutrinos) with those produced by a modification of the heavy element admixture.
Namely, the agreement with helioseismology using the AGSS09 composition could be restored by a suitable modification
of the opacity profile of the Sun, as described in \citet{villante:2010b} and \citet{villante:2014}.
The current generation of standard solar models typically relies on opacities from the Opacity Project \citep[OP, e.g.][]{2005MNRAS.360..458B} or OPAL \citep[e.g.][]{1996ApJ...464..943I}. Recently \citet{2015Natur.517...56B} experimentally measured the opacity at conditions similar to those immediately below the solar convection zone for the first time, finding wavelength-dependent Fe opacities typically 30--40\% higher than predicted by OP and OPAL. When folded into the Rosseland mean opacity needed in solar model calculations, the result is a $7\pm3\%$ increase. Such extra opacity goes towards solving the solar modelling problem by itself. Recently, also, theoretical work by \citet{krief:2016} found that line broadening induces changes in the opacity profile in a solar model that mimics the opacity variations required by helioseismic constraints \citet{villante:2014}. Detailed solar modelling however will have to await a better understanding of how such opacity increases depend on the physical conditions (temperature and density) for the relevant elements.
\citet[hereafter vSZ16]{vS16} have presented results from in-situ measurements of the chemical composition of the solar wind. In particular, they have determined abundances of C, N and O, as well as the most abundant refractories: Mg, Si, S and Fe. The comparison between elemental abundances from GS98, AGSS09 and vSZ16 is presented in Table~\ref{tab:compo}.
\citet{v16} (V16 hereafter) analyse the impacts of the vSZ16 abundances on solar interior modelling. They focus in particular on a certain subset of helioseismic probes, but with special emphasis on the solar sound speed profile. Their analysis is based on the so-called linear solar models, originally developed by \citet{villante:2010}. V16 reach the conclusion that, when the vSZ16 composition is used in solar models, the agreement between solar models and helioseismic probes is restored, and claim that they have found a solution to the solar abundance problem. Here we present a number of arguments against this claim. In fact, the vSZ16 composition, when used to construct an SSM as proposed by V16, produces a model that is strongly at odds with experimental evidence, actually leading to an even larger discrepancy than models based on AGSS09 abundances. We quantify the disagreement both with neutrino and helioseismological observations, and then go on to outline a number of other reasons why the vSZ16 abundances cannot be representative of the actual solar composition.
We note that \cite{caffau:2011} have also published solar photospheric abundances based on 3D model atmospheres. For the two most important volatiles, C and O, their results are 0.07 dex larger than the values of AGSS09. However, we do not refer to those results further here for the following reasons. The first one is that \cite{caffau:2011} does not provide a complete determination of the solar mixture and that implies using an alternative source for the missing elements. Also, among the missing elements is Si, the anchor point between the photospheric and meteoritic scales, our preferred choice building SSMs\footnote{Helioseismic and solar neutrino results of a SSM built with a hybrid solar mixture based on \cite{caffau:2011} abundances, however, has been recently discussed in \cite{serenelli:2016}.}. Finally, articles V16 and vSZ16 do not use these data in their core results and our main aim in this work is to evaluate how SSMs constructed with the vSZ16 composition compare to helioseismic and solar neutrino data, not to discuss a spectrum of possible (partial) solutions to the solar modelling problem.
The rest of this paper is organised as follows. Section~\ref{sec:neutrinos} discusses in some detail the implications of vSZ16 abundances on SSM predictions for neutrino fluxes.
Solar neutrino fluxes were not considered by V16 except for a rough estimate, which significantly underestimates the neutrino fluxes predicted by their solar model. Solar neutrinos are very important probes of the solar interior, and in particular of the core, where vSZ16 abundances strongly affect solar model properties. In Section~\ref{sec:helios}, we discuss the helioseismic properties of a standard solar model with the vSZ16 composition. Whereas V16 focused on the sound speed profile and, to a lesser extent, on the surface helium abundance and depth of the convective zone, we extend our analysis to ratios of separation frequencies that are well-known probes of the solar core \citep{basu:2007,chaplin:2007}. Section~\ref{sec:combined} presents a combined likelihood analysis of solar models with different candidate compositions. Section~\ref{sec:compo} can be read independently of those related to the SSM; here we present a number of arguments that show that it is in fact very unlikely that vSZ16 abundances are representative of the photospheric and interior composition of the Sun. We end with a summary of our most relevant findings, all of which point to the same conclusions: that vSZ16 is not representative of the photosphere, and that SSMs based on vSZ16 are in disagreement with both helioseismic probes of the solar interior and solar neutrino fluxes. Despite a metallicity that is closer to the classic GS98 measurement, they therefore perform worse than AGSS09.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Adopted solar chemical compositions. Abundances given as $\log{\epsilon_i}\equiv\log{N_i/N_H}+12$. AGSS09ph refers to the solar photospheric abundances from AGSS09, whereas AGSS09met refers to the case when the abundances for all non-volatile elements (i.e. everything other than C, N, O and the noble gases) are replaced with the corresponding CI carbonaceous chondrite meteoritic abundances from \citet{Lodders09}. Note that the errors attached to vSZ16 values incorporate the error on the absolute scale, but do not incorporate additional systematics expected from unquantified fractionation effects (see Sec.\ \protect\ref{abundances}). \label{tab:compo}}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{$\log{\epsilon}$} \\
\cline{2-5}
Element & GS98 & AGSS09met & AGSS09ph & vSZ16 \\ \hline
C & 8.52 & $8.43\pm 0.05 $& $8.43\pm0.05$& $8.65^{+0.11}_{-0.09}$\vspace{0.5mm}\\
N & 7.92 & $7.83\pm 0.05 $& $7.83\pm0.05$& $7.97^{+0.15}_{-0.11}$\vspace{0.5mm}\\
O & 8.83 & $8.69\pm 0.05 $& $8.69\pm0.05$& $8.82^{+0.10}_{-0.08}$\vspace{0.5mm}\\
Ne & 8.08 & $7.93\pm 0.10 $& $7.93\pm0.10$& $7.79^{+0.17}_{-0.12}$\vspace{0.5mm}\\
Mg & 7.58 & $7.53\pm 0.01 $& $7.60\pm0.04$& $7.85^{+0.17}_{-0.13}$\vspace{0.5mm}\\
Si & 7.56 & $7.51\pm 0.01 $& $7.51\pm0.03$& $7.82^{+0.18}_{-0.13}$\vspace{0.5mm}\\
S & 7.20 & $7.15\pm 0.02 $& $7.12\pm0.03$& $7.56^{+0.19}_{-0.13}$\vspace{0.5mm}\\
Fe & 7.50 & $7.45\pm 0.01 $& $7.50\pm0.04$& $7.73^{+0.17}_{-0.12}$\vspace{0.5mm}\\
\hline
Z/X & 0.0229 & 0.0178 & 0.0181 & 0.0265 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Solar neutrinos} \label{sec:neutrinos}
Solar neutrino fluxes predicted by solar models are particularly sensitive to variations in the solar composition. For pp-chain fluxes this dependence occurs through the impact of metals on the radiative opacity profile of the Sun. Therefore, individual elements will have different impacts on neutrino predictions. Scaling $(Z/X)_\odot$ globally is not a correct way to estimate the variations induced in solar neutrinos when the composition is varied. This was discussed at length by \citet{bahcall:2005}; since then the detailed composition has been used in studies of solar neutrinos.
Before discussing results based on SSMs, we present simple but quite accurate estimates of the changes in the neutrino fluxes expected when changing from AGSS09 to vSZ16 abundances, based on power-law expansions \citep{bahcall:1989}. As an example, let us consider the flux of neutrinos from $^8{\rm B}$ decay in the pp chain, $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$, and focus only on the most relevant elements. The dependence of the $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$ flux on variations of elemental abundances is given by the following power-law exponents: 0.139, 0.109, 0.092, 0.192, 0.140, 0.502 for O, Ne, Mg, Si, S and Fe respectively \citep{serenelli:2013}. Taking AGSS09ph as the reference composition, the expected fractional increase in $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$, if the vSZ16 composition is used instead, is
\begin{align}
\frac{\delta \Phi{(^8{\rm B})}}{\Phi{(^8{\rm B})}} \approx 0.139\times0.35 + 0.109\times(-0.28) + 0.092 \times 0.78 \nonumber \\
\phantom{0} + 0.192 \times 1.04 + 0.140 \times 1.75 + 0.502 \times 0.70 = 0.89. \nonumber
\end{align}
Here, we have taken the fractional variations for the composition directly from Table~1 in V16. The same comparison against the AGSS09met composition yields an even larger variation: $\delta \Phi(^8{\rm B})/\Phi(^8{\rm B}) = 0.99$. The power-law expansion thus leads to an estimated $90-100\%$ increase in $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$ for an SSM based on vSZ16.
Power-law expansions describe the first order response of solar models to changes in the input parameters. The changes between AGSS09 and vSZ16 are not small, and it might be that second order effects play a significant role. In the rest of this article, we therefore present results based solely on full SSMs that consistently account for the adopted solar composition. We have calibrated an SSM using the vSZ16 abundances and the same input physics as described in \citet{serenelli:2011}. In addition, we also use the two SSMs computed in that work with the GS98 and the AGSS09 (more precisely AGSS09met, see Table \ref{tab:compo}) compositions.
Results for the three SSMs and all neutrino fluxes are summarised in Table~\ref{tab:neutrinos}. Solar values for the neutrinos from all pp-chains are those recently determined by \citet{bergstrom:2016} and result from a combined analysis using all possible sources of experimental data. For $^{13}$N, $^{15}$O and $^{17}$F fluxes we quote the upper 68\% limit. As can be seen in Table\,\ref{tab:neutrinos}, the SSM based on vSZ16 predicts $\Phi(^8{\rm B}) = {\rm (10.1 \pm 1.8) \times10^6\,cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$, similar to but slightly larger than the simple power-law estimation. This is more than a factor of 2 increase with respect to the AGSS09 model and much higher than the 10\% increase guessed, with no further justification, in V16.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Solar neutrinos fluxes in ${\rm cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$ and relative errors derived from some standard solar models (with different compositions)
and from oscillation neutrino data; Units are: $10^{10}$ (pp),
$10^{9}$ ($^{7}$Be), $10^{8}$ (pep, $^{13}$N, $^{15}$O), $10^{6}$ ($^{8}B$, $^{17}$F) and $10^{3}$ (hep).\label{tab:neutrinos}}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline
Source & GS98, AGSS09met & vSZ16 & Solar \\ \hline
pp & $5.98,\,6.03(1\pm0.006)$ & $5.78 (1\pm0.008)$& $5.97(1\pm0.005)$ \\
pep & $1.44,\,1.47(1\pm0.012)$ & $1.34 (1\pm0.016)$& $1.45(1\pm 0.009)$ \\
hep & $8.04,\,8,31(1\pm0.30)$ & $7.23(1\pm0.30)$ & $19(1\pm0.55)$ \\
$^7$Be & $5.00,\,4.56(1\pm0.07)$ & $6.58 (1\pm0.08)$& $4.80(1\pm 0.05)$ \\
$^8$B & $5.58,\,4.59(1\pm0.14)$ & $10.1 (1\pm0.18)$& $5.16(1\pm 0.022)$ \\
$^{13}$N & $2.96,\,2.17 (1\pm0.14)$ & $5.46 (1\pm0.21)$& $\leq$\,13.7 \\
$^{15}$O & $2.23,\,1.56 (1\pm0.15)$ & $4.56 (1\pm0.22)$& $\leq$\,2.8\\
$^{17}$F & $5.52,\,3.40 (1\pm0.17)$ & $9.01 (1\pm0.30)$& $\leq$\,85 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The large change in $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$ is due to the large fractional increase in abundances of refractories proposed by vSZ16.
Refractories such as Mg, Si, S, Fe have relatively high atomic charge and are therefore important contributors to the radiative opacity, even at the larger temperatures present in the solar core \citep{basu:2008,villante:2014}. The temperature in the core is therefore strongly correlated with the abundance of refractories. Neutrino fluxes, especially those that depend very strongly on temperature, show an even more intense dependence.
The neutrino fluxes predicted by the vSZ16 solar model strongly disagree with the experimental constraints,
as can be seen in Table\,\ref{tab:neutrinos}.
This statement can be quantified by returning to the example of $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$. The observed flux is $\sim 50\%$ lower than the theoretical prediction.
The uncertainty in the model flux not attributable to composition is of the order of 12\% \citep{serenelli:2013}, whereas the total uncertainty including errors on abundances is 14\% if AGSS09 uncertainties are adopted. The observed solar neutrino flux has an uncertainty of just 2\%.
By combining experimental and theoretical uncertainties in quadrature, we see that the disagreement is at $\sim 4\sigma$ level. This implies that there is simply no room in SSMs to bring the vSZ16 solar model prediction into agreement with the solar $\Phi{(^8{\rm B})}$.
Only a strong reduction in refractories can bring down $\Phi{(^8{\rm B})}$, i.e. abandoning the vSZ16 composition. This reduction must bring refractories back to GS98 or AGSS09-like levels.
A similar reasoning follows for $\Phi(^7{\rm Be})$, for which the vSZ16 solar model predicts $6.58\times10^9\,{\rm cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$. This is again much higher than the experimental result, by about 4$\sigma$ when combining errors from modelling and experiment. Here again, the only way to bring this into agreement with the solar flux is to strongly reduce the abundance of refractories in the vSZ16 model to a level comparable to GS98 or AGSS09 (which agree quite well for non-volatile elements).
There is an additional piece of information, relating to CN fluxes. Borexino \citep{bellini:2012} have presented the most restrictive limit to date on the sum of the $^{13}$N and $^{15}$O fluxes: $7.7\times10^8\,{\rm cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$, at 95\%~C.L. The sum of the $^{13}$N and $^{15}$O fluxes in the vSZ16 solar model is $10.02\times10^8\,{\rm cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$, i.e.\ well over the limit given by Borexino. This primarily occurs not because CN abundances are too high in the vSZ16 composition, but because refractories again push the model towards higher core temperatures, to which the CN fluxes are highly sensitive.
Here, we have compared predictions of SSMs to data. In \citet{villante:2014}, solar neutrino fluxes were used to infer the optimal solar composition by grouping elements together either as volatiles or refractories. All elements in each group were then scaled by the same factor. These two factors were allowed to vary in a constrained manner so that both helioseismic models and solar neutrino data were reproduced. Results in that work, particularly the top right panel of Figure~6, clearly show that the typical 0.3\,dex increase in the abundance of refractories claimed by vSZ16, and used by V16 in analysing solar model predictions, is ruled out at a 6$\sigma$ level approximately.
Furthermore, the direct comparison of solar neutrino fluxes with SSM predictions can be easily performed with the results of Table~\ref{tab:neutrinos}, adding errors in quadrature and using the experimental and theoretical error correlation matrix (see \citealp{serenelli:2011,bergstrom:2016} and references therein). The comparison of neutrino fluxes from model and data excludes the SSM with V16 abundances at more than 5$\sigma$, while
neutrino data can not statistically differentiate the SSM with GS98 and AGSS09met abundances.
\section{Helioseismology} \label{sec:helios}
Next, we consider helioseismic tests of solar models. V16 employ linear solar models to study the response of the sound speed profile, depth of the convective zone and surface helium abundance to changes in the solar composition. We continue to base our results on full SSMs. It has to be made clear that the incorrect conclusions reached by V16 are not due to their use of linear solar models. However, an advantage of our approach here is that we can consider additional helioseismic probes that were not considered when linear solar models were originally developed, and were not taken into account in V16.
\subsection{Sound speed profile.}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=.275]{f1.pdf}
\caption{The difference between the sound speed predicted by solar models and that obtained by inverting helioseismic observations, for models computed with three different compositions. The pink band shows the $1\sigma$ uncertainty due to the solar composition, whereas the blue band shows the total $1\sigma$ uncertainty.\label{fig:sound}}
\end{figure}
In Figure\,\ref{fig:sound} we plot the sound speed profiles for different solar models. The pink band shows 1$\sigma$ uncertainties associated with AGSS09 abundances. The light blue band indicates the combined uncertainty in solar models, statistical uncertainty (from uncertainties in solar frequency measurements) and systematic errors in the inversion procedure \citep{innocenti:1997}. For the latter, we have assumed what the authors refer to as the ``statistical'' approach, where different sources of uncertainty are assumed to be independent. V16 also considered this choice of errors, as well as the most conservative one proposed by \citet{innocenti:1997}. The specific choice of uncertainties is not, however, central to the arguments that follow.
Results for the sound speed shown here are very close to those in V16. The agreement with helioseismic results is not nearly as good as for the GS98 composition, but it is clearly an improvement over AGSS09 at intermediate radii. This is not surprising, because the CNO abundances, O in particular, claimed by vSZ16 are quite close to GS98. This is the main reason that the largest discrepancy between the AGSS09 model and the observed sound speed at around 0.7\,$R_\odot$ is reduced when using the vSZ16 abundances.
Closer to the centre, the sound speed profile in the vSZ16 model starts deviating from the observed speed by a noticeable margin. The sound-speed estimates here are indeed more uncertain, but current estimates of uncertainties are much less than those stated by Degl'Innocenti et al. (1997). For one, estimates of the frequencies of low-degree modes that penetrate the core are much better now than 20 years ago resulting in more precise inversion results \citep[see][]{basu:2009}. Additionally, a reduction of the error estimate, particularly in the convection zone, is a result of the realisation that inversion parameters need to be selected so as to minimise correlated errors between solutions at different radii. This ensures that the solution is not biased, resulting in systematic errors (see \citealt{1996MNRAS.281.1385H,1999MNRAS.309...35R}). Also, there are now other probes of the structure of the innermost solar core that do not rely on inversion methods. These are the frequency separation ratios, which we turn to next, and which allow us to infer that inversion uncertainties from \citet{innocenti:1997} are likely to be overestimations of the actual errors.
\subsection{Small frequency separation ratios}
\cite{rox:2003} have shown that specific combinations of frequencies of low-degree modes can be used to construct helioseismic diagnostics that are largely insensitive to the structure of the outer layers of the Sun. These are particularly sensitive to the structure of the innermost 10--15\% of the solar radius \citep[see the appendix of][]{basu:2007}. This is the region where sound speed inversions become more uncertain, and where the majority of the solar neutrinos are produced. These so-called small frequency separation ratios are given by
\begin{align}
r_{02}(n) = \frac{\nu_{n,0} - \nu_{n-1,2}}{\nu_{n,1}-\nu_{n-1,1}}; \ \ \
r_{13}(n) = \frac{\nu_{n,1} - \nu_{n-1,3}}{\nu_{n+1,0}-\nu_{n,0}},
\end{align}
where $n$ represents the radial order of a mode and the second index is its angular degree.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[scale=.28]{f2.pdf}
\caption{Small frequency separation ratios for three SSMs. Solar data is depicted by points and error bars. The shaded band denotes 1$\sigma$ composition uncertainties associated with solar models, based on the uncertainties of the AGSS09met abundances. Lower panels show residuals, in units of the total combined (model and data) uncertainty for each frequency separation ratio. \label{fig:ratios}}
\end{figure*}
As mentioned above, the large increase in refractories proposed by vSZ16 has the strongest impact on the central regions of the Sun. This is hinted at by the shape of the sound speed profile (Fig.~\ref{fig:sound}), and becomes obvious in the separation ratios which are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ratios}, where results for the SSMs are shown with lines and those for the Sun \citep[based on 4752 days of BiSON data;][]{chaplin:2007,basu:2009} are shown with points and error bars.
The pink shaded area denotes the 1$\sigma$ uncertainties in solar models, based on the solar abundance uncertainties as given by AGSS09. The discrepancy between the vSZ16 solar model and helioseismic data is clearly visible. In fact, it is does a slightly worse job overall than the AGSS09met solar model. The error band includes model errors from both the solar composition and other sources. Using the same model errors for the three SSMs, and assuming for simplicity that errors are uncorrelated, the combined $\chi^2$ of the 34 available points for $r_{02}$ and $r_{13}$ are: 41, 321, and 389 for the GS98, AGSS09met, and vSZ16 solar models. If, instead, only non-composition uncertainties in the models are taken into account, $\chi^2= \{76, 603, 705\}$, in the same ordering. The assumption of uncorrelated errors is of course not correct, but a proper account of correlations, that will be the same for all the models, will not affect the qualitative picture: vSZ16 not only fails at alleviating the solar modelling problem present for AGSS09met, but in fact performs worse.
The conclusion is therefore the same as before: changes in the solar structure induced by a large increase in refractories cannot be compensated by any other variations in the SSM inputs. Only large changes in the composition can bring the vSZ16 model into agreement with data, such that refractories have to be close to those in GS98 and AGSS09.
As a final point, we consider the separation ratios and the sound speed profiles together. The GS98 model predicts both sound speed and separation ratios that are in quite good agreement with seismic data. It is not possible to alter the sound speed in the solar core --- even at the 1$\sigma$ level illustrated by blue shading in Figure\,\ref{fig:sound} --- without simultaneously degrading the agreement with the separation ratios shown in Figure\,\ref{fig:ratios}. This suggests that the estimated uncertainty in the inversion procedure, while probably appropriate in 1997, is now in fact an overestimation of the true uncertainty. Note that separation ratios were introduced only later, and have benefited from determination of frequencies for low-angular degree modes from very long time-series data not available in the 1990s \citep{basu:2009}.
\subsection{Depth of convective zone and surface helium abundance}
The depth of the convective zone ($R_\mathrm{CZ}$) and surface helium fraction ($Y_\mathrm{S}$) are two traditional helioseismic constraints with which AGSS09met SSM also disagree. Helioseismic values and results from our SSM calculations are presented in Table~\ref{tab:seismic}. As before, we assume the same model uncertainties regardless of the solar composition, in order to allow a direct comparison between solar models. V16 have considered these observables using the linear solar models and their changes in central values are consistent with those computed from SSMs. As can be seen in Table~\ref{tab:seismic}, while $R_\mathrm{CZ}$ improves, the resulting $Y_\mathrm{S}$ is in serious conflict with the helioseismically-inferred value. The vSZ16 model leads to more than a 6$\sigma$ discrepancy, up from a 3.6$\sigma$ problem for AGSS09met. V16 claim an agreement at the 1.3$\sigma$ level, but this is only because their quoted error bars are very large. Under the same considerations, AGSS09met would be well within 1$\sigma$ of the helioseismic value.
The formal agreement claimed by V16 is in fact worse than that of AGSS09 when comparable abundance uncertainties are used for both cases. Only by virtue of using large error bars and applying them only to the model based on the vSZ16 composition, do V16 make the formal agreement seem better for $Y_\mathrm{S}$.
The question therefore arises: why is $Y_\mathrm{S}$ so much worse if the sound speed profile (although see Sect.~\ref{sec:combined} for further discussion on this issue) and $R_\mathrm{CZ}$ are both better in the vSZ16 model than in AGSS09met? The simple reason is that the initial helium of the model is much more sensitive to refractories than to volatiles, which is subsequently reflected in $Y_\mathrm{S}$. This is summarised in Table\,1 in \citet{serenelli:2010}, where power-law dependences of helium on different solar model input parameters are given. On the other hand, the sound speed profile and $R_\mathrm{CZ}$ are much more sensitive to the opacity profile around the base of the convective zone, where volatiles, in particular oxygen, play a dominant role. As the volatile abundances in vSZ16 are very close to those in GS98, agreement in these observables should not come as a surprise; the much more abundant refractories, however, lead to a strongly excluded surface helium abundance.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Convective zone radius $R_\mathrm{CZ}$ and surface helium abundance $Y_\mathrm{S}$ for the solar models considered here, along with values inferred from helioseismology.
Solar $R_\mathrm{CZ}$ is from \citet{basu:1997} and $Y_\mathrm{S}$ from \citet{basu:2004}. \label{tab:seismic}}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline
Model/Sun & $R_\mathrm{CZ}$ & $Y_\mathrm{S}$ \\ \hline
GS98 & $0.712\pm0.002$ & $0.243 \pm 0.003$ \\
AGSS09met & $0.723\pm0.002$ & $0.232 \pm 0.003$ \\
vSZ16 & $0.715\pm0.002$ & $0.277 \pm 0.003$ \\
Sun & $0.713\pm0.001$ & $0.2485\pm0.0034$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Combined analysis} \label{sec:combined}
Here we present a more rigorous quantitative analysis of the overall agreement between each of the three solar models and available limits, using $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$ and $\Phi(^7{\rm Be})$ solar neutrinos as well as helioseismic diagnostics. We follow the method presented in \citet{villante:2014}, which accounts for model correlations among different observables. In order to base our conclusions on the same helioseismic observables considered in V16, we do not include in this analysis the frequency separation ratios. Unlike the analysis in \citet{villante:2014}, because we want to test the different solar compositions, we fix the elemental abundances. All non-compositional input parameters (e.g. nuclear cross sections, microscopic diffusion rates, solar age) are allowed to deviate from their central values by introducing the so-called pulls and a penalty function to the $\chi^2$ calculation (see \citealt{villante:2014} for details about the statistical approach). Note that for this reason, when a combination of observables is considered, the resulting $\chi^2$ is not simply the addition of the individual contributions of each observable.
Table~\ref{tab:chi2} presents the results for different sets of observables, taken into account one at a time, as labelled. The row $\{c_i \}$ corresponds to the sound speed profile, for which we consider 30 points distributed across the radiative interior \citep{basu:2009}. The final row in Table~\ref{tab:chi2} corresponds to all observables considered simultaneously. The vSZ16 model is better than AGSS09met only for $R_\mathrm{CZ}$. For all other observables, the performance of the vSZ16 model is worse than AGSS09, in some cases by a large amount.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Goodness of fit of each observable considered here, for each solar model. \label{tab:chi2}}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
& $\chi^2_{\rm GS98}$ & $\chi^2_{\rm AGSS09met}$ & $\chi^2_{\rm vSZ16}$ \\ \hline
$Y_\mathrm{S}$ & 1.4 & 13.5 & 34.2 \\
$R_\mathrm{CZ}$ & 0.15 & 14.8 & 0.60 \\
$Y_\mathrm{S} + R_\mathrm{CZ}$ & 1.6 & 64.8 & 47.3 \\
$\{c_i \}$ & 46.4 & 111.2 & 359.3\vspace{0.5mm}\\
\hline
$\Phi(^8{\rm B})$ & 0.44 & 1.18 & 19.0 \\
$\Phi(^7{\rm Be})$ & 0.28 & 0.45 & 15.0\vspace{0.5mm}\\
\hline
Combined (34 dof) & 65.5 & 186.1 & 489.1 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The sound speed results deserve some comment. Looking at Fig.\,\ref{fig:sound}, it might seem that the vSZ16 model is closer to the Sun than AGSS09met. In Table~\ref{tab:chi2} however, the resulting $\chi^2$ is actually worse for vSZ16. The reason is that variations in non-compositional input parameters, in particular an increase in the diffusion rate, lead to improvements in the sound speed profile of an SSM based on the AGSS09 composition in the region between 0.4 and 0.7\,${\rm R_\odot}$, and thus help to partly reconcile its prediction with observations. On the other hand, for the vSZ16 model this is not possible because varying non-compositional parameters cannot improve the agreement in the region of strongest discrepancy, below 0.4\,${\rm R_\odot}$, brought about by the large abundance of refractories.
The conflicts with observation that arise in an SSM based on the vSZ16 composition are in fact worse than the problem this solar model was supposed to cure, i.e. the discrepancy between helioseismic data and SSMs based on low-Z solar compositions such as that from AGSS09. This alone should be a good indication that the vSZ16 composition is unlikely to be representative of that in the solar interior. The next section gives even more direct reasons why the vSZ16 abundances cannot be representative of the composition of the solar photosphere.
\section{Abundances from the solar wind} \label{sec:compo}
The results and essentially all conclusions of \citet{v16} rest on the correctness of a quite non-standard set of solar abundances, originating from solar wind measurements \cite{vS10,vS16}.
These are based on \textit{in situ} analysis of ions in the wind emerging from polar coronal holes (PCHs). Solar activity predominantly affects the corona and wind at low latitudes, leaving both the rate and composition of the wind emerging from polar regions approximately constant over time. The wind from PCHs is therefore understood to be indicative of the underlying steady state of mass emission from the Sun. \cite{vS10} and \cite{vS16} claim that this makes the wind from PCHs the least affected by fractionation effects, which are known to impact the relative abundances of different nuclei in other solar wind samples. This supposedly allows the derivation of photospheric abundances from samples of the solar wind originating in PCHs. In fact, using these abundances to construct SSMs implicitly assumes they match photospheric values, i.e. that there is no fractionation at all. We show below that this assumption is incorrect.
\subsection{Spectroscopy and astrophysics}
Before looking at the solar wind measurements themselves, it is worth thinking about the basic plausibility of the solar composition advocated by \cite{vS16}, from the spectroscopic and astrophysical perspectives. The PCH-based CNO abundances in Table \ref{tab:compo} are indeed uniformly higher than AGSS09, but in rough agreement with GS98 values. The abundances of refractory elements (Mg, Si, S and Fe) are however a full 0.3\,dex higher in general than AGSS09. This makes them far higher than any spectroscopically-determined abundances in over half a century, including the pioneering works of \citet{Goldberg60}, \citet{RossAller} and \citet{AG89} -- let alone the solar abundances presented by GS98, AGSS09, \citet{Lodders09} or \citet{caffau:2011}. This includes determinations based on 1D and 3D model atmospheres, with and without corrections for departures from local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE), and with old and new atomic data. Taken as presented by \citet{vS16}, the abundances of refractory elements cannot be reconciled with the results of any spectroscopic determination, regardless of its sophistication.
For spectroscopic analysis to be this mistaken on the refractory abundances, one or both of the following exceptionally unlikely scenarios would have to be true:\begin{enumerate}
\item All oscillator strengths measured by dedicated atomic physics laboratories around the world for Si, S and Fe are systematically overestimated by about a factor of 2, as are the theoretical values computed for Mg. Each experimental atomic physics group does its work independently, employing sophisticated and accurate modern techniques like laser-induced fluorescence for determining the absolute scales of their transition probabilities, and cross-checks the results with entirely different techniques. This produces errors better than 5\% in many cases.
\item The basic underlying theoretical or methodological framework of stellar atmospheres is somehow wrong, due to something systematically amiss in all calculations of radiative transfer or atmospheric modelling --- not merely in the specific application of 3D atmospheric models and line formation modelling. This would invalidate the entire field of stellar atmospheres, and stellar abundance analysis generally. This would require discarding an enormous number of bedrock astrophysical results, with wide-ranging and highly implausible implications for the mutual consistency of stellar nucleosynthesis, stellar evolution, Galactic chemical evolution and even cosmology.
\end{enumerate}
It is also worth remembering that the AGSS09 composition is consistent with the Sun being an otherwise unremarkable Galactic thin-disk G dwarf, showing good agreement with expected abundance patterns in the nearby neighbourhood. These range from measurements of abundances in so-called `solar twins' \citep{Melendez09,Ramirez09}, to comparisons with young B-type stars \citep{Nieva11,Nieva12}, local H\,\textsc{ii} regions \citep{Esteban04,Esteban05} and the local interstellar medium \citep{Henry10}. In particular, the local `cosmic abundance standard' $Z=0.014\pm0.002$ \citep{Nieva12}, is in agreement with the AGSS09 solar metallicity $Z=0.0134$, and incompatible with the \citeauthor{vS16} value of $Z=0.0196$. Note that B-type stars have radiative atmospheres, so systematic uncertainties that might be associated with near-surface convection in the solar atmosphere do not play any role.
\subsection{Solar wind}
\label{abundances}
Spectroscopic and astrophysical considerations strongly suggest that the composition presented by \citet{vS16} should not be trusted as representative of the photosphere or the bulk Sun. Where then is the neglected systematic error (or errors) in the solar wind analysis? There appear to be two distinct but related sources. The first is apparent fractionation in the PCH sample relative to the photosphere, and the second is the normalisation scale and associated uncertainties used by \cite{vS16} to compare their abundances to the photosphere.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f3.pdf}
\caption{The ratio of solar abundances advocated by \citet[][vSZ16]{vS16} and \citet[][AGSS09]{agss09}. The trend with first ionisation potential indicates that despite being based on wind originating from polar coronal holes, the vSZ16 abudances are affected by fractionation arising from the FIP effect. \label{fig:abun}}
\end{figure}
The first ionisation potential (FIP) effect is well known to affect the relative abundances of elements in the solar wind, enhancing the abundances of elements with low ionisation potentials, and reducing those with higher ionisation thresholds \citep{Laming15}. This effect is thought to be reduced in PCH outflows compared to equatorial winds, in part because the composition is known to vary with activity in the latter \citep{Z02}. However, the stability of the composition of the solar wind from PCHs is not in and of itself an indication that the wind is unfractionated. Indeed, Fig.\,\ref{fig:abun} shows that the abundance discrepancy between AGSS09 and vSZ16 exhibits a strong trend with the first ionisation potential of the elements considered. This is clear indication that the PCH abundances are still fractionated, even if less so than other solar wind samples --- a problem also noticed by \citet{Laming15}.
It is also notable from Fig.\,\ref{fig:abun} that the FIP effect can \textit{increase or decrease} the abundance of an element, depending on whether it possesses a first ionisation potential greater or smaller than the reference element used for setting the abundance scale. In this case that is hydrogen, so helium and neon are depleted relative to the true photospheric values, whereas other elements are enhanced. This explains the implausibly high refractory abundances of vSZ16, and falsifies their claim that their value of $Z$ is a lower bound because unquantified fractionation would only decrease $Z$.
Indeed, H is not the logical reference element to choose when compiling abundances from the solar wind. All the abundances of vSZ16 are based on measurements of elemental ratios with respect to O, set to the usual spectroscopic hydrogen scale using a single measurement of H/O = $1500\pm300$ (corresponding to $\log \epsilon_{\rm O} =8.82^{+0.10}_{-0.08}$) by \citet{vS10}.\footnote{We note that the more recent analysis of the solar wind composition by \citet{2013ApJ...768...94L} instead found a most probable value of $\log \epsilon_{\rm O} =8.68$ for the fast solar wind.} \citet{vS16} neglected to include the systematic uncertainty of the H/O normalisation in their adopted abundances, drastically reducing the error budget in comparison to the correct calculation. Propagating the error from the normalisation and combining it in quadrature with the errors on the individual X/O ratios, the uncertainties on the abundances of vSZ16 can be seen to typically exceed 0.1\,dex, as shown in Table\ \ref{tab:compo}. For CNO, the coarse abundances obtainable from the solar wind are in fact consistent with the more precise values in AGSS09. This is in large part due to the similarity of the ionisation potentials of H, C, N and O; the erroneous nature of the vSZ16 refractory abundances persists. It is surprising that \cite{vS16} failed to include this important systematic uncertainty, yet somehow saw fit to claim that AGSS09 did not include systematic errors --- despite the fact that careful quantification and inclusion of systematic errors from non-LTE, the mean temperature structure of the adopted models, and the impact of 3D effects, was one of the key advances highlighted in AGSS09.
A less error-prone way to present solar wind abundances would be to choose O as the common element of comparison, removing any systematic uncertainty due to the absolute scale, in a similar way that Si is chosen for comparison with CI chondritic meteorites. This would of course also substantially reduce the central value of the overall metallicity implied by the measurements of vSZ16, and completely change the resulting solar models of \citet{v16}. Indeed, given the trend in Fig.\ \ref{fig:abun}, there is no good reason to think that the H/O ratio of \citet{vS10} is free of additional unquantified fractionation effects anyway. It is quite possible that even for elements with common first ionisation potentials, some additional effect (sub-dominant to the FIP but visible nonetheless) is causing fractionation at a level beyond the uncertainty in the photospheric abundances. This is unsurprising really, given that in spite of much theoretical work the FIP is still poorly understood -- especially its quantitative impact on elemental abundances. Higher ionisation potentials must surely play a role as well, given that the \textit{in situ} measurements involve higher charged states of each species.
\section{Summary}
We have shown that solar models constructed from the chemical composition advocated by \citet{vS16} and \citet{v16} provide vastly worse fits to the observed neutrino fluxes, sound speed profile and surface helium fraction of the Sun compared to those constructed from the canonical AGSS09 mixture that gave rise to the solar modelling problem; only the radius of the convective zone is improved. We have also demonstrated that the composition of \citet{vS16} is subject to large, unquantified normalisation and fractionation errors, and can be safely ruled out on spectroscopic and astrophysical grounds. The solar modelling problem persists: accommodating helioseismology data with the best determined solar abundances and the best standard solar models is still an unsolved problem.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
A.S. is partially supported by grants ESP2014-56003-R and ESP2015-66134-R (MINECO) and 2014-SGR-1458 (Generalitat de Catalunya). P.S. is supported by STFC (ST/K00414X/1 and ST/N000838/1). The work of F.L.V. is supported by the Italian Ministero dell'Istruzione, Universit\`a e Ricerca (MIUR) and Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN) through the ``Theoretical Astroparticle Physics'' research projects. S.B. acknowledges partial support from NSF grant AST-1514676 and NASA grant NNX13AE70G. C.P.G. is supported by Generalitat Valencia Prometeo Grant II/2014/050, by the Spanish Grant FPA2014-57816-P of MINECO and by PITN- GA-2011-289442-INVISIBLES.
|
\section{Introduction}
Although the global \emph{total} energy-momentum is well defined (for spaces with suitable asymptotic regions), for any gravitating system --- and hence for all real \emph{physical} systems --- the localization of energy-momentum is still an outstanding fundamental problem.~\cite{Sza09, Chen:2015vya} Unlike all matter and other interaction fields, the gravitational field itself has \emph{no} proper energy-momentum density. In view of the fact that energy-momentum is conserved, and that sources \emph{exchange} energy-momentum \emph{locally} with the gravitational field, one expects some kind of ``local description'' of the energy-momentum density of gravity itself. But all attempts at constructing such an expression led only to reference frame dependent quantities, generally referred to as \emph{pseudotensors}.~\cite{Chang:1998wj} Physically this can be understood as a consequence of \emph{Einstein's equivalence principle}: gravity cannot be detected at a point. The energy-momentum of gravity --- and thus for all physical systems is inherently \emph{non-local}. The modern idea is \emph{quasi-local}: energy-momentum is associated with a closed surface bounding a region.~\cite{Penrose82}
\section{Covariant Hamiltonian Formalism}
The \emph{first order} Lagrangian~\cite{Kuchar} for an \emph{$f$-form field $\varphi$} and its \emph{conjugate momentum $p$} is given by
\begin{equation}
{\cal L} = \mathcal{L}(d\varphi; \varphi, p) = d \varphi \wedge p - \Lambda(\varphi, p). \label{1st Lagrangian}
\end{equation}
The variation (with respect to $\varphi$ and $p$ independently)
\begin{equation}
\delta {\cal L} = d(\delta \varphi \wedge p) + \delta \varphi \wedge \frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta \varphi} + \frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta p} \wedge \delta p
\end{equation}
gives the equations of motion, with $\varsigma := (-1)^f$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta p} := d \varphi - \partial_p \Lambda = 0, \qquad \frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta \varphi} := - \varsigma d p - \partial_\varphi \Lambda = 0.
\end{equation}
Diffeomorphism invariance (in terms of the Lie derivative $\pounds_N = d i_N + i_N d$) leads an identity for \emph{any vector $N$}
\begin{equation}
d i_N {\cal L} \equiv \pounds_N {\cal L} \equiv d( \pounds_N \varphi \wedge p) + \pounds_N \varphi \wedge \frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta \varphi} + \frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta p} \wedge \pounds_N p.
\end{equation}
From this one gets a conserved ``translational current'' 3-form:
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}(N) := \pounds_N \varphi \wedge p - i_N {\cal L}, \qquad - d {\cal H}(N) \equiv \pounds_N \varphi \wedge \frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta \varphi} + \frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta p} \wedge \pounds_N p.
\end{equation}
Note that ${\cal H}(N)$ is not unique:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}' = \mathcal{H} + d \mathcal{B}' \quad \Rightarrow \quad d \mathcal{H} = d \mathcal{H}'.
\end{equation}
Furthermore it can be written in the form, ${\cal H}(N) = N^\mu {\cal H}_\mu + d {\cal B}(N)$ then
\begin{eqnarray}
&& d{\cal H}(N) = d [ N^\mu {\cal H}_\mu + d {\cal B}(N) ] \equiv d N^\mu \wedge {\cal H}_\mu + N^\mu d {\cal H}_\mu
\\
\Rightarrow && {\cal H}_\mu \; \textrm{vanishes ``on shell''}. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Hence for gravitating systems the Noether translational ``charge'' --- \emph{energy-momentum} --- is \emph{quasi-local}, it is given by the integral of the boundary term, ${\cal B}(N)$. But this boundary term can be completely modified to any value. However, the Hamiltonian approach tames the ambiguity. Quasi-local quantities are determined only by the surface integral
\begin{equation}
E(N) = \int_\Sigma {\cal H}(N) = \int_\Sigma \left[ N^\mu {\cal H}_\mu + d {\cal B}(N) \right] = \oint_{\partial\Sigma} {\cal B}(N).
\end{equation}
The two parts of the Hamiltonian have distinct roles: The 3-form part $N^\mu \mathcal{H}_\mu$ generates the equations of motion. As mentioned, for diffeomorphic invariant theories it has vanishing value. The Hamiltonian generally also includes a boundary term ${\cal B}(N)$: (i) it determines the values of the quasi-local quantities, and (ii) it determines the boundary conditions.~\cite{Chen:1994qg, Chen:1998aw}
\subsection{Quasi-local Quantities}
The Hamiltonian boundary terms determines the values of the quasi-local quantities:
\begin{itemize}
\item Energy is given by a suitable \emph{timelike} displacement;
\item Linear momentum is obtained from a \emph{spatial} translation;
\item Angular momentum from a suitable \emph{rotational} displacement;
\item A spacetime displacement which is asymptotically a \emph{boost} will give the center-of-mass moment.
\end{itemize}
Our Noether analysis has revealed that ${\cal B}(N)$ can be adjusted, changing the conserved value to a new value. However the variational principle contains an additional (largely overlooked) feature which distinguishes all of these choices. The boundary variation principle, i.e.\ the boundary term in the variation, tells us what to hold fixed on the boundary --- it determines the \emph{boundary conditions}.~\cite{Chang:1998wj}
The different Hamiltonian boundary terms are each associated with distinct boundary conditions. As in thermodynamics or electrostatics there are various ``energies'' which correspond to how the system interacts with the outside through its boundary. In general (in particular for gravity) it is necessary (in order to guarantee functional differentiability of the Hamiltonian on the phase space with the desired boundary conditions) to adjust the boundary term ${\cal B}(N) = i_N \varphi \wedge p$ which is naturally inherited from the Lagrangian~\eqref{1st Lagrangian}. The variation of the Hamiltonian implies
\begin{equation}
\delta {\cal H}(N) \equiv - \delta \varphi \wedge \pounds_N p + \pounds_N \varphi \wedge \delta p + d i_N(\delta \varphi \wedge p) - i_N \left( \delta \varphi \wedge \frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta \varphi} + \frac{\delta {\cal L}}{\delta p} \wedge \delta p \right).
\end{equation}
There is a freedom for modifying the boundary term ${\cal B}(N) \to {\cal B}'(N)$. Moreover, a reference configuration, $\bar\varphi$ and $\bar p$, (which determines the ground state) is essential especially for gravity, in particular to allow the desired phase space asymptotics.
With $\Delta \varphi := \varphi - \bar\varphi$, $\Delta p := p - \bar p$, we found two boundary choices (essentially \emph{Dirichlet} and \emph{Neumann}) which have the indicated covariant boundary terms in $\delta{\cal H}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal B}_{\varphi} &=& i_N \varphi \wedge \Delta p - \varsigma \Delta \varphi \wedge i_N \bar p \quad \Longrightarrow \quad i_N (\delta \varphi \wedge \Delta p),
\\
{\cal B}_{p} &=& i_N \bar \varphi \wedge \Delta p - \varsigma \Delta \varphi \wedge i_N p \quad \Longrightarrow \; - i_N (\Delta \varphi \wedge \delta p).
\end{eqnarray}
We also found two other physical interesting choices:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal B}_{\mathrm{dynamics}} &=& i_N \bar\varphi \wedge \Delta p - \varsigma \Delta \varphi \wedge i_N \bar p \quad \Longrightarrow \quad \varsigma \delta \varphi \wedge i_N \Delta p - i_N \Delta \varphi \wedge \delta p,
\\
{\cal B}_{\mathrm{constraint}} &=& i_N \varphi \wedge \Delta p - \varsigma \Delta \varphi \wedge i_N p \quad \Longrightarrow \quad i_N \delta \varphi \wedge \Delta p - \varsigma \Delta \varphi \wedge i_N \delta p.
\end{eqnarray}
Let us look at the following two applications.
\subsection{Applications: Electromagnetism and General Relativity}
The first order Lagrangian 4-form for the source free $U(1)$ gauge field one-form $A$ and its conjugate momentum $H$ is
\begin{equation}
{\cal L}_{\mathrm{EM}} = d A \wedge H - \frac{1}{2} {}^\star\! H \wedge H.
\end{equation}
The pair of first order equations are
\begin{equation}
d H = 0, \qquad d A - {}^\star\! H = 0.
\end{equation}
These are just the vacuum Maxwell equations with ${}^\star\! H = F:= dA$; hence $H = - {}^\star\! F$ and $d {}^\star\! F = 0$. The natural reference in electromagnetism is $\bar A = 0, \; \bar H = 0$. The best boundary choice is ${\cal B}_{\rm dynamics}$, which vanishes for this reference choice.
The first order Lagrangian for Einstein's (vacuum) gravity theory is
\begin{equation}
{\cal L}_{\rm GR} = R^\alpha{}_\beta \wedge \eta_\alpha{}^\beta,
\end{equation}
where the curvature 2-form is $R^\alpha{}_\beta := d \Gamma^\alpha{}_\beta + \Gamma^\alpha{}_\gamma \wedge \Gamma^\gamma{}_\beta$, and the dual basis 2-form is $\eta^{\alpha\beta} := *(\vartheta^\alpha \wedge \vartheta^\beta)$. For gravity itself, two different choices of boundary condition correspond to the quasi-local expressions which asymptotically give (a) the ADM energy, (b) the Bondi energy and, moreover, (c) the Bondi flux: the celebrated outgoing flux plus an incoming flux.~\cite{Chen:2005hwa} Our general formalism with $\varphi \to \Gamma^\alpha{}_\beta$ and $p \to \eta_\alpha{}^\beta$ gives 4 quasi-local expressions.
There is a distinguished energy expression with a very desirable property: it corresponds to imposing boundary conditions on a \emph{manifestly covariant object}:
\begin{equation}
{\cal B}_\vartheta({\bf N}) := \frac1{16 \pi} \left( \Delta \Gamma^\alpha{}_\beta \wedge i_N \eta_\alpha{}^\beta + {\bar D}^\alpha N^\beta \Delta \eta_{\alpha\beta} \right).
\end{equation}
The associated energy flux expression is
\begin{equation}
\pounds_N {\cal H}_{\vartheta} \simeq d i_N \left( \Delta \Gamma^{\alpha\beta} \wedge \pounds_N \eta_{\alpha\beta} \right),
\end{equation}
and the natural reference in gravity for the asymptotic flat spacetime is the Minkowski spacetime:
\begin{equation}
\bar g_{\mu\nu} = \mathrm{diag} (-1, +1, +1, +1).
\end{equation}
\section{Reference Choice}
Now let us turn to how to select the reference; effectively one should embed the 2-boundary into Minkowski space.~\cite{Wu:2012mi, Liu:2011jha}
In a neighborhood of the desired spacelike boundary 2-surface $S$, 4 smooth functions $y^i = y^i(x^\mu), \; i = 0, 1, 2, 3$ with $dy^0 \wedge dy^1 \wedge dy^2 \wedge dy^3 \ne 0$ define a Minkowski reference:
\begin{equation}
\bar g = -(dy^0)^2 + (dy^1)^2 + (dy^2)^2 + (dy^3)^2.
\end{equation}
The reference connection is
\begin{equation}
\bar \Gamma^\alpha{}_\beta = x^\alpha{}_i ( \bar\Gamma^i{}_j y^j{}_\beta + dy^i{}_\beta ) = x^\alpha{}_i dy^i{}_\beta,
\end{equation}
where $dy^i = y^i{}_\alpha dx^\alpha$ and $dx^\alpha = x^\alpha{}_j dy^j$ with vanishing Minkowski reference connection coefficients. $N^\mu$ is a \emph{translational Killing field} of the Minkowski reference, then the second quasi-local term vanishes. Our quasi-local expression then takes the form
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal B}(N) = N^k x^\mu{}_k (\Gamma^\alpha{}_\beta - x^\alpha{}_j \, dy^j{}_\beta) \wedge \eta_{\mu\alpha}{}^\beta.
\end{equation}
To determine the reference choice $y^{i}{}_{\mu}$ in terms of quasi-spherical foliation adapted coordinates $t, r, \theta, \phi$, the isometric matching on the 2-surface implies
\begin{equation}
g_{AB} = \bar g_{AB} = \bar g_{ij} y^i_A y^j_B = - y^0_A y^0_B + \delta_{ab} y^a_A y^b_B, \quad a, b = 1, 2, 3; \; A, B = 2, 3 = \theta, \phi,
\end{equation}
where the reference metric on the dynamical space has the components $\bar g_{\mu\nu} = \bar g_{ij} y^i{}_\mu y^j{}_\nu$. From a classic closed 2-surface into $\mathbb R^3$ embedding theorem, we expect that---as long as one restricts $S$ and $y^0(x^A)$ such that on $S$
\begin{equation}
g_{AB}' := g_{AB} + y^0_A y^0_B
\end{equation}
is convex---one can prove that there is a unique isometric embedding. (But, unfortunately, there is no explicit formula.)
\subsection{4D Isometric Matching}
Complete 4D isometric matching on $S$ has 10 constraints:~\cite{Liu:2011jha}
\begin{equation}
g_{\mu\nu}|_S = \bar g_{\mu\nu}|_S = \bar g_{ij} y^i{}_\mu y^j{}_\nu|_S.
\end{equation}
There are 12 embedding functions on the constant $t, r$ 2-surface:
\begin{equation}
y^i (\Rightarrow y^i_\theta, y^i_\phi), \quad y^i_t, \quad y^i_r.
\end{equation}
The 10 constraints split into 3 for the already discussed 2D isometric matching: $g_{\theta\theta}, g_{\theta\varphi}, g_{\varphi\varphi}$ which constrain the 4 $y^i$; 3 normal bundle algebraic quadratic expressions: $g_{tt}, g_{tr}, g_{rr}$; and 4 mixed linear algebraic expressions: $g_{t\theta}, g_{t\varphi}, g_{r\theta}, g_{r\varphi}$. The 2D isometric matching can be regarded as a given $y^0$ uniquely determining $y^1,y^2,y^3$ on $S$. The remaining 7 algebraic equations can be regarded as finding all the other embedding variables in terms of $y^i$ and $y^0{}_r$ on $S$. Thus one can take $y^0,y^0{}_r$ as the embedding control variables. Geometrically $y^0{}_r$ controls a boost in the plane normal to $S$.
\subsection{An Optimal Choice}
One can regard the value of the boundary term as a measure of the difference between the dynamical boundary values and the reference boundary values. However, how to find the ``best matched'' reference geometry? Because 12 embedding variables are subject to 10 isometric conditions, one will obtain the best matched reference geometry as long as one can obtain the two unknown variables.~\cite{Chen:2009zd, Wu:2011wk, Sun:2013ika}
For a given $S$ there are 2 different quantities which can be considered: $m^2 = - \bar g{}^{ij} p_i p_j$ and $E(N, S)$. For the latter there are 2 different ways to fix $N$. The critical points are distinguished: (1) The critical points of $m^2$. This determines the reference up to Poincar\'e transformations. (2) The critical points of $E(\partial_T, S)$. (If $m^2 > 0$, this may equivalent to (1).) (3) The critical points of $E(N, S)$ for a given dynamical vector field $N$. (Afterward one could find the extreme choice of $N$.)
The first two approaches lead to quasi-local quantities associated with $S$, the third alternative gives a quasi-local energy associated with an observer.~\cite{Nester:2012zi, Sun:2015mxg} Based on some physical and practical computational arguments, it is reasonable to expect a unique solution.
For our quasi-local values for axisymmetric solutions including Kerr see Ref.~\refcite{Sun:2013ika}.
\section{Summary}
For any gravitating system --- and hence for all \emph{physical} systems --- the \emph{localization} of energy-momentum is an outstanding problem. We've displayed the relation between covariant Hamiltonian boundary term and the quasi-local quantities.
For gravitating systems, we have obtained four quasi-local energy-momentum expressions; each is associated with a physically distinct, and geometrically clear, boundary condition. With the ``\emph{best matched}'' reference, we have a satisfactory way of fixing the Hamiltonian boundary term quasi-locally for locally Poincar\'e gauge invariant gravity including GR. This in particular gives a way of resolving the ambiguities in determining the quasi-local energy-momentum of classical physical systems.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
C.M.C. was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of the R.O.C. under the grant MOST 102-2112-M-008-015-MY3.
|
\section{Introduction and statement of the results}
\label{Sec:Intro}
This paper is devoted to certain subclasses of real functions defined on $(0,\infty).$ Unless otherwise explicitly stated, all functions will be supposed of this kind in the sequel. A non-negative function $f$ is called a Stieltjes function ($f\in\mathcal{S}$ for short) if there exists $a \ge 0$ and a non-negative measure $\mu(dt)$ on $[0,\infty)$ integrating $(1+ t)^{-1}$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{SJ}
f(x)\; =\; a\; +\; \int_0^\infty \frac{1}{x+t}\;\mu(dt).
\end{equation}
Introduced by Stieltjes for the purposes of the moment problem, such functions are important for questions related to potential theory and infinite divisibility - see \cite{SSV} and the references therein for a recent account, among other topics. Notice that in many instances, it is useful to extend Stieltjes functions to the whole cut plane $\mathbb{C}\backslash \mathbb{R}^-$. In this paper however, we will stay within the realm of functions of one real variable.
It is plain by dominated convergence that a function $f\in\mathcal{S}$ is also completely monotone ($f\in\mathcal{CM}$ for short), in other words $f$ is smooth and
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{CM}
(-1)^{n}f^{(n)}\, \ge\, 0
\end{eqnarray}
for all $n\ge 0$ where, here and throughout, $f^{(n)}$ stands for the $n-$th derivative of $f.$ Recall from Bernstein's theorem - see e.g. Theorem 1.4 in \cite{SSV} - that $f\in\mathcal{CM}$ if and only if there exists a non-negative measure $\mu (dt)$ on $[0,\infty)$ (the so-called Bernstein measure) such that
$$f(x)\; =\; \int_0^\infty e^{-xt}\, \mu(dt).$$
It is also easy to see that if $f\in\mathcal{S},$ then $x f$ is a Bernstein function ($f\in\mathcal{B}$ for short), that is a non-negative function whose derivative is completely monotone - see again \cite{SSV} for an account. More generally, it was shown by Widder - see Theorem 10.1 in \cite{W0} - that $f\in\mathcal{S}$ if and only if $f$ is smooth and
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Sti0}
(x^n f)^{(n)}\,\in\,\mathcal{CM} \quad \forall\,n\ge 0.
\end{eqnarray}
The proof of this result was recently simplified in \cite{S}, in the broader framework of generalized Stieltjes transforms. Another theorem by Widder - see Theorem 12.5 in \cite{W1} or Theorem 18b p. 366 in \cite{W} - states that a non-negative function $f$ is in $\mathcal{S}$ if and only if it is smooth and such that
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Sti1} (-1)^{n-1}(x^n f)^{(2n-1)}\; \ge\; 0\quad\forall\, n\ge 1.
\end{eqnarray}
Notice that the formal equivalence between (\ref{Sti0}) and (\ref{Sti1}), which is partly explained in Lemma 12.52 of \cite{W1}, is not immediate.
Finite type versions of (\ref{CM}) and (\ref{Sti0}) have been studied in the literature. Following \cite{Wi}, we will say that a function $f$ is $k-$monotone ($f\in\mathcal{M}_k$ for short) for some $k\ge 2$ if it is in $\mathcal{C}^{k-2}$ and such that $(-1)^{n}f^{(n)}$ is non-negative, non-increasing and convex for $n = 0,\ldots, k-2$. As in \cite{Wi}, we will say that $f\in\mathcal{M}_1$ if $f$ is non-negative and non-increasing. These functions have been characterized in Theorem 1 in \cite{Wi} - see also Lemma 17.4.1 p. 306 in \cite{LB97}, which states that $f\in\mathcal{M}_k$ if and only if there exists a non-negative measure $\mu_k (dt)$ such that
$$f(x)\; =\; \int_0^\infty \left( 1-\frac{xt}{k}\right)_{\! +}^{\! k-1}\!\! \mu_k(dt).$$
Notice that this result recovers Bernstein's theorem by letting $k\to \infty,$ identifying the exponential kernel $e^{-xt}$ at the limit of the integrand, and applying Helly's selection principle to the sequence $\{\mu_k\}$ - see the remark p. 310 in \cite{LB97} for details. More recently, in \cite{P}, it was shown that a non-negative function $f$ satisfies (\ref{Sti0}) for $n=1,\ldots, k$ if and only if it is in $\mathcal{CM}$ and its Bernstein measure has a $k-$monotone density satisfying a certain integrability property - see Theorem 1.3 therein. This result also retrieves Theorem 10.1 in \cite{W0} by the same selection argument - see Corollary 1.5 therein.\\
In this paper, we will obtain a finite type version of (\ref{Sti1}). This motivates the following definition, which is inspired by \cite{W1} and \cite{Wi}. Here and throughout, we will consider derivatives in the measure sense. With this convention, the first derivative of a convex function on $(0,\infty)$ is its right derivative, whereas its second derivative is a non-negative measure.
\begin{definition}
\label{Stn}
For $k\ge 1,$ a non-negative function $f$ satisfying {\em (\ref{Sti1})} for $n = 1,\ldots, k$ is said to be a $k-$Stieltjes function ($f\in\mathcal{S}_k$ for short).
\end{definition}
Notice that for $k\ge 2,$ a function $f\in\mathcal{S}_k$ is of class $\mathcal{C}^{2k-3}$ with $(-1)^{k-1} (x^k f)^{(2k-3)}$ a convex function. Observe also that $k$-Stieltjes functions need not even for $n=0$ satisfy (\ref{Sti0}), since the condition is on a finite number of derivatives only. On the other hand, it will be shown in Proposition \ref{SkMk} below that if $f\in\mathcal{S}_k$ for some $k\ge 2,$ then $(xf)'\in\mathcal{M}_{k-1}.$ It is clear that $\{\mathcal{S}_k\}$ is a decreasing family with $\mathcal{S}_k\downarrow\mathcal{S}.$ To state our results, we need some further notation. Introduce the following family of alternating sign polynomials
$$P_k(x)\; =\; \sum_{n=0}^k \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k\\ n+k \end{array}\!\!\!\right) (-x)^{n}.$$
Observe that $P_k(x)$ is the polynomial part of the finite Laurent series $(1-x)^k(1-x^{-1})^k.$ Set ${\hat P}_k = P_k -P_k(0)$ and consider the following family of non-negative kernels on $(0,\infty)\times[0,\infty):$
$$\Phi_k(x, t)\; =\; \frac{1}{x}\left( P_k(t x^{-1}) {\bf 1}_{\{x\ge t\}}\,-\, {\hat P}_k(x t^{-1}) {\bf 1}_{\{x<t\}}\right).$$
Observe that $x\Phi_k(x, 0) = P_k(0) = \binom{2k}{k}$ and that $x\Phi_0(x, t) = {\bf 1}_{\{x\ge t\}}.$ The fact that the kernels $\Phi_k(x,t)$ are everywhere non-negative is a direct consequence of the decreasing character of the coefficients of $P_k,$ which implies $P_k(y)\ge 0$ and ${\hat P}_k(y) \le 0$ for all $y\in[0,1].$ More generally, it will be proved in Proposition 1 below that for every $k\ge 2$ and $t > 0,$ the functions $x\mapsto \Phi_{k-1}(x,t)$ belong to $\mathcal{S}_k.$ \\
Our first main result is the following characterization.
\begin{theorem}
\label{Widderlike}
For $k\ge 2,$ one has $f\in\mathcal{S}_k$ if and only if there exists $a_k\ge 0$ and a non-negative measure $\mu_k(dt)$ on $[0,\infty)$ integrating $(1 + t)^{-1}$ such that
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Wid}
f(x)\; =\; a_k\, +\, \int_0^\infty\! \Phi_{k-1} (x,t)\, \mu_k(dt).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{theorem}
Recall that in the case $k=1,$ the condition $f\in\mathcal{S}_1$ means that $x f$ is non-decreasing and we hence have the obvious representation
$$f(x)\; =\; \frac{1}{x} \int_0^x \mu_1(dt)\; =\; \int_0^\infty\! \Phi_0 (x,t)\, \mu_1(dt)$$
for some non-negative measure $\mu_1$ on $[0,\infty)$ which, however, might not integrate $(1 + t)^{-1}.$ Observe also that
\begin{equation}
\label{Stic}
\binom {2k}{k}^{-1} \Phi_k(x, t)\; \longrightarrow\; \frac{1}{x+t}
\end{equation}
as $k\to \infty$ for all $x>0$ and $t\ge 0,$ so that again, applying Helly's selection principle one retrieves Widder's characterization of $\mathcal{S}$ given in (\ref{Sti1}). It is plain that the sets $\mathcal{S}_k$ are convex cones of functions, and the above result together with the argument of Proposition 1 in \cite{H} shows that they are closed with respect to pointwise limits. It is not clear whether these closed convex cones have abstract extensions leading to interesting invariant properties, as is the case for $\mathcal{S}$ - see \cite{H, Be}. Recall that the extension of $\mathcal{S}$ to $\mathbb{C}\backslash \mathbb{R}^-$ implies a complex inversion formula which is valid when $\mu$ in (\ref{SJ}) has a density, and which is well-known as the Perron-Stieltjes inversion formula - see e.g. Theorem 7b p. 340 in \cite{W}. In our finite type framework there is also an inversion formula for $\mu_k$, which has a real-variable character and is more directly connected to the kernels $\Phi_k$ and the conditions (\ref{Sti1}) - see Remark \ref{Inv} below. \\
The proof of the characterization of $\mathcal{S}$ by the set of conditions (\ref{Sti1}), which is more or less the topic of the whole Chapter 8 in \cite{W}, is lenghty. It hinges on the construction of a certain jumping operator connected to the Perron-Stieltjes inversion formula. Our proof goes partly along Widder's lines, but the main difference is that it relies on the {\em non-smoothness} of the kernels $\Phi_k.$ More precisely, applying the $k-$th condition (\ref{Sti1}) to $\Phi_{k-1}$ yields a Dirac mass - see Remark \ref{Expl}. This observation, which explains why the truncated Laurent series $\Phi_k$ are the relevant approximations of the Stieltjes kernel in our context, allows us to find the measure $\mu_k$ in a constructive way, starting from the convexity assumption in Definition 1 (b) and then integrating. The integration procedure works and gives the right growth order for $\mu_k,$ because the assumption $f\in\mathcal{S}_k$ forces the function $f$ to have a certain boundary behaviour at zero - see Proposition \ref{SkMk}. Overall, the problem that we consider in this paper is more complicated than the problems in \cite{P, S, W} because of its non-smooth character, and our arguments are also more intricate. \\
As mentioned before, Stieltjes functions appear in questions related to infinite divisibility. This is mainly due to the aforementioned property that $f\in\mathcal{S}\Rightarrow xf\in\mathcal{B}$ and we refer e.g. to Chapters 7 and 8 in \cite{SSV} for more on this topic. A further instance is the following notion, introduced by Thorin and the first author in the late 1970's: a function $f$ is said to be hyperbolically completely monotone ($f\in\mathcal{HCM}$ for short) if the function $f(uv)f(uv^{-1})$ is completely monotone in the variable $w = v +v^{-1},$ for every $u > 0.$ This apparently technical definition is actually quite robust, and a remarkable feature of the class $\mathcal{HCM}$ is that such functions appear both as Laplace transforms and densities of infinitely divisible distributions. It turns out that functions in $\mathcal{HCM}$ are pointwise limits of functions of the type
$$C x^{\beta-1}\prod_{i=1}^N (1+c_ix)^{-\gamma_i}$$
with all parameters positive except $\beta\in\mathbb{R}.$ The connection with Stieltjes functions is obtained by the following representation, which is given as (5.2.3) in \cite{LB92} and is a consequence of Theorem 5.3.1 therein: one has $f\in\mathcal{HCM}$ if and only if
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{CanHCM}
f(x) \; =\; C x^{\beta-1}h_1(x)h_2(x^{-1}),
\end{eqnarray}
with $C \ge 0, \beta \in \mathbb{R},$ and $-(\log h_i)' \in \mathcal{S}$ for $i=1,2.$ From this representation, it is clear that $f^p\in\mathcal{HCM}$ for all $p > 0$ if $f\in\mathcal{HCM}$ and that $fg\in\mathcal{HCM}$ whenever $f, g \in\mathcal{HCM}.$ A deeper property is that $\mathcal{HCM}$ is also stable by multiplicative convolution. We refer to Chapters 3-5 in \cite{LB92} for more details on this notion. \\
In this paper, we will obtain a finite type version of (\ref{CanHCM}). This motivates the following definition, which is rephrased from the main definition of \cite{LB97}.
\begin{definition}
\label{defHM}
A non-negative function $f$ is called $k-$hyperbolically monotone ($f\in\mathcal{HM}_k$ for short) if, for every $u>0,$ the function $f(uv)f(uv^{-1})$ is $k-$monotone in the variable $w = v +v^{-1}.$
\end{definition}
Again, we see that $\{\mathcal{HM}_k\}$ is a decreasing family with $\mathcal{HM}_k\downarrow\mathcal{HCM}.$
The Leibniz formula shows that $\mathcal{HM}_k$ is closed with respect to multiplication, and it is easy to see that it is also closed with respect to pointwise limits and to the transformation $f \to \tilde f(x)= f(x^{-1}).$ In \cite{LB97}, it was shown among other results that $\mathcal{HM}_k$ is closed with respect to multiplicative convolution. We also refer to \cite{BB} for further connections between the class $\mathcal{HM}_k$ and infinite divisibility.
In the case $k=1,$ it is not difficult to see that $f\in\mathcal{HM}_1$ if and only if
$$f(u_1v_1^{-1})f(u_2v_2^{-1}) \; \ge \; f(u_1v_2^{-1})f(u_2v_1^{-1})$$
for every $u_1 < u_2$ and $v_1 < v_2.$ This means that the kernel $f(xy^{-1})$ is ${\rm TP}_2$ on $(0,\infty)\times (0,\infty)$ or equivalently - see Theorem 4.1.8 in \cite{K}, that $y \mapsto f(e^y)$
is log-concave on its support which is necessarily a closed interval. Hence, there is a canonical representation: one has $ f\in \mathcal{HM}_1$ if and only if
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{H1}
f(x)\;= \;C \exp\left[ -\int_{x_0}^x \frac{\psi(y)}{y}dy\right],
\end{eqnarray}
with $ C, x_0 > 0$ suitably chosen, and $\psi$ a non-decreasing function (possibly taking the values $\pm \infty$). Separating the positive and negative parts of $\psi,$ it is an easy exercise to transform this representation into
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{CanHM1}
f(x) \; =\; C x^{\beta-1}h_1(x)h_2(x^{-1})
\end{eqnarray}
with $C \ge 0, \beta \in \mathbb{R},$ and $-(\log h_i)' \in \mathcal{S}_1$ (possibly taking the value $+\infty$) for $i=1,2.$ In particular, we see that $f^p \in\mathcal{HM}_1$ for every $p >0.$ In the case $k\ge 2$ however, the connection between $\mathcal{HM}_k$ and totally positive kernels of higher order is lost in general. Moreover, it is possible to exhibit functions $f\in\mathcal{HM}_k$ such that $f^p\not\in\mathcal{HM}_k$ for some $p >0$ - see Remarks 4(b) and 7(b). Having in mind an exponential representation of the type (\ref{CanHCM}) or (\ref{CanHM1}), it is hence natural to introduce the following definition:
\begin{definition}
\label{PR}
A non-negative function $f$ such that $f^p\in\mathcal{HM}_k$ for every $p>0$
is called power regular $\mathcal{HM}_k$ ($f\in\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_k$ for short).
\end{definition}
Our second main result is the following characterization.
\begin{theorem}
\label{Bondlike}
For every $k\ge 2,$ one has $f\in\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_k$ if and only if
$$f(x)\; =\; C x^{\beta-1}h_1(x)h_2(x^{-1})$$
with $C \ge 0, \beta \in \mathbb{R},$ and $-(\log h_i)' \in \mathcal{S}_k$ for $i=1,2.$
\end{theorem}
This result gives a constructive procedure to find functions in the set $\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_k$, starting either from two functions satisfying (\ref{Sti1}) for every $n\le k$ or, by Theorem 1, from two non-negative reals and two non-negative measures on $(0,\infty)$ integrating $(1+t)^{-1}.$ An example of the latter construction is provided in Section 4.2. It remains an open problem to find a canonical representation for all $k-$hyperbolically monotone functions. This problem seems however uneasy because $\mathcal{HM}_k$ is not closed with respect to positive powers, which shows that the canonical representation, if any, should not have an exponential type.
The closedness of $\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_k$ with respect to positive powers plays a crucial role in our argument because it allows to linearize the problem - see Lemma \ref{HMD}, making any function in $\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_{k+1}$ in one-to-one correspondence with a parametrized set of $k-$monotone functions in the hyperbolic variable $v+v^{-1}.$ The remainder of the proof is then an analysis on this set of functions, whose initial conditions establish the connection with $\mathcal{S}_k$ by a Taylor expansion. An
unexpected feature, which is a consequence of both Theorem 1 and the specific nature of our kernels $\Phi_k(x,t)$, is that these initial conditions determine the whole $k-$monotonicity property of these functions - see Remark \ref{Ini}. Let us finish this introduction with the following further characterization of $\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_k$, which is a simple consequence of Theorem 1, Theorem 2, and Lemma \ref{Form} below, and which we state without proof. An example of this characterization is provided in Section 4.1.
\begin{corollary}
\label{Bondesson}
For every $k\ge 2,$ one has $f\in\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_k$ if and only if
$$(-1)^j (x^j (\log f)')^{(2j-1)}\; \ge\; 0$$
for every $j\le k.$
\end{corollary}
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we prove Theorem 1, and in Section 3 we prove Theorem 2. In Section 4 we consider some explicit interesting examples, whereas the Appendix is devoted to a technical and rather surprising Lemma related to the if part of Theorem 2.
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{Widderlike}}
\subsection{Proof of the if part}
We will first investigate regularity properties of the kernel $\Phi_k(x,t),$ which are less immediate than those of the finite type kernels involved in \cite{Wi} and \cite{P}. For symmetry reasons, it will be more pleasant to consider the kernel
\begin{equation}
\label{Msika}
\Psi_k(x,t)\; = \; x \Phi_k(x,t)\; = \psi_k (x t^{-1}),
\end{equation}
where we have set $\psi_k(y) = \Psi_k (y, 1) = P_k(y^{-1}){\bf 1}_{\{y \ge 1\}}-{\hat P}_k(y){\bf 1}_{\{y < 1\}}.$ The kernel $\Psi_k$ and the function $\psi_k$ will play some role in other parts of the paper. Our analysis relies on two lemmas which will be useful in other parts of the paper as well. The first one is obtained by an elementary induction, starting from the last derivative.
\begin{lemma}
\label{Poly}
Let $P$ be a real polynomial of degree $l.$ Suppose $(-1)^i P^{(i)}(0) > 0$ and $(-1)^i P^{(i)}(1) > 0$ for all $i=0,\ldots, l.$ Then $P$ is $l-$monotone on $[0,1].$ In particular, $P$ is positive on $[0,1].$
\end{lemma}
The second one has a symmetry character and is reminiscent of Lemma 3.11 in \cite{W1}. It consists in two identities between differential operators which are easily checked on polynomials, and thus on all functions by an identification of the coefficients. Alternatively, these identities can be obtained from the Leibniz formula. Introduce the linear differential operator
$$\Theta_n(h) \; =\; x^n (x^{n-1} h)^{(2n-1)}$$
acting on any function $h$ which is regular enough. Let further ${\hat h}(x) = -h(x^{-1}).$
\begin{lemma}
\label{Form}
For any $h$ regular enough, one has
$$ \Theta_n(h)(x)\; =\; (x^{2n-1} h^{(n)}(x))^{(n-1)}\; =\;\Theta_n({\hat h})(x^{-1}).$$
\end{lemma}
\medskip
We can now state the main result of this paragraph.
\begin{proposition}
\label{IP1} For every $k\ge 1, t > 0,$ the function $x\mapsto \Phi_k(x,t)$ belongs to $\mathcal{S}_{k+1}.$
\end{proposition}
\proof We begin with an analysis of the function $\psi_k,$ which is smooth on $(0, \infty)$ except possibly at $y =1.$ Evaluating
$$P_k (1)\; =\; \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k\\ k \end{array}\!\!\!\right)\;\sum_{n=0}^k \frac{(-k)_n}{(k+1)_n}\; =\; \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k\\ k \end{array}\!\!\!\right)\;\pFq{2}{1}{-k,1}{k+1}{1}\; =\; \frac{1}{2} \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k\\ k \end{array}\!\!\!\right)\; =\;-{\hat P}_k(1),$$
where we have used the standard notation for Pochhammer symbols and the hypergeometric function, and applied the Chu-Vandermonde identity - see e.g. Corollary 2.2.3 in \cite{AAR}, shows that $\psi_k$ is continuous at $y =1.$ Similarly, we compute
$$P_k^{(i)} (1)\; =\;{\hat P}_k^{(i)} (1)\; =\; (-1)^i \, i!\left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k\\ k +i \end{array}\!\!\!\right)\;\pFq{2}{1}{i-k,i+1}{k+i+1}{1}\; =\; (-1)^i\,i!\left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k-i-1\\ k-1 \end{array}\!\!\!\right)$$
for all $i = 1,\ldots, k.$ On the other hand, setting $Q_k (y) = {\hat P}_k(y^{-1}),$ we obtain after some analogous computations
$$Q_k^{(i)} (1)\; =\;(-1)^{i+1} \, i!\left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k\\ k +1 \end{array}\!\!\!\right)\;\pFq{2}{1}{1-k,i+1}{k+2}{1}\; =\;(-1)^{i+1} \, i!\left(\frac{(k-i+1)_{k-1}}{(k-1)!}\right)$$
for all $i \ge 1.$ For $i=1,\ldots, k,$ we get
$$Q_k^{(i)} (1) \;=\; (-1)^{i+1}\,i!\left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k-i-1\\ k-1 \end{array}\!\!\!\right)\; =\;- {\hat P}_k^{(i)} (1),$$
whereas for $i =k+1,\ldots,2k-1,$ we have $Q_k^{(i)} (1) = 0 = {\hat P}_k^{(i)} (1).$ All of this shows that $\psi_k$ is of class $\mathcal{C}^{2k-1}$ at $y =1$, and the function $x\mapsto \Phi_{k} (x,t)$ is hence $\mathcal{C}^{2k-1}$ on $(0,\infty),$ too.\\
We next prove that
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Sti2} \Psi_{n,k} (x)\; =\; (-1)^{n-1} (x^{n-1} \psi_k(x))^{(2n-1)}\; \ge\; 0
\end{eqnarray}
for all $n =1,\ldots, k$ and $x >0.$ Suppose first $x < 1.$ Then, since
$$x^{n-1}\psi_k(x)\; =\; - x^{n-1} \,{\hat P}_k(x)\; =\; - \binom{2k}{k} \sum_{i=0}^{k-1} \frac{(-k)_{i+1}}{(k+1)_{i+1}}\, x^{i+n},$$
we obtain
$$\Psi_{n,k}(x)\; =\; (2n-1)!\,\sum_{i=0}^{k-n} \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k\\ k-n-i \end{array}\!\!\!\right) \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2n+i-1\\ 2n-1 \end{array}\!\!\!\right) (-x)^i.$$
For every $i =0,\ldots, k-n$ we next evaluate
$$\frac{(-1)^i \Psi_{n,k}^{(i)}(0)}{(2n-1)!i!}\, =\, \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k\\ k-n-i \end{array}\!\!\!\right) \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2n+i-1\\ 2n-1 \end{array}\!\!\!\right) \;\;\mbox{and}\;\; \frac{(-1)^i \Psi_{n,k}^{(i)}(1)}{(2n-1)!i!}\, =\, \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2k-2n-i\\ k-n-i \end{array}\!\!\!\right) \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} 2n+i-1\\ 2n-1 \end{array}\!\!\!\right),$$
where the first identity is immediate and the second one is obtained by the Chu-Vandermonde identity. Lemma \ref{Poly} implies then that (\ref{Sti2}) holds for all $n=1,\ldots, k$ and $x < 1.$ When $x >1,$ we compute
$$\Psi_{n,k} (x) = (-1)^{n-1} (x^{n-1} (\psi_k(x) -P_k(0)))^{(2n-1)}= (-1)^{n-1} (x^{n-1} Q_k(x))^{(2n-1)} = x^{-2n} \Psi_{n,k} (x^{-1}),$$
where the first equality is obvious and the third one follows from Lemma \ref{Form}. Putting everything together implies that (\ref{Sti2}) holds for every $n =1,\ldots, k$ and all $x \in(0,\infty).$ In particular, the function $x\mapsto \Phi_k(x,t)$ satisfies (\ref{Sti1}) for every $n =1,\ldots, k.$ \\
We finally consider the continuous function
$$\pi_k(x) \; =\; (-1)^{k} (x^k \psi_k(x))^{(2k-1)}\; =\; -x\Psi_{k,k}(x)\; +\; (-1)^k (2k-1) (x^{k-1} \psi_k(x))^{(2k-2)},$$
where in the second equality we have used the chain rule. If $x < 1,$ we have $\Psi_{k,k}(x) = (2k-1)!$ and $\pi_k$ has hence constant derivative $-(2k)!.$ If $x >1,$ Lemma \ref{Form} (or a direct computation) shows that $\Psi_{k,k}(x) = (2k-1)!x^{-2k}$ and this easily implies that $\pi_k$ has zero derivative. In particular, the function $\pi_k$ is convex, which means that the function $x\mapsto \Phi_k(x,t)$ fulfils the required convexity property for $\mathcal{S}_{k+1}.$
\qed
\bigskip
It is easy to see that Proposition \ref{IP1} proves the if part of Theorem 1. Suppose indeed that $f$ has the representation (\ref{Wid}) for some $k \ge 2.$ Since $a + g\in\mathcal{S}_k$ whenever $g\in\mathcal{S}_k$ for every $a\ge 0,$ it suffices to consider the case $a_k = 0.$ Moreover, at each $x > 0$, it is plain by definition that the $i-$th derivative of $x\mapsto \Phi_{k-1}(x,t)$ is bounded in $t$ by $K_{i,x} (t^{i}\wedge t^{-i})$ for some finite constant $K_{i,x}.$ Since $\mu_k$ integrates all such functions by assumption, we can apply the dominated convergence theorem, and the linearity of the integral for the convexity property, to conclude by Proposition \ref{IP1} that $f$ belongs to $\mathcal{S}_k.$
\qed
\medskip
\begin{remark}
\label{Expl}
{\em The end of the proof of Proposition \ref{IP1} shows that
$$\pi_k^{(2)}\; =\; (2k)!\, \delta_1$$
where, here and throughout, we have set the standard notation $\delta_a$ for a Dirac mass at $a$. This property allows to construct the kernel $\Phi_k$ in a recursive way, by successive integration choosing the appropriate boundary terms in order to ensure the required regularity and so that (\ref{Sti1}) holds at all intermediate levels. In this respect, the functions $x\mapsto\Phi_k(x,t)$ can be viewed as the ``fundamental solutions" of (\ref{Sti1}) up to order $k+1$ since we have
$$(-1)^k (x^{k+1} \Phi_k(x,t))^{(2k+1)}\; =\; (2k)!\, t^{-k}\, \delta_t.$$
We refer to Section 4.3 below for another recursive formula connecting $\Phi_k$ and $\Phi_{k+1}.$}
\end{remark}
\subsection{Proof of the only if part}
We begin with a proposition having an independent interest, and crucial for our purposes. For simplicity, we will set
$$g\; =\; x f\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad\varphi_n\; = \;x^{2n-1} g^{(n)}$$
for every suitable $n\ge 1.$
\begin{proposition}
\label{SkMk}
Suppose $f\in\mathcal{S}_k. $ Then $g'\in \mathcal{M}_{k-1}.$ Moreover, one has $(-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k^{(k-2)}(0+) \ge 0$ and $\varphi_k^{(j)}(0+) =0$ for all $j=0,\ldots, k-3.$
\end{proposition}
\proof Observe first that by the first equality in Lemma \ref{Form}, if $f\in\mathcal{S}_k$ then
$$(-1)^{n-1}\varphi_n^{(n-1)}\; \ge\; 0$$
for every $n =1,\ldots, k-1,$ and $(-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k^{(k-1)}$ is a non-negative measure on $(0,\infty).$ We now proceed by induction on $k.$
\medskip
If $k=2,$ then $\varphi_2'$ is a negative measure, which implies $\varphi_2(0+) > -\infty.$ Supposing $\varphi_2(0+) > 0,$ then recalling $\varphi_2 = x^3 g^{(2)},$ we see by integration that $g'(0+) =-\infty.$ This is a contradiction since $g$ is non-decreasing, by the fact that $f$ also belongs to $\mathcal{S}_1$. Hence $\varphi_2(0+) \le 0$ and $g^{(2)}\le 0,$ which implies that $g'\in\mathcal{M}_1$ as required.
\medskip
If $k=3,$ then $\varphi_3^{(2)}$ is a non-negative measure, which implies $\varphi_3'(0+) < +\infty$ and $\varphi_3(0+) > -\infty.$ If $\varphi_3(0+) < 0,$ then by integration one has $g^{(2)}(0+)=+\infty,$ a contradiction with the case $k=2.$ Moreover, the case $k=2$ also implies $\varphi_3 + 3x\varphi_2 \le 0$ and since $\varphi_2(0+) > -\infty,$ we must have $\varphi_3(0+) \le 0.$ This shows $\varphi_3(0+) = 0.$ Supposing now $\varphi_3'(0+) < 0,$ then again this implies the contradiction $g^{(2)}(0+)=+\infty.$ Hence we have $\varphi_3(0+) = 0, \varphi_3'(0+) \ge 0$ and $g^{(3)}\ge 0,$ which together with the case $k=2$ implies that $g'\in\mathcal{M}_2.$
\medskip
We now set $k\ge 4$ and suppose that the property has been shown up to rank $k-1.$ Since $(-1)^{k-1} \varphi_k^{(k-1)}$ is a non-negative measure, a direct induction shows that all right derivatives $\varphi_k^{(j)}(0+)$ exist for $j=0,\ldots, k-2.$ A further induction based on L'H\^ospital's rule and the fact, given by the case $k=3,$ that $\varphi_3(0+) = 0,$ shows that $\varphi_k^{(j)}(0+) =0$ for $j=0,\ldots, k-3.$
Supposing $(-1)^{k-1} \varphi_k^{(k-2)}(0+) <0,$ we obtain $(-1)^{k-1} g^{(k-1)}(0+) =-\infty$ and contradict the induction hypothesis. Hence $(-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k^{(k-2)}(0+) \ge 0$ and by integration we get $(-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k\ge 0,$ which implies $(-1)^{k-1} g^{(k)}\ge 0$ and hence that $g'\in\mathcal{M}_{k-1},$ too.
\endproof
\begin{remark}
\label{SkMk1}
{\em (a) As it turns out later, we will also have $(-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k^{(k-2)}(0+) = 0,$ because $b_k = 0$ with the notation of Equation (\ref{Psi1}) below. However, this fact seems more difficult to prove directly with the above induction argument.
\medskip
(b) We believe that $f\in\mathcal{S}_k\Rightarrow g^{(i)}\in\mathcal{M}_{k-i}$ for all $i =1, \ldots, k-1.$ This would give more precisions on the implication (\ref{Sti1}) $\Rightarrow$ (\ref{Sti0}).}
\end{remark}
\medskip
We can now prove the only if part of Theorem 1. Suppose that $f\in\mathcal{S}_k$ and consider the following non-negative measure on $(0,\infty):$
$$\rho_k\; =\; (-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k^{(k-1)},$$
with the above notation. For every $x > 0,$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{phi2}
\int_0^x \rho_k(dt)\; =\; (-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k^{(k-2)}(x)\, +\, (-1)^{k-2}\varphi_k^{(k-2)}(0+)\; < \; \infty
\end{equation}
by Proposition \ref{SkMk}. Suppose next that $\rho_k$ has a density, which is then the function
$$(-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k^{(k-1)}(x)\; =\; (-1)^{k-1} \Theta_k (g)(x)\; =\; (-1)^{k-1} \Theta_k ({\hat g})(x^{-1})\; =\; (-1)^{k-1}{\hat \varphi_k}^{(k-1)}(x^{-1}),$$
where the first two equalities come from Lemma \ref{Form}, and where we have used the symmetric notation ${\hat \varphi_n} = x^{2n-1} {\hat g}^{(n)}.$ Changing the variable implies
$$\int_x^\infty t^{-2} \rho_k(dt)\; =\; \int_0^{x^{-1}} \!\! {\hat \rho}_k(dt)$$
for every $x > 0,$ where ${\hat \rho}_k$ is the measure with density $(-1)^{k-1}{\hat \varphi_k}^{(k-1)}.$ By approximation, this equality remains true when $\rho_k$ is not necessarily absolutely continuous. Moreover, it is clear from the above argument applied to ${\hat g}$ that the right-hand side is also finite for every $x > 0.$ Thus we have shown that $\rho_k$ integrates $1\wedge t^{-2},$ and hence the measure
$$\nu_k(dt) \; =\; ((2k-2)! t)^{-1} \rho_k(dt),$$
integrates $t\wedge t^{-1}$ on $(0,\infty).$ Recalling the notation in (\ref{Msika}) for $\Psi_{k-1},$ we next observe that
\begin{eqnarray*}
((2k-2)! t)^{-1} \Psi_{k-1}^{(k)}(x,t) & = & ((2k-2)! t)^{-1} \frac{d^k}{dx^k} \left( \psi_{k-1}(tx^{-1})\right)\, {\bf 1}_{\{x\ge t\}}\\
& = & \frac{(-1)^{k-1} }{(k-2)! x^{k+1}} \sum_{n=0}^{k-2} \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} k-2\\ n \end{array}\!\!\!\right) (-tx^{-1})^{n}{\bf 1}_{\{x\ge t\}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, we can compute
\begin{equation}
\label{Plug}
\int_0^\infty \Psi_{k-1}^{(k)}(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt)\; =\; \frac{(-1)^{k-1} }{(k-2)! x^{k+1}} \sum_{n=0}^{k-2} \left( \!\!\!\begin{array}{c} k-2\\ n \end{array}\!\!\!\right) (-x)^{-n}\left(\int_0^x t^n\, \rho_k (dt)\right).
\end{equation}
Integration by parts with the help of Proposition \ref{SkMk} yields
$$\int_0^x t^n\, \rho_k (dt)\; =\; (-1)^{k-1}\,\sum_{i=0}^n \,(-1)^i \frac{n!\,x^{n-i}}{(n-i)!}\, \varphi_k^{(k-2-i)}(x)$$
for every $n\ge 1,$ the case $n=0$ being evaluated in the above (\ref{phi2}). Plugging all these expressions into (\ref{Plug}) and switching the two finite sums, we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Psik}
\nonumber \int_0^\infty \Psi_{k-1}^{(k)}(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt) & = & \frac{1}{x^{2k-1}}\sum_{i=0}^{k-2} \left( \sum_{n=0}^i (-1)^n \binom{i}{n}\right) \frac{x^i \varphi_k^{(i)}(x)}{i!}\; -\; \frac{\varphi_k^{(k-2)}(0+) }{(k-2)! x^{k+1}}\\
& =& \frac{\varphi_k(x)}{x^{2k-1}} \; -\; \frac{\varphi_k^{(k-2)}(0+) }{(k-2)! x^{k+1}}\; =\; g^{(k)} (x)\; -\; \frac{\varphi_k^{(k-2)}(0+) }{(k-2)! x^{k+1}}\cdot
\end{eqnarray}
Since $g'\in\mathcal{M}_{k-1}$ by Proposition \ref{SkMk}, it is obvious that $g^{(i)}(\infty)$ exists and is finite for every $i =1,\ldots, k-1.$ Moreover we have
$$g^{(2)}(x^{-1})\; =\; -x^4 {\hat g}^{(2)}(x)\, +\, 2xg'(x^{-1})\; \to\; 0$$
as $x\to 0,$ by Proposition \ref{SkMk} applied to ${\hat g}.$ This yields $g^{(2)}(\infty) =0$ and clearly, we have $g^{(i)}(\infty) =0$ as well for every $i=3,\ldots,k-1.$ Moreover, since for every $i\ge 1$ and $x >1$ one has
$$\Psi_{k-1}^{(i)}(x,t)\; \le \; K_i\,x^{-1} (xt^{-1}{\bf 1}_{\{x\le t\}} + tx^{-1}{\bf 1}_{\{t<x\}})$$
for some finite constant $K_i,$ the integrability properties of $\nu_k$ show that
$$\int_0^\infty \Psi_{k-1}^{(i)}(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt)\; \rightarrow\; 0, \qquad x\to \infty$$
for every $i=1,\ldots,k-1.$ Hence, by monotone convergence, we can integrate $(k-1)$ times the identity (\ref{Psik}) from $x$ to $\infty$ and obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Psi1}
g' (x)\; =\; a_k\; +\; b_k\, x^{-2}\; +\; \int_0^\infty \Psi_{k-1}'(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt)
\end{eqnarray}
with $a_k = g'(\infty) \ge 0$ and
$$b_k\; =\; \frac{(-1)^{k-1}\varphi_k^{(k-2)}(0+) }{(k-2)!}\; \ge \; 0.$$
Integrating now (\ref{Psi1}) from $\varepsilon >0$ to $x,$ we get
$$g(x)\,-\, g(\varepsilon)\; =\; a_k(x-\varepsilon)\; +\; b_k(\varepsilon^{-1} -x^{-1})\; +\; \int_0^\infty (\Psi_{k-1}(x,t) -\Psi_{k-1}(\varepsilon,t))\,\nu_k(dt).$$
When $\varepsilon\downarrow 0,$ the left-hand side increases to $g(x)-g(0+) < \infty$ whereas (by Proposition \ref{IP1} and monotone convergence) the three terms on the right hand side increase to some limit which must be finite. This shows that $b_k = 0$ and, since $\Psi_{k-1}(0+,t) =0,$
$$g(x)\;=\; g(0+)\; +\; a_k \,x\; +\; \int_0^\infty \Psi_{k-1}(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt).$$
In particular, the measure $\nu_k(dt)$ must integrate $(1+ t)^{-1}.$ Dividing both sides by $x$ and setting
$$\mu_k(dt)\; =\; \nu_k(dt)\;+\; g(0+)\binom{2k}{k}^{-1}\delta_0(dt),$$
we have finally built a drift coefficient $a_k\ge 0$ and a non-negative measure $\mu_k(dt)$ on $[0,\infty)$ integrating $(1+t)^{-1},$ such that $f$ has the required representation
$$f(x)\; =\; a_k \; +\; \int_0^\infty \Phi_{k-1}(x,t)\,\mu_k(dt), \qquad x > 0.$$
\qed
\begin{remark}
\label{Inv}
{\em The above proof gives the following formula for the unique non-negative measure $\mu_k$ corresponding to $f\in\mathcal{S}_k:$
$$\mu_k\; =\; g(0+)\binom{2k}{k}^{-1}\delta_0\;+\; (-1)^{k-1}((2k-2)! t)^{-1}\varphi_k^{(k-1)},$$
with the notation $g=xf$ and $\varphi_k = x^{2k-1} g^{(k)}.$ This can be viewed as a Stieltjes inversion formula of finite type. This should be compared with Theorem 9 p. 345 and Theorem 10c p. 350 in \cite{W}, which give an analogous inversion formula for (\ref{SJ}), in the case when $\mu$ therein has a density.}
\end{remark}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{Bondlike}}
We begin with the following characterization of ${\widehat \mathcal{HM}_k}$ which has independent interest, and which will be used in both if and only if parts of the proof. For every non-negative differentiable function $f,$ let $\psi_f(x) = -x (\log f)'(x)$ and introduce for every fixed $u >0$ the function
$$\Delta_u(f)(w)\; =\; {\psi_f(uv)-\psi_f(uv^{-1}) \over v-v^{-1}}$$
for $v > 0,$ which is clearly a function of $w = v+v^{-1} \in[2,\infty)$ only.
\begin{lemma} \label{HMD} For $k\ge 2,$ one has
$$f\in {\widehat \mathcal{HM}_k}\; \Longleftrightarrow\; \Delta_u(f)\in\mathcal{M}_{k-1}\;\;\,\forall\, u >0.$$
\end{lemma}
\proof Set $F_u(w) = \log(f(uv)f(uv^{-1}))$ for a given differentiable function $f.$ The crucial point is the following observation, which is obtained from the fact that $ dw/dv= v^{-1}(v-v^{-1})$ and the chain rule:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Dw}
\frac{d F_u}{dw}\; =\; -\Delta_u (f).
\end{eqnarray}
This implies that if $\Delta_u (f)\in\mathcal{M}_{k-1}$ for all $u >0,$ then $pF_u\in \mathcal{M}_k$ for all $p,u >0.$ Moreover, it is easy to see from Fa\`a di Bruno's formula that $h\in \mathcal{M}_k\Rightarrow e^h\in \mathcal{M}_k$ for any given function $h.$ This concludes the if part of the lemma.
The only if part is analogous to the proof of Theorem 3.6 (iii) p. 19 in \cite{SSV}. Rewriting
$$f^p(uv)f^p(uv^{-1})\; =\; \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{p^n}{n!} \,(F_u(w))^n$$
and differentiating term by term, we see that if $f\in {\widehat \mathcal{HM}_k},$ then
$$(-1)^j \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{p^n}{n!} \,\left((F_u(w))^n\right)^{(j)}\; \ge \; 0$$
for every $j=1,\ldots,k$ and every $p,u >0.$ Dividing by $p$ and letting $p\to 0,$ we get
$$(-1)^j F_u^{(j)}\; =\; (-1)^{j-1} \Delta_u (f)^{(j-1)}\; \ge \; 0$$
for every $j=1,\ldots,k$ and $u > 0,$ as required.
\endproof
\begin{remark}
\label{DF}
{\em (a) The above proof shows that ${\widehat \mathcal{HM}_k} = \left\{ f, \; \exists \,p_n\downarrow 0 \; \slash\; f^{p_n}\in\mathcal{HM}_k\right\}.$ Below, we will see that there are examples of functions in $\mathcal{HM}_k$ such that $f^p\not\in \mathcal{HM}_k$ for some $p < 1.$ It is an open question whether $f^p\in \mathcal{HM}_k$ for every $p \ge 1$ as soon as $f\in\mathcal{HM}_k.$
\medskip
(b) It is easy to see from (\ref{Dw}) that if $f\in{\widehat \mathcal{HM}}_k$ for some $k\ge 2,$ then $\psi_f$ cannot take infinite values, so that necessarily $f(x)>0 $ for all $ x>0.$ This is in sharp contrast with the case $k=1.$ Observe in particular from Example 17.2.3 in \cite{LB97} that the $k-$monotone function
$$x\;\mapsto\; (t-x)_+^{k-1},$$
which is in $\mathcal{HM}_k$ for every $t > 0,$ cannot be in ${\widehat \mathcal{HM}}_k$ if $k\ge 2$ since it does not have full support.}
\end{remark}
We next state a crucial computational lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{DPsi}
For every $f$ regular enough and $k\ge 0, u >0,$ one has
$$ \left\{ \Delta_u (f)^{(k)}(w)\right\}_{w=2}\; = \; {k! \over (2k+1)!}\,
(u^{2k+1}\psi_f^{(k+1)}(u))^{(k)}.$$
\end{lemma}
\proof We will use the following polynomial identity
$$\sum_{k=0}^n \;z^k\; =\; \sum_{k=0}^{[n/2]} \binom{n-k}{k}\, (-z)^k(1+z)^{n-2k},$$
where $[x]$ means the integer part of $x,$ which is an easy consequence of the Chu-Vandermonde identity. Setting now $x = v-1, y = v^{-1} -1$ and $X = w -2,$ we deduce
$$\frac{x^{n+1} -y^{n+1}}{x-y}\; =\; \sum_{k=0}^n \;x^ky^{n-k}\; =\; \sum_{k=0}^{[n/2]} \binom{n-k}{k}\, (-xy)^k(x+y)^{n-2k}\; =\; \sum_{k=0}^{[n/2]} \binom{n-k}{k}\, X^{n-k},$$
where we have used $x+y = -xy =X.$ Putting this together with a Taylor expansion of $y \mapsto \psi_f(uy)$ around $y =1,$ we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Delta_u (f)(w)& =& \sum_{n=0}^N \left( \sum_{k=0}^{[n/2]} \binom{n-k}{k}\, X^{n-k}\right)
\frac{u^{n+1}\psi_f^{(n+1)}(u)}{(n+1)!}\; +\; O (X^{N+1})\\
& =& \sum_{n=0}^N \left( \sum_{k=[(n+1)/2]}^n \binom{k}{n-k}\, X^k\right)
\frac{u^{n+1}\psi_f^{(n+1)}(u)}{(n+1)!}\; +\; O (X^{N+1})\\
& =& \sum_{k=0}^N \left( \sum_{n=0}^k \binom{k}{n}\, \frac{u^{n+k+1}\psi_f^{(n+k+1)}(u)}{(n+k+1)!}\right) X^k
\; +\; O (X^{N+1})\\
& =& \sum_{k=0}^N \left( {(u^{2k+1}\psi_f^{(k+1)}(u))^{(k)}\over (2k+1)!}\right) X^k\; +\; O (X^{N+1}),\\
\end{eqnarray*}
where in the last equality we have used the Leibniz formula and the first equality in Lemma \ref{Form}. This concludes the proof.
\endproof
\subsection{Proof of the only if part} We first consider the smooth case. Let $k\ge 2$ and suppose that $f\in\mathcal{C}^{2k-1}\cap {\widehat \mathcal{HM}}_k.$ A combination of Lemmas \ref{HMD} and \ref{DPsi} shows that
$$(-1)^{n-1}(u^{2n-1}\psi_f^{(n)}(u))^{(n-1)}\; \ge \; 0$$
for every $u >0$ and $n=1,\ldots, k.$ A perusal of Section 2.2 shows that all this leads to the representation (\ref{Psi1}) for $g=\psi_f,$ that is
$$\psi_f'(x)\; =\; a_k\; +\; b_k\, x^{-2}\; +\; \int_0^\infty \Psi_{k-1}'(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt)$$
for some $a_k, b_k \ge 0$ and $\nu_k$ a non-negative measure integrating $t\wedge t^{-1}.$ However, thinking e.g. of the function $f(x) = e^{-x^{-1}}$ which is $\mathcal{HCM},$ we may have here $\psi_f(0+)=-\infty.$ We hence integrate this into
$$\psi_f(x)\; =\; c\; +\; a_k\,x\; +\; \int_{[1,\infty)} \Psi_{k-1}(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt)\; -\; b_k\, x^{-1}\; +\; \int_{(0,1)} (\Psi_{k-1}(x,t)- P_{k-1}(0))\,\nu_k(dt)$$
for some constant $c \in\mathbb{R}.$ It is not difficult to show that $\Psi_{k-1}(x,t)- P_{k-1}(0) = \Psi_{k-1}(x^{-1},t^{-1}),$ using $P_{k-1}(1) = -{\hat P}_{k-1}(1).$ Hence, we can rewrite
\begin{eqnarray*}
\psi_f(x)& = & c\; +\; \left( a_k\,x\; +\; \int_{[1,\infty)} \Psi_{k-1}(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt)\right)\; -\; \left( b_k\, x^{-1}\; +\; \int_{(0,1)} \Psi_{k-1}(x^{-1},t^{-1})\,\nu_k(dt)\right)\\
& = & c\; +\; \left( a_k\,x\; +\; \int_{[1,\infty)} \Psi_{k-1}(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt)\right)\; -\; \left( b_k\, x^{-1}\; +\; \int_{(1,\infty)} \Psi_{k-1}(x^{-1},t)\,{\hat \nu_k}(dt)\right)
\end{eqnarray*}
where ${\hat \nu_k}$ is a non-negative measure on $(1,\infty)$ integrating $t^{-1}.$ Dividing by $x,$ we deduce
$$-(\log f)'(x)\; =\; c\,x^{-1}\; +\; \left( a_k\; +\; \int_{[1,\infty)} \Phi_{k-1}(x,t)\,\nu_k(dt)\right)\; -\; x^{-2}\left( b_k\; +\; \int_{(1,\infty)} \Phi_{k-1}(x^{-1},t)\,{\hat \nu_k}(dt)\right)$$
which is, by Theorem 1 and setting $\beta = 1-c,$ the required representation of $f.$\\
Suppose last that $f\in{\widehat \mathcal{HM}}_k$ but is not necessarily $\mathcal{C}^{2k-1}.$ Introduce the approximation
$$\psi_\varepsilon(x)\; =\; x^{-1} \int_0^\infty \psi_f(y)\, \phi_\varepsilon (yx^{-1}) \,dy\; =\; \mathbb{E}[\psi_f (xL_\varepsilon)]$$
where $h$ is a positive mollifier (for example $h(x) = \kappa e^{-(1-x^2)^{-1}}{\bf 1}_{\{\vert x\vert \le 1\}}$ where $\kappa$ is the normalizing constant), $h_\varepsilon(x) = \varepsilon^{-1} h(x\varepsilon^{-1})$ and
$$\phi_\varepsilon (x)\; =\; x^{-1} h_\varepsilon( \log x)$$
is the density of a random variable $L_\varepsilon$ with compact support $[e^{-\varepsilon},e^\varepsilon].$ The above integral is finite for every $x, \varepsilon >0$ since $f\in\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_2$ and is hence positive everywhere - see Remark \ref{DF} (b) above, so that $\psi_f$ is locally bounded on $(0,\infty).$ The same argument clearly shows that $\psi_\varepsilon$ is smooth. Setting
$$\Delta_u^\varepsilon (w)\; =\; {\psi_\varepsilon(uv)-\psi_\varepsilon(uv^{-1}) \over v-v^{-1}},$$
we get by Lemma \ref{HMD} and the linearity of the expectation that
$\Delta_u^\varepsilon\in\mathcal{M}_{k-1}.$ Hence, the above argument shows that the representation
$$\psi_\varepsilon(x)\; = \; c_\varepsilon\; +\; \left( a_{k,\varepsilon}\,x\; +\; \int_1^\infty \Psi_{k-1}(x,t)\,\nu_{k, \varepsilon}(dt)\right)\; -\; \left( b_{k, \varepsilon}\, x^{-1}\; +\; \int_1^\infty \Psi_{k-1}(x^{-1},t)\,{\hat \nu_{k, \varepsilon}}(dt)\right)$$
holds for every $\varepsilon > 0,$ for some non-negative measures $\nu_{k, \varepsilon}(dt)$ and ${\hat \nu_{k, \varepsilon}}(dt)$ integrating $t^{-1}$ at infinity. Since $\psi_\varepsilon\to \psi_f$ pointwise as $\varepsilon\downarrow 0,$ the conclusion follows from Helly's selection theorem.
\qed
\begin{remark}
\label{core}
{\em The above proof shows that $\mathcal{C}^\infty\cap {\widehat \mathcal{HM}}_k$ is dense in ${\widehat \mathcal{HM}}_k$ for the pointwise topology. It is interesting to mention that $\mathcal{C}^\infty\cap \mathcal{HM}_k$ is also dense in $\mathcal{HM}_k$ for the same topology. Indeed, if $f\in\mathcal{HM}_k,$ the approximation
$$f_\varepsilon(x)\; =\; \int_0^\infty f(y)\, h_\varepsilon (xy^{-1}) \,y^{-1}dy,\qquad\quad
\mbox{where}\qquad\quad h_\varepsilon (x)\; =\; \frac{e^{-\frac{(\log x)^2}{2\varepsilon^2}}}{\sqrt{2\pi} \varepsilon x}$$
is the density of a log-normal distribution with variance parameter $\varepsilon^2$, is well-defined since $f\in\mathcal{HM}_1$ has the representation (\ref{H1}) and since $h_\varepsilon$ integrates any polynomial function at zero and infinity. Observe that by the change of variable $x\mapsto e^t,$ this amounts to the standard convolution approximation with a Gaussian kernel. In particular, one has $f_\varepsilon\in\mathcal{C}^\infty$ and $f_\varepsilon\to f$ pointwise as $\varepsilon\downarrow 0.$ Finally, Example 17.2.5 and Property (iv) p. 302 in \cite{LB97} show that $f_\varepsilon\in\mathcal{HM}_k$ for all $\varepsilon > 0.$}
\end{remark}
\subsection{Proof of the if part}
Since $x^{\beta-1}\in\mathcal{HCM}$ and since the class ${\widehat \mathcal{HM}}_k$ is closed with respect to pointwise multiplication and to the transformation $f\mapsto{\tilde f}(x)=f(x^{-1}),$ it is enough to show that $f\in{\widehat \mathcal{HM}}_k$ whenever $-(\log f)'\in\mathcal{S}_k.$ By Lemma \ref{HMD}, Theorem 1, and monotone convergence, this amounts to showing that
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{CMK}
\Delta_{k,u}\;\in\;\mathcal{M}_{k}
\end{eqnarray}
on $(2,\infty)$ for every $k\ge 1$ and $u >0$ where, recalling the definition of $\psi_k$ at the beginning of Section 2.1, we have set
$$\Delta_{k,u}(w)\;=\; {\psi_k(uv)-\psi_k(uv^{-1})\over v-v^{-1}}$$
and we have changed the parameter $k-1$ to $k$ for the simplicity of notation. \\
Suppose first $u =1.$ For every $v > 1,$ one has
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Delta_{k,1}(w) &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{w^2-4}} \left( \binom{2k}{k} \; +\; 2\,\sum_{n=1}^k \binom{2k}{k+n} (-v)^{-n}\right)\\
& = & \frac{1}{\sqrt{w^2-4}} \left( \binom{2k}{k} \;+ \;2\,\sum_{n=1}^k \binom{2k}{k+n} \left( \frac{\sqrt{w^2-4} - w}{2}\right)^n\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
and the same formula holds for $v < 1.$ Setting $x = (2-w)^{-1}<0,$ we next claim
that
$$\Delta_{k,1}(w)\; =\; x^{1-k}\left(\sum_{n=0}^{k-1} \binom{2n}{n} \,x^n\; -\; (1-4x)^{-1/2}\right).$$
Indeed, both sides equal $1 - \sqrt{(w-2)(w+2)^{-1}}$ for $k=1$ and satisfy the recurrence relationship
$$u_{k+1} \, =\, x^{-1} u_k \, +\, \binom{2k}{k}, \quad k\ge 1.$$
If $w > 6$ viz. $4x \in (-1,0),$ we can transform the latter expression into
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{2F1}
\Delta_{k,1}(w) & = & x^{1-k}\;\sum_{n\ge k} \binom{2n}{n} \,x^n \; =\; -x\,\binom{2k}{k}\,\pFq{2}{1}{1,k+1/2}{k+1}{4x}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used the truncated binomial series formula - see e.g. Formula 2.8(9) p. 109 in \cite{EMOT} - for the second equality. Applying Euler's integral formula for the hypergeometric function - see e.g. Theorem 2.2.1 in \cite{AAR}, we finally get
$$\Delta_{k,1}(w)\; =\; \frac{(2k)!}{\sqrt{\pi} k! \Gamma (k+1/2)} \int_0^1 \left( \frac{t^{k-1/2} (1-t)^{-1/2}}{w-2 +4t}\right) \,dt,$$
a formula which remains true for $w > 2$ by analytic continuation. This shows that $\Delta_{k,1}\in\mathcal{CM}$ on $(2,\infty)$ and readily implies (\ref{CMK}).\\
The proof in the case $u\neq 1,$ which is inspired by that of the main theorem in \cite{LB97}, is more subtle. Supposing first $w\in (2, u+u^{-1}),$ we have either $u > v > 1$ or $1>v > u^{-1}$ for $u >1,$ so that
$$\Delta_{k,u}(w) \; =\; {P_k(u^{-1}v^{-1})-P_k(u^{-1}v)\over v-v^{-1}}$$
for $u > 1.$ The same formula holds with $u$ replaced by $u^{-1}$ for $u < 1.$ This shows that $\Delta_{k,u}(w)$ is a polynomial of degree $k-1$ in $w.$ Moreover, it follows from Lemma \ref{DPsi}, the first equality in Lemma \ref{Form}, and (\ref{Sti2}) that for every $j = 0, \ldots, k-1,$
$$(-1)^j\Delta_{k,u}^{(j)}(2) \; \ge \; 0.$$
Hence, by Lemma \ref{Poly}, we will have $(-1)^j\Delta_{k,u}^{(j)}\ge 0$ on $(2, u+u^{-1})$ for every $j = 0, \ldots, k-1$ as soon as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{upu}
(-1)^j\Delta_{k,u}^{(j)}(u+u^{-1}) \; \ge \; 0
\end{eqnarray}
for every $j = 0, \ldots, k-1.$ The latter is a consequence of the following simple surprising formula, whose proof is postponed to the Appendix.
\begin{lemma}
\label{Rk}
For every $w\ge u+u^{-1}>2,$ one has
$$\Delta_{k,u}^{(k)}(w) \; = \; {(-1)^{k}(2k)! (w-u-u^{-1})^k \over k!(w^2 - 4)^{k + 1/2}}\cdot
$$
\end{lemma}
We can now finish the proof of the if part of Theorem 2. It is plain by definition that $\Delta_{k,u}(w)$ and all its successive derivatives tend to zero as $w\to \infty.$ Hence, integrating successively from $w$ to $\infty$ the closed formula of Lemma \ref{Rk} shows
$$(-1)^j\Delta_{k,u}^{(j)}(w) \; \ge \; 0$$
for every $w\ge u +u^{-1}$ and $j = 0, \ldots, k.$ This implies (\ref{CMK}) on $[u+u^{-1}, \infty)$, and also on $(2,u+u^{-1})$ from the above considerations, since (\ref{upu}) holds true.
\qed
\begin{remark}
\label{Ini}
{\em The above proof shows the remarkable equivalence
$$\Delta_u(f)\in\mathcal{M}_{k-1}\; \Longleftrightarrow\;(-1)^i\left\{\Delta_u(f)^{(i)}(w)\right\}_{w=2}\,\ge\, 0\;\;\;\forall\, i=0, \ldots, k-1,$$
for every $u >0.$ In other words, the property $f\in\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_k$ is characterized only by the initial behaviour of the functions $\Delta_u(f), u >0.$}
\end{remark}
\section{Examples}
\label{Sec:Exa}
In this section we perform some explicit computations related to our main results, for some interesting classes of functions. We also define a family of positive self-decomposable distributions whose Laplace transforms are hyperbolically monotone of some finite order, but not in $\mathcal{HCM}.$
\subsection{Cauchy-type functions}
\label{Ex:Cauchy1}
We consider the functions
$$f_\alpha(x)\;= \;\frac{1}{1+2\cos(\pi\alpha) x+x^2}$$
with $\alpha\in[0,1).$ Such Cauchy-type functions appear in many situations, pure and applied. To give but one example, $f_\alpha(x)$ is a generating function of Tchebyshev polynomials of the second kind. More generally, $f_\alpha^p(x)$ is, for every $p >0,$ a generating function of Gegenbauer polynomials - see e.g. Formula (6.4.10) in \cite{AAR}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{Cauchy}
For every $k\ge 1,$ one has
$$f_\alpha\,\in\,{\widehat \mathcal{HM}_k}\;\Leftrightarrow\; 2\alpha k\le 1.$$
\end{proposition}
\proof It is clear that $f_0\in\mathcal{HCM}$ and we hence exclude the case $\alpha =0$ in the sequel. Computing
$$g_\alpha (x) \; =\; -(\log f_\alpha)'(x)\; =\; 2(\cos(\pi\alpha) + x)f_\alpha(x)\; =\;x^{-1}\left( 2 - \frac{1}{1+xe^{{\rm i}\pi\alpha}}- \frac{1}{1+xe^{-{\rm i}\pi\alpha}} \right)$$
implies, after some simplifications,
$$(-1)^{n-1}(x^n g_{\alpha}(x))^{(2n-1)}\; =\; (2n-1)!\,(f_{\alpha}(x))^{2n}\,\left( e^{{\rm i} n\pi\alpha}(x+e^{-{\rm i}\pi\alpha})^{2n} + e^{-{\rm i} n\pi\alpha}(x+e^{{\rm i}\pi\alpha})^{2n} \right).$$
Hence, by the Corollary in Section 1, we have
$$f_\alpha\,\in\,{\widehat \mathcal{HM}_k} \;\Leftrightarrow\; e^{{\rm i} n\pi\alpha}(x +e^{-{\rm i}\pi\alpha})^{2n} + e^{-{\rm i} n\pi\alpha}(x +e^{{\rm i}\pi\alpha})^{2n} \;\ge\; 0\quad\forall\, n=1,\ldots,k\;\;\mbox{and}\; x>0,$$
which is equivalent to $\cos(n\pi{\alpha}) \ge 0$ for all $n=1,\ldots,k,$ and hence to $2\alpha k\le 1.$
\endproof
\begin{remark}
{\em (a) In this example, it is clear that $g_{\alpha} > 0$ with $(xg_{\alpha})'(\infty) = 0$ and $(xg_{\alpha})(0+) =0.$ By Remark \ref{Inv}, if $2{\alpha} k\le 1$ we have hence the representation
$$g_{\alpha}(x)\; =\; \int_0^\infty \Phi_{k-1}(x,t)\, \nu_{k,{\alpha}}(dt),$$
where $\nu_{k,{\alpha}}(dt)$ has density
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_{k,{\alpha}}(t)& =& (-1)^{k-1} ((2k-2)! t)^{-1}(t^{2k-1} (tg_{\alpha}(t))^{(k)})^{(k-1)} \\
& = & (-1)^{k-1} (2k-2)!^{-1}\, t^{k-1} (t^k g_{\alpha}(t))^{(2k-1)}\\
& = & (2k-1)\, t^{k-1} (f_{\alpha}(t))^{2k}\,( e^{{\rm i} k\pi\alpha}(t+e^{-{\rm i}\pi\alpha})^{2k} + e^{-{\rm i} k\pi\alpha}(t+e^{{\rm i}\pi\alpha})^{2k} ),\\
\end{eqnarray*}
which may rewritten as
$$f_{k,{\alpha}}(t)\; =\; \frac{(4k-2)t^{k-1}}{(1+2\cos(\pi\alpha) t+t^2)^{2k}}\times\left( \sum_{n=0}^{2k} \binom{2k}{n} \cos((n-k)\pi{\alpha})\, t^n\right).$$
\medskip
(b) It can be proved by elementary yet lengthy computations that
$$f_{\alpha}^p \in \mathcal{HM}_2 \; \Leftrightarrow\; \cos(\pi{\alpha}) \ge \frac{1}{\sqrt{2(p+1)}}\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad f_{\alpha}^p \in \mathcal{HM}_3 \; \Leftrightarrow\; \cos(\pi{\alpha}) \ge \sqrt{\frac{3}{2(p+2)}},$$
which shows that it might happen that $f_{\alpha}^p\in\mathcal{HM}_k$ and $f_{\alpha}^q\not\in\mathcal{HM}_k$ for some $q < p$ and $k=2,3.$ Observe also $f_{\alpha}^p \in \mathcal{HM}_1 \Leftrightarrow \cos(\pi{\alpha}) \ge 0.$ It is interesting to notice from Formula (6.4.11) in \cite{AAR} that
$$\sqrt{\frac{3}{2(p+2)}}\qquad\mbox{resp.}\qquad \frac{1}{\sqrt{2(p+1)}}\qquad\mbox{resp.}\qquad 0$$
is the largest positive root of the Gegenbauer polynomial $C_3^\lambda(x)$ resp. $C_2^\lambda(x)$ resp. $C_1^\lambda(x)$ with $\lambda = p.$ Observe also that Proposition \ref{Cauchy} can be rephrased as
$$f_\alpha\,\in\,{\widehat \mathcal{HM}_k}\;\Leftrightarrow\; \cos(\pi{\alpha}) \ge \mu_{k,0+}$$
where $\mu_{k,0+} = \cos (\pi/2k)$ is the largest positive root of the Tchebyshev polynomial of the first kind $T_k(x),$ which is itself a renormalized limit of $C_k^\lambda(x)$ as $\lambda \downarrow 0$ - see Formula (6.4.13) in \cite{AAR}. Recalling Remark \ref{DF} (a), it is hence natural to conjecture that
\begin{equation}
\label{Gegen}
f_{\alpha}^p \in \mathcal{HM}_k \; \Leftrightarrow\; \cos(\pi{\alpha}) \ge \mu_{k,p}
\end{equation}
where $\mu_{k,p}$ is the largest positive root of the Gegenbauer polynomial $C_k^\lambda(x)$ with $\lambda = p.$ This will be the matter of further research.
\medskip
(c) It is proved in \cite{TS14, TS15} that
$$f_{\alpha} (xy^{-1})\,\in\, {\rm TP}_k\; \Leftrightarrow\; {\alpha}\, <\, 1/k\;\;\;\mbox{or}\;\;\; {\alpha}\in\{1/k,\ldots, 1/2\}$$
for every $k\ge 2,$ which shows that one may have $f_{\alpha} (xy^{-1})\in {\rm TP}_k$ and $f_{\alpha}(x)\not\in{\widehat \mathcal{HM}_{k-1}}$ if $k\ge 3.$ This contrasts with the case $k=2$ where the two properties are equivalent, as recalled in the introduction. On the other hand, the above conjecture (\ref{Gegen}) reads
$$f_{\alpha}(x)\,\in\,\mathcal{HM}_{k-1}\; \Leftrightarrow\; {\alpha}\, \le\, 1/k$$
for $p=1,$ which shows that the two properties might have a similar characterization in this framework. Observe also that Conjecture 2.1 in \cite{TS14} relates the ${\rm TP}_\infty$ character of the kernel $f_{\alpha}^p (xy^{-1})$ to the above largest positive root $\mu_{k,p}.$
\medskip
(d) The 'imaginary extension' $f_{{\rm i}{\alpha}}(x)$ admits the factorization
$$f_{{\rm i}\alpha}(x)\;= \;\frac{1}{1+2\cosh(\pi\alpha) x+x^2}\; =\; \frac{1}{(e^{\pi\alpha} +x)(e^{-\pi\alpha} +x)}$$
and is hence clearly $\mathcal{HCM}$ for every real ${\alpha}.$ In particular, the kernel $f_{{\rm i}{\alpha}} (xy^{-1})$ is always ${\rm TP}_2.$ On the other hand, the further total positivity properties of this interesting kernel do not seem easy to investigate at first sight.}
\end{remark}
\subsection{GIG-type densities}
We consider the probability density functions
$$f(x)\; =\; C x^{\beta -1}\exp(-a x^\alpha - b x^{-{\alpha}})$$
on $(0,\infty),$ with $a, b,{\alpha} > 0, \beta\in\mathbb{R}$ and $C > 0$ is the normalizing constant. In the case ${\alpha} =1$, these densities correspond to the classical generalized inverse Gaussian (GIG) distributions and are also prototypes of functions in $\mathcal{HCM},$ having the decomposition
$$f(x)\; =\; C x^{\beta -1}\, f_a (x) f_b(x^{-1})$$
with $-(\log f_a)' \equiv a$ and $-(\log f_b)' \equiv b$ both in $\mathcal{S}.$ In the case ${\alpha} > 1,$ it is easy to see that these densities are in $\mathcal{HM}_1$ but not in $\mathcal{HM}_2.$ In the case ${\alpha} < 1$, it follows from general results that these densities are all in $\mathcal{HCM}$ - see \cite{LB92} p.60. More precisely, setting $a=b=1$ without loss of generality, we have the decomposition $f(x) = C x^{\beta -1} h_{\alpha}(x) h_{\alpha}(x^{-1})$ with
$$-(\log h_{\alpha})'(x)\; =\; {\alpha} x^{{\alpha}-1}\; =\; \frac{{\alpha} \sin(\pi{\alpha})}{\pi} \int_0^\infty \frac{t^{{\alpha}-1}}{t+x}\, dt\; \in\;\mathcal{S}.$$
It is interesting to compare this formula with the finite type decompositions obtained in the present paper. For every $k\ge 2,$ Remark \ref{Inv} shows after some simplifications that we also have
$${\alpha} x^{{\alpha}-1}\; =\; \int_0^\infty \Phi_{k-1}(x,t)\, f_{k,{\alpha}}(t)\,dt$$
with
$$f_{k,{\alpha}}(t)\; =\; (2k-2)!^{-1} \,\alpha^2\prod_{i=1}^{k-1}(i^2-\alpha^2)\; t^{{\alpha}-1}.$$
Observe that the Eulerian product formula for sines implies
$$\binom{2k-2}{k-1} f_{k,{\alpha}}(t)\; \rightarrow\; \left(\frac{{\alpha} \sin(\pi{\alpha})}{\pi}\right) t^{{\alpha}-1}, \qquad k\to \infty,$$
as expected from (\ref{Stic}).
\subsection{Finite type Stieltjes functions}
In this paragraph we consider the functions $x\mapsto \Phi_k(x,1),$ which serve as building blocks for $\mathcal{S}_{k+1},$ and hence belong to $\mathcal{S}_n$ for every $n=2,\ldots, k.$ The proof of Proposition 1 implies after some computations that
\begin{equation}
\label{Phin}
\Phi_k(x,1)\; =\; \frac{1}{(2n)!}\,\int_0^\infty \Phi_n(x,t)\, t^{-1}f_{n,k}(t\wedge t^{-1}) \,dt
\end{equation}
for every $n=1,\ldots, k-1,$ where $f_{n,k}(u) = (-1)^n u^{n+1} (u^n \psi_k(u))^{(2n+1)}.$ In particular, making $n=k-1$ shows that for $k\ge 1$ we have the recursive formula
$$ \Phi_k(x,1)\; =\; (2k-1)\,\int_0^\infty \Phi_{k-1}(x,t)\,t^{-1}\,(t^k\wedge t^{-k}) \,dt.$$
Letting $k\to \infty$ in (\ref{Phin}) also implies, after some simplifications, the curious formula
$$\frac{1}{1+x}\;=\; (2n+1)\, \int_0^\infty \Phi_n(x,t)\, \frac{t^n}{(1+t)^{2n+2}}\,dt$$
for every $n\ge 1,$ which is also a consequence of Remark \ref{Inv} and the first equality in Lemma \ref{Form}. Observe also that letting $n\to \infty,$ by (\ref{Stic}) and Stirling's formula this identity becomes a trivial one:
$$\frac{1}{1+x}\;=\; \int_0^\infty \frac{1}{t+x} \;\delta_1(dt).$$
\subsection{A family of positive self-decomposable distributions}
We observe that the infinite positive measure $\nu_k (dx)$ with density
$$x^{-2}\Phi_k(x^{-1}, 1)\; =\; x^{-1} \psi_k(x^{-1})$$
is a L\'evy measure on $(0,\infty),$ that is it integrates $1\wedge x.$ Besides, since $x\mapsto \psi_k(x^{-1})$ is a non-increasing function by (\ref{Sti2}) with $n=1$, the infinitely divisible positive random variable $X_k$ with log-Laplace transform
$$-\log\mathbb{E}[e^{-\lambda X_k}]\; =\; \varphi_k(\lambda)\; =\; \int_0^\infty (1- e^{-\lambda x})\, \nu_k(dx), \qquad \lambda >0,$$
is self-decomposable - see \cite{LB92} p. 18 or Proposition 5.15 in \cite{SSV}. On the other hand, the fact that $\psi_k$ is not smooth and hence not completely monotone prevents the Bernstein function $\varphi_k$ from being complete, so that a fortiori it is not Thorin-Bernstein either, with the terminology of Chapters 7 and 8 in \cite{SSV}. Hence, the function
$$\lambda\;\mapsto\; \mathbb{E}[e^{-\lambda X_k}]$$
is not in $\mathcal{HCM}$ by Theorem 5.4.1 in \cite{LB92}. However, by Theorems 1 and 2 the latter function is in ${\widehat \mathcal{HM}_{k+1}},$ because
$$\varphi_k'(\lambda)\; =\; \int_0^\infty e^{-\lambda x}\, \psi_k(x^{-1})\, dx\; =\; \int_0^\infty \Phi_k(\lambda, t)\, e^{-t}\, dt.$$
Let us stress however that in general, non-increasing functions in $\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_k$ for some finite $k$ are not necessarily in $\mathcal{CM},$ as shows the example
$$\frac{1}{1 + 2\cos(\pi{\alpha})\lambda + \lambda^2} \; =\; \frac{1}{\sin(\pi{\alpha})} \int_0^\infty e^{-\lambda x}\, (e^{- \cos(\pi{\alpha}) x} \sin (\sin (\pi{\alpha}) x))\, dx,$$
which is for ${\alpha}\in (0, 1/2k)$ in $\mathcal{{\widehat \cH}}_k$ by Proposition \ref{Cauchy}, but not in $\mathcal{CM}.$
\section{Appendix}
\label{Sec:App1}
In this section we prove Lemma \ref{Rk}, using an idea close to the argument of pp. 307-310 in \cite{LB97}. For $u>1,$ the condition $w \ge u+u^{-1}$ implies either $v \ge u$ or $v\le u^{-1}.$ For $v\ge u$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{Ignat} \Delta_{k,u}(w)\; =\; \frac{P_k(u^{-1}v^{-1})
+{\hat P}_k(u v^{-1})}{v-v^{-1}}\; =\; {Q_k(v) \over v^{k} (v-v^{-1})}
\end{equation}
where, here and throughout, $Q_i(v)$ denotes any polynomial of
degree at most $i$ in $v.$ By the chain rule, using repeatedly $ dw/dv=
v^{-1}(v-v^{-1})$, we deduce
$$\Delta_{k,u}^{(k)}(w)\; =\;{Q_{3k}(v) \over v^{2k}(v-v^{-1})^{2k+1}}\cdot$$
On the other hand, since $P_k(x)$ is the polynomial part of the Laurent
series $(1-x)^k (1-x^{-1})^k,$ we have $P_k(x)\, +\, {\hat P}_k(x^{-1})\, =\, (1-x)^k (1-x^{-1})^k \, =\, (-x)^{-k} (x-1)^{2k},$ which entails
$$\Delta_{k,u}(w)\; =\; (-1)^k\,\frac{u^k v^{-k}(v-u^{-1})^{2k}}{v-v^{-1}}\; +\; \frac{{\hat P}_k(uv^{-1})
-{\hat P}_k(uv)}{v-v^{-1}}\cdot$$
Observing that the second term on the right-hand side is a polynomial
of degree $k-1$ in $w,$ we deduce that the $k$-th derivative $\Delta_{k,u}^{(k)}(w)$ must factorize with $(v-u^{-1})^k$ and, by symmetry as a function of $w$, with $(v-u)^k$ as well. We hence obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{Sign} \Delta_{k,u}^{(k)}(w)\; =\;{(v-u)^k(v-u^{-1})^k
R_{k}(v) \over v^{2k}(v-v^{-1})^{2k+1}}
\end{equation}
where $R_{k}(v)$ is a polynomial of degree at most $k$ in $v.$ To get out
an expression for $R_k(v),$ we again use symmetry and consider the case $v\le u^{-1},$ where
\begin{equation}
\label{Times}
\Delta_{k,u}(w)\; =\; \frac{P_k(u^{-1}v) +{\hat P}_k(u v)}{v^{-1}-v}\; =\; - {Q_k(v^{-1}) v^k\over (v-v^{-1})}
\end{equation}
where $Q_k$ is the same polynomial as in (\ref{Ignat}). It is clear that the sum of the two quantities in (\ref{Ignat}) and (\ref{Times}) is a polynomial of degree at most $k-1$ in $w,$ whose $k-$th derivative in $w$ is hence zero. This leads to
$$\Delta_{k,u}^{(k)}(w)\; =\;- {(v-u)^k(v-u^{-1})^k R_{k}(v) \over v^{2k}(v-v^{-1})^{2k+1}}$$
for $v\le u^{-1},$ with the same polynomial $R_k(v)$ as in (\ref{Sign}). Replacing now $v$ by $v^{-1}$ in (\ref{Sign}) and equating the two expressions, we
obtain $R_{k}(v) = v^{2k} R_{k}(v^{-1}),$ which implies $R_k(v)
= C_{k,u} v^k$ for some non-zero constant $C_{k,u}$ depending on
$k,u$ only. Putting everything together, for $v \ge u$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{Rad} \Delta_{k,u}^{(k)}(w)\;
=\;{C_{k,u}(v-u)^k(v-u^{-1})^k \over v^{k}(v-v^{-1})^{2k+1}}\;
=\;{C_{k,u} (w-u-u^{-1})^k \over (w^2-4)^{k+1/2}}
\end{equation}
and this formula is also clearly true for $v\le u^{-1}.$ In order to
identify the constant $C_{k,u},$ we let $w\rightarrow
\infty$ and obtain from (\ref{Ignat}) the behaviour
$$\Delta_{k,u}(w)\; \sim\; P_k(0)\, w^{-1}\; =\; \binom{2k}{k}\, w^{-1}.$$
Comparing with (\ref{Rad}), we finally obtain $C_{k,u} =(-1)^{k}
(2k)!/k!$ as required.
\qed
\begin{remark} {\em An alternative proof of Lemma 5 can be obtained with the help of the following exact formula:
$$\Delta_{k,u}(w) \; = \; -x\; \sum_{i=0}^k \binom{2k}{k+i} \,\pFq{2}{1}{i+1,k+1/2}{k+i+1}{4x}\, (xy)^i$$
for every $w\ge u+u^{-1}$ with the notations $x = (2-w)^{-1}$ and $y = u+u^{-1} -2.$ This identity, which extends (\ref{2F1}), turns out to be equivalent to some
bilinear formula of the Meixner type for the hypergeometric function - see \cite{EMOT} p. 84. Complete details have been written down and are available upon request.
Applying Euler's formula and making some simple hypergeometric transformations, we also get
$$\Delta_{k,u}^{(k)}(w) \; = \; {(-1)^{k}(2k)! (w-u-u^{-1})^k \over k!(w^2 - 4)^{k + 1/2}}\cdot$$
The unexpected point in Lemma \ref{Rk} is the simplicity of the expression of $\Delta_{k,u}^{(k)}(w),$ compared to that of $\Delta_{k,u}(w)$ and all its other derivatives in $w.$}
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\noindent
{\bf Acknowledgement.} The second author would like to thank Jean-Fran\c{c}ois Burnol for several discussions related to this paper.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Introduction}
The number of distinct prime factors of a natural number $n$, denoted by $\omega(n)$, has been the subject of extensive study, from Hardy and Ramanujan \cite{HardyRamanujan} to Erd{\H{o}}s and Kac \cite{ErdosKac}. Letting $n=\prod_i p_i^{\alpha_i}$, we have $\omega(n)=i$. For example, $\omega(5)=1$, $\omega(10)=2$, and $\omega(100)=\omega(2^25^2)=2$. Throughout, we assume that $\omega(1)=0$. The function $\omega(n)$ is also additive, so $\omega(nm)=\omega(n)+\omega(m)$ for any coprime $n$ and $m$.
In this work, we address two major types of identities: divisor sums and Dirichlet series. Many of the closed form expressions available here do not seem to be present anywhere. This is because the easiest functions to work with are \textit{multiplicative}, while $\omega(n)$ is \textit{additive}. Identities mixing both types of functions are not easy to derive using standard methods. In this paper, we use the theory of symmetric functions to find an alternative proof for many series expansions. The methods readily generalize, and can be applied to other additive functions. Our two main results are that
\begin{equation}
\sum_{d|n}\mu(d)\omega(d) f(d) = \left(\sum_{d|n}\mu(d) f(d)\right)\left( \sum_{p|n}\frac{f(p)}{f(p)-1}\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{inf1}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s} = \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}\right)\left(\sum_{p}\frac{a_p}{1+a_p}\right),
\end{equation}
with suitable restrictions on $f$ and $s$, and $a_p:=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{f({p}^m)}{{p}^{ms}}$.
For convenience, we note here that a multiplicative function satisfies $f(nm)=f(n)f(m)$ for $(n,m)=1$, where $(n,m)$ gives the greatest common divisor of $n$ and $m$. A completely multiplicative function satisfies $f(nm)=f(n)f(m)$ for any $n$ and $m$. Both satisfy $f(1)=1$. An additive function satisfies $f(nm)=f(n)+f(m)$ for $(n,m)=1$, while a completely additive function satisfies $f(nm)=f(n)+f(m)$ for any $n$ and $m$.
Now, we address some notation. We let $\sum_{p}a_p$ and $\prod_{p}a_p$ denote sums and products over all primes $p$, beginning with $p=2$. We let $\sum_{p|n}a_p$ and $\prod_{p|n}a_p$ denote sums and products over the distinct primes that divide a positive integer $n$. Finally, we let $\sum_{d|n}a_d$ and $\prod_{d|n}a_d$ denote sums and products over the positive divisors of a positive integer $n$, including $1$ and $n$. For example if $n=12$, $\prod_{d|12}a_d=a_1a_2a_3a_4a_6a_{12}$ and $\prod_{p|12}a_p= a_2a_3$. For the duration of this paper, the symbol $\N:=\left\lbrace 1,2,3\ldots \right\rbrace$ will denote the set of positive integers and will be referred to as the natural numbers. We obey the convention that for $s \in \C$, $s= \sigma + i t$ with $\sigma, t \in \R$. We also define $\C_{\alpha}:=\{z\in\C: z\ne \alpha\}$.
We also utilize the theory of Euler products. An Euler product, described in \cite[(27.4.1-2)]{NIST:DLMF}, is the product form of a Dirichlet series. For any multiplicative function $f$ we have \cite[(11.8)]{Apostol} $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}=\prod_{p}\left(1+a_p\right)$, where
\begin{equation}\label{infap}
a_p:=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{f({p}^m)}{{p}^{ms}}.
\end{equation}
The left-hand side is an Dirichlet series, and the right-hand is an Euler product. Furthermore, letting $s=\sigma+it$, the abscissa of absolute convergence is the unique real number such that $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$ absolutely converges if and only if $\sigma>\sigma_a$.
Some multiplicative functions which will be used in this paper include $\phi(n)$, which denotes the Euler totient function. This counts the number of natural numbers less than or equal to $n$ which are coprime to $n$\cite[(27.2.7)]{NIST:DLMF}. A multiplicative expression for it \cite[(27.3.3)]{NIST:DLMF} is
\begin{equation}\label{def1}
\phi(n)=n\prod_{p|n}\left(1-\frac{1}{p}\right).
\end{equation}
This is generalized by Jordan's totient function, which is defined in \cite[(27.3.4)]{NIST:DLMF} as
\begin{equation}\label{def2}
J_k(n):=n^k\prod_{p|n}\left(1-\frac{1}{p^k}\right).
\end{equation}
Using $\omega(n)$, we can also define the M{\"o}bius function, which gives the parity of the number of prime factors in a squarefree number. It is defined in \cite[(27.2.12)]{NIST:DLMF} as
\begin{equation}\label{def4}
\mu(n) :=\begin{cases} 1, & \text{if $n$=1,} \\ 0, & \text{if $n$ is non-squarefree,} \\ (-1)^{\omega(n)}, & \text{if $n$ is squarefree.} \\\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The paper is organized as follows.
In Section \ref{polynomials}, we derive identities for the elemtary symmetric functions.
In Section \ref{divisorsums}, divisor sums of $\omega(n)$ weighted by other functions are explored.
In Section \ref{infinitesums}, Dirichlet series of $\omega(n)$ weighted by other functions are explored.
Finally, in Section \ref{extensions} we present an extension to higher orders, and lay out other possible extensions of this work.
\section{Factorization identities}
\label{polynomials}
The main results of this paper are based on the following proposition.
\begin{prop} Let $n\in\N$ and $x_1,\ldots,x_n \in \C_1$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{main}
\left(\prod_{i = 1}^{n}(1-x_i)\right)\left( \sum_{i = 1}^{n}\frac{x_i}{x_i-1}\right)= \sum_{k = 1}^{n}(-1)^k k e _{k},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
e_k:=\sum_{1\leqslant i_1< i_2< \cdots < i_k \leqslant n }^{}x_{i_1}x_{i_2}\cdots x_{i_k}.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Following Macdonald \cite[(Chapter 1)]{Macdonald}, we have the relation
\begin{equation}\label{VietaDef}
E(t)=\prod_{i = 1}^{n}(1- t x_i)=\sum_{k = 0}^{n}(-1)^{k}t^k e_k,
\end{equation}
with $x_i\in\C$. Taking a logarithmic derivative of $E(t)$ yields
\begin{equation}
E'(t)=E(t)\sum_{k=1}^n \frac{x_i}{t x_i-1}.
\end{equation}
Taking $t=1$ completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor} Let $n\in\N$ and $x_1,\ldots,x_n \in \C_{-1}$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{mainpos}
\left(\prod_{i = 1}^{n}(1+x_i)\right)\left(\sum_{i = 1}^{n}\frac{x_i}{x_i+1}\right)=\sum_{k = 1}^{n}k e _{k}.
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
We repeat the previous argument with but map $t$ to $-t$ before taking the logarithmic derivative.
\end{proof}
\section{Divisor sums}\label{divisorsums}
The following theorems are obtained by reinterpreting \eqref{main}. We consider divisor sums of a multiplicative function $f$ weighted by $\omega(n)$ and $\mu(n)$ or $|\mu(n)|$. Throughout, $f(p)$ will refer to the value of $f$ evaluated at any prime $p$. We define $\sum_{p|n} g(p)$ as $0$ if $n=1$, where $g$ is any function, not necessarily multiplicative, because $1$ has no distinct prime factors. Under this convention, the theorems in this section also hold for $n=1$.
\begin{thm} Let $f(n)$ be a multiplicative function, $n \in \N$, and $f(p)\neq 1$ for any prime $p$ that divides $n$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{finite1}
\sum_{d|n}\mu(d)\omega(d) f(d) = \left(\prod_{p|n}(1-f(p))\right) \left(\sum_{p|n}\frac{f(p)}{f(p)-1}\right).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
First take any squarefree natural number $n$, so that $n = \prod_{i=1}^{\omega(n)}{p_i}$ by the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. We then let $x_i=f(p_i)$ in \eqref{main}, such that each $x_i$ is an arithmetic function evaluated at each distinct prime that divides $n$. We can evaluate $e_k$, yielding
$$e_k=\sum_{1\leqslant i_1< i_2 \cdots < i_k \leqslant n }f(p_{i_1})f(p_{i_2})\cdots f(p_{i_k}).$$
Since $f$ is multiplicative and each $p_i$ is coprime to the others by definition, we have
$$e_k=\sum_{1\leqslant i_1< i_2 \cdots < i_k \leqslant n }f(p_{i_1}p_{i_2}\cdots p_{i_k}).$$
Now we can regard $e_k$ as the sum of $f(n)$ evaluated at the divisors of $n$ with $k$ prime factors. This is because each term in $e_k$ trivially has $k$ prime factors, and every possible product of $k$ primes that divide $n$ is included in $e_k$. This is equivalent to partitioning the divisors of $n$ based on their number of distinct prime factors. Then \eqref{main} transforms into
$$\left(\prod_{i = 1}^{\omega(n)}(1-f(p_i))\right)\left( \sum_{i = 1}^{\omega(n)}\frac{f(p_i)}{f(p_i)-1}\right)=\sum_{d|n}\omega(d)(-1)^{\omega(d)}f(d).$$
Each divisor $d$ is squarefree since $n$ is squarefree, so we can replace $(-1)^{\omega(d)}$ by $\mu(d)$, where $\mu(d)$ is the M{\"o}bius function which is defined by $\eqref{def4}$. Rewriting the product and sum over $p_i$, $1\leq i \leq \omega(n)$, as a product and sum over $p$ gives \eqref{finite1} for squarefree numbers. However, we can immediately see that if $n$ is non-squarefree, $\mu(d)$ eliminates any non-squarefree divisors on the left-hand side. Meanwhile, the right-hand side is evaluated over the distinct primes that divide $n$ so changing the multiplicities of these primes will not affect the sum in any way. Therefore \eqref{finite1} is valid for all $n\in\N$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor} Let $f(n)$ be a multiplicative function, $n \in \N$, and $f(p)\neq 1$ for any prime $p$ that divides $n$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{finitecor1}
\sum_{d|n}\mu(d)\omega(d) f(d) = \left(\sum_{d|n}\mu(d) f(d)\right)\left( \sum_{p|n}\frac{f(p)}{f(p)-1}\right).
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
A general theorem for any multiplicative function $f(n)$, found in \cite[(2.18)]{Apostol}, is that
\begin{equation}\label{multApostol}
\sum_{d|n}\mu(d) f(d)= \prod_{p|n}\left(1-f(p)\right).
\end{equation}
Substituting this relation into \eqref{finite1} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} Let $f(n)$ be a multiplicative function, $n \in \N$, and $f(p)\neq -1$ for any prime $p$ that divides $n$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{finite2}
\sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)|\omega(d) f(d) = \left(\prod_{p|n}(1+f(p))\right)\left( \sum_{p|n}\frac{f(p)}{1+f(p)}\right).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We follow the reasoning of the proof of \eqref{finite1} but substitute $x_i=f(p_i)$ into \eqref{mainpos} instead of \eqref{main}. Hence, we only have to take the divisor sum over squarefree divisors without multiplying by $(-1)^{\omega(d)}$. We do this by multiplying the divisor sums by $|\mu(d)|$, the characteristic function of the squarefree numbers. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor} Let $f(n)$ be a multiplicative function with $f(1)=1$, $f(p)\neq -1$, and $n\in\N$. Then
\begin{equation}
\sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)|\omega(d) f(d) =\left( \sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)|f(d)\right)\left( \sum_{p|n}\frac{f(p)}{1+f(p)}\right).
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
We substitute $f(n)=\mu(n)g(n)$ into \eqref{multApostol}, where $g(n)$ is multiplicative, ensuring that $f(n)$ is also multiplicative. Noting that $\mu^2(n)=|\mu(n)|$ since the M{\"o}bius function only takes values of $\pm1$ and $0$ yields
$$\sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)| g(d)= \prod_{p|n}\left(1+g(p)\right).$$
Mapping $g$ to $f$ to maintain consistent notation and substituting into \eqref{finite2} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
Specializing $f(n)$ yields a variety of new formulae involving convolutions with $\omega(n)$. Below we use a variety of functions $f(n)$ along with \eqref{finite1}, \eqref{finitecor1}, and \eqref{finite2} to find new expressions for divisor sums involving $\omega(n)$.
\begin{thm} Let $n\in\N$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{finite4}
\sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)|\omega(d) = \omega(n) 2^{\omega(n)-1}.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Substituting $f(n)=1$ into \eqref{finite2} gives $\sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)|\omega(d) = \left(\prod_{p|n}2\right)\left( \sum_{p|n}\frac{1}{2}\right).$
Since the product and sum on the right-hand side are over the distinct primes that divide $n$, each is evaluated $\omega(n)$ times. This simplifies to $\sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)|\omega(d) =2^{\omega(n)} \frac{\omega(n)}{2}.$
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} Let $n\in\N$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{finite6}
\sum_{d|n}\mu(d)\omega(d){\left(\frac{n}{d}\right)}^k = {J_k(n)}\sum_{p|n}\frac{1}{1-p^k}.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Substituting $f(n)=\frac{1}{n^k}$ into \eqref{finite1} gives
\begin{equation}\label{jordanOne}
\sum_{d|n}\frac{\mu(d)\omega(d)}{d^k} = \left(\prod_{p|n}\left(1-\frac{1}{p^k}\right) \right)\left(\sum_{p|n}\frac{1}{1-p^k}\right).
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{def2} to see that $\prod_{p|n}(1-\frac{1}{p^k}) = \frac{J_k(n)}{n^k}$ and substituting this relation into \eqref{jordanOne} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} Let $n\in\N$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{finite9}
\sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)|\omega(d){\left(\frac{n}{d}\right)}^k = \frac{J_{2k}(n)}{J_k(n)}\sum_{p|n}\frac{1}{1+p^k}.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Substituting $f(n)=\frac{1}{n^k}$ into \eqref{finite2} gives
$$\sum_{d|n}\frac{|\mu(d)|\omega(d)}{d^k} =\left(\prod_{p|n}\left(1+\frac{1}{p^k}\right) \right)\left(\sum_{p|n}\frac{1}{1+p^k}\right).$$
Now we complete the proof by using \eqref{def2} to see that
$$\prod_{p|n}\left(1+\frac{1}{p^k}\right)=\frac{n^{2k}}{n^{2k}}\frac{\prod_{p|n}(1-\frac{1}{p^{2k}})}{\prod_{p|n}(1-\frac{1}{p^k})}=\frac{1}{n^k}\frac{J_{2k}(n)}{J_k(n)}.$$
\end{proof}
\begin{cor} Let $n\in\N$. Then
\begin{equation}
\sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)|\omega(d){\left(\frac{n}{d}\right)} = \psi(n)\sum_{p|n}\frac{1}{1+p}.
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Substituting $k=1$ into \eqref{finite9} and noting that $\psi(n)=\frac{J_{2}(n)}{J_1(n)}$ completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} Let $n\in\N$ with $n$ squarefree. Then
\begin{equation}
\sum_{d|n}\omega(d)d^k = \frac{J_{2k}(n)}{J_k(n)} \sum_{p|n}\frac{p^k}{1+p^k}.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Substituting $f(n)=n^k$ into \eqref{finite2} gives
\begin{equation}\label{jordanTwo}
\sum_{d|n}|\mu(d)|\omega(d)d^k = \prod_{p|n}(1+{p^k}) \sum_{p|n}\frac{p^k}{1+p^k}.
\end{equation}
Now if we let $n$ be squarefree, then $n=\prod_{p|n} p$. We also know that \eqref{def2} transforms into
$$J_k(n)=n^k\prod_{p|n}\left(1-\frac{1}{p^k}\right)=n^k \frac{\prod_{p|n}(p^k-1)}{\prod_{p|n}p^k}.$$
However we now have $n^k=\prod_{p|n}p^k$, so $J_k(n)=\prod_{p|n}(p^k-1)$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{jordanThree}
\frac{J_{2k}(n)}{J_k(n)}=\frac{\prod_{p|n}(p^{2k}-1)}{\prod_{p|n}(p^k-1)}=\prod_{p|n}\frac{(p^{2k}-1)}{(p^k-1)}=\prod_{p|n}(p^k+1).
\end{equation}
Letting $n$ be a squarefree natural number in \eqref{finite2}, we can also eliminate $|\mu(d)|$ from the sum on the left-hand side since every divisor of $n$ will already be squarefree. Substituting \eqref{jordanThree} into \eqref{jordanTwo} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Infinite sums}\label{infinitesums}
The propositions \eqref{main} and \eqref{mainpos} hold for a finite number of elements $x_i$. However, we can take the limit $i\rightarrow\infty$ to extend this sum. This enables us to find closed form product expressions for Dirichlet series, which are described in \cite[(27.4.4)]{NIST:DLMF}, of the form $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s}$ for many commonly encountered multiplicative functions $f(n)$.
For later convenience we introduce the prime zeta function, described in Fr{\"o}berg (1968) \cite[(0.1)]{PrimeZeta}, denoted by $P(s)$. We define it by
$$P(s) := \sum_{p}\frac{1}{p^s},$$
and note that it converges for $\Re(s)>1$. It is an analog of the Riemann zeta function, described in \cite[(25.2.1)]{NIST:DLMF}, with the sum taken over prime numbers instead of all natural numbers. For notational convenience we also define the shifted prime zeta function $P(s,a)$ as
$$P(s,a) := \sum_{p}\frac{1}{p^s+a},$$
such that $P(s,0)=P(s)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{primezetacor}
Let $a\in\C$ and $|a|< 2$. Then P(s,a) converges absolutely if and only if $s\in\C$, $\Re(s)>1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The result follows from using a direct comparison test with $P(1)$ to prove the divergence of $P(1,a)$, then taking an absolute value to bound it above and prove absolute convergence for $\Re(s)>1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{primezetacor2}
Let $a,s,k\in\C$ with $|a|<2$. Then $\sum_{p} \frac{p^k}{p^s+a}$ converges absolutely if and only if $\Re(s)>\max\left(1,1+\Re(k)\right)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The result follows from taking an absolute value and multiplying the top and bottom by $p^{-k}$, then applying Lemma \ref{primezetacor}, whether $\Re(k)\leq0$ or not.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{infmain} Let $f(n)$ be a multiplicative function, $s\in\C$, $a_p:=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{f({p}^m)}{{p}^{ms}}$, and $a_p \neq -1$ for any prime $p$. If $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$ and $\sum_{p}\frac{a_p}{1+a_p}$ both converge absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$, then
\begin{equation}\label{inf1}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s} = \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}\right)\left(\sum_{p}\frac{a_p}{1+a_p}\right),
\end{equation}
which converges absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We let $p_i$ denote the $i$\textsuperscript{th} prime number. We must choose a suitable $x_i$ to substitute into \eqref{mainpos}, so we let
$x_i = a_{p_i}$, $1\leq i<\infty$. We still retain the condition $x_i=a_{p_i}\neq -1$ to avoid dividing by $0$. Substituting this $x_i$ into \eqref{mainpos} gives
$$\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}ke_k = \prod_{p}\left( 1 + a_p \right) \sum_{p}\frac{a_p}{1+a_p.}$$
The product and sum on the right now go through every prime $p$ since each $x_i$ is in a one-to-one correspondence with a sum over the $i$th prime. We also have that the product over primes is the Euler product for the Dirichlet series $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$. We now prove that $e_k$ sums over every natural number $n$ that has $k$ distinct prime factors.
\begin{lemma}
Let $1\leq i<\infty$, $i\in\N$, $p_i$ denote the $i$\textsuperscript{th} prime, $f$ denote any multiplicative function, and $x_i=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{f({p_i}^m)}{{p_i}^{ms}}$.
Furthermore, let $k\in\N$ and
\begin{equation}\label{defS}
S_k:=\{n\in\N: \omega(n)=k\},
\end{equation}
so that $S_k$ is the set of natural numbers with $k$ distinct prime factors. If $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$ has an abscissa of absolute convergence $\sigma_a$, then
\begin{equation}\label{inf2}
e_k:=\sum_{1\leqslant i_1< i_2< \cdots < i_k \leqslant n }^{}x_{i_1}x_{i_2}\cdots x_{i_k} = \sum_{n \in S_k}\frac{f(n)}{n^s},
\end{equation}
which converges absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $1\leq i < \infty$, $i\in\N$, and $1\leq\epsilon_i<\infty$, $\epsilon_i\in\N$. We can directly evaluate $e_k$ as
$$e_k=\sum_{1\leqslant i_1< i_2 \cdots < i_k \leqslant n }\frac{f(p_{i_1}^{\epsilon_{i_1}})f(p_{i_2}^{\epsilon_{i_2}})\cdots f(p_{i_k}^{\epsilon_{i_k}})}{\left(p_{i_1}^{\epsilon_{i_1}}p_{i_2}^{\epsilon_{i_2}}\cdots p_{i_k}^{\epsilon_{i_k}}\right)^s}.$$
Here $\epsilon_i$ varies because it goes over every single power of $p$ which is present in $x_i$. Since $x_i$ is a subseries of $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$, it will also converge absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$ and any rearrangement of its terms does not change the value of the sum. Since $f$ is multiplicative and each $p_i$ is coprime to the others by definition, we have
$$e_k=\sum_{1\leqslant i_1< i_2 \cdots < i_k \leqslant n }\frac{f\left(p_{i_1}^{\epsilon_{i_1}}p_{i_2}^{\epsilon_{i_2}}\cdots p_{i_k}^{\epsilon_{i_k}}\right)}{\left(p_{i_1}^{\epsilon_{i_1}}p_{i_2}^{\epsilon_{i_2}}\cdots p_{i_k}^{\epsilon_{i_k}}\right)^s}.$$
If we take an arbitrary natural number $n$ with $k$ distinct prime factors, it will be present in the sum with the $k$\textsuperscript{th} symmetric function, $e_k$. The $k$\textsuperscript{th} symmetric function contains every natural number with $k$ prime factors, since $k$ dictates the number of terms that are multiplied together to form every term in $e_k$. The multiplicity also doesn't matter, since that varies with $\epsilon_i$ which is independent of $k$.
We also know that by the fundamental theorem of arithmetic, there is a bijection between the natural numbers and the products of distinct primes with any multiplicity. This means that every product of distinct primes in the expression for $e_k$ corresponds to a natural number $n$. Taking it all together, it follows that $e_k$ goes over every natural number $n$ with $k$ distinct prime factors. Rewriting each product of primes as $n$ then gives equation \eqref{inf2}. Since $\sum_{n \in S_k}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$ is a subseries of $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$, it will also converge absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$.
\end{proof}
We then have $\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}k e_k = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}k\sum_{n \in S_k}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$, where $S_k$ is defined by \eqref{defS}. This means that as $k$ goes from $1$ to $\infty$ the sum of each $k e_k$ from the left-hand side can be interpreted to go over every natural number except $1$ because they have been partitioned based on how many distinct prime factors they have. The series fails to sum over $n=1$, which does not have any prime factors, but $\omega(1)=0$ so this does not affect the sum in any way.
We can also see $\omega(n)$ is the weight that's represented by $k$ since we can bring it inside the inner sum as $\omega(n)$ and rewrite the double sum as a sum over the natural numbers. We can also change the bottom limit from $k=1$ to $k=0$ since the $k=0$ term is $0$. This gives
$$\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}k\sum_{S_k}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}= \sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\sum_{S_k}\omega(n)\frac{f(n)}{n^s}= \sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s}.$$
The inner sum converges absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$, but the sum over $n$ does not converge on this half plane in general. This rearrangement is valid if $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s}$ converges absolutely. However, as a Dirichlet series it is guaranteed to have an abscissa of absolute convergence and therefore the rearrangement is valid for some $\sigma$.
Simplifying \eqref{mainpos} finally shows that
$$\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s} = \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}\right)\left(\sum_{p}\frac{a_p}{1+a_p}\right).$$
The left-hand side has the same convergence criteria as the right-hand side. Therefore if $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$ has an abscissa of absolutely convergence $\sigma_a$ and $\sum_{p}\frac{a_p}{1+a_p}$ converges absolutely for some $\sigma>\sigma_b$, the left-hand side will converge absolutely for $\sigma>\max\left(\sigma_a, \sigma_b\right)$. This shows that weighting the terms of the Dirichlet series of any multiplicative function $f(n)$ by $\omega(n)$ multiplies the original series by a sum of $f$ over primes.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} Let $f(n)$ be a completely multiplicative function, $s\in\C$, and $n\in\N$. If $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$ has an abscissa of absolute convergence $\sigma_a$, then
\begin{equation}\label{inf3}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s} = \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}\right)\left(\sum_{p}\frac{f(p)}{p^s}\right),
\end{equation}
which converges absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If $\sigma>\sigma_a$, then $\sum_{m=1}^{\infty} \frac{f(p_i^m)}{{p_i}^{ms}}$ converges absolutely and therefore $\left|\frac{f(p)}{p^s}\right|<1$. Then
$$x_i = a_{p_i}= \sum_{m=1}^{\infty} \frac{f(p_i^m)}{{p_i}^{ms}} = \sum_{m=1}^{\infty} \frac{f(p_i)^m}{{p_i}^{ms}} = \frac{1}{1-{\frac{f(p_i)}{{p_i}^s}}}-1.$$
Replacing $a_p$ by $\left({1-{\frac{f(p)}{{p}^s}}}\right)^{-1}-1$ in \eqref{inf1} and simplifying completes the proof. We also note that $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(p)}{p^s}$ is a subseries of $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$, so it will also converge absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$ and we can simplify our convergence criterion.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} Let $f(n)$ be a multiplicative function. Let $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{|\mu(n)|f(n)}{n^s}$ and $\sum_{p}\frac{f(p)}{p^s+f(p)}$ both converge absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$. Assume that for all prime $p$ and $s \in \C$ such that $\sigma > \sigma_a$ we have $f(p) \neq - p^s$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{inf5}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{|\mu(n)|\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s} = \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{|\mu(n)|f(n)}{n^s}\right) \left( \sum_{p}\frac{f(p)}{p^s+f(p)}\right),
\end{equation}
which converges absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
To begin, we note that a product of multiplicative functions is also multiplicative. Letting $f(n) = |\mu(n)|g(n)$ in \eqref{inf1}, where $g$ is any multiplicative function which guarantees that $f$ is multiplicative, we can simplify $a_p$. We have that $|\mu(p^m)|$ is $0$ for $m\geq 2$ and $1$ for $m=1$, since $|\mu(n)|$ is the characteristic function of the squarefree integers. If $m=1$, we also have that $f(p)=|\mu(p)|g(p) = g(p)$, which means that $a_p=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{f({p}^m)}{{p}^{ms}} = \frac{g(p)}{p^s}$. We still retain the $a_p=\frac{g(p)}{p^s}\neq -1$ condition. Assuming that the sum over primes converges, substituting into \eqref{inf1} gives
$$\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{|\mu(n)|\omega(n)g(n)}{n^s} = \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{|\mu(n)|g(n)}{n^s}\right) \left(\sum_{p}\frac{\frac{g(p)}{p^s}}{1+\frac{g(p)}{p^s}}\right).$$
We utilize the same convergence criterion as Theorem \ref{infmain}. Simplifying the fraction and letting $g$ be represented by $f$ in order to maintain consistent notation completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} Let $f(n)$ be a multiplicative function. Let $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\mu(n)f(n)}{n^s}$ and $\sum_{p}\frac{f(p)}{p^s-f(p)}$ both converge absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$. Assume that for all prime $p$ and $s \in \C$ such that $\sigma > \sigma_a$ we have $f(p) \neq p^s$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{inf6}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\mu(n)\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s} = \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\mu(n)f(n)}{n^s}\right)\left(\sum_{p}\frac{f(p)}{f(p)-p^s}\right),
\end{equation}
which converges absolutely for $\sigma>\sigma_a$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We let $f(n) = \mu(n)g(n)$ in \eqref{inf1}, where $g$ is any multiplicative function which guarantees that $f$ is multiplicative. We can then simplify $a_p$, since $a_p:=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{f({p}^m)}{{p}^{ms}} = -\frac{g(p)}{p^s}$. We still retain the $a_p = -\frac{g(p)}{p^s}\neq -1$ condition. Assuming that the sum over primes converges, substituting into \eqref{inf1} gives
$$\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\mu(n)\omega(n)g(n)}{n^s} = \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\mu(n)g(n)}{n^s}\right)\left(\sum_{p}\frac{-\frac{g(p)}{p^s}}{1-\frac{g(p)}{p^s}}\right).$$
We utilize the same convergence criterion as Theorem \ref{infmain}. Simplifying the fraction and letting $g$ be represented by $f$ in order to maintain consistent notation completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We note that the following proposition, the simplest application of \eqref{inf1}, can be found in \cite[(D-17)]{Catalog}.
\begin{thm} Let $\zeta(s)$ be the Riemann zeta function. For $s\in\C$ such that $\sigma>1$ ,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)}{n^s} = \zeta(s) P(s).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We let $f(n) = 1$ in \eqref{inf3}, since this is a completely multiplicative function. We then note that $\sum_{p}\frac{1}{p^s}$ is the prime zeta function. The zeta and prime zeta functions both converge absolutely for $\sigma>1$, so the left-hand side will too.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} Let $\lambda(s)$ be Liouville's function. For $s\in\C$ such that $\sigma>1$,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)\lambda(n)}{n^s} = -\frac{\zeta(2s)}{\zeta(s)} P(s).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We let $f(n) = \lambda(n)$ in \eqref{inf3}. Liouville's function, found in \cite[(27.2.13)]{NIST:DLMF}, is completely multiplicative. We note that $\lambda(p)=-1$ for every prime $p$, since they trivially only have a single prime divisor with multiplicity $1$. This gives
$$\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)\lambda(n)}{n^s} =\left( \sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\lambda(n)}{n^s}\right)\left( \sum_{p}\frac{(-1)}{p^s}\right).$$
We then note that \cite[(27.4.7)]{NIST:DLMF} gives $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\lambda(n)}{n^s}=\frac{\zeta(2s)}{\zeta(s)}$ and states that it converges for $\sigma>1$, which completes the proof since both the zeta and prime zeta functions converge for $\sigma>1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} Let $\chi(n)$ denote a Dirichlet character. For $s\in\C$ such that $\sigma>1$ ,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)\chi(n)}{n^s} = L(s,\chi) \sum_{p}\frac{\chi(p)}{p^s}.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We let $f(n) = \chi(n)$ in \eqref{inf3}. Here $\chi(n)$ is a Dirichlet character, found in \cite[(27.8.1)]{NIST:DLMF}, which is a completely multiplicative function that is periodic with period $k$ and vanishes for $(n,k)>1$. Substituting it in \eqref{inf3} gives
$$\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)\chi(n)}{n^s} = \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\chi(n)}{n^s}\right)\left( \sum_{p}\frac{\chi(p)}{p^s}\right).$$
We then note that a Dirichlet $L$-series, an important number theoretic series, is defined in \cite[(25.15.1)]{NIST:DLMF} as $L(s, \chi) = \sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\chi(n)}{n^s}.$
Simplifying to write the sum over $n$ as an $L$-series while noting that \cite[(25.15.1)]{NIST:DLMF} states that an $L$-series converges absolutely for $\sigma>1$ completes the proof, since both the $L$ series and prime $L$ series converge absolutely for $\sigma>1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} For $s\in\C$ such that $\sigma>1$ ,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{|\mu(n)|\omega(n)}{n^s} = \frac{\zeta(s)}{\zeta(2s)} P(s,1).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We let $f(n) = 1$ in \eqref{inf5} and note that \cite[(27.4.8)]{NIST:DLMF} states that $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{|\mu(n)|}{n^s} = \frac{\zeta(s)}{\zeta(2s)}$ and that this converges for $\sigma>1$. We note that \eqref{primezetacor} states that $P(s,1)$ will also converge absolutely for $\sigma>1$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm} For $s\in\C$ such that $\sigma>1$ ,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\mu(n)\omega(n)}{n^s} = -\frac{1}{\zeta(s)} P(s,-1).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We let $f(n) = 1$ in \eqref{inf6} and note that \cite[(27.4.5)]{NIST:DLMF} states $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\mu(n)}{n^s}=\frac{1}{\zeta(s)}$ and that it converges for $\sigma>1$. We note that \eqref{primezetacor} states that $P(s,-1)$ will also converge absolutely for $\sigma>1$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
While the previous sums have involved completely multiplicative functions or convolutions with the M{\"o}bius function, we can sometimes directly evaluate $\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{f({p}^m)}{{p}^{ms}}$. Taking \eqref{inf1} but converting $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{f(n)}{n^s}$ back to its Euler product means that
$$\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)f(n)}{n^s} = \prod_{p}\left(1+a_p\right) \sum_{p}\left(\frac{a_p}{1+a_p}\right),$$
where $a_p:=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{f({p}^m)}{{p}^{ms}}$. We can extract the coefficient $a_p$ through a variety of methods.
\begin{thm} For $s\in\C$ such that $\sigma>1$,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)2^{\omega(n)}}{n^s} = 2\frac{\zeta^2(s)}{\zeta(2s)} P(s,1).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We know from \cite[(27.4.9)]{NIST:DLMF} that $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{2^{\omega(n)}}{n^s}=\frac{\zeta^2(s)}{\zeta(2s)}$ and that it converges for $\Re(s)>1$, where $2^{\omega(n)}$ is the number of squarefree divisors of $n$.
We now directly evaluate $a_p$, summing it as a geometric series. We note that $2^{\omega\left(p^m\right)}=2$, since $p^m$ trivially has a single distinct prime factor. Substituting into the formula for $a_p$ shows that
$$a_p=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{2^{\omega\left(p^m\right)}}{{p}^{ms}}=\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}2{\left(\frac{1}{p^s}\right)}^m=\frac{2}{p^s-1}.$$
Then $\frac{a_p}{1+a_p}=\frac{2}{p^s+1}$.
Substituting into \eqref{inf1} shows that
$$\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)2^{\omega(n)}}{n^s}= \left(\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{2^{\omega(n)}}{n^s}\right)\left( \sum_{p}\frac{2}{p^s+1}\right).$$
Rewriting the right-hand side in terms of zeta and prime zeta functions while noting that they will both converge if $\sigma>1$ completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{infJordan} Let $J_k(n)$ denote Jordan's totient function. For $s,k\in\C$ such that $\sigma>\max\left(1,1+\Re(k)\right)$,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)J_k(n)}{n^s} =\frac{\zeta(s-k)}{\zeta(s)} \sum_{p}\frac{p^k-1}{p^s-1}.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Taking $a_p=\frac{p^k-1}{p^s-p^k}$, we have $(1+a_p)={\left(1-\frac{1}{p^s}\right)}{\left(1-\frac{1}{p^{s-k}}\right)}^{-1}$ and $\frac{a_p}{1+a_p} = \frac{p^k-1}{p^s-1}$. Substituting into \eqref{inf1} shows that
$$\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)J_k(n)}{n^s} =\prod_{p}{\left(1-\frac{1}{p^s}\right)}{\left(1-\frac{1}{p^{s-k}}\right)}^{-1}\left( \sum_{p}\frac{p^k-1}{p^s-1}\right).$$
The series $\sum_{p}\frac{p^k-1}{p^s-1}$ does not have a representation as a sum of prime zeta and shifted prime zeta functions in general, but in special cases such as $s = 2k$, $k>1$, it does. Rewriting in terms of zeta functions and taking convergence criteria based on \eqref{primezetacor2} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We state several theorems without proof. They are all special cases of Theorem \ref{infmain} and can be proved similarly to Theorem \ref{infJordan}. In each case we begin with a known Euler product for a function $f(n)$, then use that to extract $a_p$.
\begin{thm} Let $\sigma_k(n)$ denote the sum of the $k$th powers of the divisors of $n$. For $s,k\in\C$ such that $\sigma>\max\left(1,1+\Re(k)\right)$,
\begin{equation}\label{inf12}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)\sigma_k(n)}{n^s} = \zeta(s)\zeta(s-k) \left(P(s)+P(s-k)-P(2s-k)\right).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{thm} Let $d(n)$ equal the number of divisors of n. For $s\in\C$ such that $\sigma>1$,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)d(n^2)}{n^s} = \frac{\zeta^3(s)}{\zeta(2s)} \left(4P(s,1)-P(s)\right).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{thm} Let $d(n)$ equal the number of divisors of n. For $s\in\C$ such that $\sigma>1$,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)d^2(n)}{n^s} = \frac{\zeta^4(s)}{\zeta(2s)} \left(8P(s,1)+P(2s)-4P(s)\right).
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\section{Extensions}\label{extensions}
Lastly, we show how to generalize the methods of this paper to second and higher order derivatives. Starting with the genrating product for $e_k$, that $\prod_{k=1}^n (1+tx_i) = \sum_{k = 0}^{n}e_k t^k$, we study the action of the differential operator $D:=x\frac{d}{dx}$. Applying it once yields
$$D\left(\prod_{k=1}^n (1+tx_i)\right)=\sum_{k = 1}^{n}k e_k t^k,$$
from which we recover the familiar \eqref{main} after evaluating at $t=1$. Applying $D$ a second time results in
\begin{align}
\sum_{k = 1}^{n}k^2 e_k t^k &=D\left(x\prod_{k=1}^n (1+tx_i) \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{x_i}{1+t x_i}\right) \\&=\left(\prod_{i = 1}^{n}(1+x_i)\right)\left( \left(\sum_{i = 1}^{n}\frac{x_i}{1+x_i}\right)^2+\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{x_i}{\left(1+x_i\right)^2}\right).
\end{align}
Letting $x_i =a_p:= \frac{f(p_i)}{{p_i}^s}+\frac{f({p_i}^2)}{{p_i}^{2s}}+\cdots = \sum_{m=1}^{\infty}\frac{f({p_i}^m)}{{p_i}^{ms}}$, and taking $t \rightarrow 1$ and $n\rightarrow \infty$ gives
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{{\omega(n)}^2f(n)}{n^s}=\left(\sum_{n\in\N} \frac{f(n)}{n^s}\right)\left( \left(\sum_{p}\frac{a_p}{1+a_p}\right)^2+\sum_{p}\frac{a_p}{\left(1+a_p\right)^2}\right).
\end{equation}
For a completely multiplicative function, summing $a_p$ as a geometric series reduces this to
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{{\omega(n)}^2f(n)}{n^s}=\left(\sum_{n\in\N} \frac{f(n)}{n^s}\right)\left( \left(\sum_{p}\frac{f(p)}{p^s}\right)^2+\sum_{p}\frac{f(p)}{p^s}-\sum_{p}\left(\frac{f(p)}{p^s}\right)^2\right).
\end{equation}
As an example, letting $f(n)=1$ gives
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{{\omega(n)}^2}{n^s}=\zeta(s)\left( P^2(s)+P(s)-P(2s)\right),
\end{equation}
which converges for $\Re(s)>1$. In general, applying $D$ to $E(t)$ $k$ times will result in a Dirichlet series of the form $\sum_{n\in\N}\frac{\omega(n)^kf(n)}{n^s}$.
These theorems apply to any multiplicative functions. Together, this allows for a large class of infinite and divisor sums weighted by $\omega(n)$ to be addressed for the first time. This leads to some surprising results such as that the Dirichlet series for products of $\omega(n)$ and other multiplicative functions often have a convenient closed form expression in terms of zeta and prime zeta functions. The methods of this paper also suggest an obvious generalization; taking the $k$th derivative of $E(t)$ will lead to finite and infinite sums involving $\omega(n)^k$. This also suggests deep connections between the theory of symmetric functions and Dirichlet series, since with the right choice of $x_i$ we can interpret a Dirichlet series as a sum over symmetric polynomials. Different identities for symmetric polynomials with correspond to general expressions for Dirichlet series weighted by different functions. Due to this, a systematic study of identities for symmetric functions should correspond to identities for Dirichlet series.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
Many thanks to my research supervisors at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland; Guru Khalsa, Mark Stiles, Kyoung-Whan Kim, and Vivek Amin have at various times helped me through random issues. Many thanks as well to Howard Cohl for his invaluable style tips and general mathematical expertise. Without him this paper wouldn't have gotten out of the ground. Bruce Berndt of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Krishna Alladi of the University of Central Florida also provided valuable feedback. Many thanks also go out to my teachers - William Wuu, Joseph Boettcher, Colleen Adams, Joshua Schuman, Jamie Andrews, and others - at Quince Orchard High School, who have miraculously put up with me through the years.
|
\section{Introduction\label{sec:introduction}}
The discovery of the Higgs boson provides an explanation for the origin of mass in the charged fermion and gauge sectors of the Standard Model (SM). However, despite this great success, a number of problems remain. In particular, our understanding of the origin of neutrino mass is incomplete, and we do not know the constituent properties of the dark matter (DM) that appears necessary on galactic scales. In addition to these puzzles, the origin of the $\mathcal{O}(100)$~GeV mass-parameter that determines the weak scale in the SM also remains a mystery. Thus, with regard to the mechanisms of mass in the universe, there remains much to be discovered.
The scotogenic model is a simple framework that aims to address some of these short-comings~\cite{Ma:2006km}. It offers an explanation for the origin of neutrino mass and the nature of DM by proposing a common or unified solution to these puzzles. In this approach, neutrinos acquire mass as a radiative effect, at the one-loop level, due to interactions with a $Z_2$-odd sector that includes DM candidates. The resulting theory gives a simple model for neutrino mass and DM, and has been well-studied in the literature~\cite{Schmidt:2012yg}.
Motivated by the simplicity of the scotogenic model, and our inadequate understanding of the origin of the weak scale, in this work we investigate a minimal scale-invariant (SI) implementation of the scotogenic model (hereafter, the SI scotogenic model). Our goal is to maintain the appealing features of the scotogenic model, namely the explanation for both neutrino mass and DM, while incorporating a dynamical model for the origin of the weak scale. In such a model, the dimensionful parameters, including the Higgs mass, are born as a dynamical effect via radiative symmetry breaking~\cite{Coleman:1973jx}. Due to their common origin, both the Higgs mass and the exotic masses should appear at a similar scale, of $\mathcal{O}(\mathrm{TeV})$, enhancing the prospects for testing the model. The resulting theory provides a common framework for the aforementioned problems relating to mass - namely the origin of neutrino mass, the origin of the weak scale, and the nature of DM.
We investigate the SI scotogenic model in detail, demonstrating that viable electroweak symmetry breaking can be achieved, while simultaneously generating neutrino masses and the DM relic abundance. The model predicts a singlet scalar (dilaton) that plays two important roles - it triggers electroweak symmetry breaking and sources the lepton number violation that allows radiative neutrino mass. Important constraints are studied, including those from lepton flavor violating effects, DM direct-detection experiments, and the Higgs sector, such as the invisible Higgs decay width and Higgs-dilaton mixing. Direct-detection constraints turn out to be rather severe and we find that large regions of parameter space are already excluded. None the less, viable parameter space is found with a DM mass below (roughly) 10~GeV or above 200~GeV. The model can be experimentally probed in a number of ways, including: $\mu\rightarrow e+\gamma$ searches, future direct-detection experiments, precision studies of the Higgs decays $h\rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ and $h\rightarrow \gamma Z$, and collider searches for an inert doublet.
Before proceeding we note that a number of earlier papers have studied relationships between neutrino mass and DM; see e.g.~Refs.~\cite{Krauss:2002px,Aoki:2013gzs,Ng:2014pqa,Culjak:2015qja}, and also Ref.~\cite{Ahriche:2015wha}, in which DM stability follows from an accidental symmetry. Earlier works investigating SI extensions of the SM appear in Ref.~\cite{Hempfling:1996ht} and, in particular, studies of SI models for neutrino mass can be found in Refs.~\cite{Foot:2007ay,Ahriche:2015loa}.
The structure of this paper is as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:scotogenic_SI} we introduce the model and detail the symmetry breaking sector. We turn our attention to the origin of neutrino mass in Section~\ref{sec:neutrino_mass} and discuss various constraints in Sections~\ref{sec:higgsdecay} and~\ref{sec:constraints}. Dark matter is discussed in Section~\ref{sec:dark_matter} and our main analysis and results appear in Section~\ref{sec:results}. Conclusions are drawn in Section~\ref{sec:conc}.
\section{The Scale-Invariant Scotogenic Model\label{sec:scotogenic_SI}}
The minimal SI implementation of the scotogenic model is obtained by extending the SM to include three generations of gauge-singlet fermions, $N_{iR}\sim(1,1,0)$, where $i=1,\,2,\,3,$ labels generations, a second SM-like scalar doublet, $S\sim(1,2,1)$, and a singlet scalar $\phi\sim(1,1,0)$. A $Z_2$ symmetry with action $\{N_R,\, S\}\rightarrow - \ \{N_R,\, S\}$ is imposed on the model.\footnote{This model was also mentioned in Ref.~\cite{Lee:2012jn}.} The scalar $\phi$, as well as the SM fields, transform trivially under this symmetry. The lightest $Z_2$-odd particle is stable and may be a DM candidate; this should be taken as either the lightest singlet fermion $N_{1}$ or a neutral component of the the doublet $S$, as discussed below. The scalar $\phi$ plays the dual roles of sourcing lepton number violation, to allow neutrino mass, and triggering electroweak symmetry breaking.
With this field content, the most-general Lagrangian consistent with both the SI and $Z_2$ symmetries contains the terms
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}&\supset& i\bar{N_R}\gamma^\mu \partial_\mu N_R +\frac{1}{2}(\partial^\mu \phi)^2+|D^\mu S|^2 - \frac{y_i}{2}\;\phi\,\overline{N_{iR}^c}\,N_{iR} -g_{i\alpha} \overline{N_{iR}}\,L_\alpha S-V(\phi,S,H),\label{eq:lagrange}
\end{eqnarray}
where $L_\alpha \sim(1,2,-1)$ denotes the SM lepton doublets, with generations labeled by Greek letters, $\alpha,\,\beta=e,\,\mu,\,\tau$. We denote the SM scalar doublet as $H\sim(1,2,1)$ and $V(\phi,S,H)$ is the most-general scalar potential consistent with the symmetries. The SI symmetry precludes any dimensionful parameters in the model, including bare Majorana mass terms for the fermions $N_i$.
\subsection{Symmetry Breaking}
In the absence of dimensionful parameters, the scalar potential contains only quartic interactions:
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\phi,S,H)&=& \lambda_\text{\tiny H}|H|^4+\frac{\lambda_\phi}{4} \phi^4 +\frac{\lambda_\text{\tiny S}}{2}|S|^4 +\frac{\lambda_{\phi\text{\tiny H}}}{2} \phi^2 |H|^2+\frac{\lambda_{\phi\text{\tiny S}}}{2} \phi^2 |S|^2+\lambda_{3} |H|^2 |S|^2\nonumber\\
& & +\lambda_{4}\,|H^\dagger S|^2 +\frac{\lambda_{5}}{2}(S^\dagger H)^2+\mathrm{H.c.} \label{eq:SIma_potential}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda_5$ can be taken real without loss of generality. The desired VEV pattern has $\langle S\rangle=0$, to preserve the $Z_2$ symmetry, with $\langle H\rangle\ne0$ and $\langle\phi\rangle\ne0$, to break both the SI and electroweak symmetries. In addition to the doublet scalar $S$, we shall see that the spectrum contains an SM-like scalar $h_1$ and a dilaton $h_2$.
Radiative corrections play an important role in triggering the desired symmetry breaking pattern. A full analysis of the potential requires the inclusion of leading-order loop corrections; however, in general, the full one-loop corrected potential is not analytically tractable. None the less, as discussed in Ref.~\cite{Ahriche:2015loa} (and guided by Ref.~\cite{Gildener:1976ih}), simple analytic expressions can be obtained by noting the following. Loop corrections involving SM fields are dominated by top-quark loops, due to the large Yukawa coupling. To allow viable electroweak symmetry breaking and give a positively-valued dilaton mass, these corrections must be dominated by loop corrections from a beyond-SM scalar, namely $S$. Thus, loop corrections from $S$ and $t$ are expected to dominate and, to reasonable approximation, one can neglect loop corrections involving the light scalars (namely the SM-like Higgs and the dilaton). More precisely, this gives an approximation to the potential up to corrections of $\mathcal{O}(M_{h_{1}}^4/M_S^4)$~\cite{Ahriche:2015loa}, which is reasonable provided one restricts attention to $M_S\gtrsim 200$~GeV.
Adopting this approximation, and writing the SM scalar in unitary gauge as $H=(0,\, h/\sqrt{2})$, the one-loop corrected potential for $h$ and $\phi$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
V_{1-l}\left( h,\phi \right) &=&\frac{\lambda _{\text{\tiny H}}}{4}h^{4}+\frac{\lambda _{\phi \text{\tiny H}}}{4}\phi ^{2}h^{2}+\frac{\lambda
_{\phi }}{4}\phi ^{4}+\sum_{i=all~fields}n_{i}\,G\left( M_{i}^{2}\left( h,\phi
\right) \right), \label{V}
\end{eqnarray}
where $n_i$ is a multiplicity factor, $\Lambda$ is the renormalization scale, and the sum is over all fields barring the light scalars ($h$ and $\phi$) and the light SM fermions (all but the top-quark). The function $G$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
G\left( X \right) &=&\frac{X ^{2}}{64\pi ^{2}}\left[ \log \frac{X }{\Lambda ^{2}}-\frac{3}{2}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
In the absence of bare dimensionful parameters, the field-dependent masses can be written as
\begin{equation}
M_{i}^{2}\left( h,\phi \right) =\frac{\alpha _{i}}{2}h^{2}+\frac{\beta _{i}}{2}\phi ^{2},
\end{equation}%
where $\alpha _{i}$ and $\beta _{i}$ are constants.
Symmetry breaking is triggered via dimensional transmutation, introducing a dimensionful parameter into the theory in exchange for one of the dimensionless couplings (which is now fixed in terms of the other parameters). Analyzing the potential reveals a minimum with both $\langle \phi \rangle \equiv x\neq 0$ and $\langle h\rangle \equiv v\neq 0$ for $\lambda _{\phi \text{\tiny H}}<0$. If one considers the tree-level potential, the desired VEV pattern is triggered at the scale $\Lambda$ where the running couplings obey $2\sqrt{\lambda_\text{\tiny H}(\Lambda)\lambda_\phi(\Lambda)} +\lambda_{\phi\text{\tiny H}}(\Lambda)=0$. Including loop corrections, subject to our approximation, modifies this relation to
\begin{equation}
2\left\{ \lambda _{ \text{\tiny H}}{\lambda _{\phi }}+\frac{\lambda _{\text{\tiny H}}\ }{x^{2}}\sum_{i}n_{i}\left\{ \beta _{i}-\alpha _{i}\frac{v^{2}}{%
x^{2}}\right\} G^{\prime }\left( M_{i}^{2}\right) \right\}
^{1/2}+\lambda _{\phi \text{\tiny H}}+\frac{2}{x^{2}}\sum_{i}n_{i}\alpha _{i}G^{\prime }\left(
M_{i}^{2}\right) =0, \label{1loopcoupling_condition}
\end{equation}%
with $G^{\prime }\left( \eta \right) =\partial G\left( \eta \right)
/\partial \eta $. The further condition%
\begin{equation}
-\frac{\lambda _{\phi \text{\tiny H}}}{2\lambda _{\text{\tiny H}}}=\frac{%
v^{2}}{x^{2}}+\sum_{i}\frac{n_{i}\alpha _{i}}{\lambda _{\text{{\tiny
H}}}\ x^{2}}G^{\prime }\left( M_{i}^{2}\right), \label{eq:1loopvev_cond}
\end{equation}%
is also satisfied. Absent fine-tuning, we observe that with $\lambda _{\text{\tiny H},\phi\text{\tiny H}}=\mathcal{O}(1)$ one obtains $v\sim x$ and the exotic scale is
expected near the TeV scale. Eqs.~%
\eqref{1loopcoupling_condition} and \eqref{eq:1loopvev_cond} ensure that the tadpoles
vanish.
One-loop vacuum stability requires that the couplings obey:
\begin{equation}
\lambda _{\text{{\tiny H}}}^{1-l},\lambda _{\phi }^{1-l},\lambda
_{\phi \text{{\tiny H}}}^{1-l}+2\sqrt{\lambda _{\text{{\tiny
H}}}^{1-l}\lambda _{\phi }^{1-l}}>0, \label{1loopstability_condition}
\end{equation}%
where the one-loop couplings are defined as
\begin{equation}
\lambda _{\text{\tiny H}}^{1-l}=\frac{1}{6}\frac{\partial
^{4}V_{1-l}}{\partial h^{4}},\quad \lambda _{\phi }^{1-l}=\frac{1}{6}\frac{\partial ^{4}V_{1-l}}{\partial \phi
^{4}},\quad \quad \lambda _{\phi \text{\tiny H}
}^{1-l}=\frac{\partial ^{4}V_{1-l}}{\partial h^{2}\partial \phi ^{2}}.
\end{equation}%
Eq.~\eqref{1loopstability_condition} guarantees
that the masses for the neutral scalars $h$ and $\phi$ are strictly
positive, forcing one of the beyond-SM scalars in the doublet $S$ to be the
heaviest particle in the spectrum, to overcome top-quark contributions to the dilaton mass. Demanding $\lambda _{\phi \text{\tiny H}}^{1-l}<0$
also ensures that the vacuum with $v\neq 0$ and $x\neq 0$ is preferred over the vacuum with a single nonzero VEV.
\subsection{The Scalar Spectrum}
Writing the inert-doublet as $S=(S^{+},(S^{0}+iA)/\sqrt{2})^{T}$, the
components have masses
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{S^{+}}^{2}&=&\frac{\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny S}}}}{2}\,x^{2}+\frac{%
\lambda _{3}}{2}\,v^{2},\nonumber\\
M_{S^{0},A}^{2}&=&\frac{\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny S}%
}}}{2}\,x^{2}+(\lambda _{3}+\lambda _{4}\pm \lambda _{5})\frac{v^{2}}{2}\ =\ M_{S^{+}}^{2}+(\lambda _{4}\pm \lambda _{5})\frac{v^{2}}{2}.
\end{eqnarray}
The $\lambda _{5}$-term splits the neutral scalar masses $%
M_{S^{0}}$ and $M_{A}$, with the splitting becoming negligible in the limit $%
\lambda _{5}\ll 1$.\footnote{Note that the limit $\lambda_5\ll1$ is technically natural due to the restoration of lepton number symmetry in the limit $\lambda_5\rightarrow0$.} After symmetry breaking, the scalars $h$ and $\phi $ mix
to give two mass eigenstates, which we denote by $h_{1,2}$,
\begin{equation}
h_{1}\,=h\,\cos \theta _{h}\,-\phi \sin \theta _{h}\,\,,\quad
\,h_{2}=h\,\sin \theta _{h}\,+\phi \cos \theta _{h}\,\,.
\label{eq:1loop_scalar_eigenstates}
\end{equation}%
Due to the $Z_{2}$ symmetry, the neutral components of $S$ do not mix with
these fields. At tree-level the mixing angle is determined by the VEVS,
\begin{equation}
c_{h}\ \equiv \ \cos \theta _{h}\ =\ \frac{x}{\sqrt{x^{2}+v^{2}}},\quad
s_{h}\ \equiv \ \sin \theta _{h}\ =\ \frac{v}{\sqrt{x^{2}+v^{2}}},\,
\end{equation}%
and the SM-like scalar mass is given by
\begin{equation}
M_{h_{1}}^{2}=(2\lambda _{\text{{\tiny H}}}\ -\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny H}}%
})v^{2}\ \simeq \ 125~\mathrm{GeV}.
\end{equation}%
The scalar $h_{2}$ is the pseudo-Goldstone boson associated with the broken
SI symmetry, and is massless at tree-level, though radiative corrections
induce $M_{h_{2}}\neq 0$. A useful approximation for $M_{h_{2}}$ is~\cite%
{Gildener:1976ih}
\begin{equation}
M_{h_{2}}^{2}\simeq \frac{1}{8\pi ^{2}(x^{2}+v^{2})}\left\{
M_{h_{1}}^{4}+6M_{W}^{4}+3M_{Z}^{4}-12M_{t}^{4}+2M_{S^{+}}^{4}+M_{A}^{4}+M_{S^{0}}^{4}-2\sum_{i=1}^{3}M_{%
{i}}^{4}\right\}. \label{eq:pgb_mass}
\end{equation}%
Here the singlet fermion masses are given by $M_{i}=y_{i}\,x$, and are
ordered as $M_{1}<M_{2}<M_{3}$. Eq.~\eqref{eq:pgb_mass} shows that viable symmetry breaking requires one of the scalars $S^+$, $S^0$ or $A$ to be the
heaviest particle in the spectrum, to overcome negative loop
contributions to $M_{h_{2}}$ from the top quark and the fermions $N_{i}$.
Tree-level expressions for $M_{h_{1}}$ and $\theta
_{h}$ are presented above for convenience, however, in our numerical analysis (detailed below), we
use the mass eigenvalues $M_{h_{1,2}}$ and the mixing angle $\theta _{h}$
obtained by diagonalizing the one-loop corrected potential. We note that the SI
symmetry imposes non-trivial constraints on the model, with $\lambda _{\phi
} $ and $\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny H}}}$ fixed by Eqs.~%
\eqref{1loopcoupling_condition} and \eqref{eq:1loopvev_cond}, and the Higgs
mass $M_{h_{1}}\simeq 125$~\textrm{GeV} further fixes $\lambda _{\text{{\tiny H}}}$.
\section{Neutrino Mass\label{sec:neutrino_mass}}
The combined terms in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:lagrange} and~\eqref{eq:SIma_potential}
explicitly break lepton number symmetry, giving rise to radiative neutrino mass at the one-loop level, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:SI_one_loop}. Observe that $\phi$ plays a key role in allowing the neutrino mass diagram, without which neutrinos would remain massless.\footnote{The Feynman diagram in Figure~\ref{fig:SI_one_loop} is an example of the SI type T3 one-loop topology. Related variants are possible~\cite{in_prep}.}
Calculating the mass diagram gives
\begin{equation}
(\mathcal{M}_{\nu })_{\alpha \beta }=\sum_{i}\frac{g_{i\alpha }g_{i\beta
}M_{i}}{16\pi ^{2}}\left\{ \frac{M_{S^{0}}^{2}}{M_{S^{0}}^{2}-M_{i}^{2}}\ln
\frac{M_{S^{0}}^{2}}{M_{i}^{2}}-\frac{M_{A}^{2}}{M_{A}^{2}-M_{i}^{2}}\ln
\frac{M_{A}^{2}}{M_{i}^{2}}\right\} .
\end{equation}%
In the limit that $M_{S^{0}}^{2}\approx M_{A}^{2}\equiv M_{0}^{2}$, this
simplifies to
\begin{equation}
(\mathcal{M}_{\nu })_{\alpha \beta }\simeq \sum_{i}\frac{g_{i\alpha
}g_{i\beta }\lambda _{5}v^{2}}{16\pi ^{2}}\frac{M_{i}}{M_{0}^{2}-M_{i}^{2}}%
\left\{ 1-\frac{M_{i}^{2}}{M_{0}^{2}-M_{i}^{2}}\ln \frac{M_{0}^{2}}{M_{i}^{2}%
}\right\} .
\end{equation}%
Note that the $Z_{2}$ symmetry prevents mixing between SM neutrinos and the
exotics $N_{i}$.
\begin{figure}[ttt]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.50\textwidth]{SI_one_loop.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{One-loop diagram for neutrino mass in the scale-invariant scotogenic model.}\label{fig:SI_one_loop}
\end{figure}
One can relate the entries in the neutrino mass matrix to the elements of the Pontecorvo-Maki-Nakawaga-Sakata (PMNS) mixing matrix~\cite{Pontecorvo:1967fh} elements. We parameterize the latter as
\begin{eqnarray}
U_{\nu }=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
c_{12} c_{13} & c_{13} s_{12} & s_{13}e^{-i\delta_{d}} \\
-c_{23} s_{12}-c_{12} s_{13}s_{23}e^{i\delta_{d}}&c_{12} c_{23}-s_{12} s_{13}s_{23}e^{i\delta_{d}} &c_{13}s_{23} \\
s_{12} s_{23}-c_{12} c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta_{d}}&-c_{12} s_{23}-c_{23} s_{12}s_{13}e^{i\delta_{d}} &c_{13}c_{23}
\end{array}
\right) \times U_{m},
\end{eqnarray}
with $\delta _{d}$ being the Dirac phase and $U_{m}=\mathrm{diag}(1,\,e^{i\theta _{\alpha }/2},\,e^{i\theta _{\beta
}/2})$ giving the dependence on the Majorana phases $\theta _{\alpha, \beta} $. We use the shorthand $s_{ij}\equiv \sin \theta _{ij}$ and
$c_{ij}\equiv \cos \theta _{ij}$ to refer to the mixing angles. In our numerical scans of the parameter space in the model, we fit to the best-fit experimental values for the mixing angles: $%
s_{13}^{2}=0.025_{-0.003}^{+0.003}$, $%
s_{12}^{2}=0.320_{-0.017}^{+0.016}$, $s_{23}^{2}=0.43_{-0.03}^{+0.03}$, and the mass-squared differences: $\Delta
m_{21}^{2}=7.62_{-0.19}^{+0.19}\times 10^{-5}\mathrm{eV}^{2}$ and $|\Delta
m_{13}^{2}|=2.55_{-0.09}^{+0.06}\times 10^{-3}\mathrm{eV}^{2}$~\cite{Tortola:2012te}.
To determine the parameter space that generates viable neutrino masses, we
use the Casas-Ibarra parameterization~\cite{Casas:2001sr}
\begin{equation}
(\mathcal{M}_{\nu })_{\alpha \beta }=\sum_{i}g_{i\alpha }g_{i\beta }\Lambda
_{i}=\left( g^{T}\Lambda g\right) _{\alpha \beta },
\end{equation}%
with%
\begin{equation}
\Lambda _{i}=\frac{M_{i}}{16\pi ^{2}}\left\{ \frac{M_{S^{0}}^{2}}{%
M_{S^{0}}^{2}-M_{i}^{2}}\ln \frac{M_{S^{0}}^{2}}{M_{i}^{2}}-\frac{M_{A}^{2}}{%
M_{A}^{2}-M_{i}^{2}}\ln \frac{M_{A}^{2}}{M_{i}^{2}}\right\} .
\end{equation}%
According to the Casas-Ibarra parameterization, the coupling $g$ can be
written as%
\begin{equation}
g=D_{\sqrt{\Lambda ^{-1}}}\mathcal{R}D_{\sqrt{m_{\nu }}}U_{\nu }^{\dag },
\end{equation}
where $D_{\sqrt{\Lambda ^{-1}}}=\mathrm{diag}\left\{ \sqrt{\Lambda _{1}^{-1}},%
\sqrt{\Lambda _{2}^{-1}},\sqrt{\Lambda _{3}^{-1}}\right\} $, $D_{\sqrt{%
m_{\nu }}}=\mathrm{diag}\left\{ \sqrt{m_{1}},\sqrt{m_{2}},\sqrt{m_{3}}\right\}$, and $\mathcal{R}$\ is an orthogonal
rotation matrix ($m_{1,2,3}$ are the neutrino eigen-masses).
\section{Invisible Higgs Decays\label{sec:higgsdecay}}
The model is subject to constraints on the branching fraction for invisible Higgs decays, $%
\mathcal{B}(h\rightarrow inv)<17\%$~\cite{Hinv}. One should use $%
inv\equiv \{h_{2}h_{2}\},\{N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\}$,
when kinematically available, with corresponding decay widths given by%
\begin{align}
\Gamma \left( h_1\rightarrow h_2h_2\right) & =\frac{1}{32\pi }\frac{%
\left( \lambda_{122}\right)^{2}}{M_{h_{1}}}\,\left( 1-\frac{4M_{h_2}^{2}%
}{M_{h_1}^{2}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\Theta \left(
M_{h_1}-2M_{h_2}\right), \notag \\
\Gamma \left( h_{1}\rightarrow N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}%
}\right) & =\frac{\tilde{y}_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{2}s_{h}^{2}}{16\pi }%
M_{h_{1}}\left( 1-\frac{4M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}}{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}\right) ^{%
\frac{3}{2}}\Theta \left( M_{h_1}-2M_\text{\tiny DM}\right).
\end{align}%
The effective cubic coupling $\lambda_{122}$ is defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq:eff_couplings} below. As a result of the SI symmetry, the coupling $\lambda_{122}$ vanishes at tree-level, and the non-zero loop-level coupling is
sufficiently small to ensure that decay to $h_{2}$ pairs is highly suppressed.%
\footnote{Note that $h_{2}$ decays to SM states, similar to a light SM Higgs boson but
with suppression by the mixing angle, $s_{h}^{2}$. However, dedicated ATLAS or CMS searches for such light scalars, in the
channels $2b$, $2\tau $ or $2\gamma $, do not currently exist, so we classify the decay $%
h_{1}\rightarrow h_{2}h_{2}$ as invisible. In practice, however, the suppression of $%
\Gamma (h_{1}\rightarrow h_{2}h_{2})$ due to SI symmetry renders this point
moot.}
\section{Lepton Flavor Violating Decays\label{sec:constraints}}
The new fields give rise to one-loop contributions to $\mu\rightarrow e+\gamma$. Normalized relative to $\mathrm{Br}(\mu\rightarrow e\nu_\mu\bar{\nu}_e)$, the corresponding branching fraction is
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\mathrm{Br}(\mu\rightarrow e \gamma)}{\mathrm{Br}(\mu\rightarrow e\nu_\mu\bar{\nu}_e)}=\frac{3(4\pi)^3\alpha_{em}}{4 \mathrm{G}_F^2} \left|A_D\right|^2,
\end{eqnarray}
where $A_D$ is the dipole form factor:
\begin{eqnarray}
A_D=\sum_i \frac{g_{ei}^* g_{i\mu}}{32\pi^2}\frac{1}{M_{S^+}^2}\,F^{(n)}(M_i^2/M_{S^+}^2).
\end{eqnarray}
with the loop function given by
\begin{eqnarray}
F^{(n)}(x)=[1-6x+3x^2+2x^3-6x^2\ln x]/[6(1-x)^4].
\end{eqnarray}
A simple change of labels allows one to use the above formulae for the related decay $\tau\rightarrow \mu+\gamma$. In our analysis we also include the constraint from neutrino-less double beta decay.
Note that, in general, the scotogenic model is subject to strong LFV constraints, relating to the fact that the DM annihilates via the same Yukawa couplings that mediate LFV processes. Consequently one cannot decouple the two effects and there can be tension between the demands of suppressed LFV processes and the attainment of a viable DM abundance (actually, in the scotogenic model, constraints from other LFV processes, like $\mu$-$e$ conversion, can be more severe than the above LFV decays; see the 3rd and 4th papers in Ref.~\cite{Schmidt:2012yg}). However, we shall see that the situation differs in the SI model, due to additional annihilation processes mediated by the dilaton. This provides a degree of decoupling between the LFV processes and DM annihilations, such that LFV bounds are more readily satisfied. Thus, for our purposes, it is sufficient to consider the above LFV decays (we shall see that the viable parameter space includes regions well-below the LFV bounds, so slightly stronger bounds do not have a large effect). We note that the correlation between $\mu\rightarrow e\gamma$ and the DM relic abundance, for the case of fermionic DM in the scotogenic model, was first noted in Ref.~\cite{Kubo:2006yx}, while Ref.~\cite{Babu:2007sm} noted that models with a singlet scalar allow one to decouple these issues.
\section{Dark Matter\label{sec:dark_matter}}
\subsection{Relic Density}
As the universe cools, the temperature eventually drops below the DM
mass. Consequently the DM number density becomes Boltzmann suppressed and the DM annihilation
rate can become comparable to the Hubble parameter. At a
certain temperature the
DM particles freeze out of equilibrium, such that the DM number density
in a comoving volume henceforth remains constant. The cold DM\ relic
abundance therefore depends on the total thermally averaged annihilation
cross section%
\begin{eqnarray}
& &\left\langle \sigma (N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\ N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}%
})v_{r}\right\rangle=\sum_{X}\left\langle \sigma (N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\
N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\rightarrow X)v_{r}\right\rangle \notag \\
&=& \sum_{X}\int_{4M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}}^{\infty }ds~\sigma _{N_{\text{%
{\tiny DM}}}\ N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\rightarrow X}(s)\frac{\left( s-4M_{\text{%
{\tiny DM}}}^{2}\right)}{8TM_{\text{%
{\tiny DM}}}^{4}K_{2}^{2}\left( \frac{M_\text{\tiny DM}}{T}\right) } \sqrt{s}K_{1}\left( \frac{\sqrt{s}}{T}\right) ,
\end{eqnarray}%
where $v_{r}$ is the relative velocity, $s$ is the Mandelstam variable, $%
K_{1,2}$ are the modified Bessel functions and $\sigma _{N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}%
}\ N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\rightarrow X}(s)$ is the annihilation cross due to
the channel $N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\ N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\rightarrow X$, at
the CM energy $\sqrt{s}$. At freeze-out, the thermal relic density can
be given in terms of the thermally averaged annihilation cross section by
\begin{equation}
\Omega _{\text{{\tiny DM}}}h^{2}\simeq \frac{(1.07\times 10^{9})x_{F}}{\sqrt{%
g_{\ast }}M_{pl}(\mathrm{GeV})\left\langle \sigma (N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\ N_{%
\text{{\tiny DM}}})v_{r}\right\rangle },
\end{equation}%
where $M_{pl}$ is the Plank mass and $g_{\ast }$ counts the effective degrees
of freedom of the relativistic fields in equilibrium. The inverse
freeze-out temperature, $x_{F}=M_\text{\tiny DM}/T_{F}$, can be determined
iteratively from the equation%
\begin{equation}
x_{F}=\log \left( \sqrt{\frac{45}{8}}\frac{M_{\text{{\tiny DM}}%
}M_{pl}\left\langle \sigma (N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}%
})v_{r}\right\rangle }{\pi ^{3}\sqrt{g_{\ast }x_{F}}}\right) .
\end{equation}
In the present model, the classes of DM annihilation channels are shown in
Fig.~\ref{DM-ahn}. The DM can annihilate into: (1) charged leptons and neutrinos, $\ell
_{\alpha }^{-}\ell _{\beta }^{+}$ and $\nu _{\alpha }\bar{\nu}_{\beta }$, including LFV final states with $\alpha\ne\beta$,\
(2) SM fermions and gauge bosons $b\bar{b}$, $t\bar{t}$, $W^{+}W^{-}$, $ZZ$
and the scalars $SS$, and (3) final states comprised of the Higgs and/or dilaton, $%
h_{i}h_{k}$. The first class of channels are $h_{1,2}$-mediated $s$-channel
processes, the second class are $S$-mediated $t$-channel processes
while the third class contains both $s$- and $t$-channels
processes mediated by $h_{1,2}$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{DMDM-hh.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Diagrams for DM annihilation.}
\label{DM-ahn}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Annihilation Cross Sections}
\textbf{(1) t-channel processes}
The cross section for the annihilation channel into charged leptons\footnote{For same-flavor charged leptons ($\alpha=\beta $), there are also $s$-channel processes mediated by $h_{1,2} $. However, these are proportional to their
Yukawa couplings and may therefore be ignored.} is given by~\cite{Cheung:2004xm}%
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma (N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}} &\rightarrow &\ell
_{\alpha }^{-}\ell _{\beta }^{+})v_{r}=\frac{1}{8\pi }\frac{|g_{1\alpha
}g_{1\beta }^{\ast }|^{2}}{s(M_{S^{+}}^{2}-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}+\frac{s%
}{2})^{2}}\left[ \frac{m_{\ell _{\alpha }}^{2}+m_{\ell _{\beta }}^{2}}{2}%
\left( \frac{s}{2}-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}\right) \right. \notag \\
&&\left[ +\frac{2}{3}s\left( \frac{s}{4}-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}\right)
\frac{(M_{S^{+}}^{2}-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2})^{2}+\frac{s}{2}%
(M_{S^{+}}^{2}-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2})+\frac{s^{2}}{8}}{(M_{S^{+}}^{2}-M_{%
\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{2}+\frac{s}{2})^{2}}\right] . \label{Sll}
\end{eqnarray}%
The cross section for annihilation into neutrinos can be obtained from Eq.~(\ref%
{Sll}) by replacing $M_{S^{+}}^{2}\rightarrow M_{S^{0}}^{2}$ and sending the
charged lepton masses to zero, i.e.,%
\begin{equation}
\sigma (N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\rightarrow \nu _{\alpha
}\nu _{\beta })v_{r}=\frac{|g_{1\alpha }g_{1\beta }^{\ast }|^{2}}{12\pi }%
\left( \frac{s}{4}-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}\right) \frac{(M_{S^{0}}^{2}-M_{%
\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{2})^{2}+\frac{s}{2}(M_{S^{0}}^{2}-M_{\text{{\tiny DM}}%
}^{2})+\frac{s^{2}}{8}}{(M_{S^{0}}^{2}-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}+\frac{s}{2}%
)^{4}}.
\end{equation}
\textbf{(2) s-channel processes}
The processes $N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\rightarrow b\bar{b}
$, $t\bar{t}$, $W^{+}W^{-}$ and $ZZ$ can occur as shown in Fig. \ref{DM-ahn}%
-c. The corresponding amplitude can be written as%
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}=ic_{h}s_{h}y_{1}\bar{u}\left( k_{2}\right) u\left( k_{1}\right)
\left( \frac{i}{s-M_{h_{1}}^{2}}-\frac{i}{s-M_{h_{2}}^{2}}\right) \mathcal{M}%
_{h\rightarrow SM}\left( m_{h}\rightarrow \sqrt{s}\right) ,
\end{equation}%
with $\mathcal{M}_{h\rightarrow SM}\left( m_{h}\rightarrow \sqrt{s}\right) $
being the amplitude of the Higgs decay $h\rightarrow X_{SM}\bar{X}_{SM}$, with
the Higgs mass replaced as $m_{h}\rightarrow \sqrt{s}$. This leads to the
cross section%
\begin{equation}
\sigma (N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\rightarrow X_{SM}\bar{X}%
_{SM})\upsilon _{r}=8\sqrt{s}s_{h}^{2}c_{h}^{2}y_{1}^{2}\left\vert \frac{1}{%
s-M_{h_{1}}^{2}}-\frac{1}{s-M_{h_{2}}^{2}}\right\vert ^{2}\Gamma
_{h\rightarrow X_{SM}\bar{X}_{SM}}\left( m_{h}\rightarrow \sqrt{s}\right) ,
\label{csSM}
\end{equation}%
where $\Gamma _{h\rightarrow X_{SM}\bar{X}_{SM}}\left( m_{h}\rightarrow
\sqrt{s}\right) $\ is the total decay width, with $m_{h}\rightarrow \sqrt{s}$.
Similarly, the $SS$ annihilation cross section can written as%
\begin{equation}
\sigma (N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\rightarrow SS)v_{r}=\eta
_{S}\frac{s_{h}^{2}c_{h}^{2}y_{1}^{2}}{4\pi }s\left\vert \frac{c_{h}\lambda
_{1SS}}{s-M_{h_{1}}^{2}-iM_{h_{1}}\Gamma _{h_{1}}}+\frac{s_{h}\lambda _{2SS}%
}{s-M_{h_{2}}^{2}-iM_{h_{2}}\Gamma _{h_{2}}}\right\vert ^{2}\left( 1-\frac{%
4M_{S}^{2}}{s}\right) ^{1/2}
\end{equation}%
where $\eta _{S^{0}}=\eta _{A}=1,~\eta _{S^{+}}=2$, and $\lambda _{1SS}$\
and\ $\lambda _{2SS}$\ are the triple couplings of a scalar $h_{1,2}$
with two $S$ fields, given by%
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda _{1S^{+}S^{-}} &=&\lambda _{3}c_{h}v-\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny S}}%
}s_{h}x,~\lambda _{2S^{+}S^{-}}=\lambda _{3}s_{h}v+\lambda _{\phi \text{%
{\tiny S}}}c_{h}x, \notag \\
\lambda _{1S^{0}S^{0},1AA} &=&\frac{1}{2}\left( \lambda _{3}+\lambda _{4}\pm
\lambda _{5}\right) c_{h}v-\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny S}}}s_{h}x,
\notag \\
\lambda _{2S^{0}S^{0},2AA} &=&\frac{1}{2}\left( \lambda _{3}+\lambda _{4}\pm
\lambda _{5}\right) s_{h}v+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny S}}}c_{h}x.
\end{eqnarray}
\textbf{(3) Higgs channel}
The DM can self-annihilate into $h_{i}h_{k}$,\ as seen in Fig. \ref{DM-ahn}%
-d, -e and -f. The amplitude squared is given by%
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\vert \mathcal{M}\right\vert ^{2} &=&2\tilde{y}_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{2}s%
\left[ {\frac{c_{{h}}\lambda _{{1ik}}}{s-{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}}}+{\frac{s_{{h}%
}\lambda _{{2ik}}}{s-{M_{h_{2}}^{2}}}}\right] ^{2} \notag \\
&&+4c_{{i}}c_{{k}}\tilde{y}_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{3}M_\text{\tiny DM}%
\left[ {\frac{c_{{h}}\lambda _{{1ik}}}{s-{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}}}+{\frac{s_{{h}%
}\lambda _{{2ik}}}{s-{M_{h_{2}}^{2}}}}\right] \left( \frac{s-{M_{h_{i}}^{2}}+%
{M_{h_{k}}^{2}}}{t-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}}+a\frac{s+{M_{h_{i}}^{2}}-{%
M_{h_{k}}^{2}}}{u-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}}\right) \notag \\
&&+\frac{2c_{{i}}^{2}c_{{k}}^{2}\tilde{y}_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{4}}{\left(
t-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}\right) ^{2}}\left\{ 4M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}{%
M_{h_{k}}^{2}}+\left( M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}+{M_{h_{i}}^{2}}-t\right)
\left( M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}+{M_{h_{i}}^{2}}-u\right) -s{M_{h_{i}}^{2}}%
\right\} \notag \\
&&+a^{2}\frac{2c_{{i}}^{2}c_{{k}}^{2}\tilde{y}_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{4}}{%
\left( u-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}\right) ^{2}}\left\{ 4M_{\text{{\tiny DM}}%
}^{2}{M_{h_{i}}^{2}}+\left( M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}+{M_{h_{k}}^{2}}%
-u\right) \left( M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}+{M_{h_{k}}^{2}}-t\right) -s{%
M_{h_{k}}^{2}}\right\} \notag \\
&&+a\frac{2c_{{i}}^{2}c_{{k}}^{2}\tilde{y}_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{4}}{\left(
t-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}\right) \left( u-M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}\right)
}\left\{ \left( M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}+{M_{h_{i}}^{2}}-t\right) \left( M_{%
\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{2}+{M_{h_{k}}^{2}}-t\right) \right. \notag \\
&&\left. +\left( M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}+{M_{h_{k}}^{2}}-u\right) \left(
M_\text{\tiny DM}^{2}+{M_{h_{i}}^{2}}-u\right) -\left( s-4M_{\text{%
{\tiny DM}}}^{2}\right) \left( s-M_{h_{i}}^{2}-M_{h_{k}}^{2}\right) \right\}
,
\end{eqnarray}%
with $s$, $t$ and $u$ being the Mandelstam variables, and the Yukawa couplings
are defined as $\tilde{y}_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}\equiv y_{1}$, $c_{1}\equiv c_{h}$
and $c_{2}\equiv s_{h}$. Here, we integrate the phase space numerically to obtain the cross section for a given value of $s$. At tree-level the
effective cubic scalar couplings ($\lambda _{1ik}$ and $\lambda _{2ik})$ are
given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda _{111} &=&6\lambda _{\text{{\tiny H}}}\ c_{h}^{3}v-3\lambda _{\phi
\text{{\tiny H}}}c_{h}^{2}s_{h}v+3\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny H}}%
}c_{h}s_{h}^{2}x-6\lambda _{\phi }s_{h}^{3}x, \notag \\
\lambda _{112} &=&\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny H}}%
}c_{h}^{3}x+2c_{h}^{2}s_{h}(3\lambda _{\text{{\tiny H}}}-\lambda _{\phi
\text{{\tiny H}}})v+2c_{h}s_{h}^{2}(3\lambda _{\phi }-\lambda _{\phi \text{%
{\tiny H}}})x+\lambda _{\phi \text{{\tiny H}}}s_{h}^{3}v, \notag \\
\lambda _{222} &=&\lambda _{122}\ =\ 0, \label{eq:eff_couplings}
\end{eqnarray}%
though for completeness we employ the one-loop results, obtained
from the loop-corrected potential following Ref.~\cite{AAN}. We note that the (leading order) absence of the cubic
interactions $h_{1}h_{2}^{2}$ and $h_{2}^{3}$, is a
general feature of SI models.
\subsection{Direct Detection}
With regard to direct-detection experiments, interactions between the DM and quarks are described by an effective low-energy Lagrangian:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{N_{1}-q}^{(eff)}=a_{q}\,\bar{q}q\,N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}%
}^{c}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}},
\end{equation}%
with%
\begin{equation}
a_{q}=-\frac{s_{h}c_{h}M_{q}M_\text{\tiny DM}}{2\left\langle \phi \right\rangle \langle H^{0}\rangle}\left[ \frac{1}{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}-\frac{1}{%
M_{h_{2}}^{2}}\right] .
\end{equation}%
Consequently, the effective nucleon-DM interaction is written as%
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{L}_{\text{{\tiny DM}}-\mathcal{N}}^{(eff)}=a_{\mathcal{N}}\mathcal{%
\bar{N}N}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}^{c}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}},
\end{equation*}%
where
\begin{equation}
a_{\mathcal{N}}=\frac{s_{h}c_{h}\left( M_{\mathcal{N}}-\frac{7}{9}M_{%
\mathcal{B}}\right) M_\text{\tiny DM}}{\left\langle
\phi \right\rangle \langle H^{0}\rangle }\left[ \frac{1}{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}-\frac{1}{M_{h_{2}}^{2}}%
\right] .
\end{equation}%
In this relation, $M_{\mathcal{N}}$ is the nucleon mass and $M_{\mathcal{B}}$
the baryon mass in the chiral limit \cite{He}. This leads to the following
nucleon-DM elastic cross section in the chiral limit%
\begin{equation}
\sigma _{\det }=\frac{s_{h}^{4}M_{\mathcal{N}}^{2}\left( M_{\mathcal{N}}-%
\frac{7}{9}M_{\mathcal{B}}\right) ^{2}M_\text{\tiny DM}^{4}}{\pi \langle
H^{0}\rangle ^{4}\left( M_\text{\tiny DM}+M_{\mathcal{B}}\right) ^{2}}%
\left[ \frac{1}{M_{h_{1}}^{2}}-\frac{1}{M_{h_{2}}^{2}}\right] ^{2}.
\end{equation}%
The analysis below will show that the upper bound reported by LUX experiment \cite{Akerib:2013tjd} provides a stringent constraint on $\sigma _{det}$.
\section{Analysis and Results \label{sec:results}}
Next we turn to our numerical analysis and results. We perform a numerical scan of the parameter space to determine whether radiative electroweak symmetry breaking is compatible with one-loop radiative neutrino mass and singlet neutrino DM. In the scans, we enforce the minimization conditions, Eqs.~\eqref{1loopcoupling_condition} and
\eqref{eq:1loopvev_cond}, vacuum stability via Eq.~\eqref{1loopstability_condition}, and demand that the
SM-like Higgs mass is in the experimentally allowed range, $M_{h_{1}}=125.09\mp 0.21$~\textrm{GeV}. Compatibility with
constraints from LEP (OPAL) on a light Higgs~\cite{OPAL} are enforced, and we consider the constraint
from the Higgs invisible decay, $\mathcal{B}(h\rightarrow inv)<17\%$, \cite%
{Hinv}. Dimensionless couplings are restricted to the
perturbative range throughout, and we consider values of $100~\mathrm{GeV}<\langle \phi
\rangle <5$~\textrm{TeV} for the beyond-SM VEV (however, we only find viable benchmark points for $\langle \phi\rangle \gtrsim150$~GeV).\footnote{In principle, one can consider larger values for $\langle \phi\rangle$. However, these require hierarchically small couplings in the scalar potential~\cite{Foot:2013hna}, which we do not consider here.}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.6\textwidth]{mh2.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Scalar mixing versus the light scalar mass $M_{h_2}$. The palette shows the
branching ratio for invisible Higgs decays. An overwhelming majority of
the points satisfy the constraint $B(h_{1}\rightarrow inv)<17\%$.}
\label{fig:mh2}
\end{figure}
The scan reveals a spread of viable
values for the dilaton mass $M_{h_{2}}$, consistent with OPAL, as plotted in Figure~%
\ref{fig:mh2}. In the scan we tend to find $%
M_{h_{2}} $ in the range $\mathcal{O}(1)~\mathrm{GeV}\lesssim
M_{h_{2}}\lesssim90$~\textrm{GeV}. Lighter values of $M_{h_2}$
seemingly require an amount of engineered cancellation among the
radiative mass-corrections from fermions and bosons, or larger values for $\langle \phi\rangle$; see
Eq.~\eqref{eq:pgb_mass}. We noticed that regions with $\langle \phi
\rangle \gtrsim 500$~\textrm{GeV} tend to be preferred.
We further scan for parameter space giving viable neutrino masses and mixing, subject to the LFV and
muon anomalous magnetic moment constraints, while simultaneously generating a viable DM
relic density. Figure~\ref{fig:g_LFV} shows viable benchmark sets for the
Yukawa couplings $g_{i\alpha}$, along with the
corresponding LFV branching ratios and $\delta a_\mu$ contributions. The couplings $g_{i\alpha}$ are typically well-below the perturbative bound. Note that the range for the Yukawa couplings varies over several orders of magnitude. This reflects the freedom to take the lepton-number violating quartic coupling $\lambda_5$ to be small, and accordingly transfer some of the neutrino mass suppression between the Yukawa and quartic coupling sectors. The capacity to obtain viable neutrino masses, with Yukawa couplings that vary over a considerable range, influences the strength of the signal from LFV decays. Figure~\ref{fig:g_LFV} shows that the bound from $\mu\rightarrow e\gamma$ gives important constraints in parameter space with larger $g_{i\alpha}$, while smaller values of $g_{i\alpha}$ allow the model to easily evade the bound. Constraints from the weaker $\tau\rightarrow\mu\gamma$ bound
are readily satisfied. Also, we verified that constraints from
neutrino-less double-beta decay searches are satisfied by the
benchmark points.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth]{g.eps}~%
\includegraphics[width =
0.5\textwidth]{LFV.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: Viable benchmark points for the Yukawa couplings $g_{i\alpha}$, in absolute values. The
dashed line denotes the degenerate case, i.e, $\min \left\vert
g\right\vert =\max \left\vert g\right\vert $. Right: The LFV branching
ratios versus the muon anomalous
magnetic moment, both scaled by the experimental bounds. }
\label{fig:g_LFV}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.5\textwidth]{DM.eps}~\includegraphics[width=0.5%
\textwidth]{ms2.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: The cross section ratio $\protect\sigma _{X}/\protect\sigma_{\mathrm{tot}}$\ at freeze-out versus the DM mass. Here $X$ denotes lepton pairs, gauge bosons, heavy quarks and scalars. Right: The
charged scalar masses $M_{S^+}$ versus the DM mass. The palette shows the DM Yukawa coupling $y_\text{\tiny DM}\equiv y_1$.}
\label{DM}
\end{figure}
With regards to the DM relic density, recall that there are multiple classes of
annihilation channels, namely $N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}}N_{\text{{\tiny DM}}%
}\rightarrow X$ ($X=\ell_{\alpha}^{\mp}\ell_{\beta}^{\pm}$, $\nu_\alpha\nu_\beta$,
$b\bar{b}$, $t\bar{t}$, $WW$, $ZZ$, $SS$, $h_{1,2}h_{1,2}$). Depending on the specific value of the
DM mass, a given channel may be significant or suppressed. To probe the role of the distinct channels, in Figure~\ref{DM}-left we plot the contribution
of each channel relative to the total cross section at freeze-out,
$\sigma_{X}/\sigma_{tot}$, versus the DM
mass. Annihilations into lepton pairs typically play a subdominant role. These are mediated by the couplings $g_{i\alpha}$, whose values should be sufficiently small to ensure viable neutrino masses and consistency with LFV constraints. For lighter values of $M_{\text{\tiny DM}}\lesssim 75$~GeV, the cross section tends to be dominated by annihilations into $b$ quarks, while annihilations into $Z_2$-even neutral scalar final states ($X=hh$ with $h\equiv h_{1,2}$) are dominant for heavier values of $M_\text{\tiny DM}\gtrsim125$~GeV. In the intermediate
range, annihilations into gauge bosons can also be important. For completeness, we include the final states $X=2S$ in the plot, for components of the doublet $S$. Although the doublet scalars are typically heavier than the DM, thermal fluctuations can allow a contribution from these modes (though the effect is clearly subdominant, as seen in the Figure). Figure~\ref{DM}-right shows the
mass of the charged scalar, $M_{S^+}$, versus the DM mass. In the lighter DM mass range, $M_\text{\tiny DM}\lesssim\mathcal{O}(100)$~GeV, one notices that the charged scalar mass should not exceed 450~GeV, while for larger values of $M_\text{\tiny DM}$ one can have $M_{S^+}$ at the TeV
scale. Such light charged scalars may be of phenomenological interest as they can be within reach of collider
experiments.
We note that Figure~\ref{DM}-right contains disconnected regions for viable DM, with the region $31~\mathrm{GeV}\lesssim M_\text{\tiny DM}\lesssim 48$~GeV not returning viable benchmark points. This ``missing region" results from an over-abundance of DM, due to an insufficiently large, thermally-averaged annihilation cross section. In the small $M_{\text{\tiny DM}}$ region, the annihilation cross section is dominated by $b\bar{b}$ final states, with an important sub-contribution from annihilations into dilatons. However, below $M_\text{\tiny DM}\approx 48$~GeV, we find that the dilaton contribution is too small to allow the observed relic abundance. The allowed island at $M_\text{\tiny DM}\lesssim 31$~GeV corresponds to parameter space that approaches the $h_2$ resonance, such that $2M_\text{\tiny DM}$ is around, or just below, the dilaton mass, namely $M_\text{\tiny DM}\lesssim M_{h_2}/2$ (the dilaton mass is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:DDet}). This enhances annihilations into SM final states. The corresponding enhancement to the $s$-channel process $N_\text{\tiny DM} N_\text{\tiny DM}\rightarrow h_2h_2$, via an intermediate $h_2$, is not sufficient to overcome the small cubic coupling $\lambda_{222}$, as shown in Eq.~\eqref{eq:eff_couplings}. Note also that points in the region $M_\text{\tiny DM}\lesssim M_{h_1}/2\approx 60$~GeV experience some enhancement from the $h_1$ resonance. Such enhancements do not occur in heavier $M_\text{\tiny DM}$ regions, as both the dilaton and Higgs are much lighter than the DM. Throughout the lighter $M_\text{\tiny DM}$ regions, the Higgs may decay into $N_\text{\tiny DM}$ and $h_2$ final states, though the bound on invisible Higgs decays is readily satisfied. The decay $h_1\rightarrow N_\text{\tiny DM} N_\text{\tiny DM}$ is sufficiently small due to Yukawa suppression (in addition to small $\theta_h$ mixing), as seen from the palette in Figure~\ref{DM}-right, while the decay $h_1\rightarrow h_2h_2$ is suppressed by the small cubic scalar coupling $\lambda_{122}$.
Next we consider the constraints from direct-detection experiments. We plot the direct-detection cross section
versus the DM mass for the benchmark parameter sets in Figure~\ref{fig:DDet}. The mass of the dilaton, $M_{h_2}$, in units of GeV, is shown in the corresponding palette. One immediately observes that
direct-detection limits from LUX~\cite{Akerib:2013tjd} impose very serious constraints on the model, with a
large number of benchmark sets already excluded. The plot shows that the surviving
benchmark points mostly occur for $M_\text{\tiny DM}\lesssim 10$~%
\textrm{GeV}, with a smaller number of viable points found for $M_\text{\tiny DM}\gtrsim 200$~\textrm{GeV}. Benchmarks with
intermediate $M_\text{\tiny DM}$ values are excluded. The viable parameter space typically requires a lighter dilaton mass, $M_{h_2}\lesssim 10$~GeV, as all benchmarks with $M_{h_2}\gtrsim 50$~GeV are excluded. It is clear from the figure that the surviving benchmark sets can be
probed in forthcoming direct-detection experiments.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.6\textwidth]{det.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{The direct detection cross section versus the DM mass. The dashed line shows the
the recent constraints from LUX, while the palette gives the mass for the neutral
beyond-SM scalar (dilaton), $M_{h_2}$, in units of GeV.}
\label{fig:DDet}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width =0.5\textwidth]{obl1.eps}~\includegraphics[width=0.5%
\textwidth]{obl3.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: The oblique parameters $\Delta S$\ versus $\Delta T$\
for the benchmarks used previously. The ellipsoids show the
68\%, 95\% and 99\% CL., respectively. In the Left frame, the palette shows the mixing
$\sin ^{2}\theta_{h}$ between the Higgs and the dilaton; in the Right frame it shows the relative mass splitting, $\Delta =\left(2M_{S^+}- M_A-M_{S^0}\right)/2M_{S^+}$, for components of the scalar doublet $S$.} \label{fig:obl}
\end{figure}
In Figure~\ref{fig:obl} we consider the oblique parameters. The variation with respect to the mixing parameter $\sin^2\theta_h$ is shown in the left panel. One notices that the $\sin^2\theta_h$ dependence is not the dominant source of variation. There is some sensitivity to $\sin^2\theta_h$, primarily in $\Delta S$. However, for a given fixed value of $\sin^2\theta_h$, benchmark points occur along the majority of the V-shaped curve traced out in the plot. Thus, the $\sin^2\theta_h$ dependence is not driving the variation. The dependence of the oblique parameters on the dimensionless mass-difference for components of $S$, namely $\Delta =\left(2M_{S^+}- M_A-M_{S^0}\right)/2M_{S^+}$, is shown in the right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:obl}. The plot shows that the majority of the variation in $\Delta T$ is due to the mass-splitting encoded in $\Delta$. This is expected. The $T$ parameter is sensitive to isospin violation and thus constrains the splitting for $SU(2)_L$ multiplets. Viable benchmark points occur in the region with $\Delta \approx 0$, as seen in the plot, while larger mass-splittings can conflict with the constraints.
The benchmark points include a range of values for the mass-splitting parameter $\Delta$, giving rise to the variation in Figure~\ref{fig:obl}. However, in general, one can take the couplings $\lambda_{4,5}$ in the scalar potential sufficiently small to ensure the mass-splitting for $S^+$, $S^0$ and $A$ is consistent with oblique constraints. From the (technical) naturalness perspective, arbitrarily small values of $\lambda_5$ are allowed, due to the enhanced lepton number symmetry for $\lambda_5\rightarrow0$.\footnote{In practice, the demand of viable neutrino masses gives a Yukawa coupling-dependent lower bound on $\lambda_5$.} Natural values of $\lambda_4$ are bounded from below by one-loop gauge contributions to the operator $|H^\dagger S|^2$. Consequently the mass splitting for components of $S$ is not expected to be smaller than the one-loop induced splitting, which is safely within the bounds. Thus, although the oblique parameters can exclude some regions of parameter space, the constraints are readily evaded.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 0.6\textwidth]{hYZ.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Ratio of the widths for $h\rightarrow \gamma \gamma $ and $%
h\rightarrow \gamma Z$ relative to the SM values. The constraints
from ATLAS and CMS are shown. }
\label{fig:hYZ}
\end{figure}
The exotics in the model can also give new
contributions to the Higgs decays $%
h\rightarrow \gamma Z$ and $h\rightarrow \gamma \gamma$. The ratio of the corresponding widths,
relative to the SM values, is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:hYZ}. One sees that the overwhelming majority of the benchmark points are consistent with
constraints from ATLAS and CMS. Importantly, more-precise measurements by ATLAS and CMS during Run II of the LHC will provide further probes of the model.
Before concluding, we note that our analysis reveals considerable differences between the SI scotogenic model and the standard (non-SI) scotogenic model. These relate primarily to the presence of the dilaton. The coupling between $\phi$ and the DM provides new annihilation channels for the sterile neutrino DM. This alleviates the need for larger Yukawa couplings $g_{i\alpha}$, normally required in the scotogenic model to generate the relic density, and reduces the tension with LFV constraints. However, the dilaton also permits new channels at direct-detection experiments making these constraints more severe for the SI model. As a rough guide, one expects stronger LFV signals for the scotogenic model, and stronger direct-detection signals for the SI scotogenic model.
\section{Conclusion\label{sec:conc}}
In this work, we performed a detailed study of the minimal SI scotogenic model. Our analysis demonstrates the existence of viable parameter space in which one obtains radiative electroweak symmetry breaking, one-loop neutrino masses and a good DM candidate. The model predicts a new scalar with $\mathcal{O}(\mathrm{GeV})$ mass. This field plays the dual roles of triggering electroweak symmetry breaking and sourcing lepton number symmetry violation. The model can give observable signals in LFV searches, direct-detection experiments, and precision searches for the Higgs decays $h\rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ and $h\rightarrow\gamma Z$. It also predicts a scalar doublet $S$, whose mass is expected to be $\lesssim $~TeV, within reach of collider experiments. The model is subject to strong constraints from direct-detection experiments; viable parameter space was found for $M_\text{\tiny DM}\lesssim10$~GeV and $M_\text{\tiny DM}\gtrsim 200$~GeV, while intermediate values for $M_\text{\tiny DM}$ appear excluded.
\section*{Acknowledgments\label{sec:ackn}}
AA is supported by the Algerian Ministry of Higher Education and
Scientific Research under the CNEPRU Project No D01720130042. KM is supported by the Australian Research Council.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{se:introduction}
Let $\Omega \subset \mathbb{C}$ be a simply connected domain in the plane whose boundary is a Jordan curve.
In 1985, N.~Makarov \cite{makarov85} introduced probabilistic techniques into the theory of conformal mapping to show that the harmonic measure on
$\partial \Omega$ necessarily has Hausdorff dimension 1.
This is quite surprising for domains $\Omega$ with $\Hdim \partial \Omega > 1$: for such domains, Makarov's theorem suggests that Brownian motion started at an interior point $z_0 \in \Omega$ only hits a small subset of the boundary. In probabilistic terms, the above result may be viewed as analogue of the {\em law of large numbers} for random variables.
In order to obtain finer information about the metric properties of the harmonic measure, Makarov proved a {\em law of iterated logarithm} for Bloch functions.
Loosely speaking, Makarov's work suggests that conformal maps (at least to nice fractal domains) resemble Gaussians:
$$
\mathcal N_{\mu, \sigma^2}(t) = \frac{1}{\sigma \sqrt{2\pi}} \int_{-\infty}^t \exp \biggl (- \frac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2} \biggr ) dx.
$$
A Gaussian is specified by two parameters: its mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$. The variance $\sigma^2$ may be extracted in
several ways: through the {\em central limit theorem} (CLT), the {\em law of the iterated logarithm} (LIL) or via
{\em exponential integrability} estimates. These notions lead to several different characteristics of conformal maps $f: \mathbb{D} \to \mathbb{C}$.
It is easier to define these characteristics in terms of the associated Bloch functions $b_f := \log f'.$ As is well-known, each function $b_f$ arising in this way, satisfies a bound of the form $$\|b_f\|_\mathcal B := \sup_{z \in \mathbb{D}} |f'(z)|(1-|z|^2) \leqslant 6.$$
We recall the definitions:
\begin{itemize}
\item The {\em asymptotic variance}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:av}
\sigma^2(b) = \limsup_{r\to1} \frac{1}{2\pi |\log(1-r)|} \int_{|z|=r} |b(z)|^2 \, |dz|.
\end{equation}
\item The {\em LIL constant}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lil}
C_{\LIL}(b) = \esssup_{\theta \in [0,2\pi)} \ \Biggl\{
\limsup_{r \to 1} \frac{ |b(re^{i\theta})|}{\sqrt{\log \frac{1}{1-r} \log \log\log \frac{1}{1-r}}} \Biggr\}.
\end{equation}
\item The {\em integral means spectrum}
\begin{equation}
\beta_b(\tau) = \limsup_{r \to 1} \frac{1}{ |\log(1-r)|} \cdot \log \int_{|z|=r} \bigl |e^{\tau b(z)} \bigr | \, |dz|, \qquad \tau \in \mathbb{C}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
As hinted above, in dynamical situations, the above characteristics are linked by an explicit relation:
\begin{theorem}
\label{dynamical-connections}
Suppose $f(z)$ is a conformal map, such that the image of the unit circle $f(\mathbb{S}^1)$ is a Jordan curve, invariant under a hyperbolic conformal dynamical system.
Then,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1234}
2 \frac{d^2}{d\tau^2}\biggl |_{\tau=0} \beta_{\log f'}(\tau) = \sigma^2(\log f') = C^2_{\LIL}(\log f').
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
The equalities in (\ref{eq:1234}) are mediated by a fourth quantity
involving the {\em dynamical asymptotic variance} of a H\"older continuous potential from thermodynamic formalism. Theorem
\ref{dynamical-connections} has a rich history:
the connection with $C^2_{\LIL}$ is due to Przytycki, Urba\'nski, Zdunik \cite{PUZ2}, with integral
means due to Makarov and Binder \cite{makarov99, binder}, and with $\sigma^2$ by McMullen \cite{mcmullen}, see also \cite{AIPP} for additional details.
One of our central objectives is to give a new proof of Theorem \ref{dynamical-connections} that does not involve thermodynamic formalism.
Instead, we work with a new central quantity: the {\em local variance} of a dyadic martingale associated to a Bloch function.
The definition will be given in Section \ref{sec:probability}.
We emphasize that the above quantities are unrelated in general. We refer the reader to \cite{BaMo, le-zinsmeister} for a discussion and interesting
examples.
Nevertheless, one can ask if the above characteristics agree on the level of universal bounds, taken over all conformal maps.
We show that this is essentially the case; however, in order to be able to localize these characteristics, we are forced to restrict to conformal maps that have quasiconformal extensions with bounded distortion.
To be concrete, let $\bs$ be the class of conformal maps $f: \mathbb{D} \to \mathbb{C}$ normalized so that $f(0) = 0$ and $f'(0) = 1$, and for $0 < k < 1$, let $\bs_k \subset \bs$ denote the collection of maps that admit a $k$-quasiconformal extension to the complex plane.
Let $B_k(\tau) := \sup_{f \in \bs_k} \beta_{\log f'}(\tau)$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{main-thm}
$$
\lim_{\tau \to 0} \frac{B_k(\tau)}{|\tau|^2/4} = \sup_{f \in \bs_k} \sigma^2(\log f') = \sup_{f \in \bs_k} C_{\LIL}^2(\log f').
$$
\end{theorem}
The above quantity will be denoted $\Sigma^2(k)$. As discussed in \cite{qcdim}, $\Sigma^2(k)/k^2$ is a non-decreasing convex function of $k$. It is currently known that $$0.93 < \lim_{k \to 1^-} \Sigma^2(k) < (1.24)^2.$$ We refer the reader to \cite[Section 8]{AIPP} for the lower bound
and to \cite{HK, hedenmalm-shimorin} for the upper bound.
A theorem of Makarov \cite{makarov87},
\cite[Theorem VIII.2.1]{GM} shows:
\begin{corollary}
\label{main-cor2}
{\em (i)} Let $\Omega = f(\mathbb{D})$ be the image of the unit disk and $z_0$ be a point in $\Omega$.
The harmonic measure $\omega_{z_0}$ on $\partial \Omega$, as viewed from $z_0$, is absolutely continuous with respect to the Hausdorff measure $\Lambda_{h(t)}$,
$$h(t)=t\,\exp\left\{C\sqrt{\log\frac{1}{t}\log\log
\log\frac{1}{t}}\right\},\qquad 0<t<10^{-7},$$
for any $C \geqslant C_{\LIL}(b_f)$. In particular, $C = \sqrt{\Sigma^2(k)}$ works.
{\em (ii)} Conversely, if $C < \sqrt{\Sigma^2(k)}$, there exists a conformal map $f \in \bs_k$ for which $\omega_{z_0} \perp \Lambda_{h(t)}$.
\end{corollary}
The connections to LIL in Theorem \ref{main-thm} and Corollary \ref{main-cor2} were originally proved together with I.~Kayumov using a different method than
presented here.
\newpage
We now turn to the infinitesimal analogues of the above results from the point of view of universal Teichm\"uller space. Consider the quantity
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sigma2-def}
\Sigma^2 := \sup_{|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\mathbb{D}}} \sigma^2(\mathcal S\mu),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:beurling-def}
\mathcal S\mu(z)=-\frac{1}{\pi} \int_{\mathbb{D}}\frac{\mu(w)}{(z-w)^2} \, |dw|^2, \qquad |z| > 1,
\end{equation}
is the {\em Beurling transform.}
A simple computation shows that $\mathcal S \mu \in \mathcal B(\mathbb{D}^*)$, the Bloch space of the exterior unit disk.
Furthermore, if $w^{t\mu}$ is the principal solution to the Beltrami equation $\overline{\partial}w = t \mu \, \partial w$, then
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:quadratic-error}
\| \log (w^{t\mu})' - \mathcal S\mu \|_{\mathcal B(\mathbb{D}^*)} = \mathcal O(|t|^2), \qquad t \in \mathbb{D},
\end{equation}
for instance, see
\cite[Section 2]{qcdim}. In particular, $\Sigma^2 = \lim_{k \to 0} \Sigma^2(k)/k^2$.
In order to keep the discussion in the disk,
it is sometimes preferable to work with the {\em Bergman projection}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bergman-def}
P\mu(z)=\frac{1}{\pi} \int_{\mathbb{D}}\frac{\mu(w)}{(1-z\overline{w})^2} \, |dw|^2.
\end{equation}
The two operators are connected by $\mathcal S\mu(z) = -(1/\overline{z}^2) P\mu(1/\overline{z})$.
The infinitesimal analogue of Theorem \ref{main-thm} can be expressed in terms of the {\em rescaled integral means spectrum}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:inf-ims}
B_0(\tau) \, := \, \lim_{k \to 0} B_k(\tau/k) \, = \,
\sup_{|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\mathbb{D}}} \beta_{P\mu} (\tau).
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
Since the collection of Bloch functions $\{P\mu, |\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\mathbb{D}}\}$ is invariant under rotation by $e^{i\theta} \in \mathbb{S}^1$,
$B_0(\tau)$ only depends on $|\tau|$.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}
\label{main-thm-inf}
$$
\Sigma^2 \, := \, \lim_{\tau \to 0} \frac{B_0(\tau)}{|\tau|^2/4} \, = \, \sup_{|\mu| \leqslant \chi_\mathbb{D}} \sigma^2(P\mu) \, = \, \sup_{|\mu| \leqslant \chi_\mathbb{D}} C_{\LIL}^2(P\mu).
$$
\end{corollary}
The quantity $\Sigma^2$ was first studied in \cite{AIPP}, where it was established that
$
0.87913 \leqslant \Sigma^2 \leqslant 1,
$
while Hedenmalm \cite{hedenmalm} proved the strict inequality $\Sigma^2 < 1$.
In \cite{AIPP}, the original motivation for investigating $\Sigma^2$ arose from the connection between dimensions of quasicircles and McMullen's identity (Theorem
\ref{dynamical-connections}).
Let $D(k)$ denote the maximal Minkowski dimension of a $k$-quasicircle, the image of the unit circle under a $k$-quasiconformal mapping of the plane.
As is well-known, the problem of finding $D(k)$ reduces to the study of integral means
via the anti-symmetrization procedure of \cite{kuhnau, smirnov} and the relation \cite[Corollary 10.18]{Pomm}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:beta-dimension}
\beta_{f}(t) = t-1 \quad \Longleftrightarrow \quad t = \Mdim f(\mathbb{S}^1), \qquad f \in \bS_k.
\end{equation}
In \cite{qcdim}, the author modified the argument of Becker and Pommerenke \cite{BP} for estimating integral means to show the asymptotic expansion
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:qcdim-exp}
D(k) = 1 + k^2\Sigma^2 + \mathcal O(k^{8/3-\varepsilon}).
\end{equation}
Together with Hedenmalm's estimate, this improves on Smirnov's bound $D(k) \leqslant 1+k^2$ from \cite{smirnov}.
In Section \ref{sec:ims}, we will give an estimate for $B_0(\tau)$ which implies (\ref{eq:qcdim-exp}), albeit with
a slightly weaker error term.
An a priori difficulty in studying $\Sigma^2$ is that the extremal problem (\ref{eq:sigma2-def}) has infinitely many solutions. For instance, one can take an extremal $\mu$
and modify it in an arbitrary manner on a compact subset of the disk. Alternatively, one can pullback an extremal $\mu(z) \frac{d\overline{z}}{dz}$ by a Blaschke product
$B: \mathbb{D} \to \mathbb{D}$. Further, given two extremals $\mu, \nu$, one can glue them together $\mu \cdot \{\chi_{\re z < 0}\} + \nu \cdot \{\chi_{\re z > 0}\}$ to
form yet another extremal.
In \cite[Section 6]{AIPP}, extremals were studied indirectly via fractal approximation:
\label{AIPP-fat}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:AIPP-fat}
\Sigma^2 = \sup_{\mu \in M_{\ei}, \ |\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\mathbb{D}}} \sigma^2(\mathcal S\mu),
\end{equation}
where $M_{\ei}$ is the class of Beltrami coefficients that are {\em eventually-invariant} under $z \to z^d$ for some $d \geqslant 2$, i.e.~satisfying
$(z^d)^*\mu = \mu$ in some open neighbourhood of the unit circle. In particular, since Theorem \ref{dynamical-connections} is applicable
to conformal maps $w^\mu(z)$, $z \in \mathbb{D}^*$, with $\mu \in M_{\ei}$, $\|\mu\|_\infty < 1$, the inequality $\Sigma^2 \leqslant 1$ follows from Smirnov's $1+k^2$ bound.
In Section \ref{sec:clt} of the present paper, we show that extremal Bloch functions $b = P\mu$ obey a central limit theorem. For a fixed $r <1$,
we may consider
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rescaled-bloch}
\tilde b_r(\theta) := \frac{b(re^{i \theta})}{\sqrt {|\log(1-r)|}}
\end{equation}
as a random variable with respect to the probability measure $|dz|/2\pi$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{complex-gaussian}
Suppose $|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\mathbb{D}}$.
Given $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a $\delta > 0$ such that if $r$ is sufficiently close to 1 and
$$
\sigma^2(P\mu,r) \, = \, \frac{1}{2\pi |\log(1-r)|} \int_{|z|=r} |P\mu(z)|^2 \, |dz| \, > \, \Sigma^2 - \delta,
$$
then the distribution of $(\widetilde{P\mu})_r$ is close to a complex Gaussian, of mean 0 and variance $\Sigma^2$,
up to an additive error of at most $\varepsilon$.
In other words, $\re (\widetilde{P\mu})_r$ and $\im (\widetilde{P\mu})_r$ approximate independent real Gaussians of variance $\Sigma^2/2$.
\end{theorem}
Summarizing, the above theorem says that in the problem of maximizing asymptotic variance, all extremals are Gaussians. In particular,
{\em extremality invokes fractal structure}.
\subsection*{Notation} Let $\rho_*(z) = \frac{2}{|z|^2-1}$ be the density of the hyperbolic metric in the exterior unit disk $\mathbb{D}^*$ and
$\rho_{\mathbb{H}}(z)= 1/y$ be the corresponding density in the upper half-plane.
To compare quantities, we use $A \gtrsim B$ to denote $A > C \cdot B$ for some constant $C > 0$. The notation $\fint f(t) \, g(t)dt$
denotes the average value of the function $f(t)$ with respect to the measure $g(t)dt$.
\section{Background in probability}
\label{sec:probability}
In this section, we discuss martingale analogues of the characteristics of conformal maps mentioned in the introduction. We show that they
are controlled by the local variation.
\subsection{Martingales and square functions}
Let $p \geqslant 2$ be an integer, $\mathcal D_k$ be the collection of
$p$-adic intervals $\bigl [j \cdot p^{-k}, (j+1) \cdot p^{-k} \bigr ]$ contained in $[0,1]$, and
$\mathcal M_k$ be the $\sigma$-algebra generated by $\mathcal D_k$.
A (complex-valued) {\em $p$-adic martingale} $X$ on $[0,1]$ is
a sequence of functions $\{X_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $X_k$ is measurable with respect to $\mathcal M_k$,
\item[(ii)] $\mathbb{E}(X_k | \mathcal M_{k-1}) = X_{k-1}$.
\end{itemize}
We typically view $X$ as a function from $\bigcup_{k = 0}^\infty \mathcal D_k$ to the complex numbers which satisfies the
{\em averaging property}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:martingale-condition}
X_I = \frac{1}{p} \sum_{i=1}^{p} X_{I_i},
\end{equation}
where the sum ranges over the $p$-adic children of $I$.
For a point $x \in [0,1]$, let $I_j(x) \in \mathcal D_j$ denote the $p$-adic interval of length $p^{-j}$ containing $x$, and
$\Delta_j(x) = X_{I_j(x)} - X_{I_{j-1}}(x)$
be the {\em jump} at step $j$.
The {\em $p$-adic square function} is given by
\begin{equation}
\langle X \rangle_n := \sum_{j=1}^n |\Delta_j(x)|^2.
\end{equation}
We say that a martingale has {\em bounded increments} if $|\Delta_j(x)| < C$ for all $x \in [0,1]$ and $j \geqslant 1$. For such martingales, we define:
\begin{itemize}
\item The {\em asymptotic variance}
\begin{align*}
\sigma^2(X) & = \limsup_{n \to \infty} \frac{1}{n} \int_0^1 |X_n(x)|^2 \, dx \\
& = \limsup_{n \to \infty} \frac{1}{n} \int_0^1 \langle X \rangle_n \, dx.
\end{align*}
(The equality follows from the orthogonality of the jumps.)
\item The {\em LIL constant}
$$
C_{\LIL}(X) = \esssup_{x \in [0,1]} \ \biggl\{ \limsup_{n \to \infty} \frac{|X_n(x)|}{\sqrt{ n \log\log n}}\biggr\}.
$$
\item The {\em integral means spectrum}
$$
\beta_X(\tau) = \limsup_{n \to \infty} \frac{1}{n} \cdot \log \int_0^1 \bigl | e^{\tau X_n(x)}\bigr | \, dx, \qquad \tau \in \mathbb{C}.
$$
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Local variance} For a $p$-adic interval $I$, we define the {\em local variance} of $X$ at $I$ as
\begin{equation}
\var_I X= \frac{1}{p} \sum_{i=1}^{p} |X_{I_i} - X_I|^2.
\end{equation}
More generally, we can consider
\begin{equation}
\var_I^n X= \frac{1}{n} \biggl [ \frac{1}{p^n} \sum_{i=1}^{p^n} |X_{I_i} - X_I|^2\biggr],
\end{equation}
where we sum over all $p$-adic grandchildren of $I$ of length $p^{-n}|I|$. Polarizing, we obtain
the notion of {\em local covariance} \begin{equation}
\var_I^n (X, Y) = \frac{1}{n} \biggl [ \frac{1}{p^n} \sum_{i=1}^{p^n} (X_{I_i} - X_I) \overline{(Y_{I_i} - Y_I)} \biggr]
\end{equation}
of two $p$-adic martingales $X$ and $Y$.
Our aim is to show that the local variance controls the above characteristics:
\begin{theorem}
\label{local-variance}
Suppose $S$ is a real-valued martingale with bounded increments. Let $m = \inf_I \var_I$ and $M = \sup_I \var_I$. Then,
{\em (i)} For a.e.~$x \in [0,1]$,
$$
m \, \leqslant \, \liminf \frac{\langle S \rangle_n}{n} \, \leqslant \, \limsup \frac{\langle S \rangle_n}{n} \, \leqslant \, M,
$$
{\em (ii)} $m \leqslant \sigma^2(S) \leqslant M$,
{\em (iii)} $m \leqslant (1/2) \cdot C_{\LIL}^2(S) \leqslant M$,
{\em (iv)} For $t \in \mathbb{R}$,
$$m \, \leqslant \, \liminf_{t \to 0} \frac{\beta_S(t)}{t^2/2} \, \leqslant \, \limsup_{t \to 0} \frac{\beta_S(t)}{t^2/2} \leqslant M.$$
\end{theorem}
To evaluate the LIL constant of a martingale, we use a result of W.~Stout \cite{stout}, which is stated explicitly in the form below in \cite[Theorem 2.6]{makarov90}:
\begin{lemma}[Stout]
\label{stout-thm}
If $S_n$ is a real-valued martingale with bounded increments, then
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:stout-thm}
\limsup_{n \to \infty} \frac{|S_n(x)|}{\sqrt{2 \langle S \rangle_n \log\log \langle S\rangle_n}} = 1,
\end{equation}
almost surely on the set $\{x : \langle S \rangle_n = \infty\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{local-variance}] (i) Consider the auxiliary martingale $T$ with $T_{[0,1]}=0$ and jumps
$$
T(I_i) -T(I) \, := \, |X(I_i) - X(I)|^2 - \frac{1}{p} \sum_{j=1}^{p} |X(I_j) - X(I)|^2,
$$
where $I_1, I_2, \dots, I_{p}$ are the $p$-adic children of $I$.
Note that $T$ has bounded increments since $X$ does. Applying Lemma \ref{stout-thm} to the martingale $T$, we see that
$$T_n(x) = \mathcal O \bigl (\sqrt{n \log \log n} \bigr ) = o(n),
\qquad \text{for a.e~}x \in [0,1].
$$
In particular,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\langle X\rangle_n}{n} \, = \,
\frac{1}{n} \sum_{k=1}^n \var_{I_k(x)} + o(1).
\end{equation}
The rest is easy: (ii) is trivial, (iii) follows from (i) by Stout's lemma, while (iv) follows from the expansion
$$
\frac{1}{p} \sum_{j=1}^{p} \exp(t \Delta_j) = 1 + \frac{t^2}{2} \biggl ( \frac{1}{p} \sum_{j=1}^{p} \Delta_j^2 \biggr) + \mathcal O(t^3).
$$
This proof is complete.
\end{proof}
The same argument shows:
\begin{lemma}
\label{same-variance}
If two real-valued martingales $S_1, S_2$ satisfy $\var_I S_1 = \var_I S_2$ for all $I$, then they have the same
LIL constant.
More generally, $$(1/2)\, |C_{\LIL}^2(S_1) - C_{\LIL}^2(S_2)| \leqslant \sup_I |\var_I S_1 - \var_I S_2|.$$
\end{lemma}
The above lemma also holds for the other
characteristics discussed in Theorem \ref{local-variance}.
\subsection{Some useful facts}
For future reference, we record two martingale estimates. Assume for simplicity that $S$ is a real-valued dyadic martingale with $S_{[0,1]} = 0$ and
$|\Delta_j(x)| \leqslant 1$. The {\em sub-Gaussian estimate} says that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:subgaussian}
\bigl | \{x \in [0,1] : |S_n| > t \} \bigr | \leqslant e^{-c t^2/n}.
\end{equation}
for some $c > 0$. The sub-Gaussian estimate is a consequence of a more general statement, see \cite[Proposition 2.7]{makarov90}.
Another proof is given in \cite{hedenmalm2}.
Integrating (\ref{eq:subgaussian}), we obtain bounds for the moments
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:moments}
\frac{1}{\Gamma(p+1)} \int_0^1 |S_n|^{2p} \, dx \leqslant (Cn)^p, \qquad p \geqslant 0.
\end{equation}
\section{Bloch martingales}
In this section, we review Makarov's construction of the dyadic martingale associated to a Bloch function. We then give an approximate formula
for the local variance.
For convenience, we work in the upper half-plane where the computations are slightly simpler.
Therefore, let us imagine that $b$ is a holomorphic function on $\mathbb{H}$ with
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:def-bloch}
\|b\|_{\mathcal B(\mathbb{H})} = (1/2) \, \sup_{z \in \mathbb{H}}\, y \cdot |b'(z)| \leqslant 1.
\end{equation}
Here, we assume that $b$ lies in the Bloch unit ball in order to not have to write the Bloch norm all the time.
A dyadic interval $I = [x_1, x_2] \subset [0,1]$ defines a {\em 1-box}
$$
\square_I \, = \, \bigl \{ w : \re w \in [x_1, x_2], \, \im w \in [(x_2 - x_1)/2, \, x_2 - x_1] \bigr \}
$$
in the upper half-plane. The {\em $n$-box} $\square_I^n$ is defined as the union of 1-boxes associated to $I$ and to all dyadic intervals
contained in $I$ of length at least $2^{-n+1}|I|$. For instance,
$$
\square_{[0,1]}^n \, = \, \bigl \{ w : \re w \in [0, 1], \, \im w \in [2^{-n}, 1] \bigr \}.
$$
We use $z_I = (x_1+x_2)/2 + (x_2 - x_1)i$ to denote the midpoint of the top edge of $\square_I$.
Following Makarov \cite{makarov90}, let $B$ be the complex-valued dyadic martingale given by
\begin{equation}
B_I = \lim_{y \to 0^+} \int_I b(x+iy) dx.
\end{equation}
Makarov showed that the above limit exists and satisfies
\begin{equation}
|b(z_I) - B_I | = \mathcal O(1).
\end{equation}
In particular,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bloch-martingale-condition}
|B_I - B_J| \leqslant C,
\end{equation} whenever $I, J$ are adjacent dyadic
intervals of the same size. This is stronger than simply saying that $B$ has bounded increments because $I, J$ may have different parents.
Makarov \cite{makarov90} observed that the converse also holds: if a dyadic martingale on $[0,1]$ satisfies the above property, it comes from some Bloch function $b(z)$. It is therefore natural to refer to martingales satisfying (\ref{eq:bloch-martingale-condition}) as {\em Bloch martingales}.
One may view dyadic martingales abstractly, defined on the dyadic tree. The notion of a Bloch martingale; however, requires an identification of the dyadic tree with $[0,1]$. One useful fact to keep in mind is:
\begin{lemma}[Transmutation principle]
For an abstract dyadic martingale with bounded increments, there is an embedding to $[0,1]$ so that it is Bloch.
\end{lemma}
The proof is simple and we leave it as an exercise to the reader.
\begin{theorem}
\label{variance-thm}
Suppose $I \subset [0,1]$ is a dyadic interval and $I_1, I_2, \dots, I_{2^n}$ are its dyadic grandchildren of length $2^{-n}|I|$. Then,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ltg1}
\frac{1}{\log 2} \cdot \var_I^n B = \fint_{\square_I^n} \, \biggl | \frac{2b'}{\rho_{\mathbb{H}}}(z) \biggr |^2 \, \frac{|dz|^2}{y} +
\mathcal O \bigl (\|b\|^2_{\mathcal B}/\sqrt{n} \bigr ).
\end{equation}
Furthermore, we have the ``complexification'' relations
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ltg2}
\var_I^n (\re B) = \frac{1}{2} \cdot \var_I^n B + \mathcal O \bigl (\|b\|^2_{\mathcal B}/\sqrt{n} \bigr)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ltg3}
\var_I^n (\re B,\,\im B) = \mathcal O \bigl (\|b\|^2_{\mathcal B}/\sqrt{n} \bigr ).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Due to scale invariance, we only need to consider the case when $I = [0,1]$ and $\|b\|_{\mathcal B(\mathbb{H})} = 1$.
Since $B$ has bounded jumps,
\begin{equation*}
\langle B \rangle_n \lesssim n \qquad \text{and} \qquad
\frac{1}{2^n} \sum_{j=1}^{2^n} |B_{I_j} - B_I|^2 \lesssim n.
\end{equation*}
The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2^n} \sum_{j=1}^{2^n} |B_{I_j} - B_I| \lesssim \sqrt{n}.
\end{equation}
For $z \in I_j$, the Bloch property $|b(z)-b(z_{I_j})| = \mathcal O(1)$ implies
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:l1norm}
\int_{\bottom( \square_I^n)} |b(z)-b(z_I)| \, ds \lesssim \sqrt{n},
\end{equation}
where we integrate over the bottom side of $\square_I^n$.
Similarly,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sqf-appx}
\biggl | \int_{\bottom( \square_I^n)} |b(z)-b(z_I)|^2 \, ds - \frac{1}{2^n} \sum_{j=1}^{2^n} |B_{I_j} - B_I|^2
\biggr |
\, \lesssim \, \sqrt{n}.
\end{equation}
Following \cite{nicolau}, we apply Green's identity
$$
\int_\Omega (u \Delta v - v \Delta u) dxdy = \int_{\partial \Omega} (u \cdot \partial_{\mathbf{n}} v - v \partial_{\mathbf{n}} u) ds,
$$
where $\partial_{\mathbf{n}}$ refers to differentiation with respect to the normal vector and $ds$ denotes integration with respect to arc length.
The choice $$\Omega = \square_I^n, \quad u = y, \quad v = |b(z)-b(z_I)|^2$$ yields
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\square_I^n} y \cdot |2b'(z)|^2 \, dxdy = \int_{\square_I^n} y \cdot \Delta |b(z) - b(z_I)|^2 \, dxdy, \qquad \qquad \quad
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\quad \qquad \qquad = - \int_{\partial \square_I^n} \partial_{\mathbf{n}} y \cdot |b(z) - b_I(z)|^2 \, ds + \int_{\partial \square_I^n} y \cdot \partial_{\mathbf{n}} |b(z)-b(z_I)|^2 \, ds.
\end{equation*}
It is evident that
\begin{equation}
- \int_{\partial \square_I^n} \partial_{\mathbf{n}} y \cdot |b(z)-b(z_I)|^2 \, ds = \int_{\bottom( \square_I^n)} |b(z)-b(z_I)|^2 \, ds -
\mathcal O(1).
\end{equation}
For the error term,
$$
\int_{\partial \square_I^n} y \cdot \partial_{\mathbf{n}} |b(z)-b(z_I)|^2 \, ds \, \lesssim \, \int_{\partial \square_I^n} |b(z)-b(z_I)| \, ds.
$$
From the definition of a Bloch function (\ref{eq:def-bloch}), the integral of $|b(z)-b(z_I)|$ over the top, left and right sides of $\partial \square_I^n$ is $\mathcal O(1)$, while according to
(\ref{eq:l1norm}), the integral over the bottom side is $\mathcal O(\sqrt{n})$.
Summarizing, we see that
\begin{equation}
\fint_{\square^n} \biggl |\frac{2b'(z)}{\rho_{\mathbb{H}}} \biggr |^2 \, \frac{|dz|^2}{y} = \frac{1}{n \log 2} \int_{\bottom( \square^n)} |b(z)-b(z_I)|^2 \, ds +
\mathcal O (1/\sqrt n).
\end{equation}
Combining with (\ref{eq:sqf-appx}) gives another error of $\mathcal O (1/\sqrt n)$ and proves (\ref{eq:ltg1}). For (\ref{eq:ltg2}), it suffices to
repeat the argument with $u = \re b$ (in place of $b$) and use $|b'|^2 = 2|\nabla u|^2$, while (\ref{eq:ltg3}) follows from polarization.
\end{proof}
\section{Applications to Bloch functions}
Let $\bH_k$ denote the class
of conformal maps $f: \mathbb{H} \to \mathbb{C}$ which admit a $k$-quasiconformal extension
to the plane and fix the points $0,1,\infty$. As discussed in the previous section, for $f \in \mathbf{H}_k$, the associated Bloch function
$b_f = \log f' \in \mathcal B(\mathbb{H})$ defines a dyadic martingale $B$ on $[0,1]$. We define the
asymptotic variance, LIL constant and integral means of $b$ as
$$
\frac{1}{\log 2} \cdot \sigma^2(B), \quad \frac{1}{\log 2} \cdot C_{\LIL}^2(B), \quad \frac{1}{\log 2} \cdot \beta_B(t),
$$
respectively. The factor $\chi = \log 2$ comes from the height of the boxes in the dyadic grid (as measured in the hyperbolic metric). It plays the role of the Lyapunov exponent, cf. \cite[Theorem 2.7]{mcmullen}. If one instead works with the $p$-adic grid, then the normalizing factor would be $\chi = \log p$.
In purely function-theoretic terms, the
asymptotic variance of a Bloch function $b \in \mathcal B(\mathbb{H})$ is given by
\begin{align}
\sigma^2_{[0,1]}(b) & = \limsup_{y \to 0^+} \, \frac{1}{|\log y|} \int_0^1 |b(x+iy)|^2 dx, \\
\label{eq:avar-H}
& = \limsup_{h \to 0^+} \, \frac{1}{|\log h|} \int_h^1 \int_0^1 \biggl |\frac{2b'(x+iy)}{\rho_{\mathbb{H}}}\biggr |^2 \, \frac{|dz|^2}{y}.
\end{align}
More generally, in \cite[Section 6]{mcmullen}, McMullen showed that one can compute the asymptotic variance by examining C\'esaro averages of integral means that
involve
higher order derivatives.
It is not difficult to show that the expressions
$$
\sup_{f \in \bH_k} \sigma^2(b_f), \quad \sup_{f \in \bH_k} C_{\LIL}^2(b_f), \quad \sup_{f \in \bH_k} \beta_{b_f}(t),
$$
coincide with their analogues for the class $\bS_k$ from the introduction.
\begin{theorem}[Complexification]
For any Bloch function $b \in \mathcal B(\mathbb{H})$,
\label{lil-circular}
$$
\sigma^2(\re b) = (1/2) \cdot \sigma^2(b), \qquad C_{\LIL}(\re b) = C_{\LIL}(b).
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
(i) The first statement follows from (\ref{eq:ltg2}) and the definitions
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:complexification1}
\frac{1}{n} \int_0^1 \bigl | \re B_n(x) - \re B_{[0,1]} \bigr | ^2 \, dx = \var^n_{[0,1]}[\re B]
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:complexification2}
\frac{1}{n} \int_0^1 | B_n(x) - B_{[0,1]} |^2 \, dx = \var^n_{[0,1]}[B].
\end{equation}
(ii)
For the second statement, note that the function $\theta \to C_{\LIL}(\re e^{i\theta} B)$ is continuous and
$$
C_{\LIL}(B) = \sup_{\theta \in [0,2\pi)} C_{\LIL}(\re e^{i\theta} B).
$$
We must therefore show $C_{\LIL}(\re e^{i\theta} B) \leqslant C_{\LIL}(\re B)$, for any $\theta \in [0,2\pi)$. However, if view $\re B$ and $\re e^{i\theta} B$ as
$p$-adic martingales with $p = 2^n$
large, then by (\ref{eq:ltg2}), their local variances are approximately equal. The assertion now follows from
Lemma \ref{same-variance}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
For lacunary series, the equality $C_{\LIL}(\re b) = C_{\LIL}(b)$ goes back to the 1959 work of M.~Weiss \cite{weiss}.
\end{remark}
\section{The Box Lemma}
The proofs of Theorems \ref{dynamical-connections} and \ref{main-thm} are now completed by the {\em Box Lemma} from \cite{qcdim} which describes the average non-linearity $n_f := f''/f' = (\log f')'$ of conformal mappings:
\begin{lemma}
\label{boxcart-global}
{\em (i)} Fix $0 < k < 1$.
Given $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $n \geqslant 1$ sufficiently large so that for any $n$-box $\square_I^n \subset \mathbb{H}$
and any conformal map $f \in \mathbf{H}_k$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:boxcart2}
\fint_{\square_I^n} \biggl |\frac{2n_f}{\rho_{\mathbb{H}}}(z) \biggr |^2 \, \frac{|dz|^2}{y} \, < \, \Sigma^2(k) + \varepsilon.
\end{equation}
{\em (ii)} Conversely, for any $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a conformal map $f \in \mathbf{H}_k$, whose dilatation $\bel f := \overline{\partial} f/\partial f$ is periodic with respect
to the $2^n$-adic grid for some $n \geqslant 1$,
and which satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:boxcart3}
\fint_{\square_I^n} \biggl |\frac{2n_f}{\rho_{\mathbb{H}}}(z) \biggr |^2 \, \frac{|dz|^2}{y} \, > \, \Sigma^2(k) - \varepsilon,
\end{equation}
on every $n$-box $\square_I^n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
The proof given in \cite{qcdim} forces us to restrict our attention to classes of conformal maps with bounded distortion. It would be interesting to know if
a variant of the box lemma holds
for all conformal maps with $\lim_{k\to 1^-} \Sigma^2(k)$ in place of $\Sigma^2(k)$.
\end{remark}
In view of Theorems \ref{local-variance} and \ref{variance-thm},
(i) gives the upper bound in Theorem \ref{main-thm}, while (ii) gives the lower bound.
The notion of periodic Beltrami coefficients will be discussed below in Section \ref{sec:pbc}.
In order to state the infinitesimal version of the box lemma, note that the formula for the Beurling transform
(\ref{eq:beurling-def}) may not converge if $\mu$ is not compactly supported. Therefore, we are obliged to work with a modified Beurling transform
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:beurling22}
\mathcal S^\# \mu(z) \, =\, -\frac{1}{\pi} \int_{\mathbb{H}} \mu(\zeta) \biggl [ \frac{1}{(\zeta-z)^2} - \frac{1}{\zeta^2} \biggr ] \, |d\zeta|^2.
\end{equation}
However, the formula for the derivative remains the same:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:beurling23}
\text{``}(\mathcal S \mu)'(z)\text{''} \, := \, (\mathcal S^\# \mu)'(z) \, =\, -\frac{2}{\pi} \int_{\mathbb{H}} \frac{\mu(\zeta)}{(\zeta-z)^3} \, |d\zeta|^2.
\end{equation}
In \cite{qcdim}, the infinitesimal analogue of the box lemma was proved with a quantitative relation between the box size and the error term:
\begin{lemma}
\label{boxcart}
{\em (i)}
For any Beltrami coefficient $\mu$ with $|\mu| \leqslant \chi_\mathbb{\overline{H}}$ and $n$-box $\square_I^n \subset \mathbb{H}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:boxcart}
\fint_{\square_I^n} \, \biggl |\frac{2(\mathcal S\mu)'}{\rho_{\mathbb{H}}}(z) \biggr |^2 \, \frac{|dz|^2}{y} \, < \, \Sigma^2 + C/n.
\end{equation}
{\em (ii)} Conversely, for $n \geqslant 1$, there exists a Beltrami coefficient $\mu$, periodic with respect to the $2^n$-adic grid, which satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:boxcart-local-converse}
\fint_{\square_I^n} \, \biggl |\frac{2(\mathcal S\mu)'}{\rho_{\mathbb{H}}}(z) \biggr |^2 \, \frac{|dz|^2}{y} \, > \, \Sigma^2 - C/n
\end{equation}
on every $n$-box $\square_I^n$.
\end{lemma}
The quantitative estimate will be exploited in Section \ref{sec:ims}.
\subsection{Periodic Beltrami coefficients}
\label{sec:pbc}
Given two intervals $I, J \subset \mathbb{R}$, let $L_{I, J}(z) = Az + B$ be the unique linear map with $A > 0, B \in \mathbb{R}$ that maps $I$ to $J$.
For a box $\square$, we denote its reflection in the real line by $\overline{\square}$.
Suppose $\mu$ is a Beltrami coefficient supported on the lower half-plane.
We say that $\mu$ is {\em periodic} (with respect to the dyadic grid) if for any two dyadic intervals
$I, J \subset \mathbb{R}$ with $|I|, |J| \leqslant 1$,
$
\mu|_{\overline{\square}_I} = L_{I, J}^*(\mu|_{\overline{\square}_J}).
$
We typically assume that
$\mu$ is supported on the strip $$\{w : -1 < \im w < 0\},$$ in order for $\mu$ to be invariant under translation by 1. In this case, $\mu$ descends
to a Beltrami coefficient on the disk via the exponential mapping, which is eventually-invariant under $z \to z^2$.
The notion of a Beltrami coefficient periodic with respect to the $p$-adic grid is defined similarly.
Before continuing further, we define a {\em dyadic box} in the unit disk to be the image of $\square_I$, $|I| \leqslant 1$, under the exponential mapping $\xi(w) = \exp(2\pi i w).$
Reflecting in the unit circle, we obtain a dyadic box in the exterior unit disk. Note that these boxes are not geometric rectangles, nor do they tile
$\mathbb{D}$ or $\mathbb{D}^*$ completely.
\subsection{Dynamical Beltrami coefficients}
We now consider two classes of dynamical Beltrami coefficients on the unit disk that naturally arise in complex dynamics and Teich\"muller theory:
\begin{itemize}
\item $M_{\bl} = \bigcup_f M_f(\mathbb{D})$ consists of Beltrami coefficients that are {\em eventually-invariant} under some finite
\emph{Blaschke product} $f(z) = z \prod_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{z-a_i}{1-\overline{a_i}z}$, i.e.~Beltrami coefficients which satisfy $f^*\mu = \mu$ in some open neighbourhood of the unit circle.
\item $M_{\fuchs} = \bigcup_\Gamma M_{\Gamma}(\mathbb{D})$ consists of Beltrami coefficients that are invariant under some co-compact Fuchsian group $\Gamma$,
i.e.~$\gamma^*\mu = \mu$ for all $\gamma \in \Gamma$.
\end{itemize}
Suppose $\mu$ belongs to one of the two classes of Beltrami coefficients above, with $\|\mu\|_\infty < 1$.
We view $f = w^{\mu}$ as a conformal map of the exterior unit disk.
From the construction, the image of the unit circle $f(\mathbb{S}^1)$ is a Julia set or a limit set of a quasi-Fuchsian group.
Using the ergodicity of the geodesic flow on the unit tangent bundle $T_1 X$ (Fuchsian case) or Riemann surface lamination $\hat X_B$ (Blaschke case), it is not hard to show that for any $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $n_0$ sufficiently large,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ergodicity}
\sigma^2(\log f') - \varepsilon \, < \, \fint_{\square_I^n} \, \biggl |\frac{2n_f}{\rho_*}(z) \biggr |^2 \, \rho_*|dz|^2 \, < \,
\sigma^2(\log f') + \varepsilon
\end{equation}
for any $n$-box $\square^n_I \subset \mathbb{D}^*$ with $n \geqslant n_0$.
Applying Theorems \ref{local-variance} and \ref{variance-thm}
shows that Theorem \ref{dynamical-connections} holds for conformal maps $f = w^{\mu}$ with $\mu \in M_{\bl}$ or $M_{\fuchs}$.
More generally, one can prove (\ref{eq:ergodicity}) for conformal maps to simply-connected domains bounded by Jordan repellers, see \cite[Section 8]{AIPP} for a definition.
The reader interested in working out the details can consult \cite{mcmullen}.
\section{Applications to integral means}
\label{sec:ims}
In this section, we use martingale techniques to study the rescaled integral means spectrum (\ref{eq:inf-ims}).
For a fixed $\tau \in \mathbb{C}$,
the (uniform) convergence $$\beta_{\log (w^{k\mu})'}(\tau/k) \, \to \, \beta_{\mathcal S\mu}(\tau), \qquad k \to 0,$$ can be justified
using (\ref{eq:quadratic-error}) and a variant of Lemma \ref{same-variance} for integral means, so the rescaled integral means spectrum is well-defined.
Moving to the upper half-plane, we are led to analyze the asymptotic expansion of
$$
B_0(\tau) \, = \,\lim_{k \to 0} B_k(\tau/k) \, =\, \sup_{|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\overline{\mathbb{H}}}} \beta_{\mathcal S^\#\mu} (\tau),
$$
near $\tau = 0$.
Let $B$ be the dyadic martingale associated to the Bloch function $\mathcal S^\#\mu$, $|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\overline{\mathbb{H}}}$ and $S = \re B$ be its real part. It suffices to estimate $\beta_S(t)$
with $t \in \mathbb{R}$.
We view $S$ as a $p$-adic martingale with $p = 2^n$, where the parameter $n$ will be chosen momentarily.
Suppose $I$ is a $2^n$-adic interval and
$I_1, I_2, \dots, I_{2^n}$ are its $2^n$-adic children. Then,
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{2^n} \sum_{j=1}^{2^n} \exp(t \Delta_j) & =
1 + \frac{t^2}{2} \biggl ( \frac{1}{2^n} \sum_{j=1}^{2^n} \Delta_j^2 \biggr) + \sum_{k \geqslant 3} \frac{t^k}{k!}
\biggl ( \frac{1}{2^n} \sum_{j=1}^{2^n} \Delta_j^k \biggr ). \\
& =
1 + \frac{n t^2}{2} \var_I^n + \mathcal O \biggl ( \sum_{k \geqslant 3} \frac{t^k}{k!} \cdot (Cn)^{k/2} \biggr ).
\end{align*}
Above, we used (\ref{eq:moments}) to estimate the remainder term.
If $b = \mathcal S^\#\mu$, $|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\overline{\mathbb H}}$, from Lemma \ref{boxcart}(i), we see that the above expression is bounded by
$$
\leqslant 1 + \frac{n t^2}{2} \biggl (\frac{\Sigma^2 \log 2}{2} + \mathcal O(1/\sqrt{n}) + \mathcal O(tn^{1/2}) + \dots \biggr ).
$$
Note that in order to use martingale techniques, we had to downgrade the box estimate with $\Sigma^2/2 + C/n$ to the variance bound $\var_I^n/\log 2 \leqslant \Sigma^2/2 + C/\sqrt{n}$, cf.~Theorem \ref{variance-thm}. Hence,
$$
\frac{1}{n \log 2} \log \biggl [ \frac{1}{2^n} \sum_{j=1}^{2^n} \exp(t \Delta_j)\biggr ] \leqslant \frac{t^2}{2} \biggl (\frac{\Sigma^2}{2} + \mathcal O(1/\sqrt{n}) + \mathcal O(tn^{1/2}) + \dots \biggr ).
$$
Taking $n = \lfloor t^{-1} \rfloor$ leads to the estimate
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:b0expansion}
B_0(t) \leqslant 1+\Sigma^2t^2/4+\mathcal O(|t|^{5/2}).
\end{equation}
By using Lemma \ref{boxcart}(ii), the above reasoning gives a lower bound for integral means which shows that (\ref{eq:b0expansion}) is an equality.
As mentioned in the introduction, if one avoids martingales, one can obtain a better remainder term than $\mathcal O(|t|^{5/2})$.
\section{A central limit theorem}
\label{sec:clt}
Suppose $b = P\mu$ with $|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\mathbb{D}}$. Consider the function
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rescaled-bloch2}
\tilde b_r(\theta) := \frac{b(re^{i \theta})}{\sqrt {|\log(1-r)|}}.
\end{equation}
The sub-Gaussian estimate (\ref{eq:subgaussian}) shows that most of the integral
$\int (\re \tilde{b}_r(\theta))^2 d\theta$ comes from the set
$$
A_\delta = \bigl\{\theta: -1/\delta < \re \tilde{b}_r(\theta) < 1/\delta\bigr\},
$$
that is, by making $\delta$ small, we can guarantee that
$$
\int_{A_\delta^c} (\re \tilde{b}_r(\theta))^2 d\theta < \varepsilon,
$$
where the estimate is uniform over all functions $b$ of the form above.
We now show that if $\sigma^2(b, r)$ is close to $\Sigma^2$, then the distribution of $\re \tilde{b}_r(\theta)$ is close to a Gaussian of mean 0
and variance $\Sigma^2/2$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{real-gaussian}
Suppose $|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\mathbb{D}}$.
Given $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a $\delta > 0$ such that if $r$ is sufficiently close to 1 and
$$\sigma^2(P\mu,r) \, = \, \frac{1}{2\pi |\log(1-r)|} \int_{|z|=r} |P\mu(z)|^2 \, |dz| \, > \, \Sigma^2 - \delta,$$
then for any $t \in \mathbb{R}$,
$$
\bigl | \mathbb{P}(\re \tilde{b}_r(\theta) < t) - \mathcal N_{0, \Sigma^2/2}(t) \bigr | < \varepsilon.
$$
The same statement holds with $\im \tilde{b}_r(\theta)$ as well.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Characteristic functions}
Converting to the upper half-plane, let $B$ be the $p$-adic martingale associated to the Bloch function $b = \mathcal S^\#\mu$, $|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\overline{\mathbb{H}}}$ and $S = \re B$ be its real part.
Here, we choose $p$ sufficiently large to guarantee that the box averages (\ref{eq:boxcart}) are at most
$\Sigma^2+\delta_1$. Let $\chi = \log p$ be the ``Lyapunov exponent'' of the $p$-adic grid.
As is standard \cite{durrett}, to prove the central limit theorem, one must examine the characteristic functions
$$
\varphi_n(t) = \mathbb{E} \exp \biggl ( i \cdot \frac{t S_n}{\sqrt{n\chi}}\biggr).
$$
However, since $\Delta_j(x)$ may not be constant in $x$, martingale jumps are usually not independent. Instead, we leverage the fact that
the local variance is approximately constant.
Observe that if $I$ is a $p$-adic interval and $I_1, I_2, \dots, I_{p}$ are its children, then for $t$ small,
$$
\frac{1}{p} \sum_{j=1}^{p} e^{it \Delta_j} = 1 - \frac{t^2}{2} \var_I + \mathcal O(t^3).
$$
If $S$ had {\em constant local variance}, that is if $\var_I = \sigma^2$ for all $I$, then the characteristic function
of $S_n/\sqrt{n\chi}$ would be simply
$$
\varphi_n = \biggl(1 - \frac{\sigma^2}{\chi} \cdot \frac{ t^2}{2n} + \mathcal O(t^3) \biggr)^n.
$$
Taking $n \to \infty$, one obtains
$$
\varphi \,=\, \lim_{n \to \infty} \varphi_n \, =\, \exp \biggl (-\frac{\sigma^2}{\chi} \cdot \frac{t^2}{2} \biggr ),
$$
which is the characteristic function of the Gaussian $\mathcal N_{0,\sigma^2/\chi}$.
For the problem at hand, we must slightly relax the assumption of constant local variance.
First, note that if the local variance is pinched
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:goodbox}
\Sigma^2/2 - \delta_2 \, \leqslant \, \var_I/\chi \, \leqslant \, \Sigma^2/2 + \delta_2,
\end{equation}
then the characteristic functions $\varphi_n$ satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lightbulb}
\ \varphi_n(t) = \exp \Bigl (-\sigma_n \cdot t^2/2+ o(t^2) \Bigr ), \quad \text{with } |\sigma_n - \Sigma^2/2| \leqslant \delta_2.
\end{equation}
In this case, the inversion formula for characteristic functions guarantees that for any $n \geqslant 1$, the distribution of
$S_n/\sqrt{n\chi}$ is close to $\mathcal N_{0,\Sigma^2/2}$.
\subsection{Allowing bad boxes}
Additionally, we must allow a small proportion of $p$-adic intervals $I$ to be bad where we only have weak control on $\var_I$ coming from the bounded increments assumption -- note that the Bloch norm $\| b\|_{\mathcal B(\mathbb{H})}$ is bounded by a universal constant for $b = \mathcal S^\#\mu$, $|\mu| \leqslant \chi_{\overline{\mathbb{H}}}$.
For a $p$-adic interval, write
$$
\square_I^{(p)} \, = \, \Bigl \{ w : \re w \in I, \, \im w \in \bigl [p^{-1}|I|, \,|I| \bigr ] \Bigr \}.
$$
Set
$$
\square^n \, = \, \bigl \{ w : \re w \in [0,1], \, \im w \in [p^{-n}, \, 1] \bigr \}.
$$
Fix $n \geqslant 1$. Call a $p$-adic box $\square_I^{(p)}$ with $|I| \geqslant p^{-n+1}$ {\em good} if
(\ref{eq:goodbox}) holds and
{\em bad} otherwise.
Let $\mathscr E \subset \square^n$ denote the union of bad boxes.
Inspecting (\ref{eq:avar-H}), we see that if
\begin{equation}
\sigma^2(S, n)/\chi \, := \, \frac{1}{n \chi} \int_0^1 S_n^2 \, dx \, \geqslant \, \Sigma^2/2-\delta,
\end{equation}
then
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:badbox}
\fint_{\square^n} \chi_{\mathscr E} \cdot \frac{|dz|^2}{y} \, \leqslant \, \delta_3.
\end{equation}
Therefore, to prove Theorem \ref{real-gaussian}, it suffices to show:
\begin{lemma}
\label{badbox-lemma}
If the parameters $\{ \delta_i\}$ above are sufficiently small, then $$\bigl | \mathbb P(S_n/\sqrt{n\chi} < t) - \mathcal N_{0,\Sigma^2/2}(t) \bigr | \leqslant \varepsilon.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Write $S = S^{\good} + S^{\bad}$ as a sum of two martingales, where the local variance
of $S^{\good}$ is close to $\Sigma^2$ on all intervals, while the increments of $S^{\bad}$ are non-zero only on bad intervals.
We may form $S^{\good}$ from $S$ by adjusting the jumps on the bad intervals, and defining $S^{\bad} := S - S^{\good}$ to be the difference.
From the construction, it is clear that
$$
\sigma^2(S^{\bad}, n) \, = \, \frac{1}{n} \int_0^1 (S^{\bad}_n)^2 \, dx
\, \lesssim \, \delta_3,
$$
which shows that $S^{\bad}_n/\sqrt{n\chi}$ is small outside of a set of small measure. Therefore, the distribution of $S_n/\sqrt{n\chi}$ is roughly that of $S^{\good}_n/\sqrt{n\chi}$, which we
already know to be approximately Gaussian.
\end{proof}
The proof of Theorem \ref{complex-gaussian} is similar except one considers characteristic functions of two variables
$$
\varphi_n(s, t) = \mathbb{E} \exp \biggl ( i \cdot \frac{s \re B + t \im B}{\sqrt{n\chi}}\biggr).
$$
and uses the approximate orthogonality (\ref{eq:ltg3}) between $\re B$ and $\im B$ to show
$\varphi_n(s, t) \approx \exp \Bigl (- \frac{\Sigma^2(s^2+t^2)}{4} \Bigr )$. We leave the details to the reader.
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction and main result}\label{int}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
It is well known that the spectrum of non-normal operators can be extremely
unstable even under tiny perturbations, see e.g. \cite{TrEm05,Da07}. It is
therefore a natural question to study the spectra of such operators subject
to small random perturbations. Recently, there has been a mounting interest
in the spectral properties of elliptic non-normal (pseudo-)differential operators
with small random perturbations, see for example \cite{BM,Ha06b,HaSj08,SjAX1002,Vo14,ZwChrist10}.
An interesting, perhaps surprising, result is that by adding a small random
perturbation, we can obtain a probabilistic Weyl law for the eigenvalues
for a large class of such operators.
\par
Another important example is the case of non-normal Toeplitz matrices,
since they can arise for example in models non-hermitian quantum
mechanics, see e.g. \cite{GoKh00,HaNe96}. The authors' interest in this
case, however, is motivated by the aspect of spectral instability.
\\
\par
The goal of this work is to study the spectrum of random perturbations of the
following bidiagonal $N\times N$ Toeplitz matrix:
\begin{equation}\label{int.1}
P=\begin{pmatrix} 0 &a &0 &.. &.. &0\\
b &0 &a &.. &..&0\\
0 &b &0 &.. &..&0\\
.. &.. &.. &..&..&..\\
0 & ..&.. &..&0 &a\\
0 &0 &.. &.. &b &0 \end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Here $a,\, b\in {\bf C}\setminus \{ 0 \}$ and $N\gg 1$. Identifying ${\bf C}^N$
with $\ell^2([1,N])$, $[1,N]=\{ 1,2,..,N\}$ and also with $\ell^2_{[1,N]}({\bf
Z})$ (the space of all $u\in \ell^2({\bf Z})$ with support in
$[1,N]$), we have:
\begin{equation}\label{int.3}
P=1_{[1,N]}(a\tau _{-1}+b\tau _1)1_{[1,N]}=1_{[1,N]}(a\mathrm{e}^{iD_x}+b\mathrm{e}^{-iD_x})1_{[1,N]},
\end{equation}
where $\tau _ku(j)=u(j-k)$ denotes translation by $k$, and
\begin{equation*}
(a\mathrm{e}^{iD_x}+b\mathrm{e}^{-iD_x})u(n)= \frac{1}{2\pi}
\int_{\mathbf{R}/2\pi\mathbf{Z}}\mathrm{e}^{in\xi}p(\xi)\widehat{u}(\xi)d\xi,
\quad u \in \ell^2(\mathbf{Z}),
\end{equation*}
where $\widehat{u}$ denotes the Fourier transformation of $u$ and
$p(\xi)$ is the symbol of $P$, given by
\begin{equation}\label{int.5}
p(\xi )=a\mathrm{e}^{i\xi }+b\mathrm{e}^{-i\xi }.
\end{equation}
Assume, to fix the ideas, that $|b|\le |a|$. Then
$p({\bf R})$ is equal to the ellipse, $E_1$, centred at 0 with major
semi-axis of length $(|a|+|b|)$ pointing in the direction $e^{i(\alpha
+\beta )/2}$, where $\alpha = \mathrm{arg}(a)$, $\beta=\mathrm{arg}(b)$,
and minor semi-axis of length $|a|-|b|$. The focal points
of $E_1$ are
\begin{equation}\label{rasy.2.5}
\pm 2\sqrt{ab}=\pm e^{i\frac{\alpha +\beta }{2}} 2\sqrt{|a||b|}.
\end{equation}
In a previous work \cite{SjVo15b} the authors have shown that
the numerical range of $P$ is contained in the
convex hull of the ellipse $E_1$ described above and the
eigenvalues of $P$ are given by
\begin{equation}\label{spnp.12}
z=z(\nu )=2\sqrt{ab}\cos
\left( \frac{\pi \nu }{N+1} \right),
\quad \nu =1,\dots, N.
\end{equation}
This result is also illustrated in Figure \ref{fig1}. In this work, we consider
the following random perturbation of $P$
\begin{equation}\label{int.5a}
P_{\delta} := P + \delta Q_{\omega},
\quad
Q_{\omega}=(q_{j,k}(\omega))_{1\leq j,k\leq N},
\end{equation}
where $0\leq\delta\ll 1 $, possibly depending on $N$,
and $q_{j,k}(\omega)$ are independent and
identically distributed complex Gaussian random variables,
following the complex Gaussian law $\mathcal{N}_{\mathbf{C}}(0,1)$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{ellipse.pdf}
\caption{The black dots along the focal segment show the
spectrum (obtained using MATLAB) of the unperturbed operator $P$ with dimension $N=501$,
$a=0.5$, $b=i$ and $\delta=10^{-12}$. The blue cirlces show the spectrum
of the perturbed operator \eqref{int.5a}, and the red ellipse is the image of
the symbol $p$.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
In \cite{SjVo15b}, the authors proved that when the coupling constant $\delta$ is
bounded from above and from below by sufficiently negative powers of $N$,
then most eigenvalues of $P_{\delta}$, \eqref{int.5a},
are close to the ellipse $p(\mathbf{R})$ and follow a Weyl law, with probability
close to one, as the dimension $N$ gets large (cf. Figure \ref{fig1}).
\par
The methods used in \cite{SjVo15b} are essentially based on probabilistic
subharmonic estimates of $\ln |\det(P_{\delta}-z)|$ and complex analysis,
using in particular a counting theorem of \cite{Sj09b} (see also \cite{Ha06,HaSj08}).
However, this approach is not fine to enough give a detailed description of the
exceptional eigenvalues seen inside the ellipse in Figure \ref{fig1} and
we only obtain a logarithmic upper bound on the number of eigenvalues in this
region. To gain more information about these eigenvalues, we study the random measure
\begin{equation}
\Xi :=\sum_{z\in\sigma(P_{\delta})}\delta_z,
\end{equation}
where the eigenvalues are counted with multiplicity. In particular we are
interested in studying the first intensity measure of $\Xi$, which is the
positive measure $\nu$ defined by
\begin{equation}
\mathds{E} \left[ \Xi(\varphi)\right] = \int \varphi(z)\nu(dz),
\end{equation}
where $\varphi$ is a test function of class $\mathcal{C}_0$. The measure
$\nu$ contains information about the average density of eigenvalues,
and we will show in Theorem \ref{thm1} below, that it admits a continuous
density with respect to the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbf{C}$, up to a small error
in the large $N$ limit.
\par
This approach
is more classical in the theory of random polynomials (cf. \cite{SZ03,BSZ00})
and random Gaussian analytic functions (cf. \cite{HoKrPeVi09,So00}). We
follow in particular the approach developed in \cite{Vo14}, which was
therein used to describe the average density of eigenvalues of a class of semiclassical differential
operators subject to small random perturbations.
\\
\par
The main result of this paper describes the average density of eigenvalues
in the interior of confocal ellipses. Let $p_{a,b}=p$ as in \eqref{int.5}.
For any $r>0$ we define $\Sigma_r$ to be the convex hull of
$p_{ra,r^{-1}b}(\mathbf{R})$. We will see in Section \ref{sizz} that
$p_{ra,r^{-1}b}(\mathbf{R})$, for $ (|b|/|a|)^{1/2} \leq r < +\infty$, are confocal
ellipses and that they are in the interior of $\Sigma_{r_0}$, for every $r_0>r$.
Moreover that $p_{ra,r^{-1}b}(\mathbf{R})$, with $r= (|b|/|a|)^{1/2}$, is the
focal segment.
\par
We prove the following result.
\begin{theo}\label{thm1}
Let $P_{\delta}$ be as in \eqref{int.5a} and let $p_{a,b}=p$ as in \eqref{int.5}.
Let $C\gg 1$ be arbitrary, but fixed (and not necessarily the same in the sequel).
Let $r_1=|b/a|^{1/2} +1/C$, let $\mathrm{e}^{-N/C} \leq \delta \ll 1$, $N\gg 1$
and let $r_0>0$ belong to the parameter range
\begin{equation}\label{eq1.1}
\begin{split}
& \frac{1}{C} \leq r_0 \leq 1- \frac{1}{N}, \\
& \frac{Nr_0^{N-1}}{\delta}(1-r_0)^2 +\delta N^3 \ll 1,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
so that $\delta N^3 \ll 1$. For $r>0$, let $\Sigma_r$ be the convex hull of
$p_{ra,r^{-1}b}(\mathbf{R})$. Then, for all
$\varphi\in\mathcal{C}_0(\mathring{\Sigma}_{(r_0-1/N)}\backslash{\Sigma}_{r_1} )$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq1}
\mathds{E} \left[ \sum_{\lambda\in\sigma(P_{\delta})}\varphi(z)
\right] =
\int \varphi(z)\xi(z) L(dz)
+ \langle \mu_N, \varphi \rangle,
\end{equation}
for some $C\gg 1$. Here, the density $\xi$ is a continuous function
satisfying,
\begin{equation}\label{eq2}
\begin{split}
&\xi(z) = \frac{2}{\pi}\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}\ln K(z)
\left(1 +\mathcal{O}\!\left(\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{\delta }(1-|\zeta_-|)^2
+ \delta N^3
\right)\right), \\
&K(z)= \sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\left|\frac{\zeta_-^{k+1} - \zeta_+^{k+1}}{a(\zeta_- - \zeta_+)}\right|^2,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\zeta_{\pm}(z)$ are the two solutions of the equation $p_{a,b}(\zeta)=z$
for $z\in\Sigma_1 \backslash [-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$, chosen such that
$|\zeta_-| \geq |\zeta_+|$. $\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}\ln K(z) $
is smooth and strictly positive.
\par
Furthermore, $\mu_N$ is a Radon measure of total mass $\leq N\mathrm{e}^{-N^2}$,
i.e. $ |\langle \mu_N, \varphi \rangle | \leq N\mathrm{e}^{-N^2}\|\varphi\|_{\infty}$.
\end{theo}
Let us give some remarks on this result. We will show in Section \ref{sizz} that
for $p(\zeta_{\pm})=z\in\mathring{\Sigma}_1\backslash [-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$
we have that $|\zeta_+| < |b/a|^{1/2} < |\zeta_-| <1$. In fact we have that
$|\zeta_-| \leq r_0$ when $z\in\Sigma_{r_0}\backslash [-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$.
\\
\par
Secondly, for $r_0$ satisfying the first condition in
\eqref{eq1.1}, the function $[0,r_0]\ni r \mapsto r^{N-1}(1-r)^2$ is increasing. Hence,
the error term in \eqref{eq2} is small, since it is dominated by the term in the second
line of \eqref{eq1.1}. More precisely, it satisfies for $|\zeta_-|\leq r_0$
%
\begin{equation*}
\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{\delta }(1-|\zeta_-|)^2+ \delta N^3
\leq
\frac{Nr_0^{N-1}}{\delta}(1-r_0)^2 +\delta N^3.
\end{equation*}
Theorem \ref{thm1} shows that in the interior of the ellipse $p(\mathbf{R})$ (see
Figure \ref{fig1}) there is a non-vanishing continuous density of eigenvalues
whose leading term is independent of the dimension $N$ and depends only
the symbol $p$.
\par
Furthermore, we note that the leading term of the density $\xi$ is related to
the Edelman-Kostlan formula (see for example \cite{HoKrPeVi09})
for the average density of the zeros of a Gaussian analytic function $g(z)$,
in the sense of \cite{HoKrPeVi09}, with covariance kernel $K(z)$, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
\mathds{E}[g(z)\overline{g(z)}] = K(z).
\end{equation*}
The above theorem, together with the result of \cite{SjVo15b}, is a generalisation
of the work done in the case where the unperturbed operator $P$ is given by
a large Jordan block, i.e. the case where $a=1$, $b=0$. This has already
been subject to intense study :
M.~Hager and E.B.~Davies \cite{DaHa09} showed that with a sufficiently small
coupling constant
most eigenvalues of $P_{\delta}$ can be found near a circle, with probability close to $1$, as
the dimension of the matrix $N$ gets large. This result has been refined by one of the
authors in \cite{Sj15}, showing that, with probability close to $1$, most eigenvalues
follow an angular Weyl law. Furthermore, M.~Hager and E.B.~Davies \cite{DaHa09} give a probabilistic upper bound of order $\log N$ for the number of eigenvalues in the interior of a circle.
\par
A recent result by A.~Guionnet, P.~Matched Wood and
O.~Zeitouni \cite{GuMaZe14} implies that when the coupling constant is
bounded from above and from below by (different) sufficiently negative powers of $N$, then
the normalized counting measure of eigenvalues of the randomly perturbed Jordan block converges weakly in probability to the uniform measure on $S^1$ as the dimension of the
matrix gets large.
\par
In \cite{SjVo15}, the authors show that in the case where $P$ is given by
a Jordan block matrix, the leading term of the average density of eigenvalues
is given by the density of the hyperbolic volume on the unit disk.
\par
A similar result has been obtained by C.~Bordenave and
M.~Capitaine in \cite{BoCa16}, where they allow for a more general class
of random matrices, however, with slower decay of the coupling
constant, as $N\gg 1$. In particular they show that the point process
$\Xi$ converges weakly inside some disc, in the limit $N\to\infty$, to
the point process given by
the zeros of a certain Gaussian analytic function (in the sense
of \cite{HoKrPeVi09}) on the Poincar\'e disc.
\\[2ex]
\textbf{Acknowledgements.} M.~Vogel was supported by the project
GeRaSic ANR-13-BS01-0007-01.%
\section{Image of the symbol $p$}\label{sizz}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
It will be important to understand
the solutions of the characteristic equation $p(\xi)=z$. The discussion
that follows has been taken from \cite{SjVo15b} and is presented here
for the reader's convenience.
\\
\par
We recall that we have assumed for simplicity that
$|a|\ge |b|$. The case $|a|=|b|$ will be obtained as a limiting case
of the one when $|a|>|b|$, that we consider now. We write the symbol
$p$ \eqref{int.5} in the form
$$
f_{a,b}(\zeta )=a\zeta +b/\zeta, \quad \zeta=\mathrm{e}^{i\xi},
$$
and observe that when $r>0$
$$
f_{a,b}(\partial D(0,r))=f_{ar,b/r}(\partial D(0,1))
$$
which gives a family of confocal ellipses $E_r$. The length of the
major semi-axis of $E_r$ is equal to $|a|r+|b|/r=:g(r)$. $E_{r_1}$ is contained in the bounded domain which has $E_{r_2}$
as its boundary, precisely when $g(r_1)\le g(r_2)$. The function $g$
has a unique minimum at $r=r_\mathrm{min}=(|b|/|a|)^{1/2}$. $g$ is
strictly decreasing on $]0,r_\mathrm{min}]$ and strictly increasing on
$[r_\mathrm{min},+\infty [ $. It tends to $+\infty $ when $r\to 0$ and
when $r\to +\infty $. We have
$g_\mathrm{min}=g(r_\mathrm{min})=2(|a||b|)^{1/2}$ so
$E_{r_\mathrm{min}}$ is just the segment between the two focal points,
common to all the $E_r$. For $r\ne r_\mathrm{min}$, the map $\partial
D(0,r)\to E_r$ is a diffeomorphism. Let $r_1$ be the unique value in
$]0,1[$ for which $g(r_1)=|a|+|b|=g(1)$. We get the following result:
\begin{prop}\label{sizz1} Let $|b|<|a|$.
\begin{itemize}
\item
When $z$ is strictly inside the ellipse $E_1$ described above,
then both solutions of $f_{a,b}(\zeta )=z$ belong to $D(0,1)$.
\item When $z$ is on the ellipse, one solution is on $S^1$ and the
other belongs to $D(0,1)$.
\item When $z$ is in the exterior region to the ellipse, one solution
fulfils $|\zeta |>1$ and the other satisfies $|\zeta |<1$.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
\par In the case $|a|=|b|$, $E_1$ is just the segment between the two
focal points. In this case $r_\mathrm{min}=1$ and we get:
\begin{prop}\label{sizz2}
Assume that $|a|=|b|$. \begin{itemize}
\item If $z\in E_1$ then both solutions of
$f_{a,b}(\zeta )=z$ belong to $S^1$.
\item If $z$ is outside $E_1$, one solution is in $D(0,1)$ and the
other is in the complement of $\overline{D(0,1)}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
\begin{remark}\label{remh1}
Assuming that $0<|b|\leq |a|$, we observe that for
$z\in\mathbf{C}$ the two solutions, say $\zeta_{\pm}$ of $f_{a,b}(\zeta)=z$
are solutions of the equation
\begin{equation}
\zeta^2 -\frac{z}{a}\zeta + \frac{b}{a}=0,
\end{equation}
and they satisfy the relations
\begin{equation}\label{algrel}
\zeta_+\zeta_- = \frac{b}{a},
\quad
\zeta_+ + \zeta_- = -\frac{z}{a}.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, we can fix a branch of the square root such that
$\zeta_+(z)$ and $\zeta_-(z)$ are holomorphic functions of $z$
in $\mathbf{C}\backslash [-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$.
\end{remark}
Throughout this text, we will work with the convention that
\begin{equation}\label{signcon}
|\zeta_+| \leq |\zeta_-|
\end{equation}
which in particular yields by the above discussion that when
$z$ is inside $E_r$, for $r\in [r_{\mathrm{min}}, +\infty[$, then
\begin{equation}\label{signcon2}
0< |\zeta_+| \leq \sqrt{|b/a|} \leq |\zeta_-| \leq r.
\end{equation}
\section{Preparations for the density of eigenvalues in the interior}
In this section we are interested in the density of eigenvalues in the
interior of the ellipse $p_{a,b}(\mathbf{R})$, where $p_{a,b}=p$ denotes the
principal symbol of the unperturbed operator $P$, cf. \eqref{int.3}, \eqref{int.5}.
We study the first moment of linear statistics of the point process
given by the eigenvalues of $P_{\delta}$, see \eqref{int.5a}, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.60}
I_{\varphi} = \mathds{E} \left[ \sum_{\lambda\in\sigma(P_{\delta})}\varphi(z)
\right], \quad
\varphi \in \mathcal{C}_0(\Omega),
\end{equation}
where $\Omega$ is some open subset in the interior of
$\mathrm{conv}(p_{a,b}(\mathbf{R}))\backslash[-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$,
where $\mathrm{conv}(\cdot)$ denotes the convex
hull of a set.
\par
W.~Bordeaux-Montrieux \cite{BM} noted that the Markov inequality implies
that if $C_1>0$ is large enough, then
for the Hilbert-Schmidt norm of $Q_{\omega}$ (as in \eqref{int.5a}),
\begin{equation}\label{grpp.0b}
\mathds{P}\left[
\Vert Q_{\omega}\Vert_\mathrm{HS}\le C_1N
\right] \ge 1-e^{-N^2}.
\end{equation}
Since the number of eigenvalues of $P_{\delta}$ in the support
of $\varphi$ is bounded from above by $N$, it follows from \eqref{grpp.0b} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.61}
\begin{split}
&I_{\varphi} = \mathds{E} \left[ \mathds{1}_{B_{\mathbf{C}^{N^2}}(0,C_1N)}(Q) \sum_{\lambda\in\sigma(P_{\delta})}\varphi(z)
\right] + \langle \mu_N, \varphi \rangle, \\
& |\langle \mu_N, \varphi \rangle | \leq N\mathrm{e}^{-N^2}\|\varphi\|_{\infty}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here, we identify the random matrix $Q_{\omega}$ (cf \eqref{int.5a}) with
a random vector $Q\in\mathbf{C}^{N^2}$. Furthermore, $\mu_N$ is a Radon measure
of total mass $\leq N\mathrm{e}^{-N^2}$.
\par
After the reduction to \ref{eq10.61}, it is sufficient to work with the assumption
that the random vector $Q$ is restricted to a ball of radius $C_1N$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\|Q\|_2\leq C_1 N.
\end{equation}
Note that this assumption is equivalent, to the assumption that the Hilbert-Schmidt
norm of the random matrix $Q_{\omega}$ is bounded, more precisely that
\begin{equation}\label{eqa1}
\|Q\|_{HS}\leq C_1 N.
\end{equation}
Next, we define for $r>0$
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.1}
\Sigma_{r}:= \mathrm{conv}(p_{ar,br^{-1}}(\mathbf{R})).
\end{equation}
We let
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.1.5}
\Omega\Subset\mathring{\Sigma}_1\backslash
[-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}],
\end{equation}
be open, relatively compact and connected. It
may depend on $N$ (to be specified later on) but will
avoid a fixed neighbourhood of the focal segment. Moreover,
let $W=B(0,C_1N)$ for $C_1>0$ large enough such that
\eqref{grpp.0b} holds. By remark \ref{remh1} we see that by excluding
the focal segment in \eqref{eq10.1.5} we have that $\zeta_{\pm}(z)$,
the solutions to the characteristic equation, given by the symbol \eqref{int.5},
\begin{equation*}
a\zeta + b\zeta^{-1} = z,
\end{equation*}
are holomorphic functions of $z$,.
\\
\par
In the following we write for $\mu\in\mathbf{N}$
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.2.1}
F_{\mu+1}(t) = 1 + t + \dots + t^{\mu}
, \quad 0\leq t \leq 1.
\end{equation}
As in \cite{SjVo15b}, we work under the hypothesis that
\begin{equation}\label{grpp.1}
\delta N F_N(|\zeta_-|) \ll 1.
\end{equation}
Notice that this is fulfilled for all $z$ inside $E_1=p(\mathbf{R})$, if we make
the even stronger assumption
\begin{equation}\label{grpp.2}
\delta N^2 \ll 1.
\end{equation}
(Recall that $N\gg 1$).
We have shown in \cite{SjVo15b} that assuming \eqref{grpp.1}, \eqref{eqa1}
we can identify the eigenvalues of
$P_{\delta}$ in $\Omega$ with the zeros of $g(z,Q)$, a holomorphic function
on $\Omega\times W$. Note that since there are at most $N$ eigenvalues,
we have for every $Q\in W$ that $g(\cdot,Q)\not\equiv 0$. Furthermore,
see \cite[Formula (8.18)]{SjVo15b}, $g$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.2}
g(z,Q) = g_0(z) - \delta (Q|\overline{Z})+ T(z,Q;\delta,N),
\end{equation}
where $Z$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{grpp.14}
\begin{split}
Z &= \left(
\frac{\zeta_+^{N+1-j} - \zeta_-^{N+1-j}}{a(\zeta_+ - \zeta_-)}
\frac{\zeta_+^{k} - \zeta_-^{k}}{a(\zeta_+ - \zeta_-)}
\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq N} \\
&=\left( a^{-2}
F_{N+1-j}(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)F_{k}(\zeta_+/\zeta_-) \zeta_-^{N-j+k-1}
\right)_{1\leq j,k\leq N},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.3}
g_0(z) = \frac{\zeta_-^{N+1} - \zeta_+^{N+1}}{a(\zeta_- - \zeta_+)}
= \frac{\zeta_-^N}{a} F_{N+1}(\zeta_+/\zeta_-).
\end{equation}
Moreover,
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.3.5}
|T(z,Q)|=|T(z,q;\delta,N)|=\mathcal{O}(1)(\delta N F_N(|\zeta_-|^2))^2.
\end{equation}
We will frequently write $|\cdot |$ for the Hilbert-Schmidt norm and,
until further notice, we write $F_{\mu}=F_{\mu}(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)$.
By \eqref{grpp.14}, we get that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.3.4}
|Z| =|a|^{-2} \left(\sum_{j,k=1}^N|\zeta_-|^{2(N-j+k-1)}|F_{N+1-j}|^2|F_{k}|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}
= |a|^{-2}\sum_{\mu =0 }^{N-1}|\zeta_-|^{2\mu}|F_{\mu+1}|^2.
\end{equation}
For $z\in\Omega$ we have $|\zeta_+|/|\zeta_-|\leq C < 1$ and hence
$|F_k(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)|\asymp 1$. If we also assume $z\in\Sigma_{r_0}$,
$0<r_0\leq 1-1/N$, then
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.3.6}
|Z| \asymp F_N(|\zeta_-|^2) \asymp \frac{1}{1-|\zeta_-|^2} \asymp \frac{1}{1-|\zeta_-|},
\end{equation}
where we used as well that $\sqrt{|b/a|} \leq |\zeta_-| \leq 1- 1/N$
(see \eqref{signcon2},\eqref{eq10.8}, \eqref{eq10.9}), and that
\begin{equation}
F_N(|\zeta_-|^2) = \frac{1}{1-|\zeta_-|^2}(1 - |\zeta_-|^{2(N+1)})
\asymp \frac{1}{1-|\zeta_-|^2}.
\end{equation}
Recall that $\Omega$ in \eqref{eq10.1.5} avoids a fixed neighborhood of
the focal segment of the ellipse $E_1=p(\mathbf{R})$. More precisely, in
view of the discussion in Section \ref{sizz}, we assume that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.4}
\begin{cases}
\Omega\Subset\mathring{\Sigma}_{1}\backslash \Sigma_{r_1}, \\
r_1= \sqrt{|b/a|} + 1/C, ~ C\gg 1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq10.4}, it follows that the middle term in \eqref{eq10.2}
is bounded in modulus by
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.5}
\delta |Q| |Z| \leq \mathcal{O}(1)(C_1\delta N F_N(|\zeta_-|^2))
\end{equation}
where we assumed that $|Q|\leq C_1 N$ (cf. \eqref{grpp.1}). Moreover, we
assume that the
first term in \eqref{eq10.2} is smaller than the bound on the middle term, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.6}
|g_0(z)| \ll C_1\delta N F_N(|\zeta_-|^2).
\end{equation}
Using that $|F_k(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)|\asymp 1$, we see that \eqref{eq10.6} is
implied by the assumption
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.7}
|\zeta_-|^N \ll C_1\delta N F_N(|\zeta_-|^2).
\end{equation}
More precisely, we will assume that $z$ satisfying \eqref{eq10.4} is
such that $\zeta_-(z)\in D(0,r_0)$ with
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.8}
|r_0|^N \ll C_1\delta N F_N(r_0^2), \quad r_0\leq 1 - \frac{1}{N}.
\end{equation}
Observe that the function $r^N/F_N(r^2)$ is strictly monotonically growing on
the interval $[0,1-N^{-1}]$. Thus, the inequality \eqref{eq10.7}
is preserved if we replace $r_0$ by $|\zeta_-|$, for $|\zeta_-|\leq r_0$.
\par
Combining the assumptions \eqref{eq10.4} and \eqref{eq10.7}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.9}
\begin{cases}
z\in\Omega\Subset\Sigma_{r_0,r_1}:=\mathring{\Sigma}_{r_0}\backslash \Sigma_{r_1}, \\
r_0>0 \text{ satisfies \eqref{eq10.8}}, \\
r_1= \sqrt{|b/a|} + 1/C, ~ C\gg 1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
By \eqref{grpp.1}, we see that the bound on $T$ is much smaller than the
upper bound on the middle term in \eqref{eq10.2}, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.10}
(\delta NF_{N+1}(|\zeta_-|^2))^2 \ll \delta NF_{N}(|\zeta_-|^2)
\end{equation}
Here we used as well that $F_{N+1}(|\zeta_-|^2) \asymp F_{N}(|\zeta_-|^2)$.
From \eqref{eq10.2}, \eqref{eq10.3.5} and the Cauchy inequalities, we
get
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.11}
d_Qg(z,Q) = -\delta Z\cdot dQ + \mathcal{O}(\delta^2F_{N+1}^2(|\zeta_-|^2) N)
\end{equation}
where the norm of the first term is
$\asymp \delta |Z| \asymp \delta F_N(|\zeta_-|^2) \gg
\delta^2F_{N+1}^2(|\zeta_-|^2) N$. Here, we used \eqref{grpp.1},
\eqref{eq10.3.6}. Technically, we need to apply the Cauchy inequalities
in a ball of radius $\eta C_1N$ for some $0<\eta<0$, but we have
room for that if we choose $C_1$ in \eqref{grpp.1} slightly larger
to begin with.
\par
Recall that for every $Q\in W$, $g(\cdot,Q)\not\equiv 0$. It has then been shown
in \cite{Vo14,SjVo15}, that if
\begin{equation*}
g(z,Q) = 0 \Rightarrow
d_Qg(z,Q) \neq 0
\end{equation*}
then
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.11.1}
\Gamma := \left\{
(z,Q)\in\Omega\times W; g(z,Q)=0
\right\}
\end{equation}
is a smooth complex hypersurface in $\Omega\times W$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.11.2}
K_{\varphi} =
\mathds{E} \left[ \mathds{1}_{B(0,C_1N)}(Q) \sum_{\lambda\in\sigma(P_{\delta})}\varphi(z)
\right]
=
\int_{\Gamma}\varphi(z)\mathrm{e}^{-Q^*Q}\,\frac{j^*(d\overline{Q}\wedge dQ)}{(2i)^{N^2}},
\end{equation}
where $j^*$ denotes the pull-back by the regular embedding
$j:\Gamma \to \Omega\times W$ and
$$
d\overline{Q}\wedge dQ = d\overline{Q}_1\wedge dQ_1 \wedge \dots
d\overline{Q}_N\wedge dQ_N,
$$
which is a complex $(N^2,N^2)$-form on $\Omega\times W$. Thus,
$(2i)^{-N^2}j^*(d\overline{Q}\wedge dQ)$ is a non-negative differential form on $\Gamma$
of maximal degree.
\\
\par
Next, we identify $Z(z)$ in \eqref{grpp.14} with a vector in
$\mathbf{C}^{N^2}$ and write
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.12}
Q = Q(\alpha) =\alpha_1\overline{Z}(z) + \alpha', \quad
\alpha_1\in\mathbf{C}, ~\alpha'\in \overline{Z}(z)^{\perp}
\end{equation}
and we identify $\overline{Z}(z)^{\perp}$ unitarily with $\mathbf{C}^{N^2-1}$ by
means of an orthonormal basis $e_2(z),\dots,e_{N^2}(z)$, so that
$\alpha'=\sum_2^{N^2} \alpha_je_j(z)$. Then, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.12.1}
Q=Q(\alpha,z) = \alpha_1\overline{Z}(z) + \sum_2^{N^2} \alpha_je_j(z)
\end{equation}
and we identify $g(z,Q)$ with $\tilde{g}(z,\alpha)=g(z,Q(\alpha,z))$ which is
holomorphic in $\alpha$ for every
fixed $z$ and, by \eqref{eq10.2}, \eqref{eq10.3.5}, we have that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.13}
\begin{split}
&\tilde{g}(z,\alpha) = g_0(z) -\delta |Z|^2\alpha_1 +
T\!\left(z,\alpha_1\overline{Z}(z)+ \sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_je_j(z)\right) \\
&\partial_{\alpha_1}\tilde{g}(z,\alpha) = -\delta |Z|^2 + \mathcal{O}(\delta^2F_{N+1}^3 N).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In particular, by \eqref{grpp.1}, \eqref{eq10.3.6}, we see that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.14}
|\partial_{\alpha_1}\tilde{g}(z,\alpha)| \asymp \delta F_{N+1}^2(|\zeta_-|^2).
\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq10.13},\eqref{eq10.3.5} and the Cauchy-inequalities, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.15}
|\partial_{\alpha_j}\tilde{g}(z,\alpha)| =\mathcal{O}(\delta^2F_{N+1}^2 N),
\quad j=2,\dots,N^2.
\end{equation}
The Cauchy-inequalities applied to \eqref{eq10.3} together with \eqref{eq10.3.5},
\eqref{eq10.2} yield
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.16}
\partial_{z}g(z,Q) = \partial_z g_0(z) - \delta (Q| \overline{\partial_z Z})
+ \frac{\mathcal{O}(1)(\delta N F_{N+1}(|\zeta_-|^2))^2}{\mathrm{dist}(z,\partial\overline{\Sigma}_{r_0,r_1})}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.17}
\partial_z g_0(z)= (\partial_z \ln \zeta_- ) \frac{\zeta_-^N}{a}\left[
NF_{N+1}(\zeta_+/\zeta_-) -2(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)F_{N+1}'(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)\right].
\end{equation}
Here, we used as well \eqref{algrel} which implies that
$\partial_z (\zeta_+/\zeta_-) = -(\zeta_+/\zeta_- )\partial_z \ln \zeta_-$.
\begin{remark}
Note that in \eqref{eq10.16}
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.17.5}
\mathrm{dist}(z,\partial\overline{\Sigma}_{r_0,r_1}) \geq
\frac{\min(r_0-|\zeta_-|, |\zeta_-|-r_1)}{C}
\geq \frac{r_0-|\zeta_-|}{C},
\end{equation}
for some (not necessarily equal) $C\gg 1$.
\end{remark}
For $Q$ in \eqref{eq10.12.1}, we have the following result:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem10.1} Let $Q(\alpha)\in B(0,C_1N)$ and $z\in\Omega$
as in \eqref{eq10.9}. Then,
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.18}
\begin{split}
\partial_{z}\tilde{g}(z,\alpha) = \partial_z g_0(z) - \delta \alpha_1 \partial_z |Z|^2
&+ \frac{\mathcal{O}(1)(\delta N F_{N}(|\zeta_-|^2))^2}{\mathrm{dist}(z,\partial\overline{\Sigma}_{r_0,r_1})} \\
&+\mathcal{O}(\delta^2F_{N}(|\zeta_-|^2)^2N)\left| \sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_i \partial_z e_i(z) \right|,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.19}
\begin{split}
\partial_{\overline{z}}\tilde{g}(z,\alpha) = - \delta \partial_{\overline{z}} |Z|^2\alpha_1
+\mathcal{O}(\delta^2F_{N}(|\zeta_-|^2)^2N)\left| \alpha_1\overline{\partial_z Z} +
\sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_i \partial_{\overline{z}} e_i(z) \right|.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Using \eqref{eq10.13}, one computes
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\partial_z \widetilde{g} \\
&= \partial_z g_0 - \delta\alpha_1\partial_zZ\cdot \overline{Z}
+ \partial_z(T(z,Q(\alpha,z))) \\
&=\partial_z g_0 -\delta \partial_z Z\cdot\overline{Z} +(\partial_zT)(z,Q(\alpha,z))
+ d_QT(z,Q(\alpha))\cdot \partial_zQ(\alpha,z) \\
&=\partial_z g_0 -\delta \partial_z Z\cdot\overline{Z} +(\partial_zT)(z,Q(\alpha,z))
+ (d_QT)(z,Q(\alpha,z))\cdot \sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_j\partial_ze_j(z),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where, to obtain the last equality, we used \eqref{eq10.12} and the fact that $\overline{Z}(z)$
is antiholomorphic in $z$. The Cauchy-inequalities together with \eqref{eq10.3.5}
yield that
\begin{equation}
(\partial_zT)(z,Q(\alpha,z)) = \mathcal{O}(1)
\frac{(\delta NF_N)^2}{\mathrm{dist}(z,\partial\overline{\Sigma}_{r_0,r_1})},
\end{equation}
as well as
\begin{equation}
(d_QT)(z,Q(\alpha,z))\cdot \sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_j\partial_ze_j(z)
= \mathcal{O}(\delta^2N^2F_N)\left|\sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_j\partial_ze_j(z) \right|,
\end{equation}
and we conclude \eqref{eq10.18}. Similarly, we obtain \eqref{eq10.19}.
\end{proof}
Continuing, recall that we work under assumptions \eqref{grpp.1} and
\eqref{eq10.9} (recall as well that the last one implies \eqref{eq10.6}
and \eqref{eq10.7}). We use \eqref{eq10.6}, \eqref{eq10.7} and apply Rouch\'e's Theorem
to \eqref{eq10.13}, and we see that for $C_1>0$ large enough and for $|\alpha'|<C_1N$,
the equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.21}
\tilde{g}(z,\alpha_1,\alpha') = 0
\end{equation}
has exactly one solution
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.22}
\alpha_1=f(z,\alpha') \in D\left(0,\frac{C_1 N}{F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)}\right).
\end{equation}
Note that this yields the entire hypersurface \eqref{eq10.11.1} for
$\Omega$ satisfying \eqref{eq10.9}, since $\tilde{g}\neq 0$ for $\alpha_1$ outside the above
disc, which follows from \eqref{eq10.13},\eqref{eq10.3.5} and
\eqref{eq10.6}.
Moreover, $f$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.23}
f(z,\alpha')= \frac{g_0(z)}{\delta |Z|^2} + \mathcal{O}(1)\delta N^2
= \mathcal{O}\left( \frac{g_0(z)}{\delta F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)^2} +\delta N^2\right).
\end{equation}
Differentiating \eqref{eq10.21} with respect to $z$ and $\overline{z}$,
we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.24}
\partial_z\tilde{g} + \partial_{\alpha_1}\tilde{g}\cdot\partial_z f = 0,
\quad
\partial_{\overline{z}}\tilde{g} + \partial_{\alpha_1}\tilde{g}\cdot\partial_{\overline{z}} f = 0.
\end{equation}
Which implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.25}
\partial_z f = -(\partial_{\alpha_1}\tilde{g})^{-1}\partial_z\tilde{g} , \quad
\partial_{\overline{z}} f = -(\partial_{\alpha_1}\tilde{g})^{-1}\partial_{\overline{z}}\tilde{g}.
\end{equation}
Recall from \eqref{eq10.13} that $\tilde{g}$ is holomorphic in $\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_{N^2}$
and so we see that $f$ is holomorphic in $\alpha_2,\dots,\alpha_{N^2}$.
Applying $\partial_{\alpha_j}$, $j=2,\dots,N^2$, to \eqref{eq10.26}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.26}
\partial_{\alpha_j}f = -(\partial_{\alpha_1}\tilde{g})^{-1}\partial_{\alpha_j}\tilde{g},
\quad j=2,\dots,N^2.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq10.13} in the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.27}
\partial_{\alpha_1}\tilde{g} = - \delta |Z|^2(1+\mathcal{O}(\delta F_{N+1}(|\zeta_-|^2)N)),
\end{equation}
and by Lemma \ref{lem10.1}, \eqref{eq10.25}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{leq10.28}
\begin{split}
\partial_z f =&
\frac{(1+\mathcal{O}(\delta F_{N+1}(|\zeta_-|^2)N))}{\delta |Z|^2}
\bigg[ \partial_z g_0(z) - \delta (\partial_z|Z|^2)f \\
&+\frac{\mathcal{O}(1)(\delta N F_{N+1}(|\zeta_-|^2))^2}{\mathrm{dist}(z,\partial\overline{\Sigma}_{r_0,r_1})}
+\mathcal{O}(\delta^2F_{N+1}^2(|\zeta_-|^2)N)\left| \sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_i \partial_z e_i(z) \right|
\bigg],
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{leq10.29}
\begin{split}
\partial_{\overline{z}} f = &
\frac{(1+\mathcal{O}(\delta F_{N+1}(|\zeta_-|^2)N))}{\delta |Z|^2}
\bigg[ - \delta (\partial_{\overline{z}}|Z|^2)f \\
&+\mathcal{O}(\delta^2F_{N+1}^2(|\zeta_-|^2)N)\left| f\overline{\partial_z Z}+
\sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_i \partial_{\overline{z}} e_i(z) \right|
\bigg].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Furthermore, using \eqref{eq10.15} and \eqref{eq10.26},
we get
\begin{equation}\label{leq10.30}
\partial_{\alpha_j}f= \mathcal{O}(1)\frac{\delta^2N F_{N+1}^2(|\zeta_-|^2)}{\delta F_N^2(|\zeta_-|^2)}
= \mathcal{O}(\delta N), \quad
j=2,\dots,N^2.
\end{equation}
\section{Choosing appropriate coordinates}
In the following we adopt the strategy developed in \cite[Section 5]{SjVo15}: The next
step is to find an appropriate orthonormal basis $e_1(z),\dots,e_{N^2}(z) \in\mathbf{C}^{N^2}$
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.31}
e_1(z)= \frac{\overline{Z}(z)}{|Z(z)|},
\end{equation}
such that we obtain a good control over the terms
$| \sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_i\partial_ze_i(z)|$,
$|\sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_i\partial_{\overline{z}}e_i(z)|$ and such that
the differential form $dQ_1\wedge \dots\wedge dQ_{N^2}|_{\alpha_1=f(z,\alpha')}$
can be expressed easily up to small errors.
\begin{prop}\label{prop10.1}
Let $z_0\in\Sigma_{r_0-N^{-1},r_1}$.
There exists an orthonormal basis $e_1(z),\dots,e_{N^2}(z)$ in $\mathbf{C}^{N^2}$ which
depends smoothly on $z$ in a small neighbourhood of $z_0$ in
$\mathbf{C}\backslash [-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&1) \quad e_1(z)= \frac{\overline{Z}(z)}{|Z(z)|}, \\
&2) \quad \mathbf{C} e_1(z_0)\oplus \mathbf{C} e_2(z_0) =
\mathbf{C} \overline{Z}(z_0)\oplus \mathbf{C} \overline{\partial_zZ}(z_0), \\
& 3) \quad e_j(z) -e_j(z_0) = \mathcal{O}((z_0-z)^2), ~ j=3,\dots,N^2,
\text{ uniformly w.r.t. }(z,z_0).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} The proof is identical, mutatis mutandis, to the proof of
Proposition 5.1 in \cite{SjVo15}.
\end{proof}
As remarked after the proof of Proposition 5.1 in \cite{SjVo15},
we can make the following choice:
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.32}
e_2(z)= |f_2(z)|^{-1}f_2(z), \quad
f_2(z) = \overline{\partial_z Z(z)} -
\sum_{j\neq 2} (\overline{\partial_z Z(z)}|e_j(z))e_j(z),
\end{equation}
so that for $z=z_0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.33}
f_2(z_0) = \overline{\partial_zZ(z_0)} - \frac{(Z(z_0)|\partial_z Z(z_0))}{|Z(z_0)|^2}
\overline{Z(z_0)}.
\end{equation}
\begin{prop}\label{prop10.2}
For all $z\in\Sigma_1\backslash [-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.34}
|\partial_z Z(z)|^2 - \frac{|(Z(z)|\partial_z Z(z))|^2}{|Z(z)|^2}
= 2K_N(z)^2\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}\ln K_N(z),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.35}
K_N(z)= \sum_{\mu=0}^{N-1}
\left|\frac{\zeta_-^{\mu+1} - \zeta_+^{\mu+1}}{a(\zeta_- - \zeta_+)}\right|^2
=\frac{1}{|a|^2}\sum_{\mu=0}^{N-1}|\zeta_-|^{2\mu}\, |F_{\mu+1}(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)|^2.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
Before giving the proof of this proposition, let us note that by \eqref{eq10.3.4} $K_N=|Z|$.
\begin{proof}
Until further notice, we write $F_n = F_n(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)$.
First, use \eqref{grpp.14}, in the form
\begin{equation*}
a^2 Z_{j,k} = \zeta_-^{N-j+k-1}F_{N-j+1}F_k
= \zeta_-^{\mu+\nu}F_{\mu+1}F_{\nu+1},
\end{equation*}
with $\mu = N-j$, $\nu =k-1$ and $\mu,\nu\in\{0,\dots,N-1\}$,
to compute that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\frac{a^{2}}{\partial_z\ln\zeta_-}\partial_zZ_{j,k}
= \zeta_-^{\mu+\nu} F_{\mu+1} F_{\nu+1}
\cdot\left[ (\mu+\nu) - L_{\mu+1} - L_{\nu+1}
\right],
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $L_{n}:=\frac{2\zeta_+}{\zeta_-}\partial_t\ln F_{n}(t)|_{t=\zeta_+/\zeta_-}$. Hence,
one obtains from the above expression and from \eqref{grpp.14} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.36}
\frac{|a|^4|(\partial_z Z|Z)|}{|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|}=
\left|\sum_{\mu,\nu =0}^{N-1} |\zeta_-|^{2(\mu+\nu)}|F_{\mu+1}F_{\nu+1}|^2
[(\mu+\nu)-L_{\mu+1} -L_{\nu+1} ]\right|.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq10.3.4} and a change of index, we obtain that
\eqref{eq10.36} is equal to
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&2\left|\sum_{\nu =0}^{N-1}|\zeta_-|^{2\nu}|F_{\nu+1}|^2\sum_{\mu =0}^{N-1} |\zeta_-|^{2\mu}
|F_{\mu+1}|^2
[\mu-L_{\mu+1}]\right| \\
& =2|a|^2 |Z|\left|\sum_{\mu=0}^{N-1} |\zeta_-|^{2\mu}|F_{\mu+1}|^2
[\mu-L_{\mu+1} ]\right|,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
so
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.36.1}
\frac{|a|^4|(\partial_z Z|Z)|}{|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-| |Z|}
=2|a|^2\left|\sum_{\mu=0}^{N-1} |\zeta_-|^{2\mu}|F_{\mu+1}|^2
[\mu-L_{\mu+1} ]\right|.
\end{equation}
Similarly,
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.37}
\frac{|a|^4 |\partial_z Z|^2}{|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2}=
\sum_{\mu,\nu =0}^{N-1} |\zeta_-|^{2(\mu+\nu)}|F_{\mu+1}F_{\nu+1}|^2
|(\mu+\nu)-L_{\mu+1} -L_{\nu+1} |^2.
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{eq10.36.1}, \eqref{eq10.37}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.37.1}
\begin{split}
&\frac{|a|^4}{|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2}
\left(|\partial_z Z|^2-\frac{|(\partial_z Z|Z)|^2}{|Z|^2}\right) \\
& = \sum_{\mu,\nu =0}^{N-1} |\zeta_-|^{2(\mu+\nu)}|F_{\mu+1}F_{\nu+1}|^2
\big[
|(\mu+\nu)-L_{\mu+1} -L_{\nu+1} |^2 \\
&\phantom{..........................................................}
- 4(\mu-L_{\mu+1})(\nu-\overline{L_{\nu+1}})\big].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By permuting $\mu,\nu$ we get the same sum and after taking the
average of the two expressions we may replace
$ - 4(\mu-L_{\mu+1})(\nu-\overline{L_{\nu+1}})$ by its real part. Then,
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.37.2}
\begin{split}
&|(\mu+\nu)-L_{\mu+1} -L_{\nu+1} |^2 - 4\mathrm{Re}(\mu-L_{\mu+1})(\nu-\overline{L_{\nu+1}})\\
&=|(\mu-\nu)+(L_{\nu+1}-L_{\mu+1})|^2 \\
&= \left| (\mu +1) \frac{1 + t^{\mu+1}}{1 - t^{\mu+1}} - (\nu +1) \frac{1 + t^{\nu+1}}{1 - t^{\nu+1}}
\right|^2_{t=\zeta_+/\zeta_-},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we also used that by the definition of $L_{\mu}$ above and
\eqref{eq10.2.1}
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
L_{\nu+1}-L_{\mu+1} &=
2\frac{\zeta_+}{\zeta_-}[\partial_t \ln (1 -t^{\nu+1}) - \partial_t\ln(1-t^{\mu+1} )]_{t=\zeta_+/\zeta_-}\\
&= \frac{2(\mu+1)t^{\mu+1}}{1-t^{\mu+1}}- \frac{2(\nu+1)t^{\nu+1}}{1-t^{\nu+1}}
\bigg|_{t=\zeta_+/\zeta_-}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Combining this with \eqref{eq10.37.1}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.38}
\begin{split}
&\frac{|a|^4}{|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2}
\left(|\partial_z Z|^2-\frac{|(\partial_z Z|Z)|^2}{|Z|^2}\right) \\
& = \sum_{\mu,\nu =0}^{N-1} |\zeta_-|^{2(\mu+\nu)}|F_{\mu+1}F_{\nu+1}|^2
\left| (\mu +1) \frac{\zeta_-^{\mu+1} + \zeta_+^{\mu+1}}{\zeta_-^{\mu+1} - \zeta_+^{\mu+1}}
- (\nu +1) \frac{\zeta_-^{\nu+1} + \zeta_+^{\nu+1}}{\zeta_-^{\nu+1} - \zeta_+^{\nu+1}}
\right|^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
Observe that the summands in \eqref{eq10.38} are equal to zero whenever $\mu=\nu$
and that the summands corresponding to the index pair $(\mu,\nu)$ is equal to the
one corresponding to $(\nu,\mu)$. Hence, by calculating explicitly the terms for
$(\mu,\nu)=(1,0),(0,1)$, we obtain that \eqref{eq10.38} is larger or equal than
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.38.1}
2|\zeta_-|^2 |F_2 F_1|^2
\left| 2 \frac{\zeta_-^{2} + \zeta_+^{2}}{\zeta_-^{2} - \zeta_+^{2}}
- \frac{\zeta_- + \zeta_+}{\zeta_- - \zeta_+}
\right|^2.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq10.2.1}, we have that $F_1(\zeta_+/\zeta_-) = 1$ and
$F_2(\zeta_+/\zeta_-) = 1 + \zeta_+/\zeta_-$. Therefore, \eqref{eq10.38.1}
is equal to
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.38.3}
\begin{split}
2|\zeta_- +\zeta_+|^2
\left| 2 \frac{\zeta_-^{2} + \zeta_+^{2}}{\zeta_-^{2} - \zeta_+^{2}}
- \frac{\zeta_- + \zeta_+}{\zeta_- - \zeta_+}
\right|^2
&=\frac{2 \left|2\zeta_-^2 +2\zeta_+^2 -\zeta_-^2-\zeta_+^2-2\zeta_-\zeta_+\right|^2}
{|\zeta_- - \zeta_+|^2}\\
&=2|\zeta_- -\zeta_+|^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.39}
\left(|\partial_z Z|^2-\frac{|(\partial_z Z|Z)|^2}{|Z|^2}\right) \geq
\frac{2|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2|\zeta_- -\zeta_+|^2}{|a|^{4}} =
\frac{2|\partial_z(\zeta_++\zeta_-)|^2 }{|a|^{4}}=
\frac{2}{|a|^6},
\end{equation}
where we used \eqref{algrel}, in particular that $\zeta_++\zeta_- = -z/a$ and
that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.38.2}
\partial_z\ln\zeta_- = -\partial_z\ln\zeta_+.
\end{equation}
Thus, we conclude that for all $z\in\Sigma_1\backslash [-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$
the vectors $Z(z)$ and $\partial_zZ(z)$ are linearly independent.
\end{remark}
Continuing, observe that the summands on the right hand side of \eqref{eq10.38}
are equal to
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.40}
\left| (\mu +1)
\frac{(\zeta_-^{\mu+1} + \zeta_+^{\mu+1})(\zeta_-^{\nu+1} - \zeta_+^{\nu+1})}
{(\zeta_- - \zeta_+)^2}
- (\nu +1) \frac{(\zeta_-^{\nu+1} + \zeta_+^{\nu+1})(\zeta_-^{\mu+1} - \zeta_+^{\mu+1})}
{(\zeta_- - \zeta_+)^2}
\right|^2.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq10.38.2},
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.41}
(\mu+1)(\zeta_-^{\mu+1} + \zeta_+^{\mu+1}) \partial_z\ln\zeta_-
= \partial_z(\zeta_-^{\mu+1} - \zeta_+^{\mu+1}).
\end{equation}
Thus, \eqref{eq10.40} is equal to
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.42}
\frac{|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^{-2}}{|\zeta_- - \zeta_+|^4}
\left| (\zeta_-^{\nu+1} - \zeta_+^{\nu+1})\partial_z(\zeta_-^{\mu+1} - \zeta_+^{\mu+1})
- (\zeta_-^{\mu+1} - \zeta_+^{\mu+1})\partial_z(\zeta_-^{\nu+1} - \zeta_+^{\nu+1})
\right|^2.
\end{equation}
Writing $f_{\mu}(z)=\zeta_-^{\mu+1}(z)-\zeta_+^{\mu+1}(z)$, it follows from \eqref{eq10.38}
and \eqref{eq10.42} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.43}
\left(|\partial_z Z|^2-\frac{|(\partial_z Z|Z)|^2}{|Z|^2}\right)
= \frac{1}{|a|^4|\zeta_--\zeta_+|^2}\sum_{\mu,\nu =0}^{N-1}
\left| f_{\nu}(z)\partial_zf_{\mu}(z)-f_{\mu}(z)\partial_z f_{\nu}(z) \right|^2.
\end{equation}
Since $f_{\mu}$ is holomorphic in $z$, we have
$(\partial_zf_{\mu})(\overline{\partial_zf_{\mu}})=
\partial_z\partial_{\bar{z}}|f_{\mu}|^2$, and we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.43.2}
\begin{split}
| f_{\nu}(z)\partial_zf_{\mu}(z)-f_{\mu}(z)\partial_z f_{\nu}(z) |^2
=
|f_{\nu}(z)|^2\partial_z\partial_{\bar{z}}|f_{\mu}(z)|^2 +
|f_{\mu}(z)|^2\partial_z\partial_{\bar{z}}|f_{\nu}(z)|^2 \\
- (\partial_z |f_{\nu}(z)|^2)(\partial_{\bar{z}}|f_{\mu}(z)|^2)
- (\partial_z |f_{\mu}(z)|^2)(\partial_{\bar{z}}|f_{\nu}(z)|^2).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Using an exchange of summation index, we obtain
from \eqref{eq10.43} and \eqref{eq10.43.2}
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.43.1}
\begin{split}
&
\left(|\partial_z Z|^2-\frac{|(\partial_z Z|Z)|^2}{|Z|^2}\right) \\
& = \frac{2}{|a|^4|\zeta_--\zeta_+|^2}\sum_{\mu,\nu =0}^{N-1}
\big[|f_{\nu}(z)|^2\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}|f_{\mu}(z)|^2 - (\partial_{z}|f_{\mu}(z)|^2)(\partial_{\bar{z}}|f_{\nu}(z)|^2)\big ] \\
& = \frac{2}{|a|^4|\zeta_--\zeta_+|^2}
\big[L_N(z) \partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}L_N(z) - (\partial_{z}L_N(z))(\partial_{\bar{z}}L_N(z))\big ],
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $L_N(z):= \sum_{\nu =0}^{N-1} |f_{\nu}(z)|^2$, so that by \eqref{eq10.35}
$$
K_N=\frac{L_N}{|a|^2|\zeta_- -\zeta_+|^2}
$$
Since we assumed that $z\notin [-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$,
$\zeta_{\pm}(z)$ are holomorphic functions in $z$ and $\zeta_-\neq\zeta_+$. It follows
that $\ln|\zeta_--\zeta_+|^2$ is harmonic, hence
$\partial_z\partial_{\bar{z}} \ln L_N =\partial_z\partial_{\bar{z}} \ln K_N $, and
\eqref{eq10.43} is equal to
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.44}
2K_N^2 \partial_z\partial_{\bar{z}} \ln K_N =
2\big[K_N(z)\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}K_N(z) - \partial_z K_N(z) \partial_{\bar{z}}K_N(z)\big].
\end{equation}
\end{proof}
Next we are interested in obtaining bounds on \eqref{eq10.34}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop10.3}
Assuming \eqref{eq10.9}, we have that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.45}
\left(|\partial_z Z|^2-\frac{|(\partial_z Z|Z)|^2}{|Z|^2}\right)
\asymp
\left(F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)\right)^4.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
For simplicity we assume that $a=1$. Recall from \eqref{eq10.9} that we
have \eqref{eq10.8}, so $0<\sqrt{|b/a|}\leq|\zeta_-|\leq 1-1/N$, where
we also used \eqref{signcon2} for the first two inequalities.
\par
We write $F_{\nu+1}=F_{\nu+1}(t)$. Set $t=\zeta_+/\zeta_-$, which
satisfies $|b/a| \leq |t|\leq 1 - 1/C$, see the remark after \eqref{eq10.4},
which also implies that $|F_{\nu+1}(t)|\asymp 1$.
\par
By \eqref{eq10.38},
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.46}
\begin{split}
&\left(|\partial_z Z|^2-\frac{|(\partial_z Z|Z)|^2}{|Z|^2}\right) \\
& = |\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2\sum_{\mu,\nu =0}^{N-1} |\zeta_-|^{2(\mu+\nu)}|F_{\mu+1}F_{\nu+1}|^2
\left| (\mu +1) \frac{1 + t^{\mu+1}}{1- t^{\mu+1}}
- (\nu +1) \frac{1 + t^{\nu+1}}{1 - t^{\nu+1}}
\right|^2\\
&\asymp \sum_{\mu,\nu =0}^{N-1} |\zeta_-|^{2(\mu+\nu)}
\left| (\mu +1) \frac{1 + t^{\mu+1}}{1- t^{\mu+1}}
- (\nu +1) \frac{1 + t^{\nu+1}}{1 - t^{\nu+1}}
\right|^2
=
\begin{cases}
\leq S_{2(N-1)} \\
\geq S_{N-1},
\end{cases}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.47}
\begin{split}
&S_M = \sum_0^M |\zeta_-|^{2k}A_k, \\
&A_k = \sum_{\nu+\mu=k}
\left| (\mu +1) \frac{1 + t^{\mu+1}}{1- t^{\mu+1}}
- (\nu +1) \frac{1 + t^{\nu+1}}{1 - t^{\nu+1}}
\right|^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here
$$\left|\frac{1 + t^{\mu+1}}{1- t^{\mu+1}} \right| \asymp 1, \quad
\left|\frac{1 + t^{\nu+1}}{1- t^{\nu+1}} \right| \asymp 1,$$
so $A_k=\mathcal{O}(k^3)$. The terms in $A_k$ with $\mu \gg \nu $ and
$\mu \ll \nu$ are $\asymp k^2$ and there are $\asymp k$ terms
of that kind, so $A_k\geq \frac{1}{C}k^3$, for some $C\gg 1$.
Thus, $A_k\asymp k^3$, for $k\gg 1$.
For $k=1$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.47.1}
A_1 = 2
\left| 2\frac{1 + t^{2}}{1- t^{2}}
- \frac{1 + t}{1 - t}
\right|^2 = 2.
\end{equation}
Hence, using that all $A_k \geq 0$, and that $|\zeta_-|\leq 1 - 1/N$
(see above), we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.48}
S_M \asymp \sum_0^M k^3|\zeta_-|^{2k} \asymp F_M(|\zeta_-|^2)^4 .
\end{equation}
Here, to obtain the second estimate, we used Proposition 4.2 of \cite{SjVo15}.
To conclude the statement of the proposition observe that $S_{2(N-1)}$
and $S_{N-1}$ are of the same order of magnitude, that is $F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)^4$.
\end{proof}
Continuing, recall that $F_N(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)\asymp 1$ for $z$ satisfying \eqref{eq10.9}
and that it depends holomorphically on
$z \in \mathring{\Sigma}_1\backslash [-2\sqrt{ab},2\sqrt{ab}]$. For simplicity, we
sharpen assumption \eqref{eq10.9} and assume
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.48.5}
\begin{cases}
z\in \Sigma_{(r_0-1/N),r_1} \\
r_0>0 \text{ satisfies \eqref{eq10.8}}, \\
r_1= \sqrt{|b/a|} + 1/C, ~ C\gg 1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Next, note that by the Cauchy inequalities, for $z$ satisfying \eqref{eq10.48.5}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.49}
|\partial_z F_N(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)|
\leq \mathcal{O}(1).
\end{equation}
Furthermore, $\partial_z| F_N(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)|^2 = \mathcal{O}(1)$,
$\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}} |F_N(\zeta_+/\zeta_-)|^2 = \mathcal{O}(1)$.
Using this and \cite[Proposition 4.2]{SjVo15}, we obtain for $K_N$
as \eqref{eq10.35} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.50}
\begin{split}
&\partial_z K_N = \partial_z K_{\infty}
+\mathcal{O}\!\left(
\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{2N}|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|}{1-|\zeta_-|^2}
\right) \\
&\partial_{\bar{z}} K_N = \partial_{\bar{z}} K_{\infty}
+\mathcal{O}\!\left(
\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{2N}|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|}{1-|\zeta_-|^2}
\right) \\
&\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}} K_N =\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}} K_{\infty}
+\mathcal{O}\!\left(
\frac{N^2 |\zeta_-|^{2N}|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2}{1-|\zeta_-|^2}
\right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.51}
\begin{split}
&K_{\infty} \asymp \frac{1 }{1-|\zeta_-|^2} \\
& \partial_z K_{\infty}, \partial_{\bar{z}} K_{\infty} \asymp
\frac{N }{1-|\zeta_-|^2} \\
&\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}} K_{\infty} \asymp
\frac{N^2}{1-|\zeta_-|^2}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Thus, by Proposition \ref{prop10.2},
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.52}
\begin{split}
|\partial_z Z(z)|^2 - &\frac{|(Z(z)|\partial_z Z(z))|^2}{|Z(z)|^2} \\
&= 2K_{\infty}(z)^2\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}\ln K_{\infty}(z)
+\mathcal{O}\!\left( \frac{N^2 |\zeta_-|^{2N}|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2}{(1-|\zeta_-|^2)^2}
\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Combining Proposition \ref{prop10.3} with \eqref{eq10.52} and
\eqref{eq10.51} with \eqref{eq10.3.6}, we see that
\begin{equation*}
\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}\ln K_{\infty}(z)\left( 1
+\mathcal{O}\!\left( N^2 |\zeta_-|^{2N}|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2
\right)\right)
\asymp (F_N(|\zeta_-|^2))^2.
\end{equation*}
Since $|\zeta_-|\leq 1 - 2/N$, see \eqref{signcon2} and \eqref{eq10.48.5},
it then follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.52.1}
\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}\ln K_{\infty}(z) \asymp (F_N(|\zeta_-|^2))^2.
\end{equation}
Continuing, let $e_1(z),\dots,e_{N^2}(z)$ be as in Proposition \ref{prop10.1}.
It has been observed in \cite[Section 5]{SjVo15} that if we we assume that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.52.5}
|\nabla_z e_1(z)| = \mathcal{O}(m),
\end{equation}
for some weight $m\geq 1$, then
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.53}
\left|
\sum_{3}^{N^2} \alpha_j \nabla_z e_j
\right| \leq \mathcal{O}(m)\|\alpha\|_{\mathbf{C}^{N^2-2}}.
\end{equation}
In the following we shall perform the same steps as in
\cite{SjVo15}. We present this here for the readers convenience,
so the reader already familiar with \cite{SjVo15} may skip ahead to
formula \eqref{eq10.59}.
\par
Next we will show that we can take the weight $m=F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)$
in \eqref{eq10.52.5}.
Using, \eqref{eq10.3.6}, \eqref{eq10.31}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.54}
\begin{split}
\nabla_z e_1(z) &= \frac{\nabla_z \overline{Z}(z)}{|Z(z)|} -
\frac{\nabla_z |Z(z)|}{|Z(z)|^2}\overline{Z}(z) \\
&= \frac{\nabla_z \overline{Z}(z)}{|Z(z)|} -
\frac{(\nabla_z Z(z)|Z(z))+(Z(z)|\overline{\nabla}_z Z(z))}{2|Z(z)|^3}\overline{Z}(z).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq10.3.6} and the Cauchy inequalities, we obtain
the estimate
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.54.1}
|\partial_z Z(z)| \leq \frac{F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)}{\mathrm{dist}(z,\partial\Sigma_{1,r_1})}
\leq \mathcal{O}(1)(F_N(|\zeta_-|^2))^2,
\end{equation}
where in the second inequality we used that,
$\mathrm{dist}(z,\partial\Sigma_{1,r_1}) \geq (1-|\zeta_-|)/C$, for
some $C\gg 1$.
\par
Since $Z$ is holomorphic, we conclude the same
estimates for $|\nabla_z Z|$ and $|\nabla_{z}\overline{Z}|$,
and, by using the Cauchy-inequalities,
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.54.2}
|\partial^2_z Z| \leq \mathcal{O}(F_N^3).
\end{equation}
Using this and the fact that $K_N=|Z|$ (cf. the remark after
Proposition \ref{prop10.2}) in \eqref{eq10.54}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.55}
|\nabla_z e_1| = \mathcal{O}(F_N).
\end{equation}
We can therefore take $m=F_N$ in the above. Let $f_2$ be the vector as
in \eqref{eq10.32}, so that $e_2= |f_2|^{-1}f_2$. As in the proof of
Proposition 5.1 in \cite{SjVo15}, we let $V_0$ be the isometry from $\mathbf{C}^{N^2-2}$
to $\mathbf{C}^{N^2}$ defined by $V_0\nu_j^0 = e_j(z_0)$, $j=3,\dots,N^2$, where
$\nu_3^0,\dots,\nu_{N^2}^0$ is the standard basis of $\mathbf{C}^{N^2-2}$.
Moreover, for
$z$ in a complex neighbourhood of $z_0$, we let $V(z)=(1-e_1(z)e_1^*(z))V_0$.
Setting $U(z)= V(z)(V^*(z)V(z))^{-1/2}$, we get that $e_j=U(z)\nu_j^0$, $j=3,\dots,N^2$.
%
\par
%
It has been shown in \cite{SjVo15} that \eqref{eq10.52.5} implies that
$\| \nabla_zU(z)\| = \mathcal{O}(m)$. Thus, by \eqref{eq10.55}, we obtain
$\| \nabla_zU(z)\| = \mathcal{O}(F_N)$. Consider
%
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.56}
\begin{split}
\nabla_zf_2(z) = &\nabla_z\overline{\partial_z Z(z)} -
\sum_{j\neq 2}\big[(\nabla_z\overline{\partial_z Z(z)}|e_j(z))e_j(z) \\
&+(\overline{\partial_z Z(z)}|\nabla_ze_j(z))e_j(z)
+
(\overline{\partial_z Z(z)}|e_j(z))\nabla_z e_j(z)\big].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq10.54.2}, we have that
$|\nabla_z\overline{\partial_z Z(z)} | = \mathcal{O}(F_N^3)$. Moreover,
the term for $j=1$ in the sum is of order $\mathcal{O}(F_N^3)$. It remains to
estimate,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
& \mathrm{I} = \sum_{3}^{N^2} (\nabla_z\overline{\partial_z Z(z)}|e_j(z))e_j(z) \\
& \mathrm{II} = \sum_{3}^{N^2}(\overline{\partial_z Z(z)}|\nabla_ze_j(z))e_j(z) \\
& \mathrm{III} = \sum_{3}^{N^2} (\overline{\partial_z Z(z)}|e_j(z))\nabla_z e_j(z).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Here, $|\mathrm{I}| \leq |\nabla_z\overline{\partial_z Z}(z)| = \mathcal{O}(F_N^3)$
and, using \eqref{eq10.53}, $|\mathrm{III}| \leq \mathcal{O}(F_N) |\overline{\partial_z Z}(z)|
=\mathcal{O}(F_N^3) $. Moreover,
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{II} = \sum _3^{N^2} (\overline{\partial_z Z}(z)|\nabla_zU(z)\nu_j^0)e_j(z)
= \sum _3^{N^2} ((\nabla_zU(z))^*\overline{\partial_z Z}(z)|\nu_j^0)e_j(z)
\end{equation*}
which yields that $|\mathrm{II}| = |(\nabla_zU(z))^*\overline{\partial_z Z}(z)| =
\mathcal{O}(F_N^3)$. Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.57}
|\nabla_zf_2(z)| = \mathcal{O}(F_N^3).
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq10.33}, \eqref{eq10.45}, we have that for $z=z_0$
\begin{equation*}
|f_2(z_0)|^2 =
|\partial_z Z(z_0)|^2 - \frac{|(Z(z_0)|\partial_z Z(z_0))|^2}{|Z(z_0)|^2}
\asymp F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)^4.
\end{equation*}
Thus, for $z$ in a neighbourhood of $z_0$
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.58}
|f_2(z)|^2\asymp F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)^4.
\end{equation}
In view of \eqref{eq10.57} we then obtain that
$\nabla_z|f_2(z)| =\mathcal{O}(F_N^3)$. Since,
$e_2 = |f_2|^{-1} f_2$,
%
\begin{equation*}
|\nabla e_2(z)|= \mathcal{O}( F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)).
\end{equation*}
So,
\begin{equation}
\left| \sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_j\partial_z e_j\right|
\leq \mathcal{O}(F_N(|\zeta_-|^2))\|\alpha\|_{\mathbf{C}^{N^2-1}}
\leq \mathcal{O}(NF_N(|\zeta_-|^2)),
\end{equation}
where in the last inequality we used that $\|Q_{\omega}\|
= \|\alpha\| \leq C_1 N$. Combining this with \eqref{leq10.28},
\eqref{eq10.3.6}, \eqref{eq10.23}, \eqref{eq10.3.5} and
\eqref{eq10.17.5}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.59}
\partial_zf = \mathcal{O}(1)\left[
\frac{N|\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{\delta F_N^2} + \frac{|\zeta_-|^N}{\delta F_N}
+\delta N^2F_N + \frac{\delta N^2}{r_0-|\zeta_-|}
\right].
\end{equation}
Here, the first term dominates the second and the fourth term
dominates the third, thus
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.59.1}
\partial_z f = \mathcal{O}(1)\left[
\frac{N|\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{\delta F_N^2}+ \delta N^3
\right].
\end{equation}
Similarly, using \eqref{leq10.29},
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.59.2}
\begin{split}
\partial_{\bar{z}}f = &\mathcal{O}(1)\left[
\frac{|\zeta_-|^{N}}{\delta F_N} + \delta N^2 F_N + N|\zeta_-|^N + \delta^2 N^3 F_{N+1}^2
+\delta N^2F_N
\right] \\
&=\mathcal{O}(1)\left[ \frac{|\zeta_-|^{N}}{\delta F_N} +\delta N^2 F_N \right].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Repeating line by line (with the obvious changes) the proof
of Proposition 5.3 in \cite{SjVo15}, we obtain the following,
basically, identical result:
\begin{prop}\label{prop10.4}
We express $Q$ in the canonical basis in $\mathbf{C}^{N^2}$ or in any other fixed orthonormal
basis . Let $e_1(z),\dots,e_{N^2}(z)$ be an orthonormal basis in $\mathbf{C}^{N^2}$ depending
smoothly on $z$, with $e_1(z)=|Z(z)|^{-1}\overline{Z}(z)$, and
$\mathbf{C} e_1(z)\oplus \mathbf{C} e_2(z) = \mathbf{C} \overline{Z}(z) \oplus \mathbf{C} \overline{\partial_z Z}(z)$. Write
$Q = \alpha_1\overline{Z}(z) + \sum_2^{N^2}\alpha_j e_j(z)$, and recall that the hypersurface
\begin{equation*}
\{(z,Q) \in \Sigma_{r_0-1/N}\backslash\Sigma_{r_1} \times B(0,C_1N); g(z,Q)=0\},
\end{equation*}
is given by \eqref{eq10.22} with $f$ as in \eqref{eq10.23} (see also \eqref{eq10.11.1},
\eqref{eq10.48.5}).
Then, the restriction of $dQ\wedge d\overline{Q} $ to this hypersurface is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.59.5}
\begin{split}
&dQ\wedge d\overline{Q} = J(f) dz \wedge d\overline{z}\wedge d\alpha' \wedge d\overline{\alpha}' \\
& J(f) = - \frac{|\alpha_2|^2}{|Z|^2} |(e_2|\overline{\partial_z Z})|^2 \\
&\phantom{J(f) = -}+\mathcal{O}(1)|\alpha_2||F_N|\left(\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N \delta}
+\delta N^3 F_N + |\alpha_2| F_N^2 \delta N\right) \\
&\phantom{J(f) = -}+\mathcal{O}(1)\left(\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N \delta} +\delta N^3 F_N
+ |\alpha_2| F_N^2\delta N\right)^2,
\end{split}
%
\end{equation}
where $F_N=F_N(|\zeta_-|^2)$, $\alpha' =(\alpha_2,\dots,\alpha_{N^2})$ and
$d\alpha' \wedge d\overline{\alpha}' = d\alpha_2 \wedge d\overline{\alpha}_2\wedge \dots \wedge d\alpha_{N^2} \wedge d\overline{\alpha}_{N^2}$.
\end{prop}
Note that the Jacobian $J(f)$ in \eqref{eq10.59.5} is invariant under any
$z$-dependent unitary change of variables $\alpha_2,\dots,\alpha_{N^2}
\mapsto \alpha'_2,\dots,\alpha'_{N^2} $. Therefore, to calculate $J(f)$, and
thus $\xi$, at any given point $(z_0,\alpha_0)$ we may choose the most
appropriate orthogonal basis $e_2(z),\dots,e_{N^2}$ in $\overline{Z}(z)^{\perp}$
depending smoothly on $z$.
\section{The average density}
Recall \eqref{eq10.11.2}. Using \eqref{eq10.12}, \eqref{eq10.13}, it follows by a general
formula, obtained in Section 3 of \cite{SjVo15}, that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.62}
K_{\varphi}
=
\int \varphi(z)\xi(z) L(dz),
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.63}
\xi(z) = \pi^{-N^2}\int_{{\tiny |f(z)|^2|Z(z)|^2 + |\alpha'|^2 \leq (C_1N)^2}} \mathrm{e} ^{-|f(z)|^2|Z(z)|^2-|\alpha'|^2}
J(f(z,\alpha'))L(d\alpha').
\end{equation}
where $f$ is as in \eqref{eq10.23} and $J$ is as in Proposition \ref{prop10.4}. Recall that
we work under the hypotheses \eqref{grpp.1} and \eqref{eq10.48.5}. The latter in particular
implies \eqref{eq10.6}, \eqref{eq10.7}. Applying these to \eqref{eq10.23} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.64}
|f| \leq \mathcal{O}(1)\left( \frac{g_0(z)}{\delta N F_N} + \delta N F_N \right)\frac{N}{F_N}
\ll \frac{N}{F_N}.
\end{equation}
Now we strengthen assumptions \eqref{grpp.1}, \eqref{eq10.7} to
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.65}
\left( \frac{|\zeta_-|^N}{\delta N F_N} + \delta N F_N \right)
\ll \frac{1}{N}.
\end{equation}
Then,
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{e} ^{-|f(z)|^2|Z(z)|^2} = 1 +
\mathcal{O}(1)\left( \frac{|\zeta_-|^N}{\delta N F_N} + \delta N F_N \right)^2N^2.
\end{equation*}
Thus, using \eqref{eq10.59.5}
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.66}
\begin{split}
&\xi(z) = \left(1 + \mathcal{O}(1)\left( \frac{|\zeta_-|^N}{\delta N F_N}
+ \delta N F_N \right)^2N^2 \right) \cdot \\
&\frac{|(e_2|\overline{\partial_z Z})|^2}{|Z|^2}\int_{|(f|Z|,\alpha')|\leq C_1N}
|\alpha_2|^2
\mathrm{e}^{-|\alpha'|^2}\pi^{-N^2}L(d\alpha')\\
& + \mathcal{O}(1)\int_{|(f|Z|,\alpha')|\leq C_1N}
|\alpha_2||F_N|\left(\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N \delta}
+\delta N^3 F_N + |\alpha_2| F_N^2 \delta N\right)
\mathrm{e}^{-|\alpha'|^2}\frac{L(d\alpha')}{\pi^{N^2}}\\
& + \mathcal{O}(1)\int_{|(f|Z|,\alpha')|\leq C_1N}
\left(\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N \delta} +\delta N^3 F_N
+ |\alpha_2| F_N^2\delta N\right)^2
\mathrm{e}^{-|\alpha'|^2}\frac{L(d\alpha')}{\pi^{N^2}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq10.64}, $|f| |Z| \ll N$. Therefore, the first integral is equal to
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{\pi^2}\int |w|^2 \mathrm{e}^{-|w|^2}L(dw)
+ \mathcal{O}\!\left(\mathrm{e}^{-\frac{N^2}{\mathcal{O}(1)}}\right)
= \frac{1}{\pi}\left(1 + \mathcal{O}\!\left(\mathrm{e}^{-\frac{N^2}{\mathcal{O}(1)}}\right) \right).
\end{equation*}
The sum of the other two integrals is equal to
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}(1)\left[
\left(\frac{N|\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N\delta}+\delta N^3F_N\right)^2 +
F_N\left(\frac{N|\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N\delta}+\delta N^3F_N\right)
\right].
\end{equation*}
We have seen that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.66.5}
\frac{|(e_2|\overline{\partial_z Z})|^2}{|Z|^2} = \mathcal{O}(F_N^2).
\end{equation}
Therefore, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.67}
\begin{split}
\xi(z) = &\frac{1}{\pi}\frac{|(e_2|\overline{\partial_z Z})|^2}{|Z|^2}\\
&+
\mathcal{O}(1)\left[
\left(\frac{N|\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N\delta}+\delta N^3F_N\right)^2 +
F_N\left(\frac{N|\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N\delta}+\delta N^3F_N\right)
\right].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Next, let us study the leading term in \eqref{eq10.67}. Since
$\overline{\partial_z Z}$ belongs to the span of $e_1 = \overline{Z}/|Z|$
and $e_2$ for $z=z_0$, we obtain by Pythagoras' theorem that the leading term
is equal to
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.68}
\frac{1}{\pi |Z|^2}\left(
|\overline{\partial_z Z}|^2 -
\frac{|(\partial_z Z| Z)|^2}{|Z|^2}
\right), \text{ for } z=z_0.
\end{equation}
By the remark after Proposition \ref{prop10.4}, this is then true
for all $z$.
\\
\par
Recall from the remark after Proposition \ref{prop10.2} that $K_N=|Z|$.
Similarly to \eqref{eq10.50}, using \eqref{eq10.51} we get that
$K_N= K_{\infty}(1 + \mathcal{O}(|\zeta_-|^{2N})$,
where $K_{\infty} \asymp (1-|\zeta_-|^2)^{-1}$. Using this and \eqref{eq10.52},
we see that \eqref{eq10.67} becomes
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.69}
\begin{split}
\xi(z) = &\frac{2}{\pi}\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}\ln K_{\infty}(z)
+\mathcal{O}\!\left(N^2 |\zeta_-|^{2N}|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2
\right)\\
&+
\mathcal{O}(1)\left[
\left(\frac{N|\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N\delta}+\delta N^3F_N\right)^2 +
F_N\left(\frac{N|\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{F_N\delta}+\delta N^3F_N\right)
\right],
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where by \eqref{eq10.52.1}
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.69.5}
\frac{2}{\pi}\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}\ln K_{\infty}(z)
\asymp F_N^2(|\zeta_-|^2).
\end{equation}
Thus, the error term in \eqref{eq10.69} can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.70}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{O}(F_N^2)\left(\frac{N^2 |\zeta_-|^{2N}|\partial_z\ln\zeta_-|^2}{F_N^2}
+\frac{N^2 |\zeta_-|^{2N-2}}{\delta^2 F_N^4} + \delta^2 N^6 + \frac{N |\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{\delta F_N^2} + \delta N^3
\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq10.65}, we have that $(\delta F_N)^{-1} \gg N^2$. Thus, by \eqref{grpp.1}
(which is implied by \eqref{eq10.65}), the second term in \eqref{eq10.70} is
\begin{equation*}
\gg \frac{N^6 |\zeta_-|^{2N-2}}{F_N^2}
\end{equation*}
which dominates the first term. Strengthening assumption \eqref{eq10.65} to
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.71}
\left( \frac{|\zeta_-|^{N-1} N}{\delta F_N^2} +\delta N^3\right) \ll 1,
\end{equation}
the remainder becomes
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.72}
\mathcal{O}(F_N^2)\left(\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{\delta F_N^2}
+ \delta N^3
\right).
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eq10.3.6}, assumption \eqref{eq10.71} is
equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.72.1}
\left( \frac{|\zeta_-|^{N-1} N}{\delta}(1-|\zeta_-|)^2 +\delta N^3\right) \ll 1.
\end{equation}
Note that for $1/C\leq r_0 \leq 1-1/N$, for some $C\gg 1$, the function
$[0,r_0]\ni r\mapsto r^{N-1}(1-r)^2$ is increasing. Thus, unifying our
previous assumptions, we assume that
$z\in\Sigma_{r_0-1/N}\backslash \Sigma_{r_1}$, with $r_0$ satisfying
$1/C\leq r_0 \leq 1-1/N$ and \eqref{eq10.72.1} with $|\zeta_-|$ replaced
by $r_0$, and $r_1$ as in \eqref{eq10.48.5} (note that this assumption
implies \eqref{eq10.48.5}, \eqref{grpp.1} and \eqref{eq10.72.1}).
\par
Then,
by \eqref{eq10.69}, \eqref{eq10.69.5}, \eqref{eq10.3.6} we conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{eq10.73}
\xi(z) = \frac{2}{\pi}\partial_{z}\partial_{\bar{z}}\ln K_{\infty}(z)
\left(1 +\mathcal{O}\!\left(\frac{N |\zeta_-|^{N-1}}{\delta}(1-|\zeta_-|)^2
+ \delta N^3
\right)\right).
\end{equation}
We have proved Theorem \ref{thm1}, the main result of this paper.
\providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace}
\providecommand{\MR}{\relax\ifhmode\unskip\space\fi MR }
\providecommand{\MRhref}[2]{%
\href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{#2}
}
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
|
\section{Introduction}
The Large Hadron Collider~(LHC) could soon find signatures of new physics and the Standard Model~(SM) will be part of the past of particle physics.
Recently, both the ATLAS and CMS collaborations have pointed out the possible existence of a new resonance due to an excess in the di-photon channel~\cite{ATLAS:diphotonDec2015,CMS:2015dxe,ATLAS:diphotonMar2016,CMS:2016owr}.
With $\unit[3.2]{fb}^{-1}$ of data at $\sqrt{s} = \unit[13]{TeV}$, the ATLAS collaboration claims an excess in the di-photon channel around a di-photon invariant mass of $M_{\gamma \gamma} \approx \unit[750]{GeV}$ with a local significance of $3.9\, \sigma$ ($2.0\, \sigma$ including the look-elsewhere effect)~\cite{ATLAS:diphotonMar2016}. The CMS collaboration also reports an excess with a local statistical significance of $3.4 \,\sigma$ ($1.6 \, \sigma$ including the look-elsewhere effect) in the same invariant mass region~\cite{CMS:2016owr}. From the conservative point of view it may be too early to speculate
about the existence of a new particle in nature. Nevertheless, it is interesting to know whether this excess can be explained in a well-known extension of the Standard Model
or new classes of theories for physics beyond the Standard Model have to be build.
One of the simplest toy models proposed in the literature corresponds to the case of a new SM singlet scalar field $S$ and vector-like pairs of fermions $F_L$ and $F_R$ with electric charge in a non-trivial representation of QCD. The relevant Lagrangian of this model is given by
\begin{equation}
- {\mathcal{ L}} \supset m_{F} \overline{F_L} F_R \ + \ \lambda_{F} S \overline{F_L} F_R \ + \ \textrm{h.c.},
\end{equation}
where $m_{F}$ is the vector-like mass and $\lambda_{F}$ is the Yukawa coupling between
the new Higgs and the vector-like fermions. Since the new fermions live in a non-trivial representation of QCD, one can have
the single production of $S$ through gluon fusion, and the decay of into two photons is possible because the new fermions carry electric charge.
This toy model has been studied by several groups, see Refs.~\cite{Franceschini:2015kwy,Ellis:2015oso,Gupta:2015zzs,McDermott:2015sck,Dutta:2015wqh,Kobakhidze:2015ldh,Chao:2015ttq,Curtin:2015jcv,Falkowski:2015swt,Benbrik:2015fyz,Chao:2015nsm,
Chang:2015bzc,Feng:2015wil,Boucenna:2015pav,Hernandez:2015ywg,Pelaggi:2015knk,Altmannshofer:2015xfo,Cheung:2015cug,An:2015cgp,Dev:2015vjd,Ko:2016lai,Chao:2016mtn}.
The above toy model is very naive and one should look for a UV completion of the Standard Model where one can understand the need for these vector-like quarks. If one considers a simple $U(1)^\prime$ theory one can motivate the existence of vector-like quarks. This type of model has been studied in Refs.~\cite{Chao:2015nsm,Chang:2015bzc} as an attempt to explain the di-photon excess.
In this article we investigate the possibility to explain the di-photon excess in a theory for local baryon number~\cite{FileviezPerez:2010gw,FileviezPerez:2011pt,Duerr:2013dza,Perez:2014qfa,Perez:2015rza}, where one needs to introduce vector-like quarks to cancel all baryonic anomalies~\cite{FileviezPerez:2010gw}. We study the decays of the new Higgs boson that is responsible for symmetry breaking and show that this Higgs can give
rise to the di-photon signatures reported by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations. Assuming the existence of the di-photon excess with invariant mass around
$\unit[750]{GeV}$, we find an upper bound on the symmetry breaking scale. Therefore, if this excess is real and the relevant theory corresponds to the case where baryon number is spontaneously broken, one should find a new force associated with baryon number at the Large Hadron Collider.
\section{A Theory for the Di-Photon Excess}
\label{sec:localbaryonnumber}
One can define a simple theory where baryon number is a local symmetry spontaneously broken at the low scale~\cite{FileviezPerez:2010gw,FileviezPerez:2011pt,Duerr:2013dza,Perez:2014qfa,Perez:2015rza}.
In Ref.~\cite{FileviezPerez:2011pt} it was shown that using vector-like quarks one can cancel all baryonic anomalies.
The fermions needed for anomaly cancellation and their quantum numbers under the new gauge group
$$SU(3)_C \otimes SU(2)_L \otimes U(1)_Y \otimes U(1)_B$$
are given by
\begin{align}
\Psi_L &\sim (3,2,Y_1,B_1), \ \eta_R \sim (3,1,Y_2,B_1), \ \chi_R \sim (3,1,Y_3, B_1), \nonumber \\
\Psi_R &\sim (3,2,Y_1,B_2), \ \eta_L \sim (3,1,Y_2,B_2), \ \chi_L \sim (3,1,Y_3, B_2).
\end{align}
The hypercharges and baryon numbers of these fields can be fixed by the conditions from anomaly cancellation as follows. Cancellation of the $SU(2)_L^2 \otimes U(1)_B$ anomaly requires
\begin{equation}
B_1-B_2=- \frac{1}{n_f},
\end{equation}
where $n_f$ is the number of copies of the vector-like quarks. Using this condition, $U(1)_B \otimes U(1)_Y^2$ anomaly cancellation requires
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Hypercharge}
Y_2^2+Y_3^2-2Y_1^2 = \frac{1}{2},
\end{equation}
while the cancellation of the $U(1)_Y \otimes U(1)_B^2$ anomaly for $B_1 \neq - B_2$ implies
\begin{equation}
Y_2 +Y_3 -2 Y_1 = 0.
\end{equation}
Both conditions on the hypercharges are satisfied if
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hyperchargeSolution}
Y_2=Y_1 \mp \frac{1}{2} \text{ and } Y_3= Y_1 \pm \frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation}
This relation allows to write the Yukawa couplings for the new quarks with the SM Higgs, which are relevant for the decays of the heavy new quarks.
The relevant Lagrangian for our discussion is then given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:Lagrangian}
- \mathcal{L}_Y^\prime &= h_1 \overline{\Psi_L} \tilde{H} \eta_R + h_2 \overline{\Psi_L} H \chi_R + h_3 \overline{\Psi_R} \tilde{H} \eta_L + h_4 \overline{\Psi_R} H \chi_L \nonumber \\
& \quad + \lambda_\Psi \overline{\Psi_R} \Psi_L S_B + \lambda_\eta \overline{\eta_L} \eta_R S_B + \lambda_\chi \overline{\chi_L} \chi_R S_B \ + \ \text{h.c.},
\end{align}
where $S_B \sim (1,1,0,B_2-B_1)$ is the new Higgs breaking the local symmetry and generating masses for the vector-like quarks. If the baryon numbers $B_i \neq 1/3$, there is no mixing between the vector-like quarks and the SM quarks and thus no flavor violation at tree level.
The above conditions on the hypercharges have three solutions if we demand that at least one hypercharge is equal to a SM quark hypercharge, which we regard as necessary in order for the lightest new colored field to decay. The three solutions that can be in agreement with cosmology are
\begin{equation}
\left( Y_1; Y_2; Y_3\right)\in \left\{ \left( \frac{1}{6} ; \frac{2}{3} ; -\frac{1}{3}\right) , \left(-\frac{5}{6} ; -\frac{4}{3} ; -\frac{1}{3}\right), \left( \frac{7}{6} ; \frac{5}{3} ; \frac{2}{3}\right)\right\}.
\end{equation}
The first solution was proposed in Ref.~\cite{FileviezPerez:2011pt}; see also Ref.~\cite{Duerr:2013dza}.
In Ref.~\cite{FileviezPerez:2011pt} it was proposed that the vector-like quarks can decay
into the SM quarks and a bosonic field $X$, which is automatically stable and a candidate for the cold dark matter in the Universe if it does not acquire a vacuum expectation value.
This condition defines the three different scenarios that we study in detail in this article.
\begin{itemize}
\item Type I Scenario:
In this case the hypercharges for the new vector-like quarks are $Y_1=1/6$, $Y_2=2/3$ and $Y_3=-1/3$, and the relevant Lagrangian reads as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_I \supset \mathcal{L}_Y^\prime - \lambda_1 \overline{\Psi_R} Q_L X - \lambda_2 \overline{\eta_L} u_R X - \lambda_3 \overline{\chi_L}
d_R X + \text{h.c.}
\end{equation}
Notice that in this case all the new quarks can decay into a SM quark and $X$. Therefore, they can give rise to signatures with two jets and missing energy at the LHC.
\item Type II Scenario:
This scenario is defined by the coupling of one of the vector-like quarks to $d_R$. Therefore, $Y_1=-5/6$, $Y_2=-4/3$ and $Y_3=-1/3$ and the interactions are given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{II} \supset \mathcal{L}_Y^\prime (H \leftrightarrow \tilde{H}) - \lambda_3 \overline{\chi_L} d_R X + \text{h.c.}
\end{equation}
\item Type III Scenario:
For $Y_1=7/6$, $Y_2=5/3$ and $Y_3=2/3$ the lightest new quark can decay into the $u_R$ quark and dark matter via
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L} \supset \mathcal{L}_Y^\prime - \lambda_3 \overline{\chi_L}
u_R X + \text{h.c.}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
In the above equations $X\sim (1,1,0,B_2-1/3)$ is our dark matter candidate.
The scalar potential will contain all possible terms between the SM Higgs $H$ and the new scalar fields $X$ and $S_B$. Here we list only the portal terms between the scalar fields:
\begin{equation}
V \supset \lambda_{HB} S_B^\dagger S_B H^\dagger H + \lambda_{HX} X^\dagger X H^\dagger H + \lambda_{BX} S_B^\dagger S_B X^\dagger X \ + \ \text{h.c.}
\end{equation}
The mass matrix for the up-type vector-like quarks in the basis $U_L=\left( \Psi^u_L \ \eta_L \right)$ and $U_R=\left( \Psi^u_R \ \eta_R \right)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M_U}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \begin{matrix}
\lambda_\Psi v_B & h_3 v_0 \\
h_1^* v_0 & \lambda_\eta^* v_B^*
\end{matrix}
\right),
\end{equation}
while the mass matrix for the down-type vector-like quarks in the basis $D_L=\left(\Psi^d_L \ \chi_L \right)$ and $D_R=\left( \Psi^d_R \ \chi_R \right)$ reads as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M_D}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \begin{matrix}
\lambda_\Psi v_B & h_4 v_0 \\
h_2^* v_0 & \lambda_\chi^* v_B^*
\end{matrix}
\right).
\end{equation}
Here we have used $S_B=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (v_B + h_B)+ \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}} A_B$, where $v_B$ is the vacuum expectation value and $A_B$ is the Goldstone boson eaten by the leptophobic gauge boson.
Neglecting the off-diagonal terms in the mass matrices above and defining the Dirac four component fields $U_i^T=(U_{L i} \ U_{R i})$ and $D_{i}^T=( D_{L i} \ D_{R i})$, the Lagrangian can be written as
\begin{equation}
- \mathcal{L} \supset \sum_{i=1}^2 \left( M_{U_i} \overline{U}_i U_i + \frac{M_{U_i}}{v_B} h_B \overline{U_i} U_i + M_{D_i} \overline{D}_i D_i + \frac{M_{D_i}}{v_B} h_B \overline{D_i} D_i \right),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
M_\Psi = M_{U_1} = M_{D_1}= \lambda_\Psi \frac{v_B}{\sqrt{2}}, \ \ M_\eta = M_{U_2}=\lambda_\eta \frac{v_B}{\sqrt{2}}, \ \ M_\chi = M_{D_2}=\lambda_\chi \frac{v_B}{\sqrt{2}}.
\end{equation}
Using these results and the Feynman rules in Appendix~\ref{app:feynman}, we are ready to study the production and decays of the Higgs $h_B$ responsible for symmetry breaking.
For simplicity, we will assume that all the new quarks have the same mass $m_Q$.
\section{A \texorpdfstring{$\boldsymbol{750}$}{750} GeV Higgs and the Symmetry Breaking Scale}
\label{sec:lhc}
\subsection{Decays of \texorpdfstring{$\boldsymbol{h_B}$}{hB}}
If one has the term $H^\dagger H S_B^\dagger S_B$ in the scalar potential, the new physical Higgs $h_B$ will decay into all the SM quarks, the new quarks and the SM gauge bosons at tree level.
Then, the branching ratio into two photons will be small since the predictions will be similar to the SM Higgs decays. Therefore, in this article we will assume that this term in the potential is very
small. Even if there is no symmetry protecting this term one can find this term at one-loop level using the interactions in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Lagrangian}). However, the $h_i$ couplings in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Lagrangian}) can be very small as well.
The mixing term can then be found at two-loop level where inside the loop one has the top quark and the new gauge boson, see Ref.~\cite{Ohmer:2015lxa} for a discussion.
In addition one can have tree level decays to the bosonic dark matter $X$ and unavoidably one-loop induced decays into the SM gauge bosons will occur. Also, if $h_B$ is heavy, one can have decays into two leptophobic $Z_B$ gauge bosons at tree level. In order to understand the possibility to explain the di-photon excess we will assume that the mixing to the SM Higgs is suppressed and the new quarks and gauge boson are heavy in order to avoid any tree-level decays of the physical Higgs $h_B$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{./BRs1}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{./BRs2}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{./BRs3}
\caption{Branching ratios of $h_B$ as a function of the common vector-like quark mass $m_Q$ for the Type I, II and II scenarios assuming that $M_{h_B} = \unit[750]{GeV}$.
\label{fig:Brs}}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:Brs} we show the branching ratios for $h_B$ as a function of the vector-like quark mass $m_Q$ that is assumed to be the same for all vector-like quarks. Notice that in the Type I and Type II scenarios the branching ratio into two photons is always smaller than the branching ratio into two W bosons. In the Type III
scenario $\text{BR}(h_B \to \gamma \gamma) > \text{BR} (h_B \to WW)$ due to the fact that the electric charge of the vector-like quarks inside the loop is large. As we will see in the next section, in the Type III scenario one can easily explain the di-photon excess in agreement with all bounds.
\subsection{Production Mechanism at the LHC}
The new Higgs $h_B$ that is responsible for symmetry breaking can be produced through gluon fusion due to its coupling to the new vector-like quarks.
The gluon fusion production cross section can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:SignalCrossSectionFull}
\sigma_{\gamma \gamma} \equiv \sigma (pp \to h_B) \times \text{BR}(h_B \to \gamma \gamma)= \frac{C_{gg}}{M_{h_B} \ \Gamma_{h_B} \ s} \Gamma (h_B \to gg) \Gamma (h_B \to \gamma \gamma),
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma_{h_B}$ is the total decay width of $h_B$, $s$ is the square of the center-of-mass energy and $C_{gg}$ is the gluonic PDF contribution.
Using MSTW2008 PDFs at NLO~\cite{Martin:2009iq}, $C_{gg}=2137$ for $\sqrt{s}= \unit[13]{TeV}$ and $M_{h_B} = \unit[750]{GeV}$. Working in
the most optimistic scenario where the decay is dominated by the decay into two gluons, one finds
\begin{equation}
\sigma (pp \to h_B) \times \text{BR}(h_B \to \gamma \gamma) \approx 6.6 \times 10^{3}\, \Gamma (h_B \to \gamma \gamma) \frac{\text{fb}}{\text{GeV}}.
\end{equation}
This implies that independent of the model, the requirement for the photon decay width needs to be $\Gamma (h_B \to \gamma \gamma) \gtrsim \unit[0.5 \times 10^{-3}]{GeV}$ since the favored cross section value is $\sigma_{\gamma \gamma}= \unit[6\pm3]{fb}$ for CMS and $\sigma_{\gamma \gamma}= \unit[10\pm3]{fb}$ for ATLAS.
Now, in the limit of the mass of the new vector-like fermions being larger than $M_{h_B}$, one can write the decay width to two photons as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:PhotonWidth}
\Gamma (h_B \to \gamma \gamma) = \frac{9 \alpha^2 n_f^2 \,Q^4\,M_{h_B}^3}{144 \pi^3\,v_B^2} ,
\end{equation}
where $Q$ is the electric charge of a given vector-like quark inside the loop.
Using the lower bound on the decay width, naively $\Gamma (h_B \to \gamma \gamma) \gtrsim 0.5 \times 10^{-3}$, one can set an upper bound on the symmetry breaking scale using the above expression.
{\textit{This is a striking result which allows us to understand the testability of this model as a theory for the 750~GeV resonance. }}
With an upper bound on the symmetry scale one can also find perturbative upper bounds on the gauge boson mass and the masses of the vector-like fermions. These are given by
\begin{equation}
M_{Z_B} \leq 2 \sqrt{\pi} v_B^{\rm{max}} / n_f, \ { \rm{and}} \ M_\Psi, M_\eta, M_\chi \leq \sqrt{2 \pi} v_B^{\rm{max}}.
\end{equation}
If the upper bound on the symmetry scale is not very large there is a hope to find a new force associated with baryon number and the new vector-like quarks needed for anomaly cancellation.
In the next section we perform a detailed numerical analysis to investigate accurately the values of the symmetry breaking scale and apply all relevant experimental constraints on the model.
We would like to comment that if we make the same study in a model where the SM leptons feel the new Abelian symmetry, one can show that it is not possible to explain the di-photon excess in agreement with the experimental bounds from the LEP2 experiment.
\subsection{Upper Bound on the Symmetry Breaking Scale}
\label{sec:Pheno}
In this section we show the possibility to find an upper bound on the symmetry breaking scale if one assumes that $h_B$ has a mass around $\unit[750]{GeV}$ and the model explains the di-photon excess reported by ATLAS and CMS. In Table~\ref{tab:8TeVConstraints} we list the relevant experimental constraints from the $8$ TeV LHC data to understand if our results are in agreement with the previous experimental constraints.
\begin{table}[b]
\caption{LHC $\sqrt{s}= \unit[8]{TeV}$ constraints as compiled in Ref.~\cite{Franceschini:2015kwy}. \label{tab:8TeVConstraints}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
Observable & upper limit @ $\sqrt{s}=\unit[8]{TeV}$ \\
\hline \hline
$\sigma( p p \rightarrow \gamma \gamma)$ & $< \unit[1.5]{fb}$ \\
$\sigma( p p\rightarrow Z \gamma)$ & $< \unit[11]{fb}$ \\
$\sigma( p p \rightarrow Z Z)$ & $< \unit[12]{fb}$ \\
$\sigma( p p \rightarrow W W)$ & $< \unit[40]{fb}$ \\
$\sigma( p p \rightarrow j j)$ & $< \unit[2500]{fb}$ \\
$\sigma( p p \rightarrow \text{inv.})$ & $< \unit[800]{fb}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:VEVRangesI}, we show the predictions for the cross section $\sigma (p p \to \gamma \gamma)$ versus the symmetry breaking scale $v_B$ in the Type I scenario. As one can see the allowed solutions are outside the range preferred by the ATLAS collaboration.
Now, if we are conservative and use the allowed values by the CMS collaboration the upper bound on the symmetry breaking scale is $v_{B}^\text{max}=\unit[600]{GeV}$. Then, in the Type I scenario the perturbative upper bounds are $M_{Z_B} \leq \unit[2.1]{TeV}$ and $m_Q \leq \unit[1.5]{TeV}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{./TypeI}
\caption{Predictions for the cross section into two photons as a function of the symmetry breaking scale $v_B$ in the Type I scenario. The red points are excluded by $\unit[8]{TeV}$ data given in Table~\ref{tab:8TeVConstraints}.
The green (triangle) points correspond to the case when the vector-like quark masses are equal to half the Higgs mass, while the blue (square) points show the predictions when
the vector-like masses are equal to the perturbative bound $m_{Q}=\sqrt{2 \pi} v_B$. The black dash-dotted horizontal lines show the favored range for ATLAS ($\sigma_{\gamma \gamma}=\unit[10\pm3]{fb}$),
while the gray dashed horizontal lines show the preferred range for CMS ($\sigma_{\gamma \gamma}=\unit[6\pm3]{fb}$). The Higgs mass $M_{h_B}$ is varied between $700$ and $\unit[800]{GeV}$. Here we use the MSTW2008NLO PDFs~\cite{Martin:2009iq}, and Package-X for the one-loop calculations~\cite{Patel:2015tea}.
\label{fig:VEVRangesI}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{./TypeII}
\caption{The predictions for the Type II scenario. The input parameters are the same as in Fig.~\ref{fig:VEVRangesI}. \label{fig:VEVRangesII}}
\end{figure}
The predictions for $\sigma (p p \to \gamma \gamma)$ vs.\ $v_B$ for the Type II scenario are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:VEVRangesII}. In this case one can find solutions for the cross sections which are in the overlap region for ATLAS and CMS results. Therefore, in this scenario one could have an explanation for the di-photon excess in agreement with the CMS and ATLAS.
In this case the upper bound on the symmetry breaking scale is $v_B^\text{max}=\unit[1.8]{TeV}$, which gives us the perturbative bounds $M_{Z_B} \leq \unit[6.4]{TeV}$ and $m_Q \leq \unit[4.5]{TeV}$.
\begin{figure}[p]
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{./TypeIII}
\caption{The predictions for the Type III scenario. The input parameters are the same as in Fig.~\ref{fig:VEVRangesI}. \label{fig:VEVRangesIII}}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:VEVRangesIII} we show the same results but for the Type III scenario. Notice that in this case the electric charge of the vector-like quarks inside the loop is larger and one can have a larger decay width for the decay into two photons.
In this case the upper bounds are larger and are given by $v_{B}^\text{max}=\unit[3]{TeV}$, $M_{Z_B} \leq \unit[10.6]{TeV}$ and $m_Q \leq \unit[7.5]{TeV}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[]{
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{./gaugecoupling-dijet}
}
\subfloat[]{
\includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{./gaugecoupling-ttbar}
}
\caption{Limits on the mass and coupling of the leptophobic gauge boson. (a) Limits from dijet searches~\cite{Abe:1997hm,Aaltonen:2008dn,Khachatryan:2015dcf,Khachatryan:2015sja,CMS:2015neg}. (b) Limits from $t\bar{t}$ searches~\cite{Khachatryan:2015sma,CMS:2016zte,ATLAS:2015ttbar,Aad:2015fna}. \label{fig:gBLimits}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{./limitgB-diphoton}
\caption{Combined upper limit from dijet and $t\bar{t}$ searches on the gauge coupling $g_B$ and regions that are in agreement with the di-photon excess in the three scenarios discussed in the text: Type I (green dotted), Type II (blue dashed) and Type III (red dash-dotted). \label{fig:allowedRegions}}
\end{figure}
We have shown the possibility to find an upper bound on the symmetry breaking scale and a perturbative upper bound on the leptophobic gauge boson mass.
Now, let us understand if these results are in agreement with the searches for new gauge bosons. In Fig.~\ref{fig:gBLimits} we show the
experimental bounds in the gauge coupling $g_B$ and mass $M_{Z_B}$ plane from (a) dijet searches and (b) $t \bar{t}$ searches.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:allowedRegions} we show the combined limit on the gauge coupling from both dijet and $t\bar{t}$ searches, together with the regions that can explain the di-photon excess at the LHC for the three scenarios discussed before.
As one can see the Type I scenario is ruled out by these experimental constraints. The Type II scenario is highly constrained but there are some
small regions of the parameter space where one can satisfy the experimental bounds. The Type III scenario is also constrained but the regions which are close to the upper bound on the symmetry breaking scale are allowed by the experiments.
Therefore, the Type II and Type III scenarios do provide a possible explanation for the di-photon excess in agreement with all experimental constraints.
\begin{table}[b]
\caption{Relative signal strength in the different scenarios. \label{tab:Signalstrength}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline
~~Scenario~~ & ~~$\Gamma_{W^+ W^-}/\Gamma_{\gamma \gamma}$ ~~& ~~$\Gamma_{ZZ}/\Gamma_{\gamma \gamma}$~~ & ~~$\Gamma_{Z \gamma}/\Gamma_{\gamma \gamma}$~~ & ~~$\Gamma_{g g}/\Gamma_{\gamma \gamma}$~~ \\
\hline \hline
I & 25.4 & 2.3 & 0.5 & 385.5 \\
II & 2.2 & 1.6 & 1.4 & 33.3 \\
III & 0.8 & 0.2 & 0.2 & 11.5 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
The different scenarios are experimentally well distinguishable, as the decay rates of the new Higgs boson to other electro-weak gauge bosons and gluons have a different strength. So comparing event rates in the other decay channels with respect to the di-photon event rate provides a powerful testing tool. We give the relative signal strength in Table~\ref{tab:Signalstrength}. It turns out that the most promising signal to distinguish the two viable scenarios II and III is the measurement of the relative strength of the $Z\gamma$ decay channel, which in the Type II scenario is large enough to search for the channel with two leptons and a photon in the final state.
\section{Summary}
\label{sec:summary}
In this paper we have investigated the possibility to explain the di-photon excess reported by the CMS and ATLAS collaborations in the context of a simple gauge theory.
We have identified the new resonance with a spin zero field which is responsible for the breaking of a new Abelian gauge symmetry. In this context new vector-like quarks
are needed for an anomaly-free theory and they define the production mechanism and decays of the new Higgs boson. We have focused on a
simple theory where the local symmetry is baryon number.
We have shown that if the physical Higgs $h_B$, the field responsible for symmetry breaking, is also responsible for the di-photon excess coming from the $\unit[750]{GeV}$ resonance,
one can find an upper bound on the symmetry breaking scale. Since the masses of the new gauge boson and the vector-like quarks are proportional to the same symmetry breaking
scale, one can find perturbative upper bounds on their masses. We have investigated three simple scenarios in agreement with cosmology.
The Type II and Type III scenarios can provide an explanation for the di-photon excess in agreement with the experiments.
Since we find an upper bound on the symmetry breaking scale, one can hope to discover a new force associated with the local baryon number at the LHC if this theory is relevant for the di-photon excess.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
P.F.P.\ thanks M.\ B.\ Wise for discussions. M.D.\ is supported by the German Science Foundation (DFG) under the Collaborative Research Center (SFB) 676 Particles, Strings and the Early Universe as well as the ERC Starting Grant `NewAve' (638528).
|
\section{Introduction}
In this paper, we consider a decentralized consensus optimization problem arising
from emerging technologies such as distributed machine learning
\cite{Boyd:2011a,Forero:2010a,Kraska:2013a,Li:2014a},
sensor network \cite{Iutzeler:2012a,Rabbat:2004a,Song:2009a},
and smart grid \cite{Gan:2013a,Lo:2013a}. Let $\mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{E})$
be a network (undirected graph) where
$\mathcal{V}=\{1,2,\dots,m\}$ is the node (also called agent, processor, or sensor)
set and $\mathcal{E}\subset \mathcal{V} \times \mathcal{V}$ is the edge set. Two nodes $i$ and $j$
are called neighbors if $(i,j)\in \mathcal{E}$. The communications between neighbor nodes are
bidirectional, meaning that $i$ and $j$ can communicate with each other as long
as $(i,j)\in \mathcal{E}$.
In a decentralized sensor network $\mathcal{G}$, individual nodes can acquire, store, and process data
about large-sized objects.
Each node $i$ collects data and holds objective function $F_i(x;\xi_i)$ privately where $\xi_i\in\Theta$
is random with fixed but unknown probability distribution in domain $\Theta$
to model environmental fluctuations such as noise in data acquisition and/or inaccurate estimation of objective function or its gradient.
Here $x\in X$ is the unknown (e.g., the seismic image) to be solved,
where the domain $X\subset\mathbb{R}^n$ is compact and convex.
Furthermore, we assume that $F_i(\cdot;\xi_i)$ is convex for all $\xi_i\in\Theta$ and
$i\in \mathcal{V}$, and we define $f_i(x)=\Ex_{\xi_i}[F_i(x;\xi_i)]$ which is thus convex with respect to $x\in X$.
The goal of decentralized consensus optimization is to solve the minimization problem
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:deccon}
\minimize_{x \in X} f(x),\quad \mbox{where} \ f(x):=\sum_{i=1}^m f_i(x)
\end{equation}
with the restrictions that $F_i(x;\xi_i)$, and hence $f_i(x)$, are accessible by node $i$ only,
and that nodes $i$ and $j$ can communicate only if $(i,j)\in \mathcal{E}$
during the entire computation.
There are a number of practical issues that need to be taken into consideration
in solving the real-world decentralized consensus optimization problem \eqref{eqn:deccon}:
\begin{itemize}
\item The partial objective $F_i$ (and $f_i$) is held privately by
node $i$, and transferring $F_i$ to a data fusion center is either infeasible or
cost-ineffective due to data privacy, the large size of $F_i$, and/or
limited bandwidth and communication power overhead of sensors.
Therefore, the nodes can only communicate their own estimates of $x\in\mathbb{R}^n$ with their neighbors
in each iteration of a decentralized consensus algorithm.
\item Since it is often difficult and sometimes impossible for the nodes to be
fully synchronized, they may not have access to the most up-to-date
(stochastic) gradient information during computations. In this case, the
node $i$ has to use out-of-date (stochastic) gradient $\nabla F_i(x_i(t-\tau_i(t));\xi_i(t-\tau_i(t)))$
where $x_i(t)$ is the estimate of $x$ obtained by node $i$ at iteration $t$,
and $\tau_i(t)$ is the level of (possibly random) delay of the gradient information at $t$.
\item The estimates $\{x_i(t)\}$ by the nodes should tend to be consensual as $t$ increases,
and the consensual value is a solution of problem \eqref{eqn:deccon}. In this case, there is
a guarantee of retrieving a good estimate of $x$ from any surviving node in the network
even if some nodes are sabotaged, lost, or run out of power during the computation process.
\end{itemize}
In this paper, we analyze a decentralized consensus algorithm which takes all the factors above
into consideration in solving \eqref{eqn:deccon}. We provide comprehensive convergence
analysis of the algorithm, including the decay rates of objective function and disagreements
between nodes, in terms of iteration number, level of delays, and network structure etc.
\subsection{Related work}
Distributed computing on networks is an emerging technology with extensive applications in
modern machine learning \cite{Forero:2010a,Kraska:2013a,Li:2014a},
sensor networks \cite{Iutzeler:2012a,Rabbat:2004a,Zhao:2015b,Zhao:2015a}, and big data analysis \cite{Cevher:2014b,Sayed:2014a}.
There are two types of scenarios in distributed computing: centralized and decentralized.
In the centralized scenario, computations are carried out locally by worker (slave) nodes while
computations of certain global variables must eventually be processed by designated master node
or at a center of shared memory during each (outer) iteration.
A major effort in this scenario has been devoted to update the global variable more effectively
using an asynchronous setting in, for example, distributed centralized alternating direction method
of multipliers (ADMM) \cite{Chang:2016a,Chang:2016b,Liu:2015a,Wei:2013b,Zhang:2014b}.
In the decentralized scenario considered in this paper, the nodes
privately hold parts of objective functions and can only communicate with neighbor
nodes during computations. In many real-world applications, decentralized computing is particularly useful when
a master-worker network setting is either infeasible or not economical, or the data acquisition
and computation have to be carried out by individual nodes which then need to collaboratively
solve the optimization problem. Decentralized networks are also more robust to node
failure and can better address privacy concerns.
For more discussions about motivations and advantages of decentralized computing,
see, e.g., \cite{Jakovetic:2014a,Nedic:2009b,Olfati-Saber:2004a,Shi:2015a,Tian:2008a,Tsitsiklis:1984a} and
references therein.
Decentralized consensus algorithms take the data distribution and communication restriction
into consideration, so that they can be implemented at individual nodes in the network.
In the \textit{ideal synchronous case} of decentralized consensus where all the nodes
are coordinated to finish computation and
then start to exchange information with neighbors in each iteration, a number of
developments have been made. A class of methods is to rewrite the consensus constraints for
minimization problem \eqref{eqn:deccon} by introducing auxiliary variables between
neighbor nodes (i.e., edges),
and apply ADMM (possibly with linearization or preconditioning techniques) to derive an implementable
decentralized consensus algorithm
\cite{Chang:2015a,Iutzeler:2016a,Jakovetic:2015a,Makhdoumi:2017a,Shi:2014a,Yuan:2016a}.
Most of these methods require each node to solve a local optimization problem
every iteration before communication, and reach a convergence rate of $O(1/T)$
in terms of outer iteration (communication) number $T$ for general convex objective functions $\{f_i\}$.
First-order methods based on decentralized gradient
descent require less computational cost
at individual nodes such that between two communications
they only perform one step of a gradient descent-type update at the weighted average of previous iterates obtained from neighbors.
In particular, Nesterov's optimal gradient scheme
is employed in decentralized gradient descent with diminishing step sizes to achieve
rate of $O(1/T)$ in \cite{Jakovetic:2014a}, where an alternative gradient method
that requires excessive communications in each inner iteration is also developed
and can reach a theoretical convergence rate of $O(\log T/T^2)$, despite that
it seems to work less efficiently in terms of communications than the former in practice.
A correction technique is developed for decentralized gradient
descent with convergence rate as $O(1/T)$ with constant step size in \cite{Shi:2015a},
which results in a saddle-point algorithm as pointed out in \cite{Mokhtari:2015b}.
In \cite{Zhao:2015a}, the authors combine Nesterov's gradient scheme
and a multiplier-type auxiliary variable to obtain a fast optimality convergence rate of $O(1/T^2)$.
Other first-order decentralized methods have also been developed recently, such dual averaging \cite{Duchi:2012b}.
Additional constraints for primal variables in decentralized consensus optimization \eqref{eqn:deccon}
are considered in \cite{Yuan:2015a}.
In real-world decentralized computing, it is often difficult and sometimes impossible to coordinate all the nodes
in the network such that their computation and communication are perfectly synchronized.
One practical approach for such \textit{asynchronous consensus}
is using a broadcast scenario where in each (outer) iteration, one node in the network
is assumed to wake up at random and broadcasts its value to neighbors
(but does not hear them back). A number of algorithms for broadcast consensus
are developed, for instance, in \cite{Aysal:2009a,Iutzeler:2012a,Nedic:2015a,Nedic:2016a}.
{In particular, \cite{Nedic:2016a} develops a consensus optimization algorithm for \eqref{eqn:deccon} in
the setting where every iteration one node in the network broadcasts its value to the neighbors,
but there are no delays in (sub)gradients during their updates.}
Another important issue in the asynchronous setting is that nodes may have to use out-of-date
(stale) gradient
information during updates \cite{Nedic:2009b,Wu:2016a}.
This delayed scenario in gradient descent is considered in a distributed but not decentralized setting
in \cite{Agarwal:2011a,Li:2013b,Sra:2016a,Zhang:2016a}.
In addition, analysis of stochastic gradient in distributed computing is also
carried out in \cite{Agarwal:2011a,Shamir:2014a}.
In \cite{Feyzmahdavian:2014a}, linear convergence rate of optimality is derived for strongly convex
objective functions with delays. Extending \cite{Agarwal:2011a}, a \textit{fixed} delay at all nodes
is considered in dual averaging \cite{Li:2015a} and gradient descent \cite{Wang:2015a}
in a decentralized setting, but they
did not consider more practical and useful \textit{random} delays,
and there are no convergence rates on node consensus provided in these papers.
In \cite{Wu:2016a}, both random delays in communications and gradients are considered,
however, no convergence rate is established in such setting.
\subsection{Contributions}
The contribution of this paper is in three phases.
First, we consider a general decentralized consensus
algorithm with randomly delayed and stochastic gradient (Section \ref{sec:algorithm}).
In this case, the nodes do not need to be synchronized
and they may only have access to stale gradient information. This renders stochastic gradients
with random delays at different nodes in their gradient updates,
which is suitable for many real-world decentralized computing applications.
Second, we provide a comprehensive convergence analysis of the proposed algorithm (Section \ref{sec:convergence}).
More precisely, we derive convergence rates for both the objective function (optimality)
and disagreement (feasibility constraint of consensus), and show
their dependency on the characteristics of the problem, such as Lipschitz constants of
(stochastic) gradients and spectral gaps
of the underlying network.
Third, we conduct a number of numerical experiments on synthetic and real datasets
to validate the performance of the proposed algorithm (Section \ref{sec:experiment}). In particular, we examine the
convergence on synthetic decentralized least squares, robust least squares, and logistic regression problems.
We also present the numerical results on the reconstruction of several seismic images in
decentralized wireless sensor networks.
\subsection{Notations and assumptions}\label{subsec:notation}
In this paper, all vectors are column vectors unless otherwise noted. We denote by $x_i(t)\in\mathbb{R}^n$ the
estimate of node $i$ at iteration $t$, and $x(t)=(x_1(t),\dots,x_m(t))^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$.
We denote $\|x\|\equiv\|x\|_2$ if $x$ is a vector and $\|x\|\equiv\|x\|_F$ if $x$ is a matrix,
which should be clear by the context.
For any two vectors of same dimension, $\langle x,y\rangle$ denotes their inner product,
and $\langle x,y\rangle_{Q}:=\langle x,Qy\rangle$ for symmetric positive semidefinite matrix $Q$.
For notation simplicity, we use $\langle x,y\rangle=\sum_{i=1}^{m}\langle x_i,y_i\rangle$
where $x_i$ and $y_i$ are the $i$-th row of the $m\times n$ matrices $x$ and $y$ respectively.
Such matrix inner product is also generalized to $\langle x,y\rangle_Q$ for matrices $x$ and $y$.
In this paper, we set the domain $X:=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^n:\|x\|_\infty\leq R\}$ for some $R>0$,
which can be thought of as the maximum pixel intensity in reconstructed images for instance.
We further denote $\mathcal{X} := X^m\subset \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$.
For each node $i$, we define $f_i(x):=\Ex_{\xi_i}[F_i(x;\xi_i)]$ as the expectation of objective function,
and $g_i(t):=\nabla F_i(x(t);\xi_i(t))$ (here the gradient $\nabla$ is taken with respect to $x$)
is the stochastic gradient at $x_i(t)$ at node $i$.
We let $\tau_i(t)$ be the delay of gradient at node $i$ in iteration $t$, and $\tau(t)=(\tau_1(t),\dots,\tau_m(t))^{\top}$.
We write $f(x(t))$ in short for $\sum_{i=1}^{m}f_i(x_i(t))\in\mathbb{R}$,
$x(t-\tau(t))$ for $(x_1(t-\tau_1(t)),\dots,x_m(t-\tau_m(t)))^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$,
and
$g(t-\tau(t))$ for $(g_1(t-\tau_1(t)),\dots,g_m(t-\tau_m(t)))^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$.
We assume $f_i$ is continuously differentiable, $\nabla f_i$ has Lipschitz constant $L_i$,
and denote $L:=\max_{1\leq i\leq m}L_i$.
Let $x^*\in\mathbb{R}^n$ be a solution of \eqref{eqn:deccon}, we
denote $\mathbf{1}(x^*)^{\top}$ simply by $x^*$ in this paper which is clear by the context,
for instance $f(x^*)=f(\mathbf{1} (x^*)^{\top})=\sum_{i=1}^{m}f_i(x^*)$.
Furthermore, we let $y(T):=(1/T) \sum_{t=1}^{T}x(t+1)$ be the running average of $\{x(t+1):1\leq t\leq T\}$,
and $z(T):=(1/m)\sum_{i=1}^m y(T)$ be the consensus average of $y(T)$.
We denote $J=(1/m)\mathbf{1}\bfone^{\top}$, then $z(T)=Jy(T)$.
Note that for all $T$, $z(T)$ is always consensual but $x(T), y(T)$ may not be.
An important ingredient in decentralized gradient descent is the mixing matrix $W=[w_{ij}]$
in \eqref{eqn:algupd_node}. For the algorithm to be implementable in practice,
$w_{ij}>0$ if and only if $(i,j)\in \mathcal{E}$. In this paper, we assume that $W$ is
symmetric and $\sum_{j=1}^{m} w_{ij}=1$ for all $i$, hence $W$ is doubly
stochastic, namely $W\mathbf{1}=\mathbf{1}$ and $\mathbf{1}^{\top}W=\mathbf{1}^{\top}$ where $\mathbf{1}=(1,\dots,1)^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^m$.
With the assumption that the network $\mathcal{G}$ is simple and connected,
we know $\|W\|_2=1$ and eigenvalue $1$ of $W$ has multiplicity $1$
by the Perron-Frobenius theorem \cite{Lovasz:1993a}.
As a consequence, $Wx=x$ if and only if $x$ is consensual, i.e., $x=c\mathbf{1}$ for some $c\in\mathbb{R}$.
We further assume $W\succeq 0$ (otherwise use $\frac{1}{2}(I+W)\succeq 0$ since stochastic matrix $W$ has spectral radius 1).
Given a network $\mathcal{G}$, there are different ways to design the mixing matrix $W$. For some optimal choices of $W$,
see, e.g., \cite{Sayed:2013b,Xiao:2004a}.
Now we make several assumptions that are necessary in our convergence analysis.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The network $\mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{E})$ is undirected, simple, and connected.
\item For all $i$ and $x$, the stochastic gradient is unbiased, i.e., $\Ex_{\xi_i}[\nabla F_i(x;\xi_i)]=\nabla f_i(x)$,
and $\Ex_{\xi_i}[\|\nabla F_i(x;\xi_i)-\nabla f_i(x)\|^2]\leq \sigma^2$ for some $\sigma>0$.
\item The delays $\tau_i(t)$ may follow different distributions at different nodes, but their second moments
are assumed to be uniformly bounded, i.e., there exists $B>0$ such that
$\Ex[\tau_i(t)^2]\leq B^2$ for all $i=1,\dots,m$ and iteration $t$.
\end{enumerate}
Since the domain $X$ is compact and $\nabla f_i$ are all Lipschitz continuous,
we know $\|\nabla f_i\|$ is uniformly bounded.
Furthermore, $\Ex[\|\nabla F_i(\cdot,\xi_i)\|] \leq \Ex[\|\nabla F_i(\cdot,\xi_i)-\nabla f_i(\cdot)\|] + \|\nabla f_i(\cdot)\|
\leq \sigma + \|\nabla f_i(\cdot)\|$, we know $\Ex[\|\nabla F_i(\cdot,\xi_i)\|]$ is also uniformly bounded.
Therefore, we denote by $G>0$ the uniform bound such that
$\|\nabla f_i\|, \Ex[\|\nabla F_i(\cdot,\xi_i)\|] \leq G$ for all $i$.
We also assume that the random delay $\tau_i(t)$ and error of inexact gradient
$\epsilon_i(t):=g_i(t)-\nabla f_i(x(t))$ are independent.
\section{Algorithm}\label{sec:algorithm}
Taking the delayed stochastic gradient and the constraint that nodes can only communicate
with immediate neighbors, we propose the following decentralized delayed stochastic
gradient descent method for solving \eqref{eqn:deccon}. Starting from an initial
guess $\{x_i(0):i=1,\dots,m\}$, each node $i$ performs the following updates iteratively:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:algupd_node}
x_i(t+1)=\Pi_X \sbr[3]{\sum_{j=1}^m w_{ij}x_j(t)-\alpha(t)g_i(t-\tau_i(t))}.
\end{equation}
Namely, in each iteration $t$, the nodes exchange their most recent $x_i(t)$ with
their neighbors. Then each node takes weighted average of the received local copies
using weights $w_{ij}$ and performs a gradient descent type update using a stochastic
gradient $g_i(t-\tau_i(t))$ with delay $\tau_i(t)$ and step size $\alpha(t)$, and projects the result onto $X$.
In addition, each node $i$ tracks its own running average $y_i(t)=(1/t)\cdot\sum_{s=1}^t x_i(s+1)$
by simply updating $y_i(t)=(1-1/t)\cdot y_i(t-1)+(1/t)\cdot x_i(t+1)$ in iteration $t$.
Following the matrix notation in Section \ref{subsec:notation}, the iteration \eqref{eqn:algupd_node} can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:algupd}
x(t+1)=\proj_{\mathcal{X}}[Wx(t)-\alpha(t) g(t-\tau(t))].
\end{equation}
Here the projection $\proj_\mathcal{X}$ is accomplished by each node projecting to $X$
due to the definition of $X$ in Section \ref{subsec:notation},
which does not require any coordination between nodes.
Note that the update \eqref{eqn:algupd} is also equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:alg}
x(t+1)= \argmin_{x \in \mathcal{X}} \left\{ \langle g(t-\tau(t)),x\rangle + \frac{1}{2\alpha(t)}\|x-Wx(t)\|^2\right\}.
\end{equation}
In this paper, we may refer to the proposed decentralized delayed stochastic gradient descent
algorithm by any of \eqref{eqn:algupd_node}, \eqref{eqn:algupd}, and \eqref{eqn:alg}
since they are equivalent.
\section{Convergence Analysis}\label{sec:convergence}
In this section, we provide a comprehensive convergence analysis of the
proposed algorithm \eqref{eqn:alg} by employing a proper step size policy.
In particular, we derive convergence rates for both of
the disagreement (Theorem \ref{thm:cssrate}) and objective function value (Theorem \ref{thm:z_opt}).
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:proj}
For any $x\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$, its projection onto $\mathcal{X}$ yields nonincreasing disagreement. That is
\begin{equation}
\|(I-J)\proj_{\mathcal{X}}(x)\|\leq \|(I-J)x\|.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{app:proof_proj}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:seqrate}
Let $c_1\geq0$ and $c_2>0$, and define $\alpha(t)=1/(c_1+c_2\sqrt{t})$.
Then for any $\lambda\in (0,1)$ there is
\begin{equation}
\sum_{s=0}^{t-1}\alpha(s)\lambda^{t-s-1}\leq \frac{\sqrt{\pi}\lambda^{-2}}{c_2\sqrt{t} \log(\lambda^{-1})}= O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}\right)
\end{equation}
for all $t=1,2,\dots.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{app:proof_seqrate}.
\end{proof}
Now we are ready to prove the convergence rate of disagreement
in $x(t)$ and $y(t)$. In particular, we show that $(\sum_{i=1}^m \|x_i(t)-\bar{x}(t)\|^2)^{1/2}$
decays at the rate of $O(1/\sqrt{t})$, where $\bar{x}(t)=(1/m)\sum_{i=1}^m x_i(t)$.
The same convergence rate holds for the disagreement of running average $y(t)$.
More specifically, these convergence rates are given by the bounds
in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:cssrate}
Let $\{x(t)\}$ be the iterates generated by Algorithm
\eqref{eqn:alg} with $\alpha(t)=[2(L+\eta\sqrt{t})]^{-1}$
for some $\eta>0$,
and $\lambda=\|W-J\|$. Then $\lambda$ is the second largest eigenvalue of $W$
and hence $\lambda\in(0,1)$. Moreover, the disagreement of $x(t)$ is bounded by
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:cssrate}
\Ex [\|(I-J)x(t)\|]\leq \sqrt{m}G\sum_{s=0}^{t-1}\alpha(s)\lambda^{t-s-1}
\leq \frac{\sqrt{\pi m}G\lambda^{-2}}{\eta\sqrt{t}\log(\lambda^{-1})}=O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}\right),
\end{equation}
and the disagreement of running average $y(T)=(1/m)\sum_{t=1}^{T} x(t+1)$ is bounded by
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:Ycssrate}
\Ex[\|(I-J)y(T)\|] \leq \frac{2\sqrt{\pi m}G\lambda^{-2}}{\eta\sqrt{T}\log(\lambda^{-1})}=O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}\right).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We first prove the bound on disagreement between $\{x_i(t):1\leq i\leq m\}$, i.e.,
\eqref{eqn:cssrate}, by induction. It is trivial to show
that this bound holds for $t=1$. Assuming \eqref{eqn:cssrate} holds for $t$, we have
\begin{align}
\Ex[\|(I-J)x(t+1)\|] = &\ \Ex[\|(I-J)\proj_{\mathcal{X}}(Wx(t)-\alpha(t)g(t-\tau(t)))\| ]\nonumber \\
\leq &\ \Ex[\|(I-J)(Wx(t)-\alpha(t)g(t-\tau(t)))\|]\\
\leq &\ \Ex[\|(I-J)Wx(t)\|]+\alpha(t)\Ex[\|(I-J)g(t-\tau(t))\|] \nonumber \\
\leq &\ \Ex[\|(I-J)Wx(t)\|]+\alpha(t)\sqrt{m}G \nonumber
\end{align}
where we used Lemma \ref{lemma:proj} in the first inequality,
and $\|I-J\|\leq1$ and $\Ex[\|g_i(t-\tau_i(t))\|]\leq G$ in the last inequality. Noting that
$J^2=J$ and $JW=WJ=J$, we have
\begin{equation*}
(W-J)(I-J)=(I-J)W.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, we obtain
\begin{align}
\Ex[\|(I-J)x(t+1)\|] \leq & \Ex[\|(I-J)Wx(t)\|]+\alpha(t)\sqrt{m}G \nonumber \\
= & \Ex[\|(W-J)(I-J)x(t)\|]+\alpha(t)\sqrt{m}G \nonumber \\
\leq & \Ex[\|(W-J)\|\|(I-J)x(t)\|]+\alpha(t)\sqrt{m}G \\
\leq & \lambda \sqrt{m}G \sum_{s=0}^{t-1}\alpha(s)\lambda^{t-s-1}+\alpha(t)\sqrt{m}G \nonumber \\
= & \sqrt{m}G\sum_{s=0}^{t}\alpha(s)\lambda^{t-s} \nonumber
\end{align}
where we used the induction assumption for $t$ in the last inequality.
Applying Lemma \ref{lemma:seqrate} to the bound yields the second inequality in \eqref{eqn:cssrate},
which shows that $\Ex[\|(I-J)x(t)\|]$ decays at rate $O(1/\sqrt{t})$.
By convexity of $\|\cdot\|$ and definition of $y(T)$, we obtain that
\begin{equation}
\Ex[\|(I-J)y(T)\|]\leq \frac{1}{T}\sum_{t=1}^{T} \Ex[\|(I-J)x(t+1)\|]
\leq \frac{2\sqrt{\pi m}G\lambda^{-2}}{\eta\sqrt{T}\log(\lambda^{-1})}
\end{equation}
by applying \eqref{eqn:cssrate} and using $\sum_{t=1}^{T}\frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}\leq 2\sqrt{T}$.
Therefore the disagreement $\Ex[\|(I-J)y(T)\|]$ also decays at rate of $O(1/\sqrt{T})$.
\end{proof}
The convergence rate of disagreement also yields an estimate
of differences between consecutive iterates $x(t)$ and $x(t+1)$, which is given by the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:adjrate}
Let $\{x(t)\}$ be the iterates generated by Algorithm \eqref{eqn:alg} with the settings of $\alpha(t)$,
$\lambda$, and $\eta$ same as in Theorem \ref{thm:cssrate}. Then there is
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:adjrate}
\Ex[\|x(t+1)-x(t)\|] \leq \frac{C}{\sqrt{t}},
\end{equation}
where $C:=\frac{\sqrt{m}G}{\eta}\sbr[1]{\frac{\sqrt{\pi} \lambda^{-2}}{\log(\lambda^{-1})}+\frac{1}{2}}$
is a constant independent of $t$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{app:proof_adjrate}.
\end{proof}
From the estimate of difference between consecutive iterates, we can also bound the expected difference
between $x(t)$ and $x(t-\tau(t))$ as follows.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:delayrate}
Let $\{x(t)\}$ be the iterates generated by Algorithm \eqref{eqn:alg} with the settings of $\alpha(t)$,
$\lambda$, and $\eta$ same as in Theorem \ref{thm:cssrate}. Then there is
\begin{equation}
\Ex[\|x(t)-x(t-\tau(t))\|] \leq C\del{\frac{\sqrt{2m}B}{\sqrt{t}}+\frac{4mB^2}{t}}=O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}\right).
\end{equation}
where $C$ is the constant defined in Corollary \ref{cor:adjrate}.
In particular, if $t\geq 8mB^2$, there is $\Ex[\|x(t)-x(t-\tau(t))\|]\leq \frac{2\sqrt{2m}CB}{\sqrt{t}}$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{app:proof_delayrate}.
\end{proof}
Without loss of generality and for sake of notation simplicity,
we assume iteration number $t>8mB^2$ and $\Ex[\|x(t)-x(t-\tau(t))\|]\leq \frac{2\sqrt{2m}CB}{\sqrt{t}}$
in the remaining derivations. The decay rate $O(1/\sqrt{t})$
of $\Ex[\|x(t)-x(t-\tau(t))\|]$ is useful to estimate the convergence
rate of objective function value later.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:sum_inprod}
Let $\{x(t)\}$ be the iterates generated by Algorithm \eqref{eqn:algupd}, then
the following inequality holds for all $T\geq 1$:
\begin{align}
\qquad \sum_{t=1}^{T} \Ex\left\langle \nabla f(x(t))-\nabla f(x(t-\tau(t))), x(t+1)-x^*\right\rangle
\leq 8\sqrt{2nLT} mRCB
\end{align}
where $C$ is the constant defined in Corollary \ref{cor:adjrate}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{app:proof_sum_inprod}.
\end{proof}
Now we are ready to prove the convergence rate of objective function value.
We first present the estimate of this rate for running averages $y(t)$ in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:y_opt}
Let $\{x(t)\}$ be the iterates generated by Algorithm \eqref{eqn:algupd} with
$\alpha(t)= [2(L+\eta\sqrt{t})]^{-1}$
for some $\eta>0$, then
\begin{align}\label{eqn:y_opt}
\Ex [f(y(T))]- f(x^*)\leq \frac{L\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{X}^2}{T}+
\frac{K}{\sqrt{T}}=O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}\right)
\end{align}
where $y(T)=(1/T) \sum_{t=1}^{T}x(t+1)$ is the running average of $\{x(t)\}$,
$\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{X}=2\sqrt{mn}R$ is the diameter of $\mathcal{X}$,
and $K:=\eta\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{X}^2+4\sqrt{2mL}\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{X} CB+(4m\sigma^2/\eta)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{app:proof_y_opt}.
\end{proof}
We have shown that the running average $y(T)$ makes the objective function
decay as in \eqref{eqn:y_opt}.
However, since each node $i$ obtains its own $y_i(T)$ which may not be consensual
(and the left hand side of \eqref{eqn:y_opt} could be negative),
we need to look at their consensus average $z(T)=(1/m)\sum_{i=1}^my_i(T)$
and the convergence rate of its objective function value. This is given in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:z_opt}
Let $x(t)$ be generated by Algorithm \eqref{eqn:algupd_node} with $\alpha(t)=[2(L+\eta\sqrt{t})]^{-1}$
for some $\eta>0$.
Let $y(T)=(1/T)\sum_{t=1}^{T} x(t+1)$ be the running average of $x(t)$ and
$z(T)=Jy(T)=(1/m)\sum_{i=1}^m y_i(T)$ be the consensus average of $y(T)$, then
\begin{align}\label{eqn:optbound}
0\leq\Ex [f( z(T) )] - f(x^*) \leq
\frac{L\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{X}^2+2\sqrt{m}LC^2}{T}+
\frac{K+2\sqrt{m}CG}{\sqrt{T}}=O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}}\right)
\end{align}
where $C$ is defined as in Corollary \ref{cor:adjrate}, and
$\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{X}$ and $K$ are defined as in Theorem \ref{thm:y_opt}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} We first bound the difference between the function values
at the running average $y(T)$ and the consensus average $z(T)=Jy(T)$:
\begin{align}\label{eqn:absdiff_fYfZ}
& \quad \, f(y(T))-f(z(T)) = \sum_{i=1}^m (f_i(y_i(T))-f_i(z(T))) \nonumber \\
& \leq \sum_{i=1}^m \langle \nabla f_i(z(T)),y_i(T)-z(T)\rangle + \frac{L_i}{2}\|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2 \\
& \leq \sqrt{m}G \|(I-J)y(T)\| + \frac{L}{2}\|(I-J)y(T)\|^2 \leq \frac{2\sqrt{m}CG}{\sqrt{T}} + \frac{2C^2L}{T}, \nonumber
\end{align}
where we used convexity of $f_i$ and Lipschitz continuity of $\nabla f_i$ in the first inequality,
$\|\nabla f_i\|\leq G$ and convexity of $\|\cdot\|^2$
in the second inequality, and Theorem \ref{thm:cssrate} to get the last inequality.
Therefore, combining \eqref{eqn:absdiff_fYfZ} and \eqref{eqn:y_opt} from Theorem \ref{thm:y_opt},
we obtain the bound in \eqref{eqn:optbound}.
Note that $z(T)$ is consensus, so $f(z(T))\geq f(x^*)$ since $x^*$ is
a consensus optimal solution of \eqref{eqn:deccon}.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
In summary, we have showed that the running average $y_i(T)$,
which can be easily updated by each node $i$,
yields convergence in optimality and consensus feasibility.
More precisely, Theorem \ref{thm:cssrate} implies that $\|y_i(T)-z(T)\|$ converges to $0$ at rate $O(1/\sqrt{T})$
for all nodes $i$ where $z(T)=(1/m)\sum_{i=1}^m y_i(T)$ is their consensus average,
and Theorem \ref{thm:z_opt} implies that $f(z(T))$ converges to $f(x^*)$ at rate of $O(1/\sqrt{T})$.
It is known that $O(1/\sqrt{T})$ is the optimal rate
for stochastic gradient algorithms in centralized setting,
and hence these two Theorems suggest an encouraging
fact that such rate can be retained even if the problem becomes much more complicated,
i.e., the gradients are stochastic and delayed, and the computation is carried out in decentralized setting.
{To retain convergence in this complex setting, we employed a diminishing step size policy
as commonly used in stochastic optimization. Such step size policy results in a convergence rate
of $O(1/\sqrt{T})$ even without delays and randomness in gradients.
Furthermore, due to errors and uncertainties in delayed and stochastic gradients, the iterates
may be directed further apart from solution during computations. As a consequence, the
constant in the estimated convergence rate appears to depend on the bound of set $X$ rather than
the distance between initial guess and solution set
as in the setting with non-delayed and non-stochastic gradients.}
\section{Numerical Experiments}\label{sec:experiment}
In this section, we test algorithm \eqref{eqn:algupd_node}
on decentralized consensus optimization problem \eqref{eqn:deccon}
with delayed stochastic gradients
using a number of synthetic and real datasets.
The structure of network $\mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{E})$ and objective function in \eqref{eqn:deccon}
are explained for each dataset, followed by performance evaluation
shown in plots of objective function $f(z(T))$ and disagreement
$\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$ versus the iteration number $T$,
where $y_i(T)=(1/T)\sum_{t=1}^{T}x_i(t+1)$ is the running average of
$x_i(t)$ in algorithm \eqref{eqn:algupd_node} at each node $i$, and
$z(T)=(1/m)\sum_{i=1}^{m} y_i(T)$ is the consensus average
at iteration $T$.
\subsection{Test on synthetic data}
We first test on three different types of objective functions using
synthetic datasets. In particular, we apply algorithm \eqref{eqn:algupd_node}
to decentralized least squares, decentralized robust least squares,
and decentralized logistic regression problems
with different delay and stochastic error combinations.
Then we compare the performance of the algorithm with and without delays
and stochastic errors in gradients.
The performance of the algorithm on different network size $m$
and time comparison with synchronous algorithm are also presented.
In the first set of tests on three different objective functions, we
simulate a network of regular $5\times 5$ 2-dimensional (2D) lattice of size $m=25$.
We set dimension of unknown $x$ to $n=10$ and generate an $\hat{x}\in\mathbb{R}^n$
using MATLAB built-in function \texttt{rand}, and set the $\ell_\infty$ radius
of $X$ to $R=1$. For each node $i$, we generate matrices $A_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i\times n}$ with $p_i=5$
using \texttt{randn}, and normalize each column into unit $\ell_2$ ball in $\mathbb{R}^{p_i}$ for
$i=1,\dots,m$.
Then we simulate
$b_i=A_i\hat{x}+\epsilon_i$ where $\epsilon_i$ is generated by
\texttt{randn} with mean $0$ and standard deviation $0.001$.
For decentralized least squares problem,
we set the objective function to $f_i(x)=(1/2)\|A_ix-b_i\|^2$ at node $i$.
Therefore the Lipschitz constant of $\nabla f_i$ is $L_i=\|A_i^{\top}A_i\|_2$,
and we further set $L=\max_{1\leq i\leq m}\{L_i\}$.
The initial guess $x_i(0)$ is set to $0$ for all $i$.
For each iteration $t$, the delay $\tau_i(t)$ at each node $i$ is uniformly
drawn from integers $1$ to $B$ with $B=5$, $10$ and $20$.
For given $t$, the stochastic gradient is simulated by
setting $\nabla F_i(x_i(t);\xi_i(t))=A_i^{\top}(A_ix_i(t)-b_i)+\xi_i(t)$
where $\xi_i(t)$ is generated by \texttt{randn} with mean $0$
and standard deviation $\sigma$ set to $0.01$ and $0.05$.
We run our algorithm using step size $\alpha(t)=1/(2L+2\eta\sqrt{t})$ with
$\eta=0.01$.
The objective function $f(z(T))-f^*$ and disagreement
$\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$ versus the iteration number $T$ are plotted in
the top row of Figure \ref{fig:synthetic},
where the reference optimal objective $f^*=\min_{x\in X} \sum_{i=1}^mf_i(x)$ is computed
using centralized Nesterov's accelerated gradient method \cite{Nesterov:1983a,Tseng:2008a}.
In the two plots, we observe that both $f(z(T))-f^*$
and disagreement $\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$ decays to 0
as justified by our theoretical analysis in Section \ref{sec:convergence}.
In general, we observe that delays with larger bound $B$
and/or larger standard deviation $\sigma$ in stochastic gradient
yield slower convergence, as expected.
We also tested on two different objective functions: robust least squares
and logistic regression.
In robust least squares, we apply \eqref{eqn:algupd_node} to the decentralized
optimization problem \eqref{eqn:deccon} where the objective function is set to
\begin{equation}
f_i(x):=\sum_{j=1}^{p_i}h_i^{j}(x),\ \mbox{where }h_i^{j}(x)=
\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{2}|(a_i^{j})^{\top}x-b_i^{j}|^2 & \mbox{if } |(a_i^{j})^{\top}x-b_i^{j}|\leq\delta\\
\delta (|(a_i^{j})^{\top}x-b_i^{j}|-\frac{\delta}{2}) & \mbox{if }|(a_i^{j})^{\top}x-b_i^{j}|>\delta
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $(a_i^{j})^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^n$ is the $j$-th row of matrix $A_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i\times n}$,
and $b_i^{j}\in\mathbb{R}$ is the $j$-th component of $b_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i}$ at each node $i$.
In this test, we simulate network $\mathcal{G}=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{E})$ and set
$A_i$, $b_i$, $m$, $n$, $R$, $x_i(0)$ the same way as in the decentralized
least squares test above, and set the parameter of the Huber norm in the robust least squares $\delta=0.05$.
The stochastic gradient is given by
$\nabla F_i(x;\xi_i(t))=\sum_{j=1}^{p_i}\nabla h_i^j(x)+\xi_i(t)$
where $\xi_i(t)$ is generated as before with
$\sigma$ set to $0.01$ and $0.05$. Lipschitz constants $L_i$ and $L$ are determined as
in the previous test.
The settings of $\eta$ and $\tau_i(t)$ remain the same as well.
The objective function $f(z(T))-f^*$ and disagreement $\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$
are plotted in the middle row of Figure \ref{fig:synthetic}.
In these two plots, we observe similar convergence behavior as
in the test on the decentralized least squares problem above.
For the decentralized logistic regression, we generate $\hat{x}$, $\epsilon_i$ and $A_i$ the same way as before,
and set $b_i=\text{sign}(A_i\hat{x}+\epsilon_i)\in\{\pm1\}^{p_i}$ ($\text{sign}(0):=1$).
Now the objective function $f_i$ at node $i$ is set to
\begin{equation}
f_i(x)=\sum_{j=1}^{p_i}\left(\log[1+\exp((a_i^{j})^{\top}x)]-b_i^j(a_i^{j})^{\top}x\right),
\end{equation}
where $(a_i^{j})^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^n$ is the $j$-th row of matrix $A_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i\times n}$,
and $b_i^{j}\in\mathbb{R}$ is the $j$-th component of $b_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i}$.
Then we perform \eqref{eqn:algupd_node}
to solve this problem in the network $\mathcal{G}$ above.
{Since $\nabla^2f_i(x)=\sum_{j}[\exp((a_i^{j})^{\top}x)/(1+\exp((a_i^{j})^{\top}x))^2]\cdot a_i^{j}(a_i^{j})^{\top}
\leq (1/4)\cdot\sum_j a_i^{j}(a_i^{j})^{\top}=(1/4)\cdot A_i^{\top}A_i$, there is
$\|\nabla f_i(x)-\nabla f_i(x')\|\leq (1/4)\cdot \|A_i^{\top}A_i\| \|x-x'\|$ for all $x,x'\in\mathbb{R}^n$.
Therefore we set $L_i=\|A_i^{\top}A_i\|_2/4$.}
The settings of the delay $\tau_i(t)$, $\eta$, and initial value
$x_i(0)$ remain the same as before. The stochastic error level $\sigma$ is set to $0.1$ and $0.5$.
The objective function $f(z(T))-f^*$ and disagreement $\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$
are plotted in the bottom row of Figure \ref{fig:synthetic},
where similar convergence behavior as in the previous tests can be observed.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/synthetic/ls_obj}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/synthetic/ls_dis}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/synthetic/rls_obj}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/synthetic/rls_dis}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/synthetic/logistic_obj}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/synthetic/logistic_dis}
\caption{Test on synthetic decentralized least-squares (top), robust least-squares (middle),
and logistic regression (bottom) for different
levels of delay $B$ and standard deviation in stochastic
gradient $\sigma$. Left: objective function $f(z(T))-f^*$ versus
iteration number $T$, where $f^*=f(x^*)$ is the optimal
value. Right: disagreement $\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$ versus
iteration number $T$.}
\label{fig:synthetic}
\end{figure}
We also compared the performance of decentralized gradient descent method
with and without delay and stochasticity in the gradients.
In this test, we synthesized networks and data in the same way as
in the decentralized least squares test above.
In addition, we plotted the result of $\tau_i(t)=0$ for all $i=1,\dots,m$ and
$\sigma=0$ is for comparison.
These results are shown in the top row of Figure \ref{fig:compare},
The objective function value (top left) and disagreement (top right)
both decay sightly faster when there are no delay and stochastic
error as shown in Figure \ref{fig:compare}, which is within expectations.
We further tested the performance when the network size varies.
In this experiment, we used four 2D lattice networks, with sizes $m=5^2,10^2,15^2,20^2$.
The size of $x$ and $A_i$ at each node are the same as before.
The objective function value (middle left) and disagreement (middle right)
both decays, while it appears that network with smaller size decays faster, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:compare}.
{To demonstrate effectiveness of asynchronous consensus, we
applied EXTRA \cite{Shi:2015a}, a state-of-the-arts synchronous decentralized consensus optimization method,
to the same data generated in decentralized least squares problem with network size $m=100$ and
$\sigma=0$ (no stochastic error in gradients).
We draw computing times of these 100 nodes as
independent random variables between $[.001,.500]$ms every gradient evaluation. The synchronous
algorithm EXTRA needs to wait for the slowest node to finish computation and then start a new iteration,
whereas in the asynchronous algorithm \eqref{eqn:algupd_node} the nodes communicate
with neighbors every 0.01ms using updates obtained by delayed gradients .
We plotted the objective function $f(z(T))-f^*$ and disagreement $\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$
versus running time in the bottom row of Figure \ref{fig:compare},
which show that the asynchronous updates can be more time efficient by not waiting
for slowest node in each iteration.}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/compare/comp_nondelay_ls_obj}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/compare/comp_nondelay_ls_dis}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/compare/comp_var_m_ls_obj}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/compare/comp_var_m_ls_dis}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/compare/comp_time_obj}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/compare/comp_time_dis}
\caption{Test on synthetic decentralized least-squares with and without delay/stochasticity (top)
and varying network size (bottom).
Left: objective function $f(z(T))$ versus
iteration number $T$.
Right: disagreement $\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$ versus iteration number $T$.}
\label{fig:compare}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Test on real data}
We apply algorithm \eqref{eqn:algupd_node} to seismic tomography
where the data is collected and then processed by the nodes (sensors)
in a wireless sensor network. In brief, underground seismic activities (such as earthquakes)
generate acoustic waves (we use P-wave here) which travel through
the materials and are detected by the sensors placed on the ground.
An explanatory picture of seismic tomography using a sensor network is shown in Figure \ref{fig:seismic_tomography}.
After data preprocessing, sensor $i$ obtains a matrix $A_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i\times n}$
and a vector $b_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i}$, and hence an objective $f_i(x)=(1/2)\|A_ix-b_i\|^2$
for $i=1,\dots,m$.
Here $(A_i)_{kl}$, the $(k,l)$-th entry of matrix $A_i$, is the distance that the wave generated by
$k$-th seismic activity travels through pixel $l$, for $k=1,\dots,p_i$ ($p_i$ is the total number of
seismic activities) and $l=1,\dots,n$ ($n$ is the total number of pixels
in the image), and $(b_i)_k$, the $k$-th component of $b_i$, is the total time that
the wave travels from the source of $k$-th seismic activity to the sensor $i$.
Then $x_l$, the $l$-th component of $x\in\mathbb{R}^n$, represents the unknown ``slowness''
(reciprocal of the velocity of the traveling wave) at that location (pixel) $l$. The sensors then collaboratively solve for the image $x$ that minimizes the sum of their objective functions, under the constraint that only neighbor nodes may communicate during the computation process, since wireless signal transmission can only occur within a limited geographical range.
Once $x$ is reconstructed from $\min_xf(x)=\sum_{i=1}^mf_i(x)$,
the material (e.g., rock, sand, oil, or magma) at each pixel $l$ can be identified by the value of $x_l$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/demo/seismic_tomography}
\caption{Seismic tomography of an active volcano using wireless sensor network.
When there is a seismic activity (e.g., an earthquake) happens underground,
its acoustic waves (blue solid curves with arrows) travel to the ground surface and are detected by the
sensors (green triangles). Then the sensors communicate wirelessly
to reconstruct the entire image, where each square (tan, pink or red) represents
a pixel of the image $x\in\mathbb{R}^n$.}
\label{fig:seismic_tomography}
\end{figure}
The first dataset consists of a simple and connected network $G$ with $m=32$ nodes
where each node has $3$ neighbors, and
$A_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i\times n}$ and $b_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i}$
where the number of seismic events is $p_i=512$ and
the size of a 2D image $x$ to be reconstructed is $n=64^2=4096$.
Since the matrix by stacking all $A_i$ is still underdetermined, we
employ an objective function with Tikhonov regularization as
$f_i(x)=(1/2)(\|A_ix-b_i\|^2+\mu\|x\|^2)$ at each node $i$
where $\mu$ is set to $0.1$.
Note that more adaptive regularizers of $x$, such as $\ell_1$ and total variation (TV)
which result in a nonsmooth objective function, will be explored in future research.
We apply algorithm \eqref{eqn:algupd} with
bound $B$ of delays set to $5$, $10$, and $20$ and
standard deviation $\sigma$ of stochastic gradient to $0.5$ and $0.05$.
We run our algorithm using step size $\alpha(t)=1/(2L+2\eta\sqrt{t})$ with
$\eta$
that minimizes the constant of $1/\sqrt{T}$ term in Theorem \ref{thm:z_opt}.
The objective function $f(z(T))$ and disagreement
$\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$ versus the iteration number $T$ are plotted in
the top row of Figure \ref{fig:real}, where convergence of both
quantities can be observed.
The second seismic dataset contains a connected
network $G$ of size $m=50$ where each node has $3$ neighbors,
and matrices $A_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i\times n}$ and $b_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i}$
where $p_i=800$ and the size of 3D image $x$ to be reconstructed is $n=32^3=32768$.
We use the same objective function with Tikhonov regularization as before
with $\mu=0.01$. Other parameters are set the same as in the previous
test on a 2D seismic image. The settings for $B$ and $\sigma$ remain the same.
The objective function $f(z(T))$ and disagreement
$\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$ versus the iteration number $T$ are plotted in
the middle row of Figure \ref{fig:real}, where similar convergence behavior can be observed.
The last seismic dataset consists of a connected
network $G$ of size $m=10$ where the average node degree is $5$,
and matrices $A_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i\times n}$ and $b_i\in\mathbb{R}^{p_i}$
where $p_i=1,816$ and the size of 3D image $x$ to be reconstructed is
$n=160\times 200\times 24=768,000$.
In this test, we employ objective
$f_i(x)=(1/2)(\|A_ix-b_i\|^2+\mu\|Dx\|^2)$ where
$\mu=0.1$ and $D$ is the discrete gradient operator.
Other parameters are set the same as in the previous
two seismic datasets. The bound $B$ of delay is set to $4$, $8$, and $16$,
and standard deviation of stochastic gradient $\sigma$ is set to 1e-4 and
5e-4.
The objective function $f(z(T))$ and disagreement
$\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$ versus the iteration number $T$ are plotted in
the last row of Figure \ref{fig:real}.
The reconstructed image is displayed in the right panel of Figure \ref{fig:mshimage}.
By comparing with the solution obtained by centralized LSQR solver (left),
we can see the image is faithfully reconstructed on a decentralized network with
delayed stochastic gradients.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.4\textwidth]{figures/real/64obj}
\includegraphics[width=.4\textwidth]{figures/real/64dis}
\includegraphics[width=.4\textwidth]{figures/real/32obj}
\includegraphics[width=.4\textwidth]{figures/real/32dis}
\includegraphics[width=.4\textwidth]{figures/real/mshobj}
\includegraphics[width=.4\textwidth]{figures/real/mshdis}
\caption{Tests on real seismic image reconstruction problems
with $2D$ image with $n=64^2$ (top), $3D$ image with $n=32^3$ (middle),
and $3D$ image with $n=160\times 200\times 24$ (bottom) for different
levels of delay $B$ and standard deviation in stochastic
gradient $\sigma$. Left: objective function $f(z(T))$ versus
iteration number $T$. Optimal value indicates $f^*:=f(x^*)$.
Right: disagreement $\sum_{i=1}^m \|y_i(T)-z(T)\|^2$ versus
iteration number $T$.}
\label{fig:real}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/real/lsqr500}
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{figures/real/xddgd}
\caption{Cross section of a reconstructed 3D seismic image generated by a centralized LSQR solver (left)
and decentralized algorithm with delayed stochastic gradient \eqref{eqn:algupd_node}
with $B=4$ and $\sigma=10^{-4}$ (right).}
\label{fig:mshimage}
\end{figure}
\section{Concluding Remarks}\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we analyzed the convergence of decentralized delayed
stochastic gradient descent method as in \eqref{eqn:algupd_node}
for solving the consensus optimization \eqref{eqn:deccon}.
The algorithm takes into consideration that the nodes in the network
privately hold parts of the objective
function and collaboratively solve for the consensus
optimal solution
of the total objective while they can only communicate with their immediate neighbors,
as well as the delays of gradient information in real-world networks
where the nodes cannot be fully synchronized.
We show that, as long as the random delays are bounded in expectation
and a proper diminishing step size policy is employed,
the iterates generated by the decentralized gradient decent method
converge to a consensus solution.
Convergence rates of both objective and consensus were derived.
Numerical results on a number of synthetic and real data were also presented
for validation.
|
\section{Introduction}
The most fundamental building blocks of galaxies, stars, are born within clouds of gas and dust and during their lives they enrich the gas and the interstellar medium (ISM) with heavy elements, magnetic fields, and cosmic rays, all of which strongly affect the subsequent formation of stars and their host galaxy. Star formation feedback is important because it can suppress the formation of new stars by removing the surrounding gas via strong winds. On the other hand, it can trigger the formation of more stars, e.g., in gas condensed in supernova shells (e.g., Hensler 2010). The star formation feedback is important because it can re-distribute the gas and drive outflows in galaxies, changing the energetics of the ISM and the host galaxy. To understand the evolution and appearance of galaxies it is therefore crucial to study the ISM/star formation interplay in galaxies. Most of our information about the ISM relates to its massive component, the gas and its various phases. Its interplay with star formation can be addressed through the famous Kennicutt-Schmidt relation between the rate of star formation and the gas density. However, not much is known about the most energetic ISM components, the cosmic rays and magnetic fields, and their role in structure formation in galaxies.
\subsection{Radio Continuum Emission: An Ideal SFR Tracer}
Radio continuum emission, as a tracer of the star formation rate (SFR), has been used frequently in the literature ever since the discovery of its tight correlation with the infrared emission in galaxies (see Condon 2002, and references therein), even though some authors have raised the possibility of a conspiracy of several factors tightening the radio-IR correlation (Bell 2003, Lacki et al. 2003).
Resolved observations of nearby galaxies show that the thermal and the nonthermal components of the radio continuum emission, mapped at $\gtrsim$ 200 pc linear resolutions, are both strong in star forming regions (Tabatabaei et al. 2007, 2013a, 2013b) . The separated nonthermal radio maps offer a direct basis for using the nonthermal radio continuum emission as a dust-unbiased SFR tracer in galaxies. This is understandable as massive star formation activities such as supernova explosions, their shocks, and their remnants increase the number density of high-energy cosmic ray electrons (CREs) and/or accelerate them, on the one hand, and amplify the turbulent magnetic field strength, on the other. The net effect of these processes is strong nonthermal emission in or around star forming regions. Compared to the thermal emission, the contribution to the diffuse extended emission of the nonthermal component could be larger than that of the thermal component, depending on the diffusion of the cosmic ray electrons and the magnetic fields in the ISM (Tabatabaei et al. 2013b) . This leads to a sub-linear correlation between the nonthermal emission and the IR ( another SFR tracer) at sub-kpc resolutions, and a super-linear correlation globally (Heesen et al. 2014). Although our recent study shows no significant difference between the thermal and nonthermal emission when comparing them with hybrid SFR tracers such as H$\alpha$+24$\mu$m and FUV+ 24$\mu$m in the KINGFISH (Kennicutt et al. 2011) galaxy sample (Fig. 1, see Tabatabaei et al., in prep.). Hence, globally, the nonthermal emission is a good SFR tracer, similar to the thermal emission.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics*{fig1_a.ps}\includegraphics*{fig1_b.ps}}
\caption[]{Star formation rates of the KINGFISH sample obtained using the H$\alpha$+24$\mu$m (red), FUV+24$\mu$m (blue), and 24$\mu$m (black) tracers against the thermal (left) and nonthermal (right) radio continuum star formation rate tracers. The radio SFR calibrations were obtained following Murphy et al. (2011).}
\label{fig:fig3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Star Formation and Cosmic Rays}
Supernova explosions/remnants are considered to be the main source of cosmic rays. CREs can also be generated by the interaction of cosmic ray nucleons and ISM gas. These particles are energetically important, containing at least as much energy density as the interstellar gas and the magnetic fields. They must therefore play an important role in the regulation of star formation (e.g., Jubelgas et al. 2008). CREs are expected to lose their energy at different rates depending on various cooling mechanisms in galaxies. Observationally, this is confirmed by mapping the spectral index of the nonthermal radio emission (with a power-law spectrum) in M33 and NGC~6946 (Tabatabaei et al. 2007, 2013a). In star forming regions, the observed nonthermal spectrum (or the CRE energy index) is flat with a typical index of that expected theoretically for supernova remnants (~0.5-0.6). This means that CREs are more energetic in star forming regions due to recent injection or acceleration by strong shocks. Star formation could also influence the global spectrum of the CRE population in galaxies. The radio Spectral Energy Distribution (SED) survey of the KINGFISH galaxies indicates that the global nonthermal spectral index is flatter in more star forming galaxies (Tabatabaei et al., in prep.).
\section{Star Formation and Magnetic Fields}
Star formation and feedback in galaxies cannot be understood when one neglects the connection between the magnetic fields and star formation. Radio synchrotron maps of galaxies, along with their polarization data, have enabled us to map the strength of the ordered, turbulent, and the total magnetic fields (Tabatabaei et al. 2008 and 2013a). We showed that the strength of the total and turbulent magnetic fields is correlated with the SFR surface density (Fig. 2). This correlation could be due to amplification of the turbulent magnetic field in star forming regions. Whether this enhanced magnetic field affects the formation of new stars will be addressed in our M33 cloud-scale radio continuum survey, being performed with the Karl Jansky VLA in the C and L bands.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{9cm}{!}{\includegraphics*{fig2.ps}}
\caption[]{Resolved magnetic field strength vs. the star formation rate in NGC 6946 (Tabatabaei et al. 2013a). Blue symbols show the turbulent magnetic field, red symbols the ordered magnetic field (shifted by -0.4 along the Y axis), and purple symbols the total magnetic field (shifted by +0.4 along the Y axis). The ordered magnetic field does not seem to be correlated with the SFR, instead it is connected to the large-scale dynamics of galaxies (Tabatabaei et al. 2016). }
\label{fig:fig3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Cloud-Scale EVLA Survey of Star Formation and Feedback in M33}
M33 is a Local Group galaxy with slightly sub-Solar metallicity, which makes it an ideal stepping stone to less regular and lower-metallicity objects such as dwarf galaxies and, probably, young-universe objects. We have performed a wide-band full-polarization mosaic of M33 with the EVLA in the 1-2 GHz L-band covering a one square degree area around the galaxy center, and in the 4.5-6.5 GHz C-band covering the star forming disk (inner 20' x 20' disk) at ~10'' resolution, comparable to the resolution of the IRAM 30-m CO(2-1) data (Braine et al. 2010, Gratier et al. 2010). This resolution allows mapping the cosmic ray electron energy index at a level about 9 times better than before (Tabatabaei et al. 2007). Using this dataset and taking full advantage of the Herschel M33 Extended Survey (HerM33es, Kramer et al. 2010) and Spitzer data, we uncover different phases of star formation from young stellar objects to supernovae, study the role of magnetic fields in molecular cloud formation and star formation, and dissect the star formation feedback on scales of giant molecular clouds (GMC) and larger.
\subsection{Radio Continuum Emission \& GMC-Scale Star Formation Rate}
As the first step, we have investigated the use of the radio continuum emission as an SFR tracer on GMC scales by comparing the EVLA radio data with the SFR traced using the MIPS 24$\mu$m data. An almost linear correlation holds between the SFR surface density and the 6 GHz radio luminosity density. The GMC-scale correlation agrees well with the global correlation found for the KINGFISH galaxy sample.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{9cm}{!}{\includegraphics*{fig3.ps}}
\caption[]{M33- The radio continuum emission at 6 GHz (contours) observed with the EVLA and the CO(2-1) line emission (color) at GMC-scale spatial resolution ($\sim$40 pc). }
\label{fig:fig3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Radio-CO Correlation}
Comparing the maps of the radio continuum and the CO(2-1) line emission, we found very good agreement (Fig. 3). The pixel-by-pixel correlation is characterized by a Spearman rank coefficient of 0.75 $\pm$ 0.03 (Fig. 4). A tight radio-CO correlation was also found in other galaxies such as M51 (Schinnerer et al. 2013). This correlation could be due to the thermal free-free emission, if the neutral molecular gas is well mixed with the ionized gas or if their energy sources are the same. The correlation could, on the other hand, be due to the nonthermal component of the radio continuum emission if a balance holds between the cosmic ray/magnetic field and molecular gas pressures on scales of 40\,pc and larger. This is an important suggestion which, if true, would explain the unexpectedly tight radio-FIR correlation on small scales in this galaxy (Tabatabaei et al. 2013b, the radio-FIR correlation usually breaks down on a sub-kpc scale in galaxies). Moreover, it could also indicate the importance of the magnetic fields in the ISM structure formation with possible consequences for the formation of stars. Separation of the thermal/nonthermal radio components is required to address this question. Wide-band observations at different radio bands are required to decompose the thermal/nonthermal components taking into account the possible curvatures in the nonthermal SED. The radio SED synthesis should be possible with our EVLA multi/wide-band observations and spectral synthesis. The thermal/nonthermal maps of M33 will be obtained just using the radio data and at about 9 times higher resolution than that presented in Tabatabaei et al. (2007). This will also allow identification of different phases of massive star formation (embedded young star clusters, HII regions, and SNRs) and their impact on the magnetized ISM.
Such a resolved spectral synthesis will be routine with the SKA, even for distant galaxies, taking into account its frequency coverage from 70 MHz to 25 GHz in three bands (low: 70-450 MHz, mid: 0.3-10 GHz, and high: 5-25 GHz), sensitivity, survey speed, image fidelity, temporal resolution, and field of view (Garrett et al. 2010).
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{8cm}{!}{\includegraphics*{fig4.ps}}
\caption[]{The pixel-by-pixel correlation between the molecular gas traced with the CO(2-1) emission (Fig.3) and the radio continuum emission at 6\,GHz. Blue points show the binned version of the data (green points). }
\label{fig:fig3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
|
\section{ Introduction}
The study of topological phases of matter
has been one of the most remarkable achievements in condensed matter physics over the {past decade}. {Recently, this line of thinking has been extended from gapped systems to semimetallic systems}, such as Weyl semimetals (WSM) \cite{xwan11,xugang11,burkov_balents2011,YLR2011,Xu613,Lv2015,Xu:2015aa,Lv:2015aa,Yang:2015aa,Xue1501092,Liu:2016aa,Belopolski2016,Weng:2016aa,Liang:2016aa,Huang:2015aa, FengNbP,Soluyanov:2015aa,type2a,type2b,type2c,type2d,type2e,bhyanPRB2015} and Dirac semimetals \cite{Wang_Dirac2012,Wang_Dirac2013,Liu864,cava2014,nem_dirac,jim2015}.
{The bulk band structure of WSMs is characterized by
Weyl nodes that result from the linear touching of two bands in three dimensions. The low energy theory of the WSM is dominated by relativistic Weyl fermions around the Weyl points. According to the Nielsen-Ninomiya theorem \cite{NIELSEN198120,NIELSEN1981173}, in any lattice models of the WSM, the Weyl points can only appear in pairs of opposite chiralities.}
A WSM can also be viewed as the stacking of two-dimensional (2D) Chern insulators with Chern number $C$ in the momentum ($\bm{k}$) space~\cite{YLR2011}.
Since a Weyl point is a source or sink of Berry fluxes, $C$ changes by one as the $\bm k$-space slice goes through a Weyl point.
WSMs exhibit chiral anomaly in the form of the anomalous Hall effect and the chiral magnetic effect~\cite{aji2012,12a,Son_2012,Grushin_2012,burkov_theta,hosur2013,goswami2013}. Besides, on its surfaces there exist ``Fermi arcs"~\cite{xwan11,Belopolski2016} that terminate at the surface projections of the Weyl {points} of opposite chiralities [see Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a)], which has been recently observed in transition metal pnictides~\cite{Lv2015,Lv:2015aa,Yang:2015aa,Xue1501092,Liu:2016aa,Belopolski2016,Weng:2016aa,Liang:2016aa,Huang:2015aa, Xu:2015aa,FengNbP}.
An interesting extension to the WSM is the
Weyl metal (WM), where Weyl points evolve into 2D Fermi surfaces (FS) upon a shift in chemical potential.
Each FS encloses a Weyl point, and each FS is spin-textured.
At low temperatures, with a small attractive interaction these FS's are subject to a number of instabilities in the particle-particle channel.
One such instability is towards a uniform superconducting (SC) order~\cite{Bednik2015,LuTanaka2015,Lihaldane:2015aa,Wang:2016aa,Cho_weyl_2012}. On the other hand, fermions on a given FS can form intra-FS pairs, leading to a pair-density-wave (PDW) state~\cite{Cho_weyl_2012,Bednik2015,susy_weyl,gilbert2016,rodrigo2015,you2}, which is similar to Fulde-Ferrel-Larkin-Ovchinnikov (FFLO) state but without an external field. Such a state has also been proposed and searched for in cuprate superconductors and many microscopic models~\cite{fradkin,palee,agterberg,pdw1,pdw2,pdw_pepin,davis_last}. However, it is usually secondary to the uniform SC order~\cite{Bednik2015}, at least at weak coupling.
On the other hand, in the presence of the SC order, the surface Fermi arc was found to receive an interesting reconstruction due to the change of the bulk band structure~\cite{LuTanaka2015,Lihaldane:2015aa}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.81\columnwidth]{weyl.eps}
\caption{(Color online) (a) The bulk and surface Brillouin zones (BZ) of a WSM, with two Weyl {points} shown in blue ($W_{+}$) and green ($W_-$) {respectively}. Given a $k_z$, {each} 2D {slice} can be viewed as a Chern insulator with Chern number $C$. The surface band structure exhibits Fermi arcs (denoted by red lines), each connecting the surface projections (denoted by $w_{\pm}$) of the bulk Weyl points. (b) The BZ of a $\mathcal{C}$-WM, with a hole FS (blue) and an electron FS (green), denoted as FS$_{\pm}$. Both FS$_\pm$ are spin-textured, as shown by the arrows. The surface Fermi arcs terminate on the surface projections of FS$_\pm$. (c) Simulation of the ARPES data on a $yz$-surface for a $\mathcal{C}$-WM with $Q=\pi/2$, showing the Fermi arc that terminates at the projections of the FS$_{\pm}$. For clarity the color coding is at logarithmic scale.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
In this paper, we study the density-wave instabilities in a particle-hole symmetric Weyl metal ($\mathcal{C}$-WM) and analyze the reconstruction of electronic structures both in the bulk and on the surface. In such a $\mathcal{C}$-WM, the energies of the two Weyl points are oppositely shifted by an amount of $b_0$,
rendering an electron-like FS (denoted by FS$_{+}$) and a hole-like FS (denoted by FS$_{-}$), as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(b).
Owing to the $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry, the two FS's, which are separated in momentum by $2\bm Q$, are well nested. At low temperatures, particle-hole instabilities between FS$_\pm$ are induced by a repulsive interaction.
In particular, we consider
three spin-density-wave orders (SDW$_{i}$, with spin indices $i=x,y,z$) and a charge-density-wave order (CDW), all with the same wavevector $2\bm Q$.
For an attractive interaction, uniform SC does {\it not} develop due to the anti-nesting of relevant FS regions. In this situation only two intra-FS pair-density-wave orders (PDW$_\pm$ for FS$_\pm$) with wavevectors $\pm 2\bm Q$ can develop. Thus, unlike many known cases, the leading weak-coupling instability in the particle-particle channel is unambiguously toward a PDW order.
We find that both PDW$_{\pm}$ and SDW$_z$ (the longitudinal SDW, where $z$ is parallel to $\bm{Q}$) gap out the full FS's, while the other orders leave gapless nodal lines on the FS's, as summarized in Table \ref{table:node}. The nodal structures of the SDW, CDW and PDW orders are in sharp contrast with that for the uniform SC order in a doped WM~\cite{Lihaldane:2015aa}, which was found to have at least two point nodes. We found this distinction actually has a topological origin related to the Berry flux through the Weyl FS's.
Since the density-wave orders that fully gap the FS's maximize the condensation energy, the leading instabilities are towards the SDW$_z$ for a repulsive interaction, and towards PDW$_\pm$ for an attractive interaction. We verify this via an explicit evaluation of the critical temperatures of all orders.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{fermiarc.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Surface states in a density-wave ordered $\mathcal{C}$-WM. The positions of the original FS's are still shown for comparison. (a): The surface Fermi lines (red) of a SDW$_z$ state. On each surface they pass the projections (denoted by $w_{\pm}$) of the Weyl point and extend beyond.
The case for the PDW state is similar. (b): The surface states of the CDW state. The bulk line nodes marked in solid lines project to in-gap drumhead bands on the $xy$-surfaces. (c): Simulation of the ARPES data on $yz$-surface for SDW$_z$ (left) and $xy$-surface for CDW (right). For simplicity we have set $2Q=\pi$, and the color intensity is at logarithmical scale. For the SDW$_z$ state, the spectral intensity of quasiparticles on the Fermi line becomes weaker outside the first folded BZ.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
We further analyze the fate of the surface states
in the presence of the density-wave orders.
For the SDW$_z$ state, the bulk is fully gapped and becomes a weak topological insulator. This means that the Fermi arc on each $yz$-surface of the SDW$_z$ state has nowhere to terminate. We show that the surface Fermi line, which in the $\mathcal{C}$-WM state terminates on the $yz$-surface projections of FS's [Fig.~\ref{fig1}(b) and (c)], now traverses the full surface $\bm k$-space [Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a)] in the SDW$_z$ state. For angular-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES) measurements, the spectral intensity of the surface Fermi line is weaker beyond the first folded Brillouin zones (BZ), due to vanishing quasiparticle spectral weights. Thus, the surface state as seen by ARPES still resembles an arc but no longer has sharp terminations, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a) and (c).
Moreover, due to the $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry, the new surface Fermi line necessarily passes the projections of the Weyl points $w_{\pm}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a).
For the PDW state, the surface Fermi line is similar to that in the SDW$_z$ case. Interestingly, {the zero modes at $w_{\pm}$ are Majorana modes} as a result of $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry in the Nambu space. The surface Fermi line characterizes a 2D chiral Fermi liquid on each surface. {These chiral surface states, together with the fully-gapped bulk, realizes a 3D anomalous Hall effect and support {dissipation-less} transport with a Hall conductivity $\sigma_H=e^2Q/h$ (Ref.\ \onlinecite{burkov_theta}) that is {\it independent} of the size of the material.} Near the onset of the SDW$_z$ or PDW, the order parameter fluctuations around their expectation values are soft. As such, the coupling between the surface chiral fermions with the near-critical bosonic modes are expected to give rise to a surface chiral non-Fermi liquid. Several interesting properties of the chiral non-Fermi liquid have been explored in details by Sur and Lee \cite{Sur_lee2014}. We argue that our results in $\mathcal{C}$-WM provide a natural mechanism for realizing such a system.
Although the CDW instability is not the leading one, it may emerge upon changing microscopic parameters, or simply externally introduced. Even when the CDW order is extrinsically induced, the topological band structure of the $\mathcal{C}$-WM still enforces the nodal line, thereby resulting in a line-nodal semimetal~\cite{BHB2011}.
We show that, besides the Fermi lines on $yz$-surfaces, there is one ``drumhead" band \cite{Chan:2015aa,bian_2016,Matsuura2013,Ramamurthy:2015aa} on each $xy$-surface with energies inside the CDW gap. The momentum range of the drumhead band in the 2D surface BZ corresponds to the $xy$-surface projection of the nodal lines [Fig.~\ref{fig2}(b) and (c)]. Moreover, if the system has a $\mathcal{TI}$ symmetry (a product of an anti-unitary operation and spatial inversion)~\cite{Ramamurthy:2015aa}, the two drumhead bands on the opposite surfaces are degenerate.
As a result, there exists a symmetry-protected topological charge density $j^0=\pm eb_0^2/(8\pi)$ on each $xy$-surface.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{section:model}, we study the bulk and surface states of a $\mathcal{C}$-Weyl metal.
In Sec.~\ref{section:bulk_of_cdw_sdw}, we study the CDW and SDW instabilities with a repulsive interaction and address their respective nodal structures in the bulk. In Sec.~\ref{section:bulk_of_pdw}, We analyze the PDW instability in the presence of a weak attractive interaction, and for comparison, we show the uniform SC does not emerge. In Sec.~\ref{section:LH}, we perform a systematic analysis of the structure of CDW, SDW, and PDW using a Berry flux argument, in comparison with an eariler study~\cite{Lihaldane:2015aa} done for the uniform SC order.
In Sec.~\ref{section:chiral_sdw_pdw} we present the structure of the chiral surface states of the SDW and PDW ordered bulk. Sec.~\ref{section:cdw} is devoted to the drumhead surface states of the CDW bulk and its topological properties.
Conclusions and possible relations to experiments are discussed in Sec.~\ref{section:conclusion}.
\section{Model of a $\mathcal{C}$-Weyl metal and Instabilities}\label{section:model}
\subsection{Lattice model of a $\mathcal{C}$-Weyl metal}
We begin with a simple two-band lattice Hamiltonian $H=\sum_{\bm k} \psi^\dagger({\bm k}) h({\bm k}) \psi({\bm k})$ for the $\mathcal{C}$-WM:
\begin{align}
\!\!h({\bm k})=&\sin k_x \sigma^x+\sin k_y \sigma^y+ \left(\cos k_z-\cos {Q}\right)\sigma^z/\sin Q\nonumber\\
&- (2-\cos k_x-\cos k_y)\sigma^z+b_0 {\sin k_z}/{ \sin{Q}}\,,
\label{lat}
\end{align}
where $\sigma^{x,y,z}$ are Pauli matrices for the spin.
The first four terms give rise to the two Weyl nodes $W_\pm$ at the BZ points $\pm \bm Q= (0,0, \pm Q)$ with chiralities $\chi=\mp 1$. The Chern number $C=1$ for $\bm k$-space slices with $|k_z|<Q$, and $C=0$ for those with $|k_z|>Q$.
The model breaks time-reversal symmetry, and inversion symmetry, but preserves instead a $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry:
$\mathcal{C}h^T (-{\bm k}) \mathcal{C}^{-1}=-h(\bm k),$
where ${\mathcal C}=\sigma^x$. The last term in Eq.~(\ref{lat}) shifts the energies of the two Weyl points by $\pm b_0$, and is known to give rise to the chiral magnetic effect~\cite{aji2012,12a,Son_2012,burkov_theta,Grushin_2012,hosur2013,goswami2013}. A similar two-band model has been shown by Burkov and Balents~\cite{burkov_balents2011} to emerge from a topological insulator -- trivial insulator (TI-SI) heterostructure, where
the last term of Eq.~(\ref{lat}) is generated by including the spin-orbit coupling between the TI-SI interfaces~\cite{burkov2012}. Such a term that is odd in momentum without a Pauli matrix structure was also analyzed in the context of the so-called ``type-II" Weyl semimetals~\cite{Soluyanov:2015aa,type2a,type2b,type2c,type2d,type2e,Liang:2016aa,xuzhangzhang2015}, where both electron and hole FS's exist. It has also been recently showed that the topology of the hole and electron FS's can also be induced by pressure~\cite{bhyanpressure}.
For the parameter region $b_0\ll Q$ that we focus on below, the low energy fermions can be described by expanding Eq.\ \eqref{lat} in $\bm k$-space around $W_\pm$. The resulting energies are given by $E_\lambda\approx\lambda\sqrt{p_x^2+p_y^2+p_z^2}+b_0\tau^z$, where $\lambda=\pm1$, $\bm p$ is the momentum deviation from $w_{\pm}$, and
$\tau^z=\pm 1$ distinguishes $w_{\pm}$.
There are two Weyl Fermi surfaces, each corresponding to $\tau^z=-\lambda=\pm 1$. For $\lambda=-\tau^z=1(-1)$ the Fermi velocity points outwards (inwards) from the encapsulated Weyl point and the corresponding FS is electron-like (hole-like). We denote the two FS's as FS$_\pm$. Both FS$_\pm$ are spin textured, as schematically shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig1}(b).
The two FS's are nested, as they have identical shape and opposite Fermi velocity orientations. Note that this nesting actually does not require the exact form of the lattice model (\ref{lat}), but rather is a general result of the $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry and linear expansion of the fermionic dispersion around Weyl points. Generically, the dispersion around $W_+$ is given by $h_+=b_0+k_{i}A_{ij}\sigma^j$, ($i,j=x,y,z$). According to the $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry, the dispersion around $W_-$ is then $h_-=-b_0 - k_{i} A_{ij} \tilde\sigma^j$, [$\tilde\sigma^i\equiv \mathcal{C}(\sigma^i)^T\mathcal{C}^{-1}$]. It is easy to verify the resulting FS$_\pm$ are nested.
\subsection{Fermi arcs on the surface of a $\mathcal{C}$-Weyl metal}
The surface Fermi arcs on the two opposite $yz$-surfaces, terminate on the projections of FS$_\pm$ [Fig.~\ref{fig1}(b),(c)]. The position of each Fermi arc is given by $k_y\approx\pm b_0 k_z/\sin Q$ in the small $b_0$ limit.
More concretely, we begin with Eq.~(\ref{lat}),
For a given $|k_z|<Q$, it is easy to see that the lower band of the 2D momentum space slice $h_{2D}(k_x,k_y)\equiv h(k_x,k_y,k_z)$ has Chern number $C=1$, due to a skyrmion configuration of the spin over the 2D Brillouin zone (BZ). As a result of the Chern number, if we consider open boundaries in $x$ direction, there exist chiral modes on the two edges.
The dispersion of the edge modes of each $k_z$ slice can be obtained in the continuum limit by standard procedures. In the continuum limit,
\begin{align}
h_{\rm cont}(\bm k)=k_x\sigma^x+k_y\sigma^y+m_z\sigma^z+b_z,
\end{align}
where $m_z=({\cos k_z -\cos Q})/{\sin Q}>0$ and $b_z=b_0\sin k_z/\sin Q$.
A boundary in $x$ direction {between the $\mathcal{C}$-WM and the vaccuum (which is equivalent to a trivial insulator)} can be modeled by a domain wall of $m_z$, namely $m_z(x)=-m_z\sgn(x)$, where $x<0$ is the $\mathcal{C}$-WM side. The continuum Hamiltonian becomes $h_{\rm cont}(x,k_y)=-i\partial_x \sigma^x+m_z(x)\sigma^z+k_y\sigma^y+b_z$. The eigenfunction of this Hamiltonian for the surface state is $\psi(x)=\psi_0\exp(\int^x m_z(x')dx')$ with $\sigma^y\psi^0=-\psi^0$. The energy eigenfunction, on the other hand, is given by
\begin{align}
E_{\rm surf}=-k_y+b_z=-k_y+b_0\sin k_z/\sin Q.
\end{align}
It is straightforward to obtain that for the opposite surface where $m_z(x)=m_z\sgn(x)$, $E'_{\rm surf}=k_y+b_z=k_y+b_0\sin k_z/\sin Q$.
The position of the surface Fermi arc is by definition given by $E_{\rm surf}=0$, and therefore for the fermi arcs localized on the two surfaces are given by, in the continuum limit $k_y\ll Q$,
\begin{align}
k_y=\pm b_0 k_z/\sin Q.
\end{align}
This result is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig1}. In Fig.~\ref{fig1}(c) as well as Fig.~\ref{fig2}(c), we have set $2Q=\pi$, $k_y=0$, $b_0= 0.3$ (in units where $v_F=1$) and $\rho=0.2$ and simulated the ARPES data.
\section{ Charge- and spin-density-wave orders in particle-hole channels} \label{section:bulk_of_cdw_sdw}
\subsection{Projective form factors and nodal structures}
Since FS$_\pm$ are well nested, with some small repulsive interaction~\cite{burkov_theta,nandkishore2014}, e.g., a screened Coulomb interaction, the $\mathcal{C}$-WM is intrinsically unstable in the particle-hole channel. Specifically, we consider density-wave orders with wavevector $2\bm Q$ that couple to fermions via terms
\begin{align}
\mathcal{H}_\rho&=\rho~\psi^\dagger(\bm p+\bm Q) \psi(\bm p-\bm Q)+h.c., \label{dw0}\\
\mathcal{H}_M^i&= M^i\psi^\dagger\!(\bm p+\bm Q) \sigma^i \psi(\bm p-\bm Q)+h.c.,
\label{dw}
\end{align}
where $\rho$ represents the amplitude of CDW order, and $M^i$ represent the amplitude of spin-density-wave orders (SDW$_i$) with spin orientation $i=x,y,z$. These density-wave orders has been introduced in WMs \cite{burkov_theta,franz2013} and WSMs~\cite{Wang2013axion,roy_sau2015,wclee2016,you_cho_hughes2016} in the study of chiral anomaly \cite{aji2012,12a,Son_2012,Grushin_2012,burkov_theta,hosur2013,goswami2013}. However, a detailed analysis of their intrinsic structures are still lacking.
Below we provide a systematic analysis of the instabilities towards these orders in the $\mathcal{C}$-WM.
Even though $M^i$ and $\rho$ are constants (as we will show via detailed calculations in next Subsection) in momentum, they project onto the spin-polarized FS$_{\pm}$ with different form factors. We dub the form factors on spin-textured FS's as ``projective form factors".
More specifically, we express the spin polarizations of the low energy fermions $c_{\pm}^\dagger(\bm p)$ on FS$_\pm$ as
$c_{\pm}^\dagger(\bm p)=\sum_\alpha \xi_{\pm,\alpha}(\hat{\bm p}) \psi_\alpha^\dagger(\bm p \pm \bm Q)$, where $\alpha$'s are spin indices. The spinor part of the Bloch wave function is given by
\begin{align}
\xi(\bm p \pm \bm Q)\equiv \xi_{\pm} (\hat {\bm p})=\[\sin \frac{\theta}{2},~ \pm \cos\frac{\theta}{2} \exp(-i\varphi) \]^T,\label{sup:eq3}
\end{align}
where $(\theta,\varphi)$ are defined as spherical coordinates via $\bm p=(b_0\sin\theta\cos\varphi , b_0\sin\theta\sin\varphi, b_0\cos\theta)$. The CDW and SDW Hamiltonians project onto low energy fermions $c_\pm$ as
$\bar{\mathcal{H}}_\rho= \rho\chi_\rho(\hat{\bm p}) c_+^\dagger(\bm p) c_-(\bm p)+h.c.\,$ and $
\bar{\mathcal{H}}_M^i = M^i\chi_M^i(\hat{\bm p}) c_+^\dagger(\bm p) c_-(\bm p)+h.c.
$. After simple math, we find that the {projective form factors} are given by:
\begin{align}
&\chi_{\rho}(\hat{\bm p})=\xi^\dagger_{+}(\hat{\bm p})\xi_{-}(\hat{\bm p})=-\cos\theta\,, \label{projective_rho}\\
& \chi_{M}^x(\hat{\bm p})=\xi^\dagger_{+}(\hat{\bm p})\sigma^x\xi_{-}(\hat{\bm p})=i\sin\theta\sin\varphi\,, \label{projective_mx} \\
&\chi_{M}^y(\hat{\bm p})=\xi^\dagger_{+}(\hat{\bm p})\sigma^y\xi_{-}(\hat{\bm p})=i\sin\theta\cos\varphi\,,\label{projective_my} \\
&\chi_{M}^z(\hat{\bm p})=\xi^\dagger_{+}(\hat{\bm p})\sigma^z\xi_{-}(\hat{\bm p})=1\,.\label{projective_mz}
\end{align}
It is clear that SDW$_z$ gaps out the full FS, while CDW and SDW$_{x,y}$ have line nodes~\cite{footnote}. We illustrate their nodal structures in Table \ref{table:node}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Bulk nodal structures of density-wave ordered Weyl metals. The positions of the nodal lines are marked by solid lines around an original spherical FS. The $x,y,z$ directions are the same as in Fig.~\ref{fig1}.}
\label{table:node}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
CDW & SDW$_x$ & SDW$_y$ & SDW$_z$ & PDW$_\pm$\\
\hline
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\columnwidth}{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{rho.eps}}\end{minipage}&
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\columnwidth}{\vspace{0.5mm}\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{mx.eps}}\end{minipage}&
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\columnwidth}{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{my.eps}}\end{minipage}&
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\columnwidth}{Full gap}\end{minipage} &
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.15\columnwidth}{Full gap}\end{minipage} \end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Linearalized gap equations and critical temperatures}
The nodal structures of the different orders in the particle-hole channel in Eqs.~(\ref{dw0},\ref{dw}) distinguish their respective critical temperatures. For a repulsive interaction, SDW$_z$ (i.e., the longitudinal SDW) has the highest critical temperatures among SDW and CDW orders, heuristically because it gaps out the full FS's (see Table \ref{table:node}) and maximizes
the condensation energy.
Below we perform a more rigorous analysis by directly solving the linearized gap equations for the SDW and CDW orders.
We analyze the longtitudinal SDW$_z$ order first. For the constant interaction repulsive $V$, we take and later verify the ansatz $M^z(\bm p)=M^z$, and the linear gap equation is given by
\begin{align}
M^z\sigma^z_{\alpha\beta}
=&-VT\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d^3\bm p}{(2\pi)^3}G_{\alpha\gamma}(\omega_m, \bm p+\bm Q)\nonumber\\
&\times G_{\delta\beta} (\omega_m, \bm p-\bm Q) M^z \sigma^z_{\gamma\delta},
\label{sup:gap}
\end{align}
where $G_{\alpha\beta}(\omega_m, \bm k)=\langle \mathcal{T} \psi_\alpha(\omega_m, \bm k) \psi_\beta^\dagger(\omega_m, \bm k) \rangle $ is the spin-dependent fermionic Green's function. $\omega_m$ is the fermionic Matsubara frequency. In practice for a given $\bm k$, only one of the two spin orientations of the fermion is at low energy and has a Fermi surface (FS)~\cite{wang_new}. This low-energy spin orientation is given by the spinor in Eq.~(\ref{sup:eq3}). Since the instabilities are dominantly driven by the nesting of the FS$_\pm$, we can safely project out the high energy spin polarization. Thus,
\begin{align}
G_{\alpha\beta}(\omega_m, \bm p\pm \bm Q)\equiv G_{\alpha\beta}^{\pm}(\omega_m, \bm p)=&-\frac{\xi_{\pm,\alpha}(\hat {\bm p})\xi_{\pm,\beta}^*(\hat {\bm p})}{i\omega_m\mp\epsilon(\bm p)},
\label{sup:G}
\end{align}
where $\xi_{\pm}(\bm p)\xi^*_{\pm}(\bm p)$ is the spin projection operator, and $\pm\epsilon(\bm p)$ is the fermionic dispersion for the electron (hole) FS. Plugging Eq.\ \eqref{sup:G} into Eq.\ \eqref{sup:gap}, we obtain
\begin{align}
M^z\sigma^z_{\alpha\beta}=&VN(0)T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{\omega_m^2+\epsilon^2}\int \frac{\sin\theta d\theta d\varphi}{4\pi}\nonumber\\
&\times\xi_{+,\alpha}(\hat {\bm p})\xi_{-,\beta}^*(\hat {\bm p})\chi_M^z(\hat {\bm p}) M^z,
\label{sup:gap2}
\end{align}
where $N(0)$ is the density of states on FS$_\pm$, and, $\chi_M^z(\hat {\bm p})=1$ is precisely the projective form factor given in Eq.~(\ref{projective_mz}). The angular integral in Eq.\ \eqref{sup:gap2} can be carried out as
\begin{align}
M^z\sigma^z=&VN(0)T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{\omega_m^2+\epsilon^2}\int \frac{\sin\theta d\theta d\varphi}{8\pi}\nonumber\\
&\times\[\begin{array}{cc} -\cos{\theta}+1&-\sin{\theta}e^{i\varphi}\\ \sin{\theta}e^{-i\varphi}& -\cos{\theta}-1 \end{array}\]
M^z,\nonumber\\
=&\frac{VN(0)}{2}T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{\omega_m^2+\epsilon^2}M^z\sigma^z.
\label{sup:gap3}
\end{align}
From Eq.\ \eqref{sup:gap3}, we see that the Pauli matrix structures from the l.h.s.\ and the r.h.s.\ indeed match. The factor 2 in the denominator is the manifestation of the fact that only one spin orientation of the fermions contributes to the instability.
The integral and summation over $\epsilon$ and $\omega_m$ produce the usual logarithmical divergence as $T\to 0$. By standard procedures, we obtain the critical temperature for $M^z$ to have a nontrivial solution is
\begin{align}
T_{c1}=\Lambda e^{-\frac{2}{N(0)V}}\equiv \Lambda e^{-{1}/{g}},
\label{sup:tc1}
\end{align}
where we have defined the dimensionless repulsive coupling $g\equiv N(0)V/2$.
The critical temperatures for other particle-hole instabilities can be similarly obtained. For the SDW$_x$ order $M^x(\bm p)=M^x$,
\begin{align}
M^x\sigma^x_{\alpha\beta}=&VN(0)T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{\omega_m^2+\epsilon^2}\int \frac{\sin\theta d\theta d\varphi}{4\pi}\nonumber\\
&\times\xi_{+,\alpha}(\hat {\bm p})\xi_{-,\beta}^*(\hat {\bm p})\chi_M^x(\hat {\bm p}) M^x\,
\label{sup:gap4}
\end{align}
and the only difference with Eq.\ \eqref{sup:gap2} lies in the projective form factor $\chi_M^x(\hat {\bm p})$ is given in Eq.~(\ref{projective_mx}). An angular integration similar to Eq.\ \eqref{sup:gap3} yields
\begin{align}
M^x\sigma^x=&VN(0)T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{\omega_m^2+\epsilon^2}\int \frac{\sin\theta d\theta d\varphi}{8\pi}\nonumber\\
&\times\[\begin{array}{cc} -\cos{\theta}+1&-\sin{\theta}e^{i\varphi}\\ \sin{\theta}e^{-i\varphi}& -\cos{\theta}-1 \end{array}\](i\sin\theta \sin\varphi)
M^x,\nonumber\\
=&\frac{VN(0)}{6}T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{\omega_m^2+\epsilon^2}M^x\sigma^x.
\label{sup:gap5}
\end{align}
We indeed find that the Pauli matrix structures match for both sides and the critical temperature is given by
\begin{align}
T_{c2}=\Lambda e^{-3/g}.
\label{sup:tc2}
\end{align}
It is straightforward to repeat the same procedure for CDW order $\rho$ and SDW$_y$ order $M^y$, and the only difference is that their projective form factors
$\chi_\rho=-\cos\theta$ and $\chi_{M}^y$ are given in Eq.~(\ref{projective_rho}) and (\ref{projective_my}) respectively. After performing the angular integral over the FS, we find that their critical temperatures are also given by
\begin{align}
T_{c2}=\Lambda \exp({-3/g}).
\end{align}
The result of our comparative analysis based on nodal structures of density-wave orders in the $\mathcal{C}$-WM can be formally extrapolated to the WSM limit ($b_0\to 0$), \emph{even if} both FS$_\pm$ and the line nodes reduce to points. Indeed, a renormalization group (RG) analysis in a WSM
\cite{nandkishore2014} has also identified the longitudinal SDW as the leading instability. However, due to the vanishing density of states at the Weyl points in the WSM limit,
the interaction in a WSM has to be strong enough in order to induce density-wave instabilities, and
strictly speaking, the weak coupling RG method they adopted becomes uncontrolled in this regime. Besides, the subleading SDW and CDW instabilities identified in our analysis are not present in their analysis.
\section{Pair-density wave orders in particle-particle channels}\label{section:bulk_of_pdw}
With some attractive interaction, e.g., from electron-phonon coupling, the $\mathcal{C}$-WM also has instabilities in the particle-particle channel. Unlike a case with either two electron FS's or two hole FS's \cite{Bednik2015,LuTanaka2015,Lihaldane:2015aa,Wang:2016aa,Cho_weyl_2012}, there is no instability towards a spatially uniform SC in the $\mathcal{C}$-WM, because the fermions that are paired for uniform SC have {\it opposite} energies. Nonetheless, there do exist intra-FS pairing instabilities~\cite{Bednik2015,Cho_weyl_2012}.
Since each FS is centered around a nonzero momentum $\pm\bm Q$, such pairing results in a non-uniform superconducting state with finite pairing momentum $\pm 2{\bm Q}$, i.e., the PDW$_\pm$ state~\cite{Bednik2015,LuTanaka2015,Lihaldane:2015aa,Wang:2016aa,Cho_weyl_2012}. The corresponding PDW$_{\pm}$ order parameters in FS$_\pm$ are given by $\phi_{\pm}\sim\langle\psi^\dagger(\bm p\pm\bm Q)(i\sigma^y)\psi^\dagger(-\bm p\pm\bm Q)\rangle$.
Below we solve the linear gap equation for PDW order and obtain its critical temperature. The analysis of the PDW order for the $\mathcal{C}$-WM is analogous to that for a doped WM~\cite{Cho_weyl_2012,Bednik2015}, and for comparison with SDW and CDW orders we present the detailed calculation here. Since we are mainly concerned with the projective form factor of the order parameter, we consider the simple density-density interaction $-U<0$ that is attractive and independent of momentum transfer.
We focus on the PDW$_+$ order, and it is trivial to check that the onset temperature for PDW$_-$ is identical to that for PDW$_+$.
The gap equation for PDW$_+$ order parameter $\phi_+$ is
\begin{align}
&\phi_+(i\sigma^y)_{\alpha\beta}\nonumber\\
=&UT\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d^3\bm p}{(2\pi)^3}G^+_{\alpha\gamma}(\omega_m, \bm p)G^+_{\beta\delta} (-\omega_m, -\bm p) \phi_+ (i\sigma^y)_{\gamma\delta}\nonumber\\
=&UN(0)T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{\omega_m^2+\epsilon^2}\int \frac{\sin\theta d\theta d\varphi}{4\pi}\nonumber\\
&\times\xi_{+,\alpha}(\hat {\bm p})\xi_{+,\beta}(-\hat {\bm p})\chi_{\phi_{+}}(\hat {\bm p}) \phi_+.
\label{sup:gap6}
\end{align}
Note that in the last line we have automatically obtained the projective form factor of PDW$_+$ as $\chi_{\phi_+}(\hat{\bm p})\equiv\xi_{+}^{\dagger}(\hat {\bm p})(i\sigma^y) \xi_{+}^*(-\hat {\bm p})=-\exp(i\varphi)$. Other than the north and south poles where $\varphi$ is ill-defined, the PDW$_{+}$ order gaps out the full FS. (After a gauge transformation the singular points at the two poles can be removed.) Hence, the PDW order parameter gaps out a full FS \cite{Cho_weyl_2012,Bednik2015}, which is included in Table \ref{table:node}.
Further plugging in the expression for $\xi_{+}(\pm \hat{\bm p})$, the angular integral is performed as
\begin{align}
\phi_+ \sigma^y=&UN(0)T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{\omega_m^2+\epsilon^2}\int \frac{\sin\theta d\theta d\varphi}{8\pi}\nonumber\\
&\times\[\begin{array}{cc} -\sin\theta e^{i\varphi}&-\cos\theta+1 \\ -\cos\theta-1 & \sin\theta e^{-i\varphi} \end{array}\] \phi_+\nonumber\\
=&\frac{UN(0)}{2}T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{\omega_m^2+\epsilon^2} \phi_+ \sigma^y\,.
\end{align}
Again, the factor 2 in the denominator is due to the fact that only one of the two spin directions of a fermion participates the pairing.
The critical temperature of the PDW order is given by
\begin{align}
T_{c3}=\Lambda e^{-\frac{2}{N(0)U}}\equiv \Lambda e^{-{1}/{g'}}\,.
\end{align}
{It is also instructive to analyze the uniform SC order which does not develop. The linear gap equation for the SC order parameter $\Delta$ is
\begin{align}
&\Delta(i\sigma^y)_{\alpha\beta}\nonumber\\
=&UT\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d^3\bm p}{(2\pi)^3}G^+_{\alpha\gamma}(\omega_m, \bm p)G^-_{\beta\delta} (-\omega_m, -\bm p) \Delta (i\sigma^y)_{\gamma\delta}\nonumber\\
=&-UN(0)T\sum_{\omega_m}\int \frac{d\epsilon}{(i\omega_m-\epsilon)^2}\int \frac{\sin\theta d\theta d\varphi}{4\pi}\nonumber\\
&\times\xi_{+,\alpha}(\hat {\bm p})\xi_{+,\beta}(-\hat {\bm p})\chi_{\Delta}(\hat {\bm p}) \Delta.
\label{sup:gap6}
\end{align}
Even before the angular integral, one immediately finds that the integral over $\epsilon$ vanishes, due to the double pole $\epsilon=i\omega_m$ in the complex plane. Hence for a weak constant interaction $U$, the uniform SC does not develop.
\section{Topological properties of the projective form factors}\label{section:LH}
The fact that the CDW, SDW$_{i}$ and PDW orders have smooth projective form factors $\chi$'s (i.e., no vortices) over the full FS's is in sharp contrast with the case of uniform SC in a doped WM~\cite{Bednik2015,LuTanaka2015,Lihaldane:2015aa,Wang:2016aa,Cho_weyl_2012}. As pointed out by Li and Haldane \cite{Lihaldane:2015aa}, the gap for uniform SC of a doped WM has to have at least two {topologically robust} point nodes due to a $4\pi$ Berry flux carried by the pairing field through a FS. Below we show that the Berry fluxes carried by the CDW and SDW fields through each FS vanish, even though the fermionic field $\psi$ itself carries a nonzero Berry flux. Therefore, the resulting form factors in our case are allowed to be non-singular (and even a constant for SDW$_z$).
In this sense, the nodal lines for the CDW and SDW$_{x,y}$ are not topologically robust alone. However, they can be protected by an additional $\mathcal {TI}$ symmetry~\cite{Ramamurthy:2015aa}. We find that such a symmetry indeed can be present for the CDW state (see Sec. \ref{section:cdw}).
In the $\mathcal{C}$-WM, the Berry flux of the fermion wave function $\xi_{\pm}$ through FS$_\pm$ is given by
\begin{align}
\Phi_\pm\equiv\oint_{\rm{FS}_{\pm}} d\bm p\cdot \nabla_{\bm p}\times \mathcal{A}_{\pm}(\bm p)= 2\pi,
\end{align}
where the Berry connection $\mathcal{A}_{\pm}(\bm p)\equiv\xi_{\pm}^\dagger(\bm p) (i\nabla_{\bm p}) \xi_{\pm}(\bm p)$. This result is well-known, and accounts for the fact that $\xi_\pm$ cannot be well-defined everywhere on the FS$_\pm$.
The fact that $\Phi_+=\Phi_-$ is a combination of the following two effects -- (i) that the two Weyl points of the original WSM state are of opposite chiralities, and (ii) that the FS$_\pm$ are formed by upper and lower branches of the energy eigenvalues respectively.
The Berry flux can be generalized to fermionic bilinear operators~\cite{nagaosa}. Particularly in the particle-hole channel between FS$_\pm$, the Berry connection for the CDW and SDW operators are given by:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{A}_{ph}(\bm p)=\mathcal{A}_{\pm}(\bm p)-\mathcal{A}_{\mp}(\bm p),
\end{align}
where the relative minus sign comes from fact that creation and annihilation operators rotate oppositely under a gauge tranformation. In the particle-particle channel for PDW$_\pm$, the Berry connection is
\begin{align}
\mathcal{A}_{pp}(\bm p)=\mathcal{A}_{\pm}(\bm p)+\mathcal{A}_{\pm}(-\bm p).
\end{align}
The Berry flux carried by the CDW and SDW order parameters through a FS, say FS$_{+}$, satisfies
\begin{align}
\Phi_{ph}\equiv&\oint_{\rm{FS}_{+}} d\bm p\cdot \nabla_{\bm p}\times \mathcal{A}_{ph}(\bm p)\nonumber\\
=&\oint_{\rm{FS}_{+}} d\bm p\cdot \nabla_{\bm p}\times[\mathcal{A}_{+}(\bm p)-\mathcal{A}_{-}(\bm p)]\nonumber\\
=&\Phi_{+}-\Phi_{-}=0,
\label{sup:eq18}
\end{align}
while the Berry flux for PDW orders, for example $\phi_+$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\Phi_{pp}\equiv&\oint_{\rm{FS}_{+}} d\bm p\cdot \nabla_{\bm p}\times \mathcal{A}_{pp}(\bm p)\nonumber\\
=&\oint_{\rm{FS}_{+}} d\bm p\cdot \nabla_{\bm p}\times[\mathcal{A}_{+}(\bm p)+\mathcal{A}_{+}(-\bm p)]\nonumber\\
=&\Phi_{+}-\Phi_{+}=0.
\label{sup:eq19}
\end{align}
The vanishing of the Berry fluxes indicates that the projective form factor $\chi$'s (analog of wave function for the fermions) for CDW, SDW, and PDW order parameters can be smooth and nonsingular everywhere on the FS. Particularly, for SDW$_z$ and PDW$_{\pm}$, the projective form factors are a constant.
This is in contrast with the SC case in a doped WM, where the Berry flux of the SC order parameter was found~\cite{Lihaldane:2015aa} to be $4\pi$, and the resulting SC gap necessarily has point nodes\cite{Cho_weyl_2012,LuTanaka2015,Lihaldane:2015aa}.
{From this argument, the line nodes for CDW and SDW$_{x,y}$ orders are not topologically robust, and can be eliminated by perturbations. For example, it is straightforward to check that the CDW line node induced by an imaginary order parameter $\rho$ can be eliminated by introducing a small SDW$_z$ order parameter $M^z$ that is real. However, as we show in Sec.\ \ref{section:cdw}, the line nodes can be protected by a $\mathcal{TI}$ symmetry~\cite{Ramamurthy:2015aa}.}
\section{ Chiral surface states of the SDW/PDW bulk}\label{section:chiral_sdw_pdw}
\subsection{Main results}
In the SDW$_z$ state, the bulk becomes fully gapped. Therefore, the Chern numbers of all $k_z$ slices have to be the same, resulting in a 3D weak topological insulator formed by stacking Chern insulators with $C=1$ for all $k_z$'s. Meanwhile, the surface Fermi arc, which in the $\mathcal{C}$-WM state used to terminate at the FS [Fig.\ \ref{fig1}(b)], cannot terminate anywhere, and necessarily traverses the full surface BZ. On a $yz$-surface, a Fermi arc portion that is far away from both FS$_\pm$ in the metallic state is not affected dramatically by $M^z$, since the density-wave order parameter concentrates around FS$_\pm$. For momenta close to FS$_\pm$, the position of the Fermi line is strongly modified. Particularly, {we find that, as a result of a $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry inherited from the metallic state,} the Fermi line in the SDW$_z$ state passes the $w_\pm$ points, i.e., $k_y=0, k_z=\pm Q$.
This argument is further verified by numerical calculation of $yz$-surface states and the surface ARPES intensity profile [see Fig.~\ref{fig2}(c)].
The surface Fermi line in the PDW state is similar to the SDW case. Particularly, the Fermi line also passes $w_{\pm}$ due to a $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry. However, this $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry is not inherited from the original metallic model (\ref{lat}) but from the superconducting Nambu representation. As a result, for the PDW state, the zero modes at $w_{\pm}$ are actually Majorana modes.
In summary, we fixed the behavior of the surface Fermi line in the SDW$_z$ and PDW$_\pm$ states with two main arguments -- (a) since the bulk is fully gapped, the Chern number $C$'s for all $k_z$ slices are necessarily the same, and (b) for slices at $k_z=\pm Q$, there exists a particle-hole $\mathcal C$-symmetry for the 2D Hamiltonian. As a consequence, for both cases, the reconstructed surface Fermi line traverses the full $\bm k$-space, and passes the $k_y=0$ for $k_z=\pm Q$, i.e. the projections $w_{\pm}$ of the bulk Weyl points $W_{\pm}$.
\subsection{Details of analysis}
In the following, we provide a detailed analysis on these arguments.
For the SDW$_z$ case, we consider the simplest ``period-two" case with $2Q=\pi$, and it is trivial to generalize to other values of $Q$. The single-particle Hamiltonian at $k_z=\pm Q=\pm \pi/2$ with $M^z$ term is,
\begin{align}
h_M^z(k_x, \!k_y)\!=\!&\sin k_x \sigma^x\!+\!\sin k_y \sigma^y\!-\!(2\!-\!\cos k_x\!-\!\cos k_y)\sigma^z\nonumber\\
&+b_0s^z+M^z\sigma^z s^x\,,
\label{k=q}
\end{align}
where the Pauli matrix $s^{z}$ distinguishes $k_z=\pm Q$. Similar to the original $\mathcal C$-WM, Eq.\ \eqref{k=q} has a $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry with a symmetry operation given by $\mathcal{C}'=\sigma^x s^x$, for which
\begin{align}
{\mathcal C}'(h_{M}^z)^T(-k_x,-k_y)\mathcal{C}'=h_{M}^z(k_x,k_y).
\end{align}
It is straightforward to see that this $\mathcal{C}'$ operator derives from the $\mathcal{C}$ operator for the original $\mathcal{C}$-WM Hamiltonian [Eq.~(\ref{lat}) with $k_z=\pm \pi/2$]. The $s^x$ operator takes $k_z\to-k_z$. However, such an ``inherited" $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry is not present for other $k_z$ slices, as under $s^x$, $k_z$ generally becomes $k_z \mp 2Q\neq -k_z$ for $k_z\neq \pm Q$.
This 2D Hamiltonian has $C=1$ and supports chiral edge modes. Due to the $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry the chiral modes must pass zero energy at the particle-hole symmetric momenta $k_y=0 {~\rm or~} \pi$~\cite{Qi2008}. Given that the original Fermi arc is at small $k_y$'s, we expect that the surface Fermi line passes $k_y=0, k_z=\pm Q$, i.e., $w_{\pm}$ points. This indeed is confirmed by numerics (see Fig. \ref{fig2}).
We move to the PDW case and invoke the similar arguments. We show below that for $k_z=\pm Q$ there also exists a $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry, although this $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry has a distinct nature from that for the SDW$_z$ case. To see this, we set $k_z=Q$ and go to the Nambu space,
\begin{align}
\!h_{\phi_+}(k_x,k_y)=&\sin k_x \sigma^x + \sin k_y \sigma^y \tau^z\nonumber\\
& -(2 - \cos k_x - \cos k_y)\sigma^z \tau^z \nonumber\\
&+ b_0 \tau^z - \phi_+ \sigma^y \tau^y,
\label{sup:hphi}
\end{align}
where we have neglected the $\phi_-$, since it concentrates on the other FS centered at $k_z=-Q$.
Under the operation $\mathcal{C''}=\tau^x$, this Hamiltonian satisfies
\begin{align}
{\mathcal C}''h_{\phi_+}^T(-k_x,-k_y)\mathcal{C}''=h_{\phi_+}(k_x,k_y),
\end{align}
thus $\mathcal{C}''$ defines a particle-hole symmetry operation for Eq.\ \eqref{sup:hphi}. By the same reasoning, the reconstructed surface Fermi line in the PDW case passes the $w_{\pm}$ points at
$k_y=0, k_z=\pm Q$.
It is instructive to compare the $\mathcal{C}''=\tau^x$ for the PDW$_\pm$ state with ${\mathcal C}'=\sigma^xs^x$ for the SDW$_z$ state at $k_z=\pm Q$. For the SDW$_z$ state, the $\mathcal{C}'$ derives from the $\mathcal{C}$-symmetry in the metallic state. For the PDW$_\pm$ state, however, the $\mathcal{C}''$ comes instead from the superconducting Nambu space, just like the case for a conventional superconductor.
Note also that, $\mathcal{C}''$ is technically a redundancy, just like that for the BdG Hamiltonian of a topological superconductor. Therefore, the zero modes at $k_y=0, k_z=\pm Q$ only carry half of the fermionic degree of freedom, and are Majorana modes.
\section{ Drumhead surface states of the CDW bulk}\label{section:cdw}
\subsection{Main results}
Although the CDW instability is not the leading one, it may emerge by modifying some parameters, or simply introduced extrinsically. For example, a CDW order can be imposed either by replacing lattice atoms or by changing bond lengths periodically.
In the CDW state, by projecting the nodal line (see Table \ref{table:node}) onto the $xy$-surfaces,
there exist surface states with energies inside the bulk CDW gap~\cite{Chan:2015aa,bian_2016,Matsuura2013,Ramamurthy:2015aa}. These so-called ``drumhead" surface states only occupy a portion [the cyan regions in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(b)] of the surface BZ. The drumhead states localized on opposite surfaces become degenerate if an additional $\mathcal {TI}$ symmetry is imposed~\cite{Ramamurthy:2015aa}. Due to this degeneracy, there exists a topological charge polarization between the two $xy$-surfaces. The charge density on each surface is given~\cite{Ramamurthy:2015aa} by
$j^0=\pm e/2 \times{b_0^2}/{4\pi}$,
where $\pi b_0^2$ is the area enclosed by the line node projection. For a period-two CDW order ($2Q=\pi$) with even number of sites, we identify the microscopic form of this $\mathcal{TI}$ symmetry and show that it is present when the CDW is a bond order, leading to a periodic modulation in the nearest-neighbor hopping matrix. {This $\mathcal{TI}$ symmetry also protects the CDW line node.}
This can be experimentally realized, e.g., by modulating the thicknesses of the TI-SI layers~\cite{burkov_balents2011,burkov2012}. On the other hand,
surface states exist within line sections by projecting the bulk nodal lines onto the $xz$- and $yz$-surfaces, which coexist and connect with the Fermi arcs [see Fig.~\ref{fig2}(b)].
There are also similar drumhead surface states for both SDW$_{x}$ and SDW$_{y}$ states. However, the $\mathcal{TI}$ symmetry that protects the degeneracy between the two surface bands is absent.
\subsection{Details of analysis}
In the following, we analyze the $xy$ surface states for a CDW ordered bulk. The CDW order parameter, when projected to FS$_\pm$, has a projective form factor $\chi_\rho=\cos \theta$ with a line node at $\theta=\pi/2$. For definiteness we consider a special case when $2Q=\pi$, i.e., the period of the CDW is two. The analysis can be accordingly generalized to more general values of $Q$.
It is known that line nodes in the bulk projects onto the surface with in-gap surface states that exist within the momentum range bounded by the line node~\cite{Chan:2015aa,bian_2016,Matsuura2013,Ramamurthy:2015aa}. The existence of the surface states from the line node can be understood as follows~\cite{Matsuura2013,Ramamurthy:2015aa}. We can consider a Wilson loop around the line node shown in Fig.\ \ref{sup:linenode}(a). In the 2D plane of the loop, the loop traps a Dirac node, which carries a Berry flux of $\pi$. As a result, along this loop the fermion acquires a Berry phase of $\pi$. One can distort the contour into two paths [shown in Fig.\ \ref{sup:linenode}(b)], and the berry phase difference along the two paths is given by $P_a-P_b=\pi$. We can view the two paths alternatively as along two gapped 1D subsystems $a$ and $b$, and the quantity $P_{a,b}/(2\pi)$ is the charge polarization of each 1D insulator. Therefore, the polarization of $a$ and $b$ differs by $1/2$. On the boundary this indicates that there exist edge states either inside or outside the projection of the line node. For our case, since the topology is due to the Weyl physics at small momentum $k_{x,y}$, the edge states are located inside the line node projection.
On the other hand, if the system additionally possesses a composite symmetry of an antiunitary operation ($\mathcal T$) and spatial inversion ($\mathcal I$), the polarization of all 1D subsystems are quantized to 0 or $1/2$ up to integers~\cite{Ramamurthy:2015aa}.
{In this case the polarization for different 1D subsystems can only change discontinuously across the line node. This also indicates that the line node cannot be gapped out in the presence of $\mathcal{TI}$, since otherwise The Berry curvature would be smeared around the line node and the 1D polarizations varies smoothly~\cite{Ramamurthy:2015aa} }
For the 3D system, the total surface charge polarization can be obtained by summing the charge polarization of the topological 1D subsystems~\cite{Ramamurthy:2015aa}
\begin{align}
j^0=\pm\frac{e}{2}\frac{S_{xy}}{4\pi^2}=\pm\frac{eb_0^2}{8\pi},
\end{align}
where we have used the fact that the area enclosed by the line node $S_{xy}=\pi b_0^2$.
{ Below we specify what the $\mathcal{TI}$ symmetry is} for the period-two CDW state of the $\mathcal{C}$-WM with wavevector $2Q=\pi$. For a translationally invariant system, the inversion operation simply corresponds to $\bm k\to -\bm k$. However, for a density-wave state, the lattice translation symmetry is broken and the inversion operation is more subtle. In this case it is easier to work in the real space rather than in $\bm k$-space.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{linenode.eps}
\caption{The line node in the CDW state. The CDW wavevector is along the vertical direction, which folds the momentum space.}
\label{sup:linenode}
\end{figure}
For a given $k_x$ and $k_y$, the Hamiltonian of the CDW ordered $\mathcal{C}$-WM can be regarded as a 1D model along the $z$ direction with open boundary condition:
\begin{align}
H^{k_x,k_y}_\rho=&[\sin {k_x}\sigma^x+\sin k_y\sigma^y\nonumber\\
&+(2-\cos k_x-\cos k_y)\sigma^z]\otimes\mathbb{I}_N\nonumber\\
&+\sigma^z \otimes\mathbb{C}_N +\sigma^0\otimes\mathbb{S}_N+\sigma^0\otimes \rho_N
\label{sup:hr}
\end{align}
where $\mathbb{I}_N,\mathbb{C}_N,\mathbb{S}_N,\mathbb{\rho}_N$ are matrices in coordinate space along $z$-direction with site number $N$. $\mathbb{I}_N$ is an identity matrix, and $\mathbb{C}_N,\mathbb{S}_N$ are real and imaginary nearest-neighbor hopping matrices with the form (examples are given for $N=8$)
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{C}_N=\frac12\(\begin{array}{cccccccc} 0& 1& 0&0& 0& 0&0&0 \\1& 0& 1&0& 0& 0&0&0 \\0& 1& 0&1& 0& 0&0 &0\\0& 0& 1&0& 1& 0&0&0 \\0& 0& 0&1& 0& 1&0 &0\\0& 0& 0&0& 1& 0&1&0 \\0& 0& 0&0& 0& 1&0 &1\\0& 0& 0&0& 0&0& 1&0 \end{array}\),~
\mathbb{S}_N=-\frac{i}2\(\begin{array}{cccccccc} 0& 1& 0&0& 0& 0&0&0 \\-1& 0& 1&0& 0& 0&0&0 \\0& -1& 0&1& 0& 0&0 &0\\0& 0& -1&0& 1& 0&0&0 \\0& 0& 0&-1& 0& 1&0 &0\\0& 0& 0&0& -1& 0&1&0 \\0& 0& 0&0& 0& -1&0 &1\\0& 0& 0&0& 0&0& -1&0\end{array}\),\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
and $\rho_N$ is the CDW matrix which we will address.
One can verify that the first three terms in Eq.\ \eqref{sup:hr} with $\mathbb{I}_N,\mathbb{C}_N,\mathbb{S}_N$ preserve a composite symmetry of $\mathcal{TI}$, where
\begin{align}
\mathcal{T}= &\exp \[-i\frac{\sigma^z}{2} \arctan\frac{\sin k_y}{\sin k_x} \]K\exp \[i\frac{\sigma^z}{2} \arctan\frac{\sin k_y}{\sin k_x} \] \nonumber\\
=&\exp \[-i{\sigma^z} \arctan\frac{\sin k_y}{\sin k_x} \]K
\label{sup:T}
\end{align}
is an anti-unitary operator ($K$ is the usual complex conjugation sending $i$ to $-i$), and $\mathcal{I}$ is spatial inversion that takes $z\to N+1-z$, namely,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{I}=\(\begin{array}{cccccccc} 0& 0& 0&0& 0& 0&0&1 \\0& 0& 0&0& 0& 0&1&0 \\0& 0& 0&0& 0& 1&0 &0\\0& 0& 0&0& 1& 0&0&0 \\0& 0& 0&1& 0& 0&0 &0\\0& 0& 1&0& 0& 0&0&0 \\0& 1& 0&0& 0& 0&0 &0\\1& 0& 0&0& 0&0& 0&0\end{array}\).
\label{sup:I}
\end{align}
For the CDW term with wavevector $2Q=\pi$, the unit cell size is doubled, and we specifically focus on a case with even number of sites $N=2m$. We consider two types of the CDW's of the form,
\begin{align}
\mathbb{\rho}^{(a)}_N=\frac12&\(\begin{array}{cccccccc} 1& 0& 0&0& 0& 0&0&0 \\0& -1& 0&0& 0& 0&0&0 \\0& 0& 1&0& 0& 0&0 &0\\0& 0& 0&-1& 0& 0&0&0 \\0& 0& 0&0& 1& 0&0 &0\\0& 0& 0&0& 0& -1&0&0 \\0& 0& 0&0& 0& 0&1 &0\\0& 0& 0&0& 0& 0&0 &-1\end{array}\),\nonumber\\
\mathbb{\rho}^{(b)}_N=-\frac{1}2&\(\begin{array}{cccccccc} 0& 1& 0&0& 0& 0&0&0 \\1& 0& -1&0& 0& 0&0&0 \\0& -1& 0&1& 0& 0&0 &0\\0& 0& 1&0& -1& 0&0&0 \\0& 0& 0&-1& 0& 1&0 &0\\0& 0& 0&0& 1& 0&-1&0 \\0& 0& 0&0& 0& -1&0 &1\\0&0& 0& 0&0& 0& 1&0 \end{array}\),\nonumber
\end{align}
where the first one is a site order that modulates the on-site charge density and the second one is a bond order that modulates the nearest-neighbor hopping amplitudes. In $\bm k$ space, the two types of CDW's are related by a $\pi/2$ phase shift of the order parameter.
It is easy to see that both are invariant under $\mathcal T$, however only $\rho_N^{(b)}$, the bond order, is invariant under $\mathcal{I}$ (which takes $z\to N+1-z$), while $\rho_N^{(a)}$, the site order, reverses sign under $\mathcal{I}$. On the other hand it is straightforward to see that for \emph{odd} number of sites, the $\mathcal{TI}$ symmetry is present for a CDW site order. This even-odd dichotomy is similar to case of edge states in graphene~\cite{bernevig_book}.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{drumhead.eps}&\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{density.eps}\\
(a)&(b)
\end{tabular}
\caption{(a) The in-gap drumhead bands ($|k_x|\lesssim0.5$) for a bond-ordered CDW state at $k_y=0$ with open boundaries in $z$-direction. Each in-gap point is two-fold degenerate corresponding to two opposite surface states. (b) The surface charge density in the $xy$ surface BZ due to the line node in the bulk.}
\label{sup:drumhead}
\end{figure*}
With the $\mathcal{TI}$ symmetry defined by Eqs.\ (\ref{sup:T}) and (\ref{sup:I}), it is straightforward to show that the charge polarization along $z$ direction for 1D subsystems with any given $k_{x,y}$ is quantized. The charge polarization along $z$ satisfies
\begin{align}
P_z(k_x, k_y)=&\frac{e}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} dk_z \sum_{E_a(\bm k)<0}\langle u_a(\bm k)| z|u_a(\bm k)\rangle \nonumber\\
=&\frac{e}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} dk_z \sum_{E_a(\bm k)<0} \langle u_a(\bm k)|(\mathcal{TI}) z(\mathcal{TI})|u_a(\bm k)\rangle \nonumber\\
=&-\frac{e}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} dk_z \sum_{E_a'(\bm k)<0} \langle u_a'(\bm k)|\hat z|u_a'(\bm k)\rangle \nonumber\\
=&-P_z(k_x, k_y).
\label{sup:pz}
\end{align}
Since $P_z$ is well-defined only up to an integer, its value is quantized to either $0$ or $1/2$.
{As we discussed, this also indicates the nodal line in the bulk is protected.}
We numerically computed the energy spectrum for $\rho_N^{(b)}$ bond order with open boundary conditions in $z$ direction with $N=40$, $2Q=\pi$, $k_y=0$, $b_0= 0.3$ and $\rho=0.2$. We show the resulting band structure and surface charge density in Fig.\ \ref{sup:drumhead}.
\section{Conclusion}\label{section:conclusion}
In this paper, we studied the instabilities of a particle-hole symmetric Weyl metal with both repulsive and attractive interactions. We analyzed the nodal structures of each order (Table \ref{table:node}) and addressed their relation to the Berry curvature flux through the FS's. As a result of distinct nodal structures, we found that the leading instabilities are SDW$_z$ (for a repulsive interaction) and PDW$_\pm$ orders (for an attractive interaction), with wavevectors equal to the separation between the Weyl points. We analyzed the properties of surface states, schematically shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}. We found that in the SDW$_z$ and PDW states, the surface Fermi arc in the $\mathcal{C}$-WM state now goes through the projection of the Weyl points and traverses the full BZ.
In the CDW state, there exist drumhead surface bands inside the projection of the nodal line, and can lead to topologically protected charge responses on the surface.
Experimentally, the SDW state realizes a 3D Hall effect, and can be detected via neutron scattering or nulcear magnetic resonance measurements. The PDW states can be detected via a scanning Josephson tunneling microscopy that has been recently developed~\cite{davis_last}. The surface states can be detected using ARPES. It will be interesting to search for these orders in Weyl materials in the near future.
\acknowledgments We thank J. G. Analytis, G. Y. Cho, A. V. Chubukov, R. Fernandes, E. Fradkin, T. L. Hughes, J. Kang, S. Ramamurthy and F. Yang for inspiring discussions. This work was supported in part by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation's EPiQS Initiative through Grant No. GBMF4305 at the University of Illinois (Y.W.) and by the NSF through grant No. DMR 1408713 at the University of Illinois (P.Y.).
|
\section*{Version fran\c{c}aise abr\'eg\'ee}
\selectlanguage{english}
\section{Motivations}
\label{sec:motiv}
\subsection{The quest for cosmic accelerators}
Present-day astronomy is still primarily concerned with the study of sources of photons and covers the electromagnetic spectrum from radio waves up to very-high-energy gamma rays. The gamma-ray domain corresponds
to photons with energies greater than 0.5~MeV and the most energetic cosmic
photons presently detected reach about 100 TeV. The present review is focused on the
high-energy part of the electromagnetic spectrum, above 100~MeV, which is related to the origin of cosmic rays. Low-energy $\gamma$-ray astronomy, which is based on
specific techniques (collimators, coded masks, Compton telescopes), and essentially addresses different questions of astrophysics (e.g. nuclear $\gamma$-ray emission lines), is not covered in the present review, except for gamma-ray bursts,
some of which have a high-energy component.
Cosmic rays, discovered in 1912 by Victor Hess \cite{Hess}, are, for the most part, high-energy protons and nuclei
whose spectrum extends over eleven orders of magnitude \cite{CRspec}, from a few times $10^9$~eV up to about $10^{20}$~eV. Their energy distribution is well described by a power law ($\propto E^{-\gamma_{cr}}$) whose exponent or ``spectral index'' $\gamma_{cr}$ is equal to 2.7 up to about $4 \times 10^{15}$~eV, then to 3 up to $4 \times 10^{18}$~eV, where $\gamma_{cr}$ is again slightly lower. The first spectral break in the $10^{15}$~eV (or PeV) region is called the ``knee''. Cosmic rays with energies below the knee are essentially originating from our Galaxy. Above the knee, their origin (galactic vs. extra-galactic) remains controversial. Therefore, identifying cosmic accelerators in which particles can reach at least the PeV energy range (or ``pevatrons'') is an important challenge today.
About 2\% of the cosmic rays are electrons and positrons with a much steeper energy spectrum \cite{CRspec}.
Unfortunately, all these particles are charged, and thus continuously deviated by turbulent magnetic fields embedded in interstellar and
intergalactic plasmas, so that their direction when they reach the Earth is almost completely uncorrelated with that of their source, except perhaps
at extreme energies where fluxes are extremely low \cite{auger}. Thus, the quest for cosmic accelerators as well as for acceleration mechanisms mostly relies on photons which propagate along a straight line. The presence of high-energy electrons and positrons can also be indirectly detected by their synchrotron
radiation from radio waves to X~rays, but the most energetic photons produced by cosmic-ray interactions with radiation fields or matter provide a complementary and more direct insight into both the accelerators and the targets (e.g. molecular clouds).
\subsection{Gamma-ray production mechanisms}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{crab_neb_fermi.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{pks2155_2008.eps}
\caption{\it Spectral energy distributions $E^2 d^3N_\gamma/(dE \, dt \, dS)$ of two different non-thermal sources emitting photons from radio waves to very-high-energy
gamma rays: on the left, a galactic source, the Crab nebula \cite{Crabsed}; on the right, an extra-galactic source, the active galactic
nucleus PKS 2155-304 \cite{PKSsed}. Note that 1 erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ =
$10^{-3}$ W m$^{-2}$.}
\label{fig:sed}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Gamma rays can be produced by two different processes~:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\bullet$] High-energy electrons and positrons interact with radiation fields. In magnetic fields, they produce synchrotron photons whose energies can at most reach
the domain of low-energy gamma rays. But they can also interact with ambient low-energy photons (from stellar or synchrotron origin) and boost them to very high
energies. This last mechanism is just the Compton effect, albeit observed from a Lorentz frame quite different from that of the electron at rest, used in nuclear
physics~; it is therefore referred to as the ``Inverse Compton effect''. The two preceding processes, induced by electrons and positrons, are said to be ``leptonic''.
\item[$\bullet$] In denser regions of the interstellar medium, high-energy protons and nuclei interact with matter through nuclear interactions, often producing
neutral mesons, mainly $\pi^0$'s, which decay into $\gamma$ rays and whose mass $m_0$ is 135~MeV/c$^2$.
These processes involving nucleons and mesons are said to be ``hadronic''. The kinematics of the decay $\pi^0 \rightarrow \gamma + \gamma$ shows that, whatever the spectrum of
the incident particle, the $\gamma$-ray energy spectrum reaches a maximum at $m_0 \, c^2/2 \approx 68$~MeV, just above the threshold of the production reaction, then decreases smoothly, according to a power law whose spectral index is close to that of the incident particle\footnote{Note that $\gamma$ rays can also undergo hadronic interactions, e.g. $\gamma$ + p $\rightarrow$ $\pi^0$ + p.}. This is the main reason why this review is limited to $\gamma$ rays above 100~MeV.
\end{itemize}
Many of the sources detected above 100 MeV also emit non-thermal photons over the whole electromagnetic spectrum. Since $\gamma$-ray differential fluxes
$d^3N_\gamma/(dE \, dt \, dS)$ decrease very rapidly with energy, it is convenient to consider the ``spectral energy distribution'' (or SED), i.e. the distribution of the
quantity\footnote{In the notation of radio-astronomy, the SED takes the form $\nu F(\nu)$ in which $\nu$ is the
photon frequency and $F(\nu)$ is the power received by unit area and frequency.}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sed}
E^2 \frac{d^3N_\gamma}{dE \, dt \, dS} = E \frac{d^3N_\gamma}{d \ln E \, dt \, dS}
\end{equation}
which represents the power received by unit area by unit of $\ln E$. The spectral energy distribution provides a useful representation of the non-thermal emission of
an astrophysical object from radio waves to the highest energies.
Figure \ref{fig:sed} shows the SEDs of two very different objects, the Crab nebula \cite{Crabsed}
and the active galactic nucleus PKS~2155-304 \cite{PKSsed}. For these two objects, a two-component structure is observed, the first bump being due to synchrotron radiation and the second one being
generally interpreted as due to Inverse Compton effect. In the case of PKS~2155-304 which is a variable source, the determination of the SED requires
simultaneous observations at different wavelengths in the framework of a coordinated campaign. Variability correlations may then be found between different parts of
the spectrum, thus providing important clues in modeling the object. From figure \ref{fig:sed}, it is clear that the spectra (SED or photon energy spectrum) can be approximated by power laws only in a limited energy range. A photon energy spectrum proportional to $E^{-\gamma_p}$ is said to be ``soft'' if $\gamma_p$ (photon index) is greater than 2 (which corresponds to a decreasing part of the SED), and ``hard'' in the opposite case.
In the present volume, a short introduction on acceleration and radiation
physics is given by M.~Lemoine and G.~Pelletier \cite{theory}.
\subsection{Astrophysical sources of high-energy $\gamma$ rays.}
High-energy astronomy, whose pace of development increased substantially since 1991, has now revealed several categories of
objects whose emission is dominated by non-thermal processes involving violent shocks, sometimes associated with stellar explosions or with the presence of compact objects (neutron
stars or black holes), namely\footnote{In some cases, such processes are associated to extended objects
resulting from many supernova explosions or stellar winds. Such a
``superbubble'' has recently been observed in the Large Magellanic Cloud \cite{sb_lmc}.}:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\bullet$] Galactic sources such as pulsars, pulsar wind nebulae, supernova remnants, some particular binary systems and the centre of our Galaxy; in the present
volume, pulsars are covered by I.~Grenier and A.~Harding \cite{pulsars}, pulsar-wind nebulae and supernova remnants by J.~W.~Hewitt and
M.~Lemoine-Goumard \cite{snr-pwn}, $\gamma$-ray emitting binary systems by G.~Dubus \cite{binaries} and
the Galactic Center region by M.~Su and C.~van~Eldik \cite{GC}.
\item[$\bullet$] Extragalactic sources will be covered in the second volume of this review: starburst galaxies by
S.~Ohm \cite{starburst}, active galactic nuclei by C.~Dermer and B.~Giebels \cite{agn} and $\gamma$-ray bursts by F.~Piron \cite{grb}.
\end{itemize}
Extragalactic $\gamma$-ray astronomy is limited somewhat by the absorption of $\gamma$ rays on their path to the Earth by the extragalactic background light (EBL)
when the center-of-mass
energy of the $\gamma$ + photon reaction allows for the production of an $e^+ + e^-$ pair. This absorption effect, due to the infrared and optical background light,
has been observed on TeV $\gamma$ rays from active galactic nuclei. Its estimation allows the density of background photons to be measured, as explained
by D.~Horns and A.~Jacholkowska \cite{probes} in the second volume of this review. This is an important result, since direct measurements of these cosmic radiation fields are
difficult to obtain due to galactic foregrounds.
\subsection{The Universe as a laboratory of fundamental Physics}
In many respects, the Universe can be considered as a laboratory of fundamental and particle physics, in which cosmic $\gamma$-rays are useful and important tools.
High-energy $\gamma$ rays might be produced through new processes predicted by theories beyond the standard model of particle physics. In popular models of dark matter ($\Lambda$CDM models), the invisible mass
in the Universe is due to weakly interacting particles with a mass of the order of 100~GeV/c$^2$ or more (see e.g. \cite{DM}). Being their own anti-particles,
they can mutually annihilate in regions with a
high density of dark matter, thus producing high-energy photons either directly or through the decay of other particles. Gamma rays might also be produced in
micro-bursts due to the final stage of evaporation of primordial black holes through the Hawking process \cite{PBH}.
The search for $\gamma$ rays from dark matter annihilation or primordial black holes evaporation is discussed by P. Brun and
J. Cohen-Tanugi \cite{DM-PBH} in the second volume of this review.
New phenomena such as a possible violation of Lorentz invariance as
predicted in some theories of Quantum Gravity \cite{QG} could also affect the propagation of $\gamma$ rays from sources at cosmological distances. The observation of rapidly variable sources such as $\gamma$-ray bursts or
active galactic nuclei have yielded strong constraints on these theories. Gamma-ray propagation might also be affected by a possible quantum oscillation between a
$\gamma$ ray and an axion-like particle in the presence of external magnetic fields \cite{ALP}. As the axion-like particle is unsensitive to
background light, this oscillation would make the Universe look more transparent to $\gamma$ rays than expected; it could also produce a
modulation in the measured spectra. The search for Lorentz invariance violation and for axion-like particles is discussed
by D. Horns and A. Jacholkowska \cite{probes} in the second volume of this review.
Although only upper bounds have been set to date on such new processes, this field of research is presently
very active.
\section{A brief history of high-energy $\gamma$-ray astronomy}
\subsection{Detecting high-energy $\gamma$ rays from space and from the ground}
The atmosphere being opaque to photons beyond the optical waveband, high-energy astrophysics required the advent of space-based experiments and started with
the discovery of the first cosmic X-ray source \cite{Xastro} by Giacconi et al. in 1962. However, as compared to soft X-ray astronomy, space-based $\gamma$-ray astronomy faces additional challenges:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\bullet$] High-energy $\gamma$ rays cannot be focused, unlike soft X rays which can be collected by special mirrors whose effective area is much greater than
that of the detector. In the case of $\gamma$ rays, the effective detection area is practically restricted to that of the detector itself which is
necessarily limited to values of the order of 1~m$^2$ in order to fit into a launcher. Since fluxes decrease rapidly with increasing $\gamma$-ray energy,
satellite experiments can only efficiently explore the energy band below about 100~GeV, called the \textbf{high-energy} (HE) $\gamma$-ray domain as opposed to the \textbf{very-high-energy} domain (VHE), for which ground-based detectors are required.
\item[$\bullet$] Above 100~MeV, $\gamma$ rays can only be detected by their conversion into $e^+ + e^-$ pairs in matter, with the incident direction being
reconstructed from the electron tracks. Efficient detection requires converters with a short enough radiation length, but in such materials, electrons
suffer strong multiple scattering which degrades the angular resolution. This effect is however smaller as energy increases, but even in the best cases
the angular resolution is of the order of 0.15$^\circ$, whereas soft X-ray telescopes can reach values of a few arc seconds.
\item[$\bullet$] Finally, the electron, positron and subsequent $\gamma$ rays produced by bremsstrahlung are absorbed in a calorimeter which yields the total energy
of the pair with a typical resolution of 15\%.\\
\end{itemize}
The very-high-energy (VHE) domain beyond about 100~GeV requires very different techniques, operated from the ground. When a very-high-energy $\gamma$ ray enters the
atmosphere and converts at high altitude, the initial electrons and positrons generate an electromagnetic cascade: each high-energy $e^\pm$ radiates
secondary $\gamma$ rays through bremsstrahlung, which further convert into $e^+ + e^-$ pairs of lower energies. Most of those charged particles have a velocity
greater than that of light in air; on the passage of such particles, the air emits visible light through the
Cherenkov effect (see section \ref{sec-ground}). This light can be collected by special telescopes even if the electrons and positrons of the shower do not reach the ground. The
effective detection area is comparable to that of the light pool on the ground\footnote{Note that the effective detection area is not related
to the size of the mirror, the latter being relevant for the detection threshold.}, i.e. a few $10^4$~m$^2$, adapted to the very low $\gamma$-ray fluxes above 100~GeV.
Alternatively, one can detect the charged particles of a multi-TeV cascade reaching the ground in a high-altitude experiment. The main difficulty which
hampered the first ground-based experiments is that charged cosmic rays also produce such cascades in the atmosphere, which represent an enormous background compared to
genuine $\gamma$-ray-induced cascades. This difficulty was eventually overcome in 1989 with the advent of the Cherenkov imaging technique. After this, very-high-energy
$\gamma$-ray astronomy developed rapidly and reached its full maturity at the beginning of the 2000's \cite{CRAS-2000}.
In this volume, satellite detectors are reviewed by D.~J. Thompson \cite{space} and present ground-based detectors are discussed by M. de Naurois and
D.~Mazin \cite{ground}. In the second volume, future projects, both in space and on the ground, are reviewed by J. Kn\"odlseder \cite{future}.
A short history of these two different domains of $\gamma$-ray astronomy is given below.
\subsection{High-energy $\gamma$-ray astronomy in space}
\subsubsection{From OSO-3 to Fermi-LAT}
\begin{table}[htb]
\caption{\it Catalogues from space experiments in high-energy $\gamma$-ray astronomy.}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
Satellite & & Catalogue & Year & & Number \\
or experiment & & & of the catalogue & & of sources \\ \hline
COS-B & & 2CG & 1981 & & 25 \\
EGRET & & 3EG & 1999 & & 271 \\
Fermi LAT & & 2FGL & 2012 & & 1873 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:catal}
\end{table}
Shortly after the birth of X-ray astronomy, the first attempts to detect cosmic $\gamma$ rays with balloon-borne detectors were unsuccessful due to the high level
of secondary $\gamma$ rays produced by cosmic rays in the atmosphere. The OSO-3 satellite, flown in 1967-1968, provided the first clear evidence that the Milky Way
was a bright source of $\gamma$ rays above 50~MeV \cite{oso-3}, albeit without any imaging capability (left map in figure \ref{fig:oso-cosb}). The following
space missions in this domain were the second Small Imaging Satellite SAS-2 (1972-1973; $E > 35$~MeV) \cite{sas-2} and COS-B (1975-1982; $E>100$~MeV) \cite{cosb}.
SAS-2 revealed the diffuse emission of the Galaxy and discovered the Crab and Vela nebulae and the periodic signals from their pulsars. COS-B produced a catalogue of 25
sources (right map in figure \ref{fig:oso-cosb}), all galactic except for one, the quasar 3C273 \cite{cosb}. The next step was the Compton Gamma-ray Observatory, launched in
1991 with four gamma-ray instruments on board, among which EGRET (Energetic Gamma Ray Experiment Telescope) was devoted to high energies (20~MeV- $>$~10~GeV) \cite{egret}. The Third EGRET Catalogue
\cite{egret_3cat} revealed 271 sources (left map in figure \ref{fig:egret_fermi}) among which were many active galactic nuclei, inauguring extra-galactic
$\gamma$-ray astronomy at high energies.
The characteristics of the EGRET detector and its main results are described by D.~J.~Thompson \cite{space} in this volume. The same article explains how the
following mission, the Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope was conceived, taking advantage of instrumental progresses in particle physics; it describes the
Large Area Telescope (Fermi LAT) (20~MeV- $>$~300~GeV) and its performance characteristics \cite{LAT}. Launched in 2008 after a smaller
Italian mission, Astro-rivelatore Gamma a
Immagini LEggero (AGILE) \cite{agile}, it produced a particularly rich harvest of new sources (right map in figure \ref{fig:egret_fermi}), due in large part to its large effective area and huge field of view.
The Fermi Large Area Telescope Second
Source Catalogue \cite{2FGL} contains 1873 sources including various classes of objects, and a third catalogue has recently been published \cite{3FGL}
(see \cite{space} in this volume). Table~\ref{tab:catal} summarizes the
spectacular progress of space-based $\gamma$-ray astronomy at high energies in the last 30 years.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{oso3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{cosb_catal.eps}
\caption{\it First results from gamma-ray satellites: OSO-3 on the left; COS-B on the right.}
\label{fig:oso-cosb}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{egret_3cat.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{2FGL.eps}
\caption{\it Map of source locations in galactic coordinates for the third EGRET catalogue, 3EG \cite{egret_3cat} (left) and for the second Fermi-LAT catalogue \cite{2FGL} (right).}
\label{fig:egret_fermi}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{The case of gamma-ray bursts}
Gamma-ray bursts have been primarily studied below 50~MeV, but some of them have a high-energy component that is now fully accessible thanks to
the Fermi Large Area Telescope. It is therefore useful to give a short historical review on these fascinating phenomena which mostly produce
hard X~rays and low-energy $\gamma$ rays. Gamma-ray bursts
were serendipitously discovered in 1969 by the US Vela satellites monitoring the sky in low-energy $\gamma$ rays to confirm compliance with the Nuclear Test Ban
Treaty. Bursts of $\gamma$ rays coming from space were actually detected and revealed to the astronomical community only in 1973 \cite{grb_discov}. Their duration is extremely variable
(from 0.001~s to several hours) and their temporal structure quite irregular. Most of the emission takes place between a few keV and about 10~MeV, with the SED peaking around
1~MeV. The first detections could give no clue on the incident direction nor on the source distance.
The next step came from the detector BATSE (Burst and Transient Source Experiment, 20~keV-1~MeV) on board the Compton Gamma-ray Observatory. Despite a rather poor
angular resolution of about 5$^\circ$, BATSE produced a sky map of 2704 bursts \cite{batse} with a quasi-isotropic distribution, suggesting the possibility of an
extragalactic origin, which at first sight seemed unlikely due to the enormous energy required at the source. This hypothesis was nevertheless confirmed in 1997 by the
observation of GRB~970228 by the italian-dutch satellite Beppo-SAX \cite{beppo}. The burst was first detected by a wide-field camera with a 3~arc minutes angular
resolution, then the satellite was reoriented to localize the source within 50 arc seconds with narrow-field X-ray telescopes. This allowed several ground-based telescopes
as well as the Hubble space telescope to associate the source with a fading optical transient emission about 20 hours later; the extragalactic
nature of the source was then established by localizing this ``afterglow'' within a host galaxy whose redshift was found to be 0.835. Further space
missions (HETE-2, INTEGRAL, Swift) strongly contributed to the study of $\gamma$-ray bursts at low energies, whereas the corresponding optical and radio afterglows
were subsequently followed from the ground. These observations confirmed that sources were extragalactic, sometimes located at
cosmological distances, e.g. that of the burst GRB~090423 detected by the Swift satellite, whose optical counterpart yielded a redshift of 8.26 \cite{grbz}.
These phenomena are currently interpreted as strongly beamed emission originating from collapsing massive stars or merging compact objects.
Until the advent of the Fermi mission, little was known about the emission of $\gamma$-ray bursts at high energies. EGRET was not
adapted to detecting them, due to the large dead time of 0.1~s of its spark chamber; it nevertheless recorded some,
such as GRB~940217 in which an 18~GeV $\gamma$ ray was detected more than 90 minutes after the burst began \cite{grb94}. On board the Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope,
$\gamma$-ray bursts are detected by the Gamma-ray Burst Monitor (GBM) \cite{gbm} from 8~keV to 40~MeV and by the Fermi LAT from 20~MeV to 300~GeV.
Unlike EGRET, the LAT has a short dead time of 26~$\mu$s, providing efficient detection of the high-energy component of $\gamma$-ray bursts triggered
by GBM. After 3 years of observation, the LAT observed 35 bursts at energies greater than 20~MeV \cite{grb_LAT}; they are among the brightest ones
detected by GBM. An exceptionally bright burst, GRB~130427A, showed a high-energy component temporally distinct from that detected by GBM and lasting
almost 20 hours, with a 95~GeV $\gamma$ ray detected a few minutes after the burst began. These very recent data, which cannot be explained without introducing an
additional component in the GRB spectra, are discussed in this volume by F.~Piron \cite{grb}.
\subsection{Very-high-energy $\gamma$-ray astronomy from the ground}
\label{sec-ground}
What is now known as Cherenkov radiation was studied experimentally by P.A. Cherenkov \cite{Cherenkov 1934} in 1934 while conducting experiments on beta particles travelling through water, and it wasn't until 1937 that this emission was explained theoretically by I. Frank and I. Tamm \cite{Frank 1937}. Most of the work on Cherenkov radiation at that time was done with charged particles passing through solid and liquid media, but in 1947 P.M.S. Blackett \cite{Blackett 1948} pointed out that the effect should exist in gases and suggested that Cherenkov radiation produced by cosmic ray particles traversing the atmosphere could contribute to the light intensity of the night-sky.
Such pulsed visible light emission induced by cosmic particles in the atmosphere was indeed detected for the first time in 1952 by W. Galbraith and J.V. Jelley \cite{Galbraith 1953} in association with large cosmic ray air showers, and it was later shown to be genuine Cherenkov radiation by the same team in a series of measurement done at the Pic du Midi (France) during the summer 1953. This led A. Chudakov \cite{Chudakov 1958} to implement the first Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescope (ACT) as a way to perform a calorimetric measurement of the energy of extensive air showers (EAS) in complement of a ground counter array in Pamir at 3860 m asl.
The switch of interest from cosmic rays (CR) to very high energy (VHE) cosmic gamma-rays can be traced back to a presentation by G. Cocconi
\cite{Cocconi 1960} at the 1959 International Cosmic Ray Conference (ICRC) in Moscow in which he predicted that the Crab Nebula should be a strong source of $\gamma$ rays at TeV energies and that a high angular resolution could make possible to separate them from the isotropic CR background.
Even if Cocconi's model overestimated the flux by a factor 1000, and the proposed detector was not really appropriate, this contribution stimulated further work to use Cherenkov radiation as suggested by G.T. Zatsepin and A.E. Chudakov \cite{Zatsepin 1961}, soon followed by the construction in Crimea of the first ACT designed for gamma-ray observations in the early 1960s.
But the charged cosmic-ray background was too huge for this first generation of ACTs: they could not discriminate between electromagnetic and hadronic
showers, and hence could only rely on a subtraction method (``counts on source'' minus ``counts off source''), so they were not sensitive enough to detect successfully cosmic gamma-rays, even from the strongest sources.
\subsubsection{The long way towards a first firm detection}
A landmark was set by the construction, completed in 1968 on Mount Hopkins (Whipple observatory) in Arizona, of a 10~m diameter ACT, by far the largest reflector dedicated to this field of research for many years. Again the difficulty to overcome the huge background was only slowly overcome after a long series of detector improvements and analysis method developments.
The instrumentation of the focal plane of this telescope went through a series of steps, from a single phototube, through a set of 2 tubes in coincidence in 1972 for the so-called double beam technique, then a set of 3 tubes with a guard ring of 7 additional tubes in 1976, and after a stop of funding from 1978 to 1982 reached the 37 pixel imaging camera proposed by Trevor Weekes in 1981 \cite{Weekes 1981} and completed in 1983.
In the meanwhile, Monte Carlo computer simulations of the shower development and Cherenkov light emission and detection was more and more used to help understand the response of the detectors.
Together with the focal plane instrumental progress, it allowed the development of image analysis methods, such as that proposed by A.M. Hillas in 1985 \cite{Hillas 1985} (and widely known as the Hillas parameter method), that greatly improved the background rejection.
This was decisive for obtaining the first successful detection of the gamma-ray emission above 0.7 TeV from the Crab nebula in 1989 by the Whipple collaboration \cite{Weekes 1989}, 37~years after the initial Cherenkov light pulse observation by W. Galbraith and J.V. Jelley!
\subsubsection{The flourishing of new detectors and the confirmation of the Crab signal}
During this period, there were active experiments in Ireland, the United States, the U.S.S.R., Australia and India, but many results only had a
weak 3-4 $\sigma$ (standard deviation) statistical significance with systematics not always well controlled.
A discussion took place in 1985 at the ICRC conference, which led to an informal agreement for positive detection to require at least 5 $\sigma$ of statistical significance including the effect of trial factors.
Efforts in this field have been strongly stimulated by the claim in 1983 by two experiments (the Kiel and the Haverah Park arrays) of a possible
detection of $10^{15}$~eV $\gamma$ rays from Cygnus X-3 with an abnormal muon content in the showers that could have been interpreted as a possible new physics.
This result was highly controversial, see \cite{Bonnet-Bidaud 1988} for a full discussion, but it created some interest in the HEP community and triggered a move of new teams to this field that brought in their own expertise and technology.
Other Cherenkov techniques, developped in France and based on a sampling of the Cherenkov wave front with many telescopes spread on the ground also proved to be efficient in rejecting the night sky and hadronic background, and they were able to confirm the Crab nebula emission at VHE energies : ASGAT \cite{Goret 1993} in 1992 and THEMISTOCLE \cite{Baillon 1993} in 1993.
This wavefront sampling technique was subsequently extended to lower energies (around or below 100 GeV) by using fields of large heliostats built for solar energy plants (so called solar farms) with the addition of a secondary optics such as in experiments like CELESTE \cite{Pare 2002} \cite{de Naurois 2002}, STACEE \cite{Gingrich 2005}, GRAAL \cite{Arqueros 2002} and Solar Two \cite{Tumer 1999} which were able to detect the strongest sources at the level of the Crab nebula flux, but suffered from a limited field of view hampering their background rejection.
\subsubsection{Further developments of the imaging technique}
In the years following the successful detection of the Crab nebula, most of the progress came from further developments in the technique of imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes (IACT) with a progressive increase of the granularity of image detectors.
For instance the camera at the focus of the Whipple telescope first upgrade from 37 to 109 pixels allowed the detection a second VHE source which turned
out to be extragalactic : an AGN (active galactic nucleus) Mrk 421 \cite{Punch 1992}.
It was soon followed by a series of further upgrades to 151 pixels in 1996, 331 pixels in 1997 and 490 pixels in 1999.
Building upon the development of the imaging technique, and following a dedicated workshop organized in 1992 by P. Fleury and G. Vacanti in Palaiseau, several new IACT came also online worldwide in the 1990’s such as the CANGAROO I telescope \cite{Hara 1993} operated from 1992 to 1998 with a 220 pixel camera; or the MARK VI detector \cite{Armstrong 1999} operated from 1995 to 2000 with a central imaging (109 pixels) telescope complemented by two additional simpler telescopes for triggering purpose.
During this period two important advances were achieved:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\bullet$] The power of stereoscopic observation of air showers was demonstrated by the HEGRA collaboration operating a set of 5 telescopes \cite{Daum 1997} from 1996 to 2002, each with a 271 pixel camera, allowing a better assessment of the shower geometry, and hence an improved rejection of the hadronic background and yielding an increase in sensitivity of about a factor 10 compared to a single telescope of the same size.
\item[$\bullet$] The importance of having a very fast and fine grained camera associated with a more sophisticated analysis was demonstrated by the CAT collaboration \cite{Barrau 1998} \cite{Le Bohec 1998} using, also from 1996 to 2002, a telescope with a 546 pixel camera and a 12 ns integration time, allowing an energy threshold comparable to that of the Whipple telescope to be reached with a much smaller mirror (16~m$^2$), compared to that of Whipple (60~m$^2$).
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Present major IACT systems}
Another milestone was reached in April 1997 when 3 major experiments (CAT, HEGRA and Whipple observatory) detected the same flaring episode of the AGN Mrk 501.
It was the first simultaneous detection of a flaring source and the coherent light curve, assembled from these observations (see figure \ref{fig:mkn97}) and taking benefit
of their spread in longitude, was presented \cite{Djannati 1997} at the Kruger Park workshop (the 5th in the series initiated at Palaiseau in 1992).
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{mkn501_97.eps}
\caption{\it April 1997 nightly gamma-ray rate from the active galactic nucleus Mrk~501, as seen by three experiments: CAT, Whipple observatory and HEGRA.}
\label{fig:mkn97}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
This new and exciting result brought much confidence and credit to the field and induced a strong push to build new facilities combining the
best of these three detectors: large dishes to lower the energy threshold, fast and fine grained cameras to get the best from image analysis and
stereoscopic observation with several telescopes as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:hwch}.
The first of these new projects was the evolution, starting in 1997, towards Cangaroo II and then to Cangaroo III \cite{Kubo 2004}, which led to the operation from 2003 to 2011 of a 4 telescope array (3 tel. only beyond 2004), of 10~m IACTs equipped with a 427/552 pixel camera.
But due to various factors, among which the technical choices for phototubes and the mirror technology, its sensitivity was quickly outperformed by the present major IACT systems : H.E.S.S. \cite{Stegmann 2012 & Bolmont 2014}, MAGIC \cite{Aleksic 2012} and VERITAS \cite{Kieda 2013}. These large VHE gamma-ray observatories are presented with more details in a separate paper of this volume \cite{ground}, and their
main characteristics are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:iact}.
\begin{table}[thb]
\begin{center}
\caption{\it Main characteristics of present major IACT systems.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|}\hline
System & Location & ~Number of~ & ~Mirror area~ & ~Number of~ & Date of \\
& & telescopes & & pixels & first light \\ \hline \hline
& & 4 & $4 \times 108$~m$^2$ & $4 \times 960$ & Dec. 2003 \\
H.E.S.S. & Namibia & & & & \\
& & 1 & +~614~m$^2$ & +~2048 & July 2012 \\ \hline
& La Palma & & & & ~2004 (1 tel.)~ \\
MAGIC & Canary & 2 & $2 \times 236$~m$^2$ & $2 \times 576$ & \\
& Islands & & & & ~2009 (2 tel.)~ \\ \hline
& ~near Tucson~ & & & & \\
VERITAS & & 4 & $4 \times 110$~m$^2$ & $4 \times 499$ & Jan. 2007 \\
& Arizona & & & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:iact}
\end{center}
\end{table}
H.E.S.S. (High Energy Stereoscopic System) has been designed as a general purpose detector for observing the southern sky (where most of our galaxy is located) with an unprecedented sensitivity. It started observations in 2004 and was awarded the Descartes Prize of the European Commission in 2006 - the highest recognition for collaborative research - and the prestigious Rossi Prize of the American Astronomical Society in 2010. Its initial energy threshold (100 GeV for the four telescope system) has recently been improved (below 50 GeV) by the addition of a fifth larger telescope.
\begin{figure}[h,b,t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{hess.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth]{whipple_2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{cat_2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{hegra_2.eps}
\caption{\it Illustration of the combination in H.E.S.S. (upper panel) of large dishes as in Whipple (lower left), fast and fine grained cameras as in CAT (lower centre) and stereoscopic observation as in HEGRA (lower right)]. Image credits: Christian F\"ohr, MPIK - Whipple TBD - CNRS Phototh\`eque/IN2P3 Fran\c{c}ois Toussenel - HEGRA TBD}
\label{fig:hwch}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The MAGIC collaboration started with a single large telescope optimized for the low energy observation of transient phenomena and the
study of distant AGNs. It was later complemented by a second identical telescope to allow stereoscopic observations and benefit of the
associated background reduction that allowed the detection of the pulsed $\gamma$-ray emission of the Crab in the 50-400 GeV energy range.
Finally, VERITAS (Very Energetic Radiation Imaging Telescope Array System) came online in 2007.
It has recently (2012) been upgraded to include a better trigger system, higher quantum efficiency phototubes, and high speed networking, with the
result of an improved $\gamma$-ray sensitivity and an energy threshold reduced by 30\%.
Since 2007, it has detected more than 20 extra-galactic objects, and in the recent years, its focus has shifted from discovery of new targets to long-term monitoring of known sources.
The wealth of the scientific harvest of these IACT has pushed all groups to unite in the preparation of the world-wide CTA (Cherenkov Telescope Array) project \cite{Acharya 2013} which aims at expanding the energy coverage, improving the angular resolution and increasing the sensitivity by a factor 10.
\subsubsection{Ground-based detectors with a wide field-of-view}
Another technique, based on revisiting surface arrays must also be reported here: scintillation counters are now replaced by big water tanks in which a large fraction of the shower particles that reach the (high altitude) ground are detected through their Cherenkov light emission in water. This allows dense arrays to be built, reaching a high efficiency of particle detection over a large area, and now makes it possible to detect astrophysical $\gamma$-ray sources. This water Cherenkov technique gave its first source detections with the MILAGRO \cite{Abdo 2006} array (2000-2008). The present major detector of this type is the HAWC (High Altitude Water Cherenkov) $\gamma$-ray observatory \cite{Abeysekara 2013} whose construction has just been completed using 55 kilotons of water distributed over 300 tanks at an altitude of 4100 m a.s.l.
Its energy threshold will be higher than IACT's and its hadron rejection and angular resolution will not reach the IACT level, but
HAWC will observe continuously (while IACT have a maximum of 20\% of duty cycle), have a much wider field of view (though its effective energy threshold increases rapidly with zenith angle) and offer a good stability and ease of operation. So, HAWC will be very complementary to IACT and will notably allow a full sky survey at TeV energies, the detection of unexpected transients for providing alerts to pointed instruments, and the study of large extended sources.
\subsubsection{Presently detected VHE $\gamma$-ray sources: a rich catalogue}
All the VHE gamma-ray sources and the associated publications are registered in an online catalogue, TeVCat \cite{TeVCat}, from which sky maps and characteristic tables can easily be extracted.
This database shows that 155 highly significant sources have now been published in referred journals (or recently announced).
Fig.~\ref{fig:vhe_sources}a displays how this number has grown over time, from the first discovery in 1989 to the end of 2014. It clearly exhibits a slow evolution until 1996 (only 3 sources by that time), a more visible slope over [1996-2004] due to camera upgrades or new telescopes coming online, and a very fast rise from 2005 onwards when H.E.S.S. started operations, soon followed by MAGIC and VERITAS and bringing the source count to its present level of 155.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.40\linewidth]{evol.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\linewidth]{vhe_skymap.eps}
\caption{\it (a) Evolution over time (year of announcement) of the number of VHE gamma-ray sources (TeVCat \cite{TeVCat}), with the contributions
from H.E.S.S., MAGIC and VERITAS. (b) Sky map of the present 155 VHE gamma-ray sources (TeVCat \cite{TeVCat}) in galactic coordinates (Hammer projection)
with a zoom on the Galactic Centre area.}
\label{fig:vhe_sources}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
A sky map of these VHE gamma-ray sources in galactic coordinates is shown in Fig.~{\ref{fig:vhe_sources}b. The contribution of the galactic sources is concentrated close to the horizontal axis and most of the sources situated away from this axis are extragalactic active galactic nuclei. The physics properties of these various objects are discussed in the other papers of this topical issue of Comptes Rendus Physique.
It was not possible to cover all experiments in this short historical introduction, and a more comprehensive coverage of VHE gamma-ray astronomy can be found in several recent reviews \cite{Fegan 2012}, \cite{Lorenz 2012}, \cite{Hillas 2013}.
\section{Outline of the review}
With the present introduction, the first volume of this review includes two articles on instrumentation (from space and from the ground), a theoretical basis on particle acceleration in astrophysical plasmas and on radiation mechanisms, and articles on several galactic objects: pulsars, binary systems, supernova remnants and pulsar wind nebulae, and the Galactic Centre region.
The second volume covers extragalactic sources (starburst galaxies, active galactic nuclei and gamma-ray bursts)
and applications to fundamental physics (search for primary black holes and Dark Matter,
search for Lorentz invariance violation and for axion-like particles).
The second volume is completed by a review of future projects in $\gamma$-ray astronomy.
\section{Glossary}
The acronyms currently used in
the articles of the two volumes are explicited in the following glossary.\\
\begin{description}
\item[1FGL,2FGL,3FGL]: first, second and third catalogs of Fermi LAT.
\item[1LAC,2LAC,3LAC]: first, second and third AGN catalogs of Fermi LAT.
\item[ACT]: Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescope.
\item[AdEPT]: Advanced Energetic Pair Telescope.
\item[AGILE]: Astro-rivelatore Gamma a Immagini LEggero.
\item[AGN]: Active Galactic Nucleus.
\item[ALP]: Axion-like particle.
\item[ASGAT]: AStronomie GAmma \`a Th\'emis.
\item[AU]: Astronomical unit.
\item[BATSE]: Burst and Transient Source Experiment (on board CGRO satellite).
\item[BH]: Black hole.
\item[BL Lac]: Class of active galactic nuclei similar to BL Lacertae.
\item[BW]: Black widow.
\item[CALET]: CALorimetric Electron Telescope.
\item[CANGAROO]: Collaboration of Australia and Nippon for a GAmma Ray Observatory in the Outback.
\item[CAT]: Cherenkov Array at Th\'emis.
\item[CELESTE]: CErenkov Low Energy Sampling and Timing Experiment.
\item[CGRO]: Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory.
\item[CL]: Confidence limit.
\item[CMB]: Cosmic Microwave Background.
\item[CMZ]: Central molecular zone (part of the Galactic Centre region)
\item[COMPTEL]: Compton telescope (on board CGRO satellite).
\item[CR]: Cosmic Rays.
\item[CTA]: Cherenkov Telescope Array.
\item[CWB]: Colliding wind binary.
\item[DAMPE]: Dark Matter Particle Explorer (satellite).
\item[DIGB]: Diffuse isotropic gamma-ray background.
\item[DM]: Dark matter.
\item[DSA]: Diffusive shock acceleration.
\item[DSSD]: Double-sided silicon strip detector.
\item[EAS]: Extensive air shower.
\item[EBL]: Extragalactic background light.
\item[EED]: Electron energy distribution.
\item[EGB]: Extragalactic gamma-ray background.
\item[EGRET]: Energetic Gamma Ray Experiment Telescope (on board CGRO satellite).
\item[FIDO]: Force-free Inside the light cylinder and Dissipative Outside (model of pulsar environment).
\item[FR~I, FR~II]: Fanaroff-Riley I and II (radiogalaxies).
\item[FSRQ]: Flat spectrum radio-quasar.
\item[GBM]: Gamma Ray Burst Monitor (on board Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope).
\item[GAMMA-400]: Gamma Astronomical Multifunctional Modular Apparatus with the
maximum gamma-ray energy of 400 GeV.
\item[GC]: Galactic Centre.
\item[GJ]: Goldreich-Julian (model of pulsar magnetospheres).
\item[GLAST]: Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope (former name of the Fermi space
telescope).
\item[GRAAL]: Gamma Ray Astronomy at ALmeria.
\item[GRB]: Gamma Ray Burst.
\item[HAGAR]: High Altitude GAmma Ray (telescope).
\item[HARPO]: Hermetic ARgon POlarimeter.
\item[HAWK]: High Altitude Water Cherenkov (telescope).
\item[HEGRA]: High Energy Gamma Ray Astronomy (array of 5 telescopes).
\item[HE]: High energy (100 MeV-100 GeV).
\item[HERD]: High Energy cosmic Radiation Detection.
\item[H.E.S.S.]: High Energy Stereoscopic System.
\item[HiSCORE]: Hundred Square-km Cosmic ORigin Explorer.
\item[HSP]: High-synchrotron-peak (blazar).
\item[HVC]: High velocity cloud.
\item[INTEGRAL]: INternational Gamma-Ray Astrophysics Laboratory.
\item[ISM]: Interstellar medium.
\item[ISP]: Intermediate-synchrotron-peak (blazar).
\item[IACT]: Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescope.
\item[IC]: Inverse Compton radiation.
\item[ICRC]: International Cosmic Ray Conference.
\item[KM3Net]: Cubic Kilometer NEutrino Telescope.
\item[LAT]: Large Area Telescope (Fermi Gamma ray Space Telescope).
\item[LHAASO]: Large High Altitude Air Shower Observatory.
\item[LMC]: Large Magellanic Cloud.
\item[LMXB]: Low-mass X-ray binary.
\item[LIV]: Lorentz invariance violation.
\item[LSP]: Low-synchrotron peak (blazar).
\item[LST]: Large size telescopes (in CTA).
\item[MACE]: Major Atmospheric Cherenkov Experiment.
\item[MAGIC]: Major Atmospheric Gamma-ray Imaging Cherenkov telescope.
\item[MAGN]: Misaligned active galactic nuclei.
\item[MHD]: Magneto hydrodynamics.
\item[MSP]: Millisecond pulsar.
\item[MST]: Medium size telescopes (in CTA).
\item[NFW]: Navarro-Frenk-White (halo profile).
\item[NIR]: Near infrared
\item[OSO-3]: Third satellite of the Orbiting Solar Observatory program.
\item[OSSE]: Oriented Scintillation Spectrometer Experiment (on board CGRO
satellite).
\item[PAM]: Photon-ALP mixing.
\item[PANGU]: PAir-productioN Gamma-ray Unit.
\item[PBH]: Primordial black hole.
\item[PIC]: Particle-in-cell (simulations).
\item[PMT]: Photo-multiplier tube.
\item[PWN]: Pulsar wind nebula.
\item[QCD]: Quantum chromodynamics.
\item[QED]: Quantum electrodynamics.
\item[QG]: Quantum gravity.
\item[RB ]: Redback.
\item[RL-NLS1]: Radio-loud narrow-line Seyfert 1 (galaxy).
\item[SAS-2]: second Small Imaging Satellite.
\item[SSC]: Synchrotron Self Compton (model).
\item[SSD]: Silicon strip detector.
\item[SED]: Spectral Energy Distribution.
\item[SEP]: Strong equivalence principle.
\item[SMBH]: Supermassive black hole.
\item[SN]: Supernova.
\item[SNR]: Supernova remnant.
\item[SR]: Synchrotron radiation.
\item[SST]: Small size telescopes (in CTA).
\item[STACEE]: Solar Tower Atmospheric Cherenkov Effect Experiment.
\item[SVOM]: Space-based multi-band astronomical Variable Objects Monitor.
\item[SW]: Striped wind.
\item[THEMISTOCLE]: Tracking High Energy Muons In Showers Triggered On Cherenkov Light Emission.
\item[UHE]: Ultra-high energy (above 1 PeV).
\item[VERITAS]: Very Energetic Radiation Imaging Telescope Array System.
\item[VHE]: Very high energy (above 100 GeV).
\item[VLBI]: Very-long-base interferometry.
\item[WCD]: Water Cherenkov detectors.
\item[WIMP]: Weakly interacting massive particle.
\item[WMAP]: Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe.
\end{description}
\section{Acknowlegements}
We are grateful to Dr.~Steve Fegan for fruitful discussions in the preparation of the article.
Figures \ref{fig:sed}, \ref{fig:oso-cosb} and \ref{fig:egret_fermi} are reproduced by permission of AAS.
|
\section{Introduction}
The complete tree-level S-matrix of a large variety of field theories of massless particles are now known (or conjectured) to have a description in terms of contour integrals over ${\cal M}_{0,n}$, the moduli space of $n$-punctured Riemann sphere
\cite{Cachazo:2013hca,Cachazo:2013iea,Cachazo:2014xea,Mason:2013sva,Dolan:2013isa,Berkovits:2013xba,Adamo:2013tsa,Gomez:2013wza,Dolan:2014ega,
Geyer:2014fka,Cachazo:2014nsa,Ohmori:2015,MasonC}. Some of these theories are Yang-Mills, Einstein gravity, Dirac-Born-Infeld, and the $U(N)$ non-linear sigma model \cite{Cachazo:2014xea,Ohmori:2015}. The new formulas for the scattering of $n$ particles are given as a sum over multidimensional residues \cite{harris} on ${\cal M}_{0,n}$.
In addition, many algorithms have been created in order to compute these kind of contour integrals \cite{Kalousios:2013eca,Kalousios:2015fya,humbertoF,jacobrules,jacobSF,Cardonaone,Cardonatwo,fengalgorithm,LamECHY,Weinzierl:2014vwa,mafra}, as well as much progress have been done at loop level \cite{Adamo:2015,Adamo:2013tsa,Casali:2014hfa,Masonloop1,jacobrulesloop,
Qcutone,Qcuttwo,fengplanarloop,Masonloop2,ellisloop1,ellisloop2}.
Denoting the position of $n$ punctures on a sphere by $\{ z_1,z_2,\ldots z_n\}$ and using $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ to fix three of them, say $z_1,z_2,z_3$, there is a rational map from ${\mathbb C}^{n-3}\to {\mathbb C}^{n-3}$ which is a function of the space of kinematic invariants for the scattering of $n$ massless particles ($k_a^2=0$), $s_{ab} = k_a\cdot k_b$,
\begin{equation}
E_a(z) =\sum_{b=1,b\neq a}^n\frac{s_{ab}}{z_a-z_b} \,,\quad {\rm for} \quad a\in \{1,2,\ldots ,n\},
\end{equation}
with $a\in \{4,5,\ldots ,n\}$.
Using this map scattering amplitudes are defined as the sum over the residues of
\begin{equation}\label{form1}
{\cal M}_n = \int d^{n-3}z\frac{|1,2,3|^2\,\,H(z)}{E_4(z)E_5(z)\cdots E_n(z)}.
\end{equation}
over all the zeroes of the map $\{E_4,E_5,\ldots ,E_n\}$. Here $|1,2,3|=(z_1-z_2)(z_2-z_3)(z_3-z_1)$ and $H(z)$ is a rational function that depends on the theory under consideration. The equations defining the zeroes, $E_a=0$, are known as the scattering equations \cite{Fairlie:1972,Roberts:1972,Fairlie:2008dg,Gross:1987ar,Witten:2004cp,Caputa:2011zk,Caputa:2012pi,Makeenko:2011dm,Cachazo:2012da}. In section \ref{preliminaries} we will give a short review about this ideas.
The representation \eqref{form1} of scattering amplitudes makes many properties manifest. Some of them are gauge invariance, soft limits, BCJ relations and the existence of KLT formulas \cite{SWsoft,freddysoft,chileG,soft1,soft2,soft3,Kawai:1985xq,Bern:2008qj,Bern:1998sv,humbertoF,freddyklt1,freddyklt2}. The drawback is that integrals of the form \eqref{form1} require the solution of polynomial equations whose degree increases with the number of particles.
In this paper we reformulate the formula for scattering amplitudes in terms of a double cover of the punctured sphere. More precisely, we consider a sphere as a curve in ${\mathbb CP}^2$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{initialcurve}
y^2 = \sigma^2-\Lambda^2,
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda$ is a non zero constant parameter.
Clearly, the curve is invariant under a simultaneous scaling of the coordinates $(y,\sigma,\Lambda)$. The new formulation is schematically given by
\begin{equation}\label{form2}
{\cal M}_n ={1\over {\rm Vol}(PSL(2,\mathbb{C}))} \int \prod_{a=1}^n \left(\frac{(y_a\,d y_a)}{\prod_{a=1}^n (y_a^2-\sigma_a^2 + \Lambda^2)}\right)
\prod_{b=1}^n\frac{d\sigma_b\,\,\,H(\sigma,y,\Lambda)}{ E_b(\sigma,y,\Lambda )}.
\end{equation}
Integration over both residues of the curve implements the sums over choices of branches.
In the double cover description each puncture is specified by a pair of complex numbers $(\sigma_a,y_a)$. The value of $y_a$ indicates the branch where the puncture is located. The new form of the components of the map $E_a$ is
\begin{equation}
E_a(\sigma,y,\Lambda ) = \sum_{b=1,b\neq a}^n\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{y_b}{y_a}+1\right)\frac{s_{ab}}{\sigma_a-\sigma_b}.
\end{equation}
This form is very easy to motivate and it is done in section \ref{sthreedc}.
The differential form being integrated in the double cover version of the formula for ${\cal M}_n$ is invariant under the global rescaling inherited from ${\mathbb CP}^2$. This ${\mathbb C}^*$ group can be promoted to a full redundancy of the description introducing the scale measure
\begin{equation}\label{mlambda}
\frac{1}{{\rm vol}({\mathbb C}^*)}\frac{d\Lambda}{\Lambda},
\end{equation}
where the $\Lambda$ factor is proportional to the square root of the discriminant of the quadratic curve in \eqref{initialcurve}, $\Delta=4\Lambda^2$.
The ${\mathbb C}^*$ action is non-trivial on the puncture locations, this means that one can combine the new $\mathbb{C}^*$ action with the $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ group of the sphere and use it to fix the $\sigma$ coordinate of four punctures. Doing so leaves $\Lambda$ as an integration variable to be fixed by the scattering equations. This is done in section \ref{new gauge fixing}.
In section \ref{residuetheorem} we show that the global residue theorem can be used to replace one of the components of the map, say $E_n$, by $\Lambda$. As it turns out the residue theorem only picks up poles at $\Lambda=0$ and at $\Lambda=\infty$ and both are identical. At $\Lambda=0$ the branch cut connecting the two branches of the double cover closes and the integrals separates into sectors. Each sector is determined by the distribution of the punctures between the two branches. The amplitude then becomes schematically
\begin{equation}
{\cal M}_n = \sum_{U\cup D}{\cal M}_U^{\rm off-shell} \frac{1}{P^2_U} {\cal M}_D^{\rm off-shell}.
\end{equation}
where the sum is over possible distributions of punctures and ${\cal M}^{\rm off-shell}$ refers to amplitudes where one particle, corresponding to the puncture created by the closing of the branch cut is off-shell.
We apply this procedure to more general integrals over the moduli space which appear as parts of physical amplitudes in their CHY representation. In these more general cases, when the integrand has at most double poles on the boundary of the moduli space ${\cal M}_{n,0}$ then the propagator is a standard Feynman propagator. An example of an integral with at most double poles is
\begin{equation}
\int d^n z\frac{1}{E_1(z)E_2(z)\cdots E_n(z)}\frac{1}{(123\cdots n)^2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{PTdef}
(123\cdots n) := (z_1-z_2)(z_2-z_3)\cdots (z_n-z_1).
\end{equation}
This integral is known to give the sum over all Feynman diagrams computing a partial amplitude in a cubic scalar theory in the bi-adjoint representation of $U(N)\times U(M)$. Iterating the procedure gives rise to a novel set of diagrams where the buliding blocks are four-particle amplitudes and propagators.
When the integrand has higher order poles on the moduli space one finds generalized propagators which are made from higher powers of kinematic invariant. One example, explicitly compute in section \ref{mainsection}, is a six-particle integral
\begin{equation}
\int d^6 z\frac{1}{E_1(z)E_2(z)\cdots E_6(z)}\frac{1}{(1234)^2(56)^2}
\end{equation}
with $(56)=(z_5-z_6)(z_6-z_5)$ consistent with the definition \eqref{PTdef}. This integral has poles of the form $1/s_{56}^3$.
A very familiar way of understanding this process is by analogy with the Stukelberg procedure for taking massless limits of massive vector bosons \cite{procafield}. The mass parameter is played by the kinematic invariant controlling the factorization limit while the Stukelberg field is played by the $\Lambda$ parameter.
All this process is shown in section \ref{mainsection}, where we formulate a new algorithm and in section \ref{examples} we give three non trivial examples.
In section \ref{jacobvslambda} we compare our method with the rules given in \cite{jacobrules} by Baadsgaard {\bf et al}. We also generalize the new algorithm to non trivial numerators and we give a simple example.
Finally, we end in section \ref{discussion} with discussions.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{preliminaries}
In this section we review the basic CHY construction \cite{Cachazo:2013hca,Cachazo:2013iea,Cachazo:2014xea} and show some examples that motivate the double-cover construction.
\subsection{CHY Construction}
Consider the scattering of $n$ massless particles. The scattering data is determined in terms of a set of $n$ momentum vectors $\{ k_1^\mu,k_2^\mu,\ldots ,k_n^\mu \}$ and $n$ wave functions $\{ \epsilon_1^\mu,\epsilon_2^\mu,\ldots ,\epsilon_n^\mu \}$. Here we take the wave functions to be polarization vectors as higher spin wave functions, e.g. for gravitons, can be constructed using tensor products. In a slightly different terminology from the original CHY construction, one introduces $n$ rational functions of the puncture locations, $z_a$, defined by \cite{Gross:1987ar,Cachazo:2013hca}
\begin{equation}
E_a = \sum_{b=1,b\neq a}^n \frac{s_{ab}}{z_a-z_b}.
\end{equation}
It is easy to show that three linear combinations vanish
\begin{equation}
\sum_{a=1}^n z_a^m E_a = 0 \quad {\rm for} \quad m \in \{0,1,2\}.
\end{equation}
Recalling that different configurations of punctures on a ${\mathbb CP}^1$ are to be identified if they differ by a $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ transformation. This means that the location of three punctures can be fixed. It is possible to show that for any rational function $H(z)$ which transforms as
\begin{equation}\label{int_trans}
H(z)\to H(z)\prod_{a=1}^n(\gamma z_a+\delta )^4 ,\quad {\rm when} \quad z_a \to \frac{\alpha z_a+\beta}{\gamma z_a+\delta} \quad{\rm and}\quad\alpha\delta-\beta\gamma=1,
\end{equation}
the contour integral \cite{Cachazo:2013hca}
\begin{equation}
\int \prod_{a=1,a\neq \{i,j,k\}}^n dz_a \frac{|ijk|_z |pqr|_z}{\prod_{c=1,c\neq \{p,q,r\}}^n E_c(z)}H(z)
\end{equation}
that computes one of the local residues at a zero of the map ${\mathbb C}^{n-3}\to {\mathbb C}^{n-3}$ is independent of the choice of fixed punctures $\{z_i,z_j,z_k\}$ and of equations eliminated $\{E_p,E_q,E_r\}$ to construct the map. In this formula $|ijk|$ stands for the Vandermonde determinant of $z_i,z_j,z_k$.
One way to see that this is the case is to realize that the generators of $PSL(2,{\mathbb C})$ are
\begin{equation}
L_1 = \sum_{a=1}^n\partial_{z_a}, \quad L_0 = \sum_{a=1}^n z_a \partial_{z_a}, \quad L_{-1} = \sum_{a=1}^n z^2_a \partial_{z_a}.
\end{equation}
Treating the $PSL(2,{\mathbb C})$ as a redundance of the integral and using a gauge fixing procedure one can check that the Fadeev-Popov determinant is indeed
\begin{equation}\label{zgfixing}
|ijk|_z = \left|
\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & ~z_i & ~z_i^2 \\
1 & ~z_j & ~z_j^2 \\
1 & ~z_k & ~z_k^2 \\
\end{array}
\right|.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Examples}
The CHY representation of many theories are known (or are conjectured). In this subsection we review some of them in order to motivate the constructions in this paper.
Let us start with Einstein gravity \cite{Cachazo:2013hca,Cachazo:2013iea}. The integrand $H$ is computed as the reduced determinant of a matrix
a $2n\times 2n$ antisymmetric matrix
\begin{equation}\label{Psi}
\Psi = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
A & -C^{\rm T} \\
C & B \\
\end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
where $A$, $B$ and $C$ are $n\times n$ matrices. The first two matrices have components
\begin{equation}
A_{ab} = \begin{cases} \displaystyle \frac{k_{a}\cdot k_b}{z_{a}-z_{b}} & a\neq b,\\
\displaystyle \quad ~~ 0 & a=b,\end{cases} \qquad B_{ab} = \begin{cases} \displaystyle \frac{\epsilon_a\cdot\epsilon_b}{z_{a}-z_{b}} & a\neq b,\\
\displaystyle \quad ~~ 0 & a=b,\end{cases}
\label{ABmatrix}
\end{equation}
while the third is given by
\begin{equation}
C_{ab} = \begin{cases} \displaystyle \frac{\epsilon_a \cdot k_b}{z_{a}-z_{b}} &\quad a\neq b,\\
\displaystyle -\sum_{c=1;c\neq a}^n\frac{\epsilon_a \cdot k_c}{z_{a}-z_{c}} &\quad a=b.\end{cases}
\end{equation}
This matrix depends on the momenta $k^\mu_a$ and on polarization vectors $\epsilon_a^\mu$.
The diagonal components of the $C$ matrix can be written in a manifestly $PSL(2,{\mathbb C})$ covariant way by choosing a momentum vector, say $k_n$ if $a\neq n$, and eliminating it using momentum conservation
\begin{equation}
C_{aa} = -\sum_{b=1,b\neq a}^{n-1}\epsilon_a \cdot k_c\frac{(z_{n}-z_{c})}{(z_{a}-z_{c})(z_{a}-z_{n})}.
\end{equation}
The integrand is given by
\begin{equation}
H^{\rm gravity}(z) = {\rm det}'\Psi = \frac{1}{(z_i-z_j)^2}\det\Psi_{ij}^{ij},
\end{equation}
where $\Psi^{ij}_{ij}$ is the $(n-2)\times (n-2)$ matrix obtained from $\Psi$ by removing the rows $(i,j)$ and the columns $(i,j)$.
The second example is that of the scattering of gluons in a $U(N)$ Yang-Mills theory \cite{Cachazo:2013hca,Cachazo:2013iea}. The coefficient of the trace ${\rm Tr}(T^{a_1}T^{a_2}\cdots T^{a_n})$ is computed by the integrand
\begin{equation}
H^{\rm YM}(z) = \frac{1}{(123\cdots n)}{\rm Pf}'\Psi ,
\end{equation}
where ${\rm Pf}'\Psi = (z_i-z_j)^{-1}{\rm Pf}\Psi^{ij}_{ij}$ and $(123\cdots n) = (z_1-z_2)(z_2-z_3)\cdots (z_n-z_1)$.
The third example is that of a scalar theory in the bi-adjoint representation of $U(N)\times U(\tilde N)$ \cite{Cachazo:2013iea}. The coefficient of the trace ${\rm Tr}(T^{a_1}T^{a_2}\cdots T^{a_n}){\rm Tr}({\tilde T}^{a_{w(1)}}{\tilde T}^{a_{w(2)}}\cdots {\tilde T}^{a_{w(n)}})$ with $w$ some permutation of labels, is given by
\begin{equation}\label{scalarH}
H^{\rm scalar}(z) = \frac{1}{(123\cdots n)}\times \frac{1}{(w(1)w(2)w(3)\cdots w(n))}.
\end{equation}
The last two examples are also purely scalar theories but with derivative interactions \cite{Cachazo:2014nsa,Cachazo:2014xea}.
The fourth example is a special Galileon theory (sGal) that possesses more non-linearly realized symmetries than a generic Galileon. Amplitudes in this theory are computed using
\begin{equation}
H^{\rm sGal}(z) = \left({\rm det}' A\right)^2 ,
\end{equation}
where ${\rm det}' A = (z_i-z_j)^{-2}{\rm det}A^{ij}_{ij}$.
The fifth and final example is the $U(N)$ non-linear sigma model. The term proportional to the trace ${\rm Tr}(T^{a_1}T^{a_2}\cdots T^{a_n})$ is computed by
\begin{equation}
H^{\rm NLSM}(z) = \frac{1}{(123\cdots n)}{\rm det}'A ,
\end{equation}
In order to illustrate the kind of integrals we are interested in performing let us consider ${\rm det}' A$ for four particles,
\begin{equation}
{\rm det}' A_4 = \frac{1}{(z_1-z_2)^2}\left|
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & \frac{s_{34}}{z_3-z_4} \\
\frac{s_{34}}{z_4-z_3} & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right|.
\end{equation}
This means that the integrands of the Galileon and NLSM are
\begin{equation}
H^{\rm sGal}_4 = s_{34}^4\times \frac{1}{(z_1-z_2)^4(z_3-z_4)^4}, \quad H^{\rm NLSM}_4 = s_{34}^2\times \frac{1}{(1234)}\frac{1}{(z_1-z_2)^2(z_3-z_4)^2}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Singularities on ${\cal M}_{0,n}$}
The examples given above make it clear that a variety of integrands $H(z)$ can appear. One way to classify them is by the kind of singularities they have as different boundaries on the moduli space of a punctured sphere are approached. The largest codimension singularities are when two punctures approach each other. Consider for example the integrands for four particles \cite{Cachazo:2013iea,Cachazo:2014nsa,Cachazo:2014xea}
\begin{equation}
H^{\rm \phi^3}_4 \!\!\sim \frac{1}{(1234)^2},~~ H^{\rm NLSM}_4 \!\!\sim \frac{1}{(1234)}\frac{1}{(z_1-z_2)^2(z_3-z_4)^2}, ~~H^{\rm sGal}_4 \!\!\sim \frac{1}{(z_1-z_2)^4(z_3-z_4)^4}\nonumber.
\end{equation}
Clearly, the first integrand has double poles as any two consecutive punctures approach each other $z_a\to z_{a+1}$ and no other poles. The second integrand has a triple poles when $z_1\to z_2$ and when $z_3\to z_4$ and simple poles when $z_2\to z_3$ and when $z_4\to z_1$. Finally, the last integrand only has fourth order poles when $z_1\to z_2$ and when $z_3\to z_4$. It is easy to show that the order of the pole is related to the order of the propagator associated to the coincident punctures. If the integrand as a $(m+1)^{\rm th}$ order pole when $z_a\to z_b$ then the integral has a pole of the form $1/s_{ab}^m$.
In the rest of this paper we develop a double cover formulation which is tailored for exploiting the behavior of integrands near boundaries of the moduli space. This method not only becomes a powerful tool in the evaluation of integrals but it also makes physical properties manifest such as crossing and factorization.
\section{Double-Cover Formulation}\label{sthreedc}
We consider a sphere as a curve in ${\mathbb CP}^2$ defined by \cite{harris}
\begin{equation}\label{ac}
y^2 = \sigma^2-\Lambda^2.
\end{equation}
We call this curve $\Sigma$ and it can be interpreted as two sheets joined by a branch cut. We take $\sigma$ as the coordinate on a sheet and $y$ as the variable determining the branch. $\Lambda$ is taken to be a constant parameter that controls the opening of the branch cut joining the branch points $\sigma=-\Lambda$ and $\sigma=\Lambda$.
The location of $n$-punctures on $\Sigma$ is given by $n$ pairs $\{(\sigma_a,y_a)\}$. We would like to find formulation of the maps $E_a$ defining the scattering equations for this curve. Clearly, $E_a$ must have a simple pole when puncture $a$ coincides with puncture $b$. On $\Sigma$, it is not enough to have $\sigma_a \to \sigma_b$ but we also need $y_a\to y_b$, i.e., they must be on the same branch. When $\sigma_a\to \sigma_b$ one can have either $y_a\to y_b$ or $y_a\to -y_b$. So we need a projector, $P_{b}^{(a)}$, that gives one in the former and zero in the latter. One choice is
\begin{equation}
P_{b}^{(a)} = \frac{1}{2}\left( \frac{y_b}{y_a}+1 \right).
\end{equation}
This turns out to be the correct choice and one has
\begin{equation}
E_a(\sigma,y ) = \sum_{b=1,b\neq a}^n\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{y_b}{y_a}+1\right)\frac{s_{ab}}{\sigma_a-\sigma_b}.
\end{equation}
One important condition the equations have to satisfy is that they must be covariant under the exchange of $\sigma$ and $y$ (with $\Lambda\to i\Lambda$) which is a symmetry of the curve $\Sigma$. It is easy to check that on the support of $y_b^2 = \sigma_b^2-\Lambda^2$, the function $y_a E_a$ is invariant.
Having found the new version of the maps $E_a$ which give rise to the scattering equations, the next step is to translate the rational function $H(z)$ which defines the theory under consideration. All such functions can be decomposed as linear combinations of functions of the form \cite{humbertoF}
\begin{equation}\label{general_H}
H(z ) = \frac{1}{(\alpha(1)\alpha(2)\cdots \alpha(n))(\gamma(1)\gamma(2)\cdots \gamma(n))}f(r_{ijkl}),
\end{equation}
where $(\alpha(1)\alpha(2)\cdots \alpha(n))$ and $(\gamma(1)\gamma(2)\cdots \gamma(n))$ are Parke-Taylor factors with ordering $\alpha$ and $\gamma$ (see \eqref{PTdef} for the Parke-Taylor factor definition \cite{Parke:1986gb}). $f$ is a rational function of $r_{ijkl}$ which are general cross ratios, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
r_{ijkl} \equiv \frac{z_{ij}\, z_{kl}}{z_{il}\, z_{jk}},
\end{equation}
where we have introduced a convenient shorthand notation
\begin{equation}
z_{ab} \equiv z_a - z_b \quad \quad (\sigma_{ab} \equiv \sigma_a-\sigma_b).
\end{equation}
In order to map $H(z)$ to $H(\sigma,y)$, we define any combinations of factors of the form
\begin{equation}
(z_{a_1}-z_{a_2})(z_{a_2}-z_{a_3})\cdots (z_{a_{m-1}}-z_{a_m})(z_{a_{m}}-z_{a_1})
\end{equation}
as a chain $(a_1~a_2~\cdots a_{m-1}~a_m)$ of length $m$. Chains are taken to have lengths $2\leq m\leq n$. A chain of length $2$ is given by
\begin{equation}
(a_1~a_2) = (z_{a_1}-z_{a_2})(z_{a_2}-z_{a_1}).
\end{equation}
It is straightforward to check
\begin{equation}
r_{ijkl}\equiv \frac{z_{ij}\, z_{kl}}{z_{il}\, z_{jk}}=\frac{z_{ij} z_{jl} z_{lk} z_{ki} }{z_{kj} z_{jl} z_{li} z_{ik} }=\frac{(ijlk)}{(ikjl)} .
\end{equation}
Now we propose to use the following replacement into the chain so as to construct the integrand $H(\sigma,y)$,
\begin{equation}\label{replace}
\frac{1}{z_{ab}} ~\mapsto ~\tau_{a:b} \equiv{1\over 2} \left(\frac{y_a+y_b+\sigma_{ab}}{y_a}\right)\frac{1}{\sigma_{ab}}.
\end{equation}
Note that while the left hand side is antisymmetric in the $a$ and $b$ labels the right hand side is not and hence the notation $\tau_{a:b}$. This fact becomes irrelevant when the substitution is made into chains and hence the importance of the appearance of them in the integrands. So, we complete the map $H(z)\rightarrow H(\sigma,y)$ by
\begin{equation}\label{general_Hsy}
H(\sigma,y)=(\tau_{\alpha(1):\alpha(2)}\cdots \tau_{\alpha(n):\alpha(1)} ) (\tau_{\gamma(1):\gamma(2)}\cdots \tau_{\gamma(n):\gamma(1)} ) f \left( \frac{\tau_{i:k} \tau_{k:j} \tau_{j:l} \tau_{l:i} } {\tau_{i:j} \tau_{j:l} \tau_{l:k} \tau_{k:i} } \right).
\end{equation}
In addition one can check, in a simple way, the chain property
\begin{align}\label{cproperty}
(a_1\,a_2\cdots a_{m-1}\,a_m)&= (-1)^m (a_m\, a_{m-1} \cdots a_2 a_1 ),\\
(\tau _{a_1:a_2} \cdots \tau_{a_{m-1}:a_{m}} \,\tau_{a_m:a_1} ) &=(-1)^m ( \tau_{a_{m}:a_{m-1}} \, \tau_{a_{m-1}:a_{m-2}} \cdots
\tau _{a_2:a_1} \,\tau_{a_1:a_m} ),
\end{align}
and the inverse map works in the same way, $\tau_{a:b}\rightarrow \frac{1}{z_{ab}}$.
Moreover, it is straightforward to check the scattering equations can be written as
\begin{equation}
E_a(\sigma,y)=\sum_{b\neq a}^n\,s_{ab}\, \tau_{a:b}=\frac{1}{y_a}\sum_{b\neq a}^n\,s_{ab}\,\tilde \tau_{a:b}= \frac{1}{y_a}\tilde E_a(\sigma,y),
\end{equation}
where we have denoted $\tilde\tau_{a:b}$ and $\tilde E_a$ as
\begin{equation}\label{tautilde}
\tilde\tau_{a:b}=\frac{y_a+y_b+\sigma_{ab}}{2\,\sigma_{ab}}, \qquad \tilde E_a=\sum_{b\neq a}^n\,s_{ab}\,\tilde \tau_{a:b}.
\end{equation}
It is not obvious how chains appear in integrands that are computed using the Pfaffian or the determinant of the matrices $\Psi$ of $A$.
\subsection{Redundancies}\label{R_part1}
Next we move to the discussion of the redundancies and how to gauge fix them. This subsection is only the first part of the discussion in which we show how to perform the standard gauge fixings. In the second part, presented in section \ref{new gauge fixing}, we perform a different gauge fixing which allow us to use residue theorems to break up contour integrals into integrals with smaller number of punctures.
We consider the following integral
\begin{equation}\label{intres}
{\cal I}=\frac{1}{{\rm Vol}(PSL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int \prod_{a=1}^n\,\frac{d\sigma_a \,(y_a\, d y_a)}{(y^2_a-\sigma_a^2+\Lambda^2)}\times\frac{H(\sigma,y)}{\prod_{b=1}^n E_b(\sigma,y)}
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda$ is a non-zero constant parameter and $H(\sigma, y)$ is a general rational function as in \eqref{general_Hsy}.
The factor ${\rm Vol}(PSL(2,\mathbb{C}))$ in the integral is there only as a reminder that the integral has a redundancy that has to be gauge fixed. The $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ action is generated by the vectors (on the support of the algebraic curve $y_a^2=\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2,\,a=1,\cdots n$)
\begin{equation}\label{redun}
L_{\pm 1} = \sum_{a=1}^n \frac{1}{\Lambda}y_a(\sigma_a \mp y_a)\partial_a, \qquad L_0 = \sum_{a=1}^n y_a\partial_a,
\end{equation}
where $\partial_a \equiv \partial /\partial \sigma_a$ and they satisfy the algebra
\begin{equation}
[L_{\pm 1},L_0]=\pm\,L_{\pm 1},\qquad [L_1,L_{-1}]=2L_0.
\end{equation}
The covariance of the $E_a$ maps under these transformations imply that there are three linear combinations among them\footnote{We would like to thank B. Feng for letting us know this typo.}
\begin{equation}
\sum_{a=1}^n \,\, y_a\, E_a = 0, ~~
\sum_{a=1}^n \,\sigma_a\, y_a\, E_a = 0,~~
\sum_{a=1}^n \,\, y_a^2\, E_a = 0.
\end{equation}
In order to define local residues in \eqref{intres}, one must remove three of the elements of the map $(\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\ldots ,\sigma_n)\mapsto (E_1,E_2,\ldots ,E_n)$ from $\mathbb{C}^n\mapsto \mathbb{C}^{n}$. This is welcome as one can use the $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ group to fix the location of three $\sigma_a$ variables. Using the standard Fadeev-Popov procedure one has
\begin{equation}\label{partGF}
{\cal I}=\frac{1}{2^3}\int_{\Gamma} \prod_{a\neq i,j,k}d\sigma_a \prod_{b=1}^n \frac{(y_b\,dy_b)}{(y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)} \times \frac{|i,j,k| |p,q,r|}{\prod_{d\neq p,q,r} E_d}H(\sigma,y),
\end{equation}
where the Fadeev-Popov determinants are given by
\begin{equation}
|p,q,r| = \frac{1}{\Lambda^2} \left|
\begin{array}{ccc}
y_p & \,\, y_p(\sigma_p+y_p)\, \,& y_p(\sigma_p-y_p) \\
y_q & \,\, y_q(\sigma_q+y_q) \,\, & y_q(\sigma_q-y_q) \\
y_r & \,\,y_r(\sigma_r+y_r)\,\,& y_r(\sigma_r-y_r) \\
\end{array}
\right|=
\frac{2\,y_p y_q y_r}{\Lambda^2}\left|
\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & \,\, y_p \,\,& \sigma_p \\
1 &\,\, y_q \,\,& \sigma_q \\
1 &\,\, y_r \,\,& \sigma_r \\
\end{array}
\right|,
\end{equation}
likewise for $|i,j,k|$ and $\Gamma$ is the integration cycle defined by the solutions of the $2n-3$ equations
\begin{align}\label{cycle_one}
& y_b^2-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2=0, ~ ~ b=1,\ldots n, \\
& E_d=0, ~~ {\rm with} ~ d= 1,\ldots n ~{\rm and}~ d\neq p,q,r.
\end{align}
The $2^3$ factor appears when the $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ symmetry is fixed and the $(\mathbb{Z}_2)^3 $ symmetry ($\sigma_i\rightarrow-\sigma_i, \sigma_j\rightarrow-\sigma_j,\sigma_k\rightarrow-\sigma_k$) is broken.
Note that the values of $\sigma_i,\sigma_j$ and $\sigma_k$ have been fixed but their branches do not, i.e. $y_i,y_j$ and $y_k$ can still take any of the solutions to $y_b^2-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2=0$.
\subsubsection{Promoting $\Lambda$ to variable}
In the previous prescription, \eqref{partGF}, $\Lambda$ is a constant parameter. In this section we show how to introduce $\Lambda$ as a variable.
It is straightforward to check that the integral in \eqref{intres} is invariant by the scale transformation
\begin{equation}\label{scaletransformation}
(\sigma_a,y_a,\Lambda)\rightarrow \rho (\sigma_a,y_a,\Lambda), \,\rho\in \mathbb{C}^* ~ {\rm and}~ a=1,\dots,n,
\end{equation}
Note that the $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ measure
\begin{equation}\label{mgltwo}
\frac{d\sigma_i d\sigma_j d\sigma_k}{|i,j,k| },
\end{equation}
is also invariant by the scale transformation in \eqref{scaletransformation}.
In order to promote the $\Lambda$ parameter to a variable we introduce the scale invariant measure $\frac{d\Lambda}{\Lambda}$. Thus, the new measure
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\Lambda}{\Lambda}\frac{d\sigma_i d\sigma_j d\sigma_k}{|i,j,k| },
\end{equation}
is also scale and $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ invariant, i.e $GL(2,\mathbb{C})$ invariant. Clearly, the generators of this $GL(2,\mathbb{C})$ symmetry are given by the elements $\{L_0,L_{-1},L_1\}$ and the scale generator
\begin{equation}\label{redun_D}
D = \sum_{a=1}^n \sigma_a\partial_a + \Lambda\partial_\Lambda.
\end{equation}
Its algebra is given by
\begin{equation}
[L_{\pm 1},L_0]=\pm\,L_{\pm 1},\quad [L_1,L_{-1}]=2L_0,\quad [D,L_m]=0,\,\,\,m\in\{-1,0,1\},
\end{equation}
on the support of the algebraic curve $y_a^2 = \sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2$.
Now, note that the denominator in \eqref{mgltwo} can be written as the following determinant
\begin{equation}
\Lambda\,|i,j,k| = \frac{1}{\Lambda^2} \left|
\begin{array}{cccc}
y_i\,\, & \,\, y_i(\sigma_i+y_i)\, \,& \,\, y_i(\sigma_i-y_i)\,\,&\,\,\sigma_i \\
y_j \,\,& \,\, y_j(\sigma_j+y_j) \,\, &\,\, y_j(\sigma_j-y_j) \,\,&\,\,\sigma_j\\
y_k \,\,& \,\,y_k(\sigma_k+y_k)\,\,&\,\, y_k(\sigma_k-y_k) \,\,&\,\,\sigma_k\\
0 \,\, & \,\,0\,\,&\,\, 0 \,\,&\,\, \Lambda \\
\end{array}
\right| \equiv \Delta_{\rm FP}(ijk;\Lambda).
\end{equation}
This determinant is just the Fadeev-Popov determinant for the gauge fixing of the three punctures $(\sigma_i,\sigma_j,\sigma_k)$ and the branch cut variable $\Lambda$.
Finally, we can rewrite the \eqref{intres} prescription as
\begin{equation}\label{general_prescription}
{\cal I}=\frac{1}{{\,\rm Vol}(GL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int \frac{d\Lambda}{\Lambda}\int d^n\sigma\prod_{b=1}^n\,\frac{(y_b\, d y_b)}{(y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)} \times \frac{H(\sigma,y)}{\prod_{d=1}^n E_d} .
\end{equation}
Fixing the $\{E_p,E_q,E_r\}$ scattering equations , the $(\sigma_i,\sigma_j,\sigma_k)$ punctures and the $\Lambda$ branch cut variable one obtains
\begin{equation}\label{fullGF}
{\cal I}={1\over 2^3 }\int_{\Gamma} \prod_{a\neq i,j,k}d\sigma_a \prod_{b=1}^n \frac{(y_b\, dy_b)}{(y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)}\times \frac{\Delta_{\rm FP}(ijk;\Lambda)\,\, |p,q,r|}{\Lambda}\times\frac{H(\sigma,y)}{\prod_{d\neq p,q,r} E_d},
\end{equation}
which is the same expression as in \eqref{partGF}.
\subsection{Equivalence with the CHY Construction}\label{ECHY}
The idea of this section is to show how the \eqref{intres} prescription is in fact equivalent to the original CHY approach.
Let us define a map from the double-cover version of the sphere into a single cover of $\mathbb{CP}^1$. This should take us back to the original CHY construction. Such a map is very well known and it is given by
\begin{equation}\label{mapcpone}
\sigma_a = \frac{\Lambda}{2}\left(z_a+\frac{1}{z_a}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda\neq\{0,\infty\}$ is a constant and $z_a$ are the coordinates on $\mathbb{C}P^1$ (CHY coordinates). The first observation is that if all the punctures are located on the same branch, say the upper sheet, i.e. $y_a=+\sqrt{\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2}$, then
\begin{equation}
\tau_{a:b}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{y_a+y_b+\sigma_{ab}}{y_a}\right)\frac{1}{\sigma_{ab}} = \left(\frac{2}{\Lambda} \right)\,\,\frac{z_a^2}{ (z_a^2-1)}\times \frac{1}{z_{ab}}.
\end{equation}
In this expression it is easy to see that the lack of antisymmetry in the labels translate into an overall factor in the $z_a$ variables. Also it is simple to show
\begin{equation}
d\sigma_a = \left(\frac{\Lambda}{2}\right)\,\,\frac{ (z^2_a-1)}{z_a^2}\,\, dz_a,
\end{equation}
which means that
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{y_a+y_b+\sigma_{ab}}{y_a}\right)\frac{d\sigma_a}{\sigma_{ab}} = \frac{dz_a}{z_{ab}}.
\end{equation}
This is indeed the natural differential form on $\Sigma$ with simple poles at $(\sigma_a,y_a) = (\sigma_b,y_b)$ and at $\sigma_a=\infty$ with residues $1$ and $-1$ respectively.
Therefore, it is straightforward to conclude
\begin{align}
H(\sigma,y) &= \left(\frac{2}{\Lambda}\right)^{2n}\left(\prod_{a=1}^n\frac{z_a^2}{z_a^2-1}\right)^2 H(z)\\
E_a(\sigma,y)&=\sum_{i\neq a}^n s_{ai}\,\tau_{a:i}=\left(\frac{2}{\Lambda}\right)\left(\frac{z_a^2}{z_a^2-1}\right)\sum_{i\neq a}^n \frac{s_{ai}}{z_{ai}}=\left(\frac{2}{\Lambda}\right)\left(\frac{z_a^2}{z_a^2-1}\right)\,E_a(z),
\end{align}
where $H(z)$ is as in \eqref{general_H}.
Carrying out the integration over the $y_a$ variables on the contour given by the solutions $y_a=+\sqrt{\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2}$ and performing the map \eqref{mapcpone}, then \eqref{intres} becomes
\begin{eqnarray}\label{CHYequiv}
&&\left.\frac{1}{{\,\rm Vol}(PSL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int \prod_{a=1}^n\frac{(y_a\, d y_a) }{(y^2_a-\sigma_a^2+\Lambda^2)} \left(d^n\sigma\,\frac{H(\sigma,y)}{\prod_{b=1}^n E_b(\sigma,y)}\right) \right|_{y_a=+\sqrt{\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2}}\\
&&=\left(\frac{1}{2^n}\right)\frac{1}{{\rm Vol}(PSL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int\prod_{a=1}^n dz_a \frac{H(z)}{\prod_{b=1}^n E_b(z)},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where the $\frac{1}{2^n}$ factor comes from the integral
\begin{equation}
\left.\int \prod_{a=1}^n\frac{(y_a\, d y_a) }{(y^2_a-\sigma_a^2+\Lambda^2)}\right|_{y_a=+\sqrt{\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2}}=\frac{1}{2^n}.
\end{equation}
Computing the integral over all possible configurations, this means the $2^n$ way of choosing $(y_1=\pm\sqrt{\sigma_1^2-\Lambda^2},...,y_n=\pm\sqrt{\sigma_n^2-\Lambda^2})$, and performing the map \eqref{mapcpone}, one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{1}{{\,\rm Vol}(PSL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int \prod_{a=1}^n\frac{(y_a\, d y_a) }{(y^2_a-\sigma_a^2+\Lambda^2)} \left(d^n\sigma\,\frac{H(\sigma,y)}{\prod_{b=1}^n E_b(\sigma,y)}\right)\\
&&=\frac{1}{{\rm Vol}(PSL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int\prod_{a=1}^n dz_a \frac{H(z)}{\prod_{b=1}^n E_b(z)}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
This result agrees with the original CHY formula.
%
\section{New Gauge Fixing}\label{new gauge fixing}
In this section we find that by using the full $GL(2)$ redundancy one can gauge fix the location of four punctures, modulo branches. Thus, promoting $\Lambda$ to a variable to be fixed by the scattering equations, one has the possibility of using a global residue theorem \cite{harris} that leads to a new diagrammatic expansion of general amplitudes. Moreover, the residue theorem allows the analytic evaluation of integrals with rational functions whose answers have non-local poles and thus are hard to obtain by other means.
\subsection{New Gauge Fixing}
Let us start by reviewing the generations of the $GL(2,\mathbb{C})$ redundancy, as we did in \eqref{redun} in section \ref{sthreedc},
\begin{equation}\label{redun2}
L_{\pm 1} = \sum_{a=1}^n \frac{1}{\Lambda}y_a(\sigma_a \mp y_a)\partial_a, \qquad L_0 = \sum_{a=1}^n y_a\partial_a, \qquad D = \sum_{a=1}^n \sigma_a\partial_a + \Lambda\partial_\Lambda,
\end{equation}
where $y_a^2=\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2$.
Since all four vectors act on $\sigma$'s one can use them to fix four of the punctures' $\sigma$. For simplicity of notation let us assume that they are $\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\sigma_3$ and $\sigma_4$. The Fadeev-Popov jacobian, $\Delta_{\rm FP}$, is now
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{\rm FP}(1234) = \frac{1}{\Lambda^2} {\rm det}\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
y_1\,\, &\,\,y_1(\sigma_1+y_1)\,\, & \,\, y_1(\sigma_1-y_1)\,\, &\,\, \sigma_1 \\
y_2\,\, &\,\,y_2(\sigma_2+y_2)\,\, & \,\, y_2(\sigma_2-y_2)\,\, &\,\, \sigma_2 \\
y_3\,\, &\,\,y_3(\sigma_3+y_3)\,\, & \,\, y_3(\sigma_3-y_3)\,\, &\,\, \sigma_3 \\
y_4\,\, &\,\,y_4(\sigma_4+y_4)\,\, & \,\, y_4(\sigma_4-y_4)\,\, &\,\, \sigma_4 \\
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation}
In addition to this one still has to remove three elements from the map $\{ E_1,E_2,\ldots ,E_n\}$. This procedure is not affected by the new gauge choice and the formula used in \eqref{partGF} is still valid. Putting all together and removing, without loss of generality, the scattering equations $E_1,\,E_2$ and $E_3$ we arrive at the new formula
\begin{equation}\label{newGF}
{\cal I}={1\over 2^3}\int_{\Gamma} \frac{d\Lambda}{ \Lambda} \prod_{a=5}^n d\sigma_a \prod_{b=1}^n\frac{(y_b\, dy_b)}{(y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)} \times\frac{\,\Delta_{\rm FP}(1234)\,|1,2,3|\; }{\prod_{d=4}^n E_d}H(\sigma,y),
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma$ is the integration cycle defines as in \eqref{cycle_one}, given by the equations
\begin{align}\label{cycle_two_Gamma}
& y_b^2-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2=0, ~ ~ b=1,\ldots n, \\
& E_d=0, ~~ {\rm with} ~ d= 4,\ldots n,\nonumber
\end{align}
for the $2n-3$ variables $(\Lambda,\sigma_5,\ldots,\sigma_n,y_1,y_2,\ldots ,y_n)$.
It is interesting to note that the opening of the branch cut connecting the two branches (sheets) becomes a function of the kinematic invariants $k_a\cdot k_b$. This means that as we move in the space of kinematic invariants the branch cut also moves. This is what makes factorization and crossing natural properties to address using this formulation.
\section{Residue Theorem and Diagrammatic Expansion}\label{residuetheorem}
The equations obtained at the end of the previous section are polynomial equations of increasing degree as the number of particles increases. In fact, the equations \eqref{cycle_two_Gamma} lead to higher degree polynomials than the original CHY scattering equations. This seems to be an obstacle. However, using a residue theorem we will effectively replace one of the $E_a=0$ equations by the equation $\Lambda=0$. This might come as a surprise as closing the cut is intuitively related to a factorization limit. Instead, what we will see is that once the cut closes a new puncture appears that represents an off-shell particle. The sum over solutions to the equations $y_b^2 = \sigma_b^2-\Lambda^2$ give rise to $y_b = \pm \sigma_b$ and determine the branch location of the $b^{\rm th}$-puncture. For a given distribution of particles, say a subset $U$ ($L$) is on the upper (lower) branch, the equation $E_a$ that was eliminated gives rise to the propagator $1/P_U^2$ where $P_U$ is the sum over the momenta of all external particles on the upper branch. In this way, the integral given in \eqref{newGF}
\begin{equation}\label{general_integral}
{\cal I}\,=\,{1\over 2^3}\int_\Gamma \frac{d\Lambda}{ \Lambda} \prod_{a=5}^n d\sigma_a \prod_{b=1}^n \frac{(y_b\,dy_b)}{(y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)}\times \frac{ \Delta_{\rm FP}(1234)\,\, |1,2,3| }{\prod_{d=4}^n E_d(\sigma,y)}H(\sigma,y)
\end{equation}
becomes a sum of products of contour integrals with smaller number of particles. By iterating the process we find a diagrammatic description. The most important outcome is that at each step in the iteration process the degree of the scattering equation is lowered and analytic evaluations become possible.
\subsection{Residue Theorem}
Following the similar ideas as in section \ref{ECHY} les us consider the general integral
\begin{equation}\label{Gintegral}
{\cal I}\,=\frac{1}{{\rm Vol} (GL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int_\gamma d\Lambda\left(\prod_{b=1}^n \frac{\,dy_b}{(y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)} \right) \left( \prod_{a=1}^n \frac{ d\sigma_a}{ \tilde E_a(\sigma,y)} \right)\frac{H(\sigma,y) \prod_{c=1}^n y_c^2}{\Lambda},
\end{equation}
where $\gamma$ is the contour defined by the equations
\begin{equation}
y_a^2-\sigma_a^2+\Lambda^2=0,~~ \tilde E_a(\sigma,y)=\sum_{b\neq a}\frac{k_a\cdot k_b}{\sigma_{ab}}(y_b+y_a) =0,~~{\rm for}~~ a\in\{1,2,\ldots,n\},
\end{equation}
and $H(\sigma,y)\prod_{c=1}^n y_c^2/\Lambda$ is the integrand. Clearly there are more integration variables than contours, nevertheless, when the $GL(2,\mathbb{C})$ symmetry is fixed then the number of integration variables becomes equal to the contour cycles.
Note that \eqref{Gintegral} depends over the $\Lambda$ variable by the expression
\begin{equation}
\int \frac{ d\Lambda}{\prod_{b=1}^n (y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)} \times \frac{1}{\Lambda},
\end{equation}
where $\prod_{b=1}^n (y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)$ defines the integration cycle. Naively, using the global residue theorem, it is straightforward to see that the previous expression can be written as
\begin{equation}
\int \frac{ d\Lambda}{\prod_{b=1}^n (y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)} \times \frac{1}{\Lambda} = -\int \frac{ d\Lambda}{\Lambda\,\,\prod_{b\neq l}^n (y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)} \times \frac{1}{y^2_l-\sigma_l^2+\Lambda^2},
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda\,\, \prod_{b\neq l}^n (y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)$ defines the new contour and $1/(y^2_l-\sigma_l^2+\Lambda^2)$ becomes part of the integrand.
Nevertheless, in order to apply the global residue theorem one must also verify if the point at infinity is a pole. One says that the \eqref{Gintegral} integral has a pole at infinity if and only if \cite{harris}
\begin{equation}\label{infty_condition}
{\rm deg}(g)> (d_1+\cdots + d_{2n})-((2n+1)+1),
\end{equation}
where $g(\sigma,y,\Lambda)$ is the integrand
\begin{equation}
g(\sigma,y,\Lambda)= \frac{H(\sigma,y) \prod_{c=1}^n y_c^2}{\Lambda}\,\,\,\Rightarrow\,\,\, {\rm deg}(g) = -1,
\end{equation}
$d_1+\cdots + d_{2n}$ is sum over all degrees of the polynomials that define the integration contour, i.e.
\begin{equation}
d_1+\cdots + d_{2n}={\rm deg}\left(\prod_{b=1}^n (y^2_b-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2)\,\tilde E_b\right)=2n
\end{equation}
and $2n+1$ is the number of integration variables, i.e. $(\Lambda,\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_n,y_1,\ldots,y_n)$. Clearly \eqref{Gintegral} has a pole at infinity and it must be integrated when the global residue theorem is performed.
Since the integrand in \eqref{Gintegral} is not well defined when $\Lambda=0$, then this implies that the \eqref{Gintegral} integrand is given on the $\Lambda\neq 0$ chart . Thus, so as to explore the pole at infinity we consider the following transformation
\begin{equation}
\Lambda\, \rightarrow \, \Lambda^\prime=\frac{1}{\Lambda},\quad y_i \, \rightarrow \, y_i^\prime=\frac{y_i}{\Lambda^2},\quad \sigma_i \, \rightarrow \, \sigma_i^\prime=\frac{\sigma_i}{\Lambda^2}.
\end{equation}
Under this transformation \eqref{Gintegral} becomes invariant, i.e.
\begin{equation}
{\cal I}=\frac{1}{{\rm Vol} (GL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int_{\gamma^{\prime}} d\Lambda^\prime\left(\prod_{b=1}^n \frac{\,dy^\prime_b}{(y^{\prime\, 2}_b-\sigma_b^{\prime\,2}+\Lambda^{\prime\,2})} \right) \left( \prod_{a=1}^n \frac{ d\sigma_a^\prime}{ \tilde E_a(\sigma^\prime,y^\prime)} \right)\frac{H(\sigma^\prime,y^\prime) \prod_{c=1}^n y_c^{\prime\,2}}{\Lambda^\prime},
\end{equation}
where $\gamma^\prime$ is the contour defined by the equations
\begin{equation}
y_a^{\prime\, 2}-\sigma_a^{\prime\, 2}+\Lambda^{\prime \,2}=0,~~ \tilde E_a(\sigma^\prime,y^\prime)=\sum_{b\neq a}^n \,\frac{k_{a}\cdot k_b }{\sigma^\prime_{ab}} (y_a^\prime+y_b^\prime)= 0,
\end{equation}
and $H(\sigma^\prime,y^\prime)$ is defined with the $\tau_{a:b}^\prime$'s forms
\begin{equation}
\tau_{ab}^\prime = \frac{1}{2\,\, y_a^\prime}\left(\frac{y_a^\prime+y_b^\prime+\sigma_{ab}^\prime}{\sigma_{ab}^\prime}\right).
\end{equation}
Note that the minus sign $d\Lambda/\Lambda\rightarrow -d\Lambda^\prime/\Lambda^\prime$ is used to reorient the $\Lambda$ contour. Finally, we can now integrate around the point $\Lambda^\prime=0$ which is the pole at infinity, therefore performing the global residue theorem the \eqref{Gintegral} integral could be read as
\begin{equation}\label{Gintegral2}
{\cal I}=\frac{-2}{{\rm Vol} (GL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int_{\tilde\Gamma} \frac{d\Lambda}{\Lambda}\left(\frac{\prod_{i=1}^n dy_i}{\prod_{b\neq l}^n(y^{2}_b-\sigma_b^{2}+\Lambda^{2})} \right) \left( \prod_{a=1}^n \frac{ d\sigma_a}{ \tilde E_a(\sigma,y)} \right)\frac{H(\sigma,y) \prod_{c=1}^n y_c^{2}}{(y^{2}_l-\sigma_l^{2}+\Lambda^{2})},
\end{equation}
where the new $\tilde\Gamma$ contour is now defined by the $2n$ equations
\begin{equation}
\Lambda=0,~~\, y_b^2-\sigma_b^2+\Lambda^2=0,~~{\rm for}~~ b\neq l,~~ \tilde E_a(\sigma,y)=0,~~{\rm for}~~ a\in\{1,2,\ldots,n\}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Recovering The Curve}
Note that in the result obtained in \eqref{Gintegral2} the $y_l^2-\sigma_l^2+\Lambda^2=0$ constraint is lost, i.e. we are not anymore on the support of the curve $y_l^2=\sigma_l^2-\Lambda^2$. Since our aim is to be on a sphere then this constraint must be recovered. In order to get back the $y_l^2-\sigma_l^2+\Lambda^2=0$ equation we perform the residue theorem but now using the $y_l$ variable.
Before applying the residue theorem it is useful to remember the following, first, in full view, the integration contour is defined by polynomials over the $y_i$'s variables
$$
\Lambda\,\prod_{b\neq l}^n(y^{2}_b-\sigma_b^{2}+\Lambda^{2}))\prod_{a=1}^n\tilde E_a(\sigma,y)=\Lambda \,\prod_{b\neq l}^n(y^{2}_b-\sigma_b^{2}+\Lambda^{2}))\prod_{a=1}^n \left[ \sum_{i\neq a}^n s_{ab} \left( \frac{y_a+y_i}{\sigma_{ai}} \right) \right],
$$
and secondly, the integrand
$$
{H(\sigma,y) \prod_{c=1}^n y_c^{2}\over (y^{2}_l-\sigma_l^{2}+\Lambda^{2})},
$$
has just one singularity over the $y_i$'s variables given by $(y_l^2-\sigma_l^2+\Lambda^2)$. With this in mind, we are ready to use the residue theorem over $y_l$. The integral by the $y_l$ variable is read as
\begin{equation}
\int_{\tilde \Gamma} \frac{d y_l}{\prod_{a=1}^n \tilde E_a}\times {H(\sigma,y) \prod_{c=1}^n y_c^{2}\over (y^{2}_l-\sigma_l^{2}+\Lambda^{2})},
\end{equation}
so, performing the residue theorem one obtains\footnote{There is no contribution from the point at infinity.}
\begin{equation}
\int_{\tilde \Gamma} \frac{d y_l}{\prod_{a=1}^n \tilde E_a}\times {H(\sigma,y) \prod_{c=1}^n y_c^{2}\over (y^{2}_l-\sigma_l^{2}+\Lambda^{2})}=
-\int_\Gamma \frac{d y_l}{(y^{2}_l-\sigma_l^{2}+\Lambda^{2})\,\prod_{a\neq l}^n \tilde E_a}\times {H(\sigma,y) \prod_{c=1}^n y_c^{2}\over \tilde E_l},
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma$ is the new integration contour defined by the $2n$ equations
\begin{equation}
\Lambda=0,~~\, \tilde E_b(\sigma,y)=0,~~{\rm for}~~ b\neq l,~~\, y_a^2-\sigma_a^2+\Lambda^2 =0,~~{\rm for}~~ a\in\{1,2,\ldots,n\}.
\end{equation}
Finally, the \eqref{Gintegral} integral is written as
\begin{equation}
{\cal I}=\frac{2}{{\rm Vol} (GL(2,\mathbb{C}))}\int_{\Gamma} \frac{d\Lambda}{\Lambda}\left(\prod_{b=1}^n \frac{dy_b}{(y^{2}_b-\sigma_b^{2}+\Lambda^{2})} \right) \left( \frac{\prod_{a=1}^n d\sigma_a}{\prod_{i\neq l}^n \tilde E_i(\sigma,y)} \right)\frac{H(\sigma,y) \prod_{c=1}^n y_c^{2}}{\tilde E_l}\nonumber.\\
\end{equation}
Fixing the $(\sigma_m,\sigma_n,\sigma_p,\sigma_q)$ puctures and the $(E_m,E_n,E_q)$ scattering equations the above integral becomes
\begin{equation}\label{Gintegral3}
{\cal I}=\frac{1}{2^2}\int_{\gamma} \left(\frac{d\Lambda}{\Lambda}\right)\left(\prod_{b=1}^n \frac{(y_b\,\, dy_b)}{(y^{2}_b-\sigma_b^{2}+\Lambda^{2})} \right) \left( \prod_{a\neq m,n,p,q} \frac{ d\sigma_a}{ E_a(\sigma,y)} \right)\frac{|m,n,q|\Delta_{\rm FP}(mnq,p)H(\sigma,y) }{ E_p},
\end{equation}
where the contour $\gamma$ is defined by the equations
\begin{equation}
\Lambda=0,~~\, \tilde E_b(\sigma,y)=0,~~{\rm for}~~ b\neq \{m,n,p,q\},~~\, y_a^2-\sigma_a^2+\Lambda^2 =0,~~{\rm for}~~ a=1,2,\ldots,n.
\end{equation}
We call this integral the {\bf $\Lambda-$prescription}.
Note that we have chosen the same labels for the punctures and scattering equations, this will be useful when we will formulate the $\Lambda-$algorithm in section \ref{Lalgorithm}.
The $\Lambda-$prescription, \eqref{Gintegral3}, recovered the support on the curves $y_a^2=\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2$, moreover, it must be computed around the cycles $\Lambda\rightarrow 0$ and $\Lambda\rightarrow \infty$,
which are exactly the same, as one can see in {\bf Fig. 5.1}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{lambda-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,,
\begin{center}
(a)
\end{center}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{lambdainfty-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,,
\begin{center}
(b)\\
{\bf Fig. 5.1} (a) Limit $\Lambda\rightarrow 0$. (b) Limit $\Lambda\rightarrow \infty$.
\end{center}
\end{center}
In addition, one of the $(n-3)$ scattering equations becomes free, i.e. it now is part of the integrand, in \eqref{Gintegral3} it is $E_p$.
This new point of view gives us a new kind of diagrammatic representation, {\bf Fig. 5.1}. In the next section we will learn to use this new prescription and we will propose a new algorithm (the $\Lambda-$algorithm).
\section{ $\Lambda$-Diagrams and A New Algorithm}\label{mainsection}
Here we present a new algorithm, which is a consequence of the new prescription given in \eqref{Gintegral3}.
Before formulating the algorithm we introduce some notations. Let us remember the $s_{a_1\ldots a_n}$ Mandelstam variables are defined as\footnote{We have introduced the $(1/2)$ factor for
convenience}
\begin{equation}
s_{a_1\ldots a_n}:={1\over 2}(k_{a_1}+\cdots + k_{a_n})^2.
\end{equation}
Nevertheless, it will be useful for us to use the variables
\begin{equation}
k_{a_1\ldots a_n}:=\sum_{a_i<a_j}^n k_{a_i}\cdot k_{a_j},
\end{equation}
Clearly, when the particles are massless, i.e. $k_i^2=0$, then $s_{a_1\ldots a_n}= k_{a_1\ldots a_n}$.
In the next two section, \ref{colour} and \ref{ltheorem}, we give all tools to formulate our new algorithm in section \ref{Lalgorithm}. While we develope the sections \ref{colour} and \ref{ltheorem}, we apply all these tools on a simple and particular example and at the end we obtain the result for the \eqref{Gintegral3} integral.
\subsection{More Notations and a Simple Example}\label{colour}
In the same way as in \cite{humbertoF}, any $H(\sigma,y)$ integrand over ${\cal M}_{0,n}$ can be written as a linear combinations of integrands with no zeros , i.e. integrands with just $2n-\tau_{a:b}$ factors. We call this kind of integrands as\footnote{The $D$ letter means that there are only $\sigma_a$ factors into denominator.} $H^D(\sigma)$. Each $H^D(\sigma)$ integrand has associated a 4-regular graph\footnote{A $G$ graph is defined by the two finite sets, $V$ and $E$. $V$ is the vertex set and $E$ is the edge set.} (bijective map), which we denoted by $G=(V_G,E_G)$ \cite{humbertoF,graph1,graph2}. The vertex set of $G$ is given by the $n$-labels (punctures)
$$
V_G=\{1,2,\ldots,n\}
$$
and the edge set is given by the elements $\tau_{a:b}\,\leftrightarrow\,\overline{\,a\,b\,}\,,\,$ i.e.
$$
E_G = \{\,\,\overline{\,a\,b\,}\,\,/\,\,\tau_{a:b}\,\, \,\,\text{is a factor into the} ~~ H^D(\sigma)~~ \text{ integrand.}\,\,\}.
$$
Since $\tau_{a:b}$ always appears into a chain, for instance, let us remember the smallest chain is given by
\begin{equation}
\tau_{a:b}\tau_{b:a},
\end{equation}
then the graph is not a directed graph, as well as in \cite{humbertoF}.
For example, let us consider the integrand
\begin{equation}\label{fexample}
H^D_4(1,2,3,4)=[1234]\times [1234]\,,
\end{equation}
where the $[\,\cdot\,]$ bracket is defined as
\begin{equation}
[1234]=(\tau_{1:2}\tau_{2:3}\tau_{3:4}\tau_{4:1})\,\,.
\end{equation}
This integrand is represented by the $G$ graph
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{4_p_t_o-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,.
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.1})\,{\small {\rm \,$G$ graph associated to the integrand in \eqref{fexample}.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
This is useful to clarify that the $G$ graph must be draw such that the number of intersection among the edges is as small as possible.
Note that the $G$ graph does not have any information of the $GL(2,\mathbb{C})$ symmetry and the $\Lambda$ parameter or branch cut. In order to introduce this information on the graph we coloured the vertex set in the following way
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{diagram3-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,.
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.2})\,{\small {\rm \,Coloured Vertices. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The $G$ graph can now contain the whole information of the integrand, i.e, it now represents the total integrand ${\cal I}=|ijk|\Delta_{FP}(ijk,d) H(\sigma)$.
For example, using the $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ symmetry to fix the $(\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\sigma_3)$ punctures and the scale symmetry to fix the $\sigma_4$ puncture, the graph in {\bf Fig.6.1} becomes
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{4_p_fixing-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{4_p_scaleF-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{4_p_cut1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{4_p_cut2-eps-converted-to.pdf},
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.3})\,{\small {\rm \,(a) Fixing $(\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\sigma_3)$ from the $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ symmetry. (b) Fixing $\sigma_4$ from the scale symmetry. (c) Possibles contribution after performing the $ \Lambda$ integral.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
where {\bf Fig.6.3(c)} shows the whole possibles non-zero contributions or configurations, up to $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry $y_a\,\rightarrow\, -y_a$, after performing the $\Lambda$ integral around $\Lambda=0$. It is explained in detail in the next section.
\subsubsection{Configurations and $\Lambda-$Theorem}\label{ltheorem}
Although we previously have already used the word ``{\bf configuration}", in this section we give a formal definition. So, the first thing we do in this section is to define what is a configuration
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Configuration}: A configuration, which we denoted by $C$, is the integration over the $(y_1,\ldots y_n)$ variables around one of the $2^n$ solutions of the equations
\begin{equation}
y_a^2-\sigma_a^2+\Lambda^2=0,~~~{\rm for}~a=1\ldots n.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
This definition means that a $C$ configuration is the choosing of the $2^n$ possibilities given by $(y_1=\pm\sqrt{\sigma_1^2-\Lambda^2},...,y_n=\pm\sqrt{\sigma_n^2-\Lambda^2})$, i.e. a configuration fixed the punctures on the upper or lower sheet.
Now, with this in mind we are ready to come back to our example and note that besides of two configurations given in {\bf Fig.6.3(c)}, there are more possibles configurations (up to $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry) such as
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{non_c1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{non_c2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{non_c3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{non_c4-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{non_c5-eps-converted-to.pdf},
\end{center}
where the red line enclose the punctures on the same branch cut, i.e. the red line is the branch cut, which is controled by the $\Lambda$ integration variable.
However, these five configurations vanish trivially because the $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ symmetry is breaking on upper and lower sheet when $\Lambda\rightarrow 0$. This computation is straightforward.
So as to classify the different kind of configurations we introduce the following terminology
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Allowable Configuration}: Let $C$ be a configuration. We say $C$ is an {\it allowable configuration} if the number of fixed punctures on the upper and lower sheet is two. This implies that in the $\Lambda\rightarrow 0$ limit the $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ symmetry is well defined (gauged) on each sheet.
\end{itemize}
Clearly, for the diagram in {\bf Fig.6.3} there is one more {\it allowable configuration} given by
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{4_p_czero-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.4})\,{\small {\rm Allowable configuration which vanishes. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
but this one also vanishes.
The vanishing of this last configuration is a consequence of the following theorem
\\
\begin{tabular}{| l |}
\cline{1-1}
$\Lambda-${\bf Theorem}\qquad\qquad\qquad\\
Let $C$ be an allowable configuration, then the integrand ${\cal I}=|ijk|\Delta_{FP}(ijk,d) H^D(\sigma)$ \\
on the $C$ configuration has the $\Lambda-$behavior \\
\\
\hspace{5cm}$\mathcal {I}\,\Big|_{\Lambda\rightarrow 0}^C\, \sim\, \Lambda^{L-4}\,+\,{\cal O}(\Lambda^{L-3})$\\
\\
around $\Lambda= 0$, where $L$ is the number of edges which are intersected by the red line.\\
\cline{1-1}
\end{tabular}
\\
\\
This theorem is proved in appendix \ref{appendix}.
So far, we have defined what is a configuration, an allowable configuration and we have formulated the $\Lambda-$theorem. Now, with the intention to set down the $\Lambda-$algorithm it is useful to define a new kind of configuration
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Singular Configuration}: Let $C$ be a configuration. We say $C$ is an {\it singular configuration} if $C$ is an allowable configuration and the integrand, ${\cal I}=|ijk|\Delta_{FP}(ijk,d) H(\sigma)\sim \Lambda^{-s},\,\, s>0$ around $\Lambda=0$.
\end{itemize}
Following with our example, we note that expanding the \\
${\cal I}=|123|\Delta_{FP}(123,4) H^D_4(1,2,3,4)$ total integrand and the $E_4$ scattering equation (S.E) around $\Lambda=0$, the two configurations in {\bf Fig.6.3(c)} become
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{4_c1-eps-converted-to.pdf}\qquad \qquad\
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{4_c2-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.5})\,{\small {\rm Computing the non-zero allowable configurations. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Thus, the integration over $\Lambda$ is straightforward and the final result is
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{4_p_answer-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.6})\,{\small {\rm Final solution for the integrand in \eqref{fexample}. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
which is the right answer.
We call this method the $\Lambda-$algorithm. In the next section we explain carefully this algorithm.
\subsection{The $\Lambda-$Algorithm}\label{Lalgorithm}
In this section we introduce formally the $\Lambda-$algorithm, which is given up to $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry,, $y_a\,\,\rightarrow\,\, -y_a$.
We describe step by step the method.\\
{\bf $\Lambda-$Algorithm Steps}
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf (1)} To draw the graph to be computed. Let us remember that the graph must be drawn such that the intersection number of the edges is the minimum.
This drawing must have three yellow vertices ($PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ gauge fixing) and one green vertex (scale symmetry fixing)
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{ge_graph1-eps-converted-to.pdf}.
\begin{center}
(Figure (a))\,{\small {\rm 4-Regular graph. $PSL(2,\mathbb{C})$ (Yellow) and scale symmetry (Green) gauge fixing.\,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
\item {\bf (2)} To find all non-zero allowable configurations
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{ge_graph2-eps-converted-to.pdf}.
\begin{center}
(Figure (b))\,{\small {\rm One non-zero allowable configuration. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The gauge fixing from the step (1) must be chosen such that there are not singular configurations. This fact becomes clearer in section \ref{examples}.
If it is not possible to choose a gauge fixing such that it avoids singular configurations then the $\Lambda-$algorithm can not be applied directly.
From the $\Lambda-$theorem, it is clear that the red line in all non zero configurations intersects only 4 black lines, i.e. just 4 black lines go through the branch cut.
\item {\bf (3)} To compute the $\Lambda$ integral around the cycle $|\Lambda|=\epsilon$ (on all configurations found in the previous step).
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf (i)} After computing the $\Lambda$ integral (on one particular configuration) the sphere is splitting into two spheres, the upper-sheet and the lower-sheet. This splitting is identified by the red line. As a consequence two new (massive) punctures arise, one on the upper and the other one on the lower-sheet. These punctures are fixed on each sheet at the point $\sigma_0=0$ and they are denoted by the red color. This process is shown in the following figure
\\
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{ge_graph-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
(Figure (c))\,{\small {\rm Computating the $\Lambda$ integral on one particular configuration. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The particles inside of the red line, including now the new red massive puncture at $\sigma_0=0$ on the upper-sheet, shape a new 4-regular graph on the upper-sheet (subdiagram) and the particles outside of the red line, including the new red massive puncture at $\sigma_0=0$ on the lower-sheet, shape the other new 4-regular graph (subdiagram), such as it is shown in figure (c).
The momentum of the red massive puncture on the upper-sheet is the sum over all momenta of the particles outside of the red line, i.e.
\begin{equation}
k_0^{\rm upper}=k_p + \cdots + k_q +\cdots + k_r +\cdots,
\end{equation}
and the momentum of the red massive puncture on the lower-sheet is the sum over all momenta of the particles inside of the red line, i.e.
\begin{equation}
k_0^{\rm lower}=k_m + \cdots + k_n +\cdots \,.
\end{equation}
\item {\bf (ii)} The scattering equation associates to the puncture in the green triangle, in figure (c) it is $E_p$, becomes.
$$
E_p=\sum_{a\neq {\rm upper \,\,sheet }}\frac{k_p\cdot k_a}{\sigma_{pa}}+\frac{k_p\cdot k_0^{\rm lower}}{\sigma_p}+{\cal O}(\Lambda).
$$
Using the scattering equations (at $\Lambda=0$) located on the same sheet as the green puncture, in figure(c) it is the lower sheet, i.e $E_r, \ldots $, it is straightforward to prove that
$$
E_p = -\frac{(\sigma_q-\sigma_0)(\sigma_0-\sigma_q)}{(\sigma_0-\sigma_p)(\sigma_p-\sigma_q)(\sigma_q-\sigma_0)}k_{p\ldots q\ldots r \ldots}+{\cal O}(\Lambda)\,\, ,
$$
where $\sigma_0=0$. The $(\sigma_0-\sigma_p)(\sigma_p-\sigma_q)(\sigma_q-\sigma_0)$ factor becomes one of the two Faddeev-Popov determinants on the lower brach and the numerator, $(\sigma_q-\sigma_0)(\sigma_0-\sigma_q)$, cancels out with the
$|m,n,q|\,\Delta_{\rm FP}(mnq,p)$ Faddeev-Popov expansion given in appendix \ref{appendix}. Therefore, one can say that the $E_p$ scattering amplitude becomes the propagator
$$
\frac{1}{E_p} \quad \rightarrow \quad\,\,\frac{1}{k_{p...q...r...}}\,\,\, .
$$
Note that although in our example (figure (c)) $k_{p...q...r...}=k_{m...n...}$, in general this is not true. Since the $\Lambda-$algorithm is a iterative process then new massive particles arise (red punctures) and the equality $k_{p...q...r...}=k_{m...n...}$ can be broken.
Finally, the two new subdiagrams are given in the original CHY approach, where $(\sigma_0,\sigma_m,\sigma_n)$ are the gauged punctures on the upper-sheet and $(\sigma_0,\sigma_p,\sigma_q)$ are the gauged punctures on the lower-sheet.
\end{itemize}
\item {\bf (4)} To come back to the step (1).
It is useful to remember that a 4-regular graph with 3 vertices is just 1
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{3pt-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\begin{center}
(Figure (d))\,{\small {\rm 3-point 4-regular graph\,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Building Blocks}\label{bblocks}
Since that the $\Lambda$-algorithm is an iterative process then it is useful to construct fundamental graphs or irreducible graphs (building blocks).
Our building blocks are given by the following diagrams of 4 and 5 vertices
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{bb_1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{bb_2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{bb_3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{bb_4-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{bb_5-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.7})\,{\small {\rm Building Blocks. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The $(I)$ graph, which was computed previously, and $(II)$ graph are trivials \cite{Cachazo:2013iea}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb1_c-eps-converted-to.pdf}\qquad ,\qquad
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb2_c-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\,.
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.8})\,{\small {\rm Building Blocks (I) and (II). \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
In order to compute the the $(II)$ and $(III)$ building blocks, one can note that
on the support of the $E_d$ scattering equation (before performing the residue theorem, section \ref{residuetheorem})
\begin{equation}
E_d=k_{ad}\,\tau_{d:a}+k_{bd}\,\tau_{d:b}+k_{cd}\,\tau_{d:c}=0\,\,\Rightarrow\,\, -1=\frac{k_{ad}}{k_{cd}}\left(\frac{\tau_{d:a}\tau_{b:c}}{\tau_{b:a}\tau_{d:c}}\right)\,\, .
\end{equation}
So, the $(III)$ and $(IV)$ graphs in {\bf Fig.6.7} become very simples
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb3_c-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb3_c2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb3_c3-eps-converted-to.pdf},\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb4_c-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb4_c2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb4_c3-eps-converted-to.pdf}.
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.9})\,{\small {\rm Building Blocks (III) and (IV).\,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Finally, the $(V)$ building block in {\bf Fig.6.7} can not be computed using the $\Lambda-$algorithm, because this graph has a singular configuration. So, we use the algorithm given in \cite{humbertoF} (the general KLT algorithm).
\subsubsection{General KLT algorithm and computation of the $(V)$ building block}\label{fivebb}
In order to apply the general KLT algorithm \cite{humbertoF} on the $(V)$ building block, one must first note that this building block has the following decomposition (in two 2-regular graphs)
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb5_d-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb5_dl-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb5_dr-eps-converted-to.pdf}.
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.10})\,{\small {\rm Decomposition in two 2-regular graphs \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The second step is to find a left and right (Parke-Taylor) base {\it compatible}\footnote{A Parke-Taylor factor is said to be compatible with a 2-regular graph if the union of the two graphs, which is a 4-regular graph, admits a Hamiltonian decomposition, i.e., it is the union of two Parke-Taylor factors.} with the the ${\cal I_L}$ and ${\cal I_R}$ graphs. Choosing the left and right base as
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{base_L-eps-converted-to.pdf}\qquad , \qquad
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{base_R-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.11})\,{\small {\rm Left and right base. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
and following the general KLT algorithm \cite{humbertoF}, it is straightforward to read the $(V)$ building block as
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb5_uL-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{matrix_m-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb5_vR-eps-converted-to.pdf},
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.12})\,{\small {\rm Graph representation of the ${\cal I}_{(V)} = (L\,{\cal I_L} )^{\rm T} (m^{L|R})^{-1} (R\,{\cal I_R} )$ computation. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
where the relative sign was explained in \cite{Cachazo:2013iea} .
So as to be consistent with the initial gauge fixing we must keep it\footnote{This fact is very important, because when the $\Lambda-$algorithm is iterated then massive particles arise and the gauge fixing must be kept step by step to obtain the right answer. }, i.e. the color of the vertices.
Although in \cite{Cachazo:2013iea} was given an algorithm to computed the diagrams found in {\bf Fig.6.12}, we apply the $\Lambda-$algorithm since it works when one of the particles is off-shell.
Let us consider the second component of the first vector given in {\bf Fig.6.12}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb5_comp-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb5_comp2-eps-converted-to.pdf}.
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.13})\,{\small {\rm $\Lambda-$algorithm. (1) Integrand. (2) Allowable configurations non zero. (3) Computing the $\Lambda$ integral. (4) Final answer. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
In {\bf Fig.6.13} we describe step by step the $\Lambda-$algorithm for a particular diagram in {\bf Fig.6.12}:\\
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf (1)} We draw the graph to be computed, including the gauge fixing (colored vertices).
\item {\bf (2)} We find the all non-zero allowable configurations, which is only one.
\item {\bf (3)} We compute the $\Lambda$ integral around $\Lambda=0$.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf (i)} The scattering equation $1/E_b$ becomes the propagator $1/k_{ab}$.
\item {\bf (ii)} The subdiagram obtained on the upper-sheet is a 4-regular graph at three point, which is trivial,, i.e. 1. On the other hand, the 4-regular subdigram obtains on the lower-sheet is a 4-point graph, which is the $(II)$ building block given in {\bf Fig.6.7}.
\item {\bf (iii)} The new massive particle in the graph on the lower-sheet has momentum $k_0=k_a+k_b$.
\end{itemize}
\item {\bf (4)} we used the $(II)$ building block in {\bf Fig.6.7} to obtain the final answer.
\end{itemize}
Following the same simple procedure one can compute all graphs in {\bf Fig.6.12}, for example, the $m^{L|R}_{22}$ and $m^{L|R}_{12}$ matrix components, respectively, are given by
\begin{center}
\quad\quad\qquad\qquad\qquad
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb5_m-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{bb5_m2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.6.14})\,{\small {\rm Computation of the $m^{L|R}_{22}$ and $m^{L|R}_{21}$ matrix components, respectively. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Therefore, the ${\cal I}_{(V)}$ building block is
\begin{align}\label{buidingfive}
{\cal I}_{(V)}&=\left(\frac{1}{k_{ab}k_{de}}\right)^{2}
\left(
\begin{matrix}
1\\
1
\end{matrix}
\right)^{\rm T}
\left(
\begin{matrix}
\frac{1}{k_{bce} k_{be}} & 0\\
0 & \frac{1}{k_{ae} k_{bd}}
\end{matrix}
\right)^{-1}
\left(
\begin{matrix}
-1\\
\quad 1
\end{matrix}
\right)\nonumber\\
&=\left(\frac{1}{k_{ab}k_{de}}\right)^{2}
( k_{ae} k_{bd}-k_{bce} k_{be} )\,\, .
\end{align}
\section{Examples}\label{examples}
Although in the previous section we have already applied the $\Lambda-$algorithm, the idea here is to give some non-trivial examples in order to show the power of this new algorithm.
This section is divided as follows, the first example show us how to use the $\Lambda$ algorithm, which will be applied over a six point highly non trivial diagram. The idea of the second one is to mix the $\Lambda$ algorithm with the KLT general algorithm \cite{humbertoF}, where we will compute a six point diagram which cannot be performed just with the $\Lambda$ algorithm. Finally, the last one is given in order to illustrate the using of all building blocks, with this in mind we choose a non trivial eight point diagram.
\subsection{Six-Point}\label{sixpoint}
Let us consider the following two non-trivial six-point examples
\begin{center}
\quad
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{example_6p-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.1})\,{\small {\rm Six-point examples. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The first one, ${\cal I_{(A)}}$, will be computed just using the $\Lambda-$algorithm. For the second one, ${\cal I_{(B)}}$, the $\Lambda-$algorithm is not enough. We will combine the $\Lambda$ and the general KLT algorithm \cite{humbertoF} to compute it.
\subsubsection{$\mathcal{I_{(A)}}$-Computation}\label{IAcomputation}
In order to avoid singular configurations we choose the following gauge fixing
\begin{center}
\quad
\includegraphics[scale=0.37]{ex_IA_g-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.2})\,{\small {\rm Gauge Fixing. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
This is straightforward to see that there are two kind of allowable configurations. The first one is given by the diagrams
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{IA_c1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{IA_c2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{IA_c3-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, ,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.3})\,{\small {\rm Allowable configurations of type 1. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
and the second one by
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{IA_ca-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.38]{IA_cb-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.4})\,{\small {\rm Allowable configurations of type 2. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Since the elements of each type are totally analogues then we only compute one of each set.
Let us begin by computing the $(I)$ configuration in {\bf Fig.7.3}. Applying the $\Lambda-$algorithm, the $E_5$ scattering equation becomes the $1/k_{356}$ propagator and the diagram breaks into two graphs (upper and lower sheet) in the original CHY approach
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{C1_IA1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{C1_IA2-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, \qquad\qquad\qquad .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.5})\,{\small {\rm Computing the $(I)$ diagram. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Using the building blocks given in section \ref{bblocks} (see {\bf Fig.6.8} and {\bf Fig.6.9}), we are able to find the final answer for the $(I)$ configuration in {\bf Fig.7.3}. Thus, following the same procedure for the $(II)$ and $(III)$ configurations one obtains
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{dia_123-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.6})\,{\small {\rm Results of the $(I),(II)$ and $(III)$ configurations. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
We must now compute the (a) and (b) configurations in {\bf Fig.7.4}. Let us start with the (a) configuration. From the $\Lambda-$algorithm one has
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{IB_ca-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.7})\,{\small {\rm Computing the (a) configuration in {\bf Fig.7.4}. \,}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
So as to apply the $\Lambda-$algorithm on the resulting 5-point graph, we must fix the scale symmetry (S.S) . We gauge the $\sigma_4$ puncture
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{ca_FR-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.8})\,{\small {\rm Gauging the Scale Symmetry (Iterative process)\,.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
It is simple to see that the non-zero allowable configurations in {\bf Fig.7.8} are given by
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.48]{ca_5p_c-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.9})\,{\small {\rm Allowable configurations 5-point graph (Iterative process)\,.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
These three configurations are straightforward to compute applying the $\Lambda-$algorithm
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{ca_5p_comp-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, ,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.10})\,{\small {\rm Allowable configurations five-point graph (Iterative process)\,.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
where it is useful to remember that $k_0=k_2+k_3$, {\bf Fig.7.7}. From the building blocks of the section \ref{bblocks}, {\bf Fig.6.9}, we obtain the final answer for the (a) configuration in {\bf Fig.7.4}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.67]{ca_final-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.11})\,{\small {\rm Result (a) configuration.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Performing the same procedure for the (b) configuration one obtains
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.67]{ca_final2-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.12})\,{\small {\rm Result (b) configuration.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Therefore, summing over all allowable configurations we obtain the total answer for the ${\cal I_{(A)}}$ graph, which is given by the non trivial expression
\begin{align}\label{rsixpoint}
{\cal I_{(A)}}&=(I) +(II)+(III)+({\rm a}) + ({\rm b})\nonumber\\
&= \frac{ B[14:34+45+46] }{k_{356}}\frac{(k_{36})^2 B[56:36]}{(k_{56})^2}
+
\frac{ B[14:34] }{k_{256}}
\frac{(k_{26})^2 B[56:26] }{ (k_{56} )^2 }
\nonumber\\
& + \frac{B[34:14+45+46]}{k_{156}}\,
\frac{ (k_{16})^2 B[56:16] }{ (k_{56})^2 }
\\
&+ \frac{1}{k_{1456}}\left[
\frac{ (k_{26}+k_{36})^2 B[56:26+36] }{k_{14} (k_{56})^2 }
+
\frac{ (k_{16})^2 B[56:16] }{ (k_{24}+k_{34}) (k_{56})^2 }
+\frac{ (k_{46})^2 B[56:46] }{k_{456} (k_{56})^2 }
\right]\nonumber\\
&+ \frac{1}{k_{3456}}\left[\frac{ (k_{36}+k_{46})^2 B[56:36+46]}{ k_{34} (k_{56})^2 }
+
\frac{ (k_{36})^2 B[56:36] }{ (k_{14}+k_{24}) (k_{56})^2 }
+
\frac{ (k_{46})^2 B[56:46] }{k_{456} (k_{56})^2 }
\right]\nonumber,
\end{align}
where we have defined
\begin{equation}
B[A+ B+\cdots I : C + B+\cdots J]:=\frac{1}{k_{A}+ k_{B}+\cdots k_I}+
\frac{1}{k_{C}+ k_{D}+\cdots k_J},
\end{equation}
and the labels $A,B,C,D,I$ and $J $ mean a index set, for example $k_A:=k_{a_1\cdots a_m}$.
The \eqref{rsixpoint} result was checked numerically.
\subsubsection{$\mathcal{I_{(B)}}$-Computation (General KLT and $\Lambda$ Algorithms)}\label{IBcomputation}
In section \ref{bblocks} we have combined the general KLT algorithm \cite{humbertoF} and the $\Lambda-$algorithm, respectively, in order to compute the $(V)$ building block, however, in this section our idea is the opposite. First, we apply the $\Lambda-$algorithm as far as it is possible. From this method we will obtain subdiagrams with less vertices than the original one. Second, we perform the general KLT algorithm on these subdiagrams and finally we will be able to use the $\Lambda-$algorithm, again, to compute the diagrams into the vectors and matrix, such as it was done in section \ref{fivebb}.
Let us remember that in the general KLT algorithm \cite{humbertoF} one must find a base, left $({\cal L})$ and right $({\cal R})$, such that all graphs have a Hamiltonian decomposition, i.e. the integrands are product of two Parke-Taylor factors. One of its main drawback is to compute the inverse of the Gram matrix given by the product among the left and right base, $m^{\cal L|R}$. For example, in six-point it is necessary to invert a $6\times 6$ matrix.
However, since our idea is first to apply the $\Lambda-$algorithm then this drawback is softened.
Let us consider the ${\cal I_{(B)}}$ example in {\bf Fig.7.1}. In order to avoid singular allowable configurations we set the following gauge fixing
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{IB_gauge-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.13})\,{\small {\rm Gauge Fixing\,.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
There are only three non-zero allowable configurations
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{IB_configuration-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.14})\,{\small {\rm Non-zero configurations\,.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Since these three configurations are the same up to relabel the (1,2,3) vertices then it is enough just to compute one of them, for example we choose the first one, (i) configuration. Following the techniques presented in the section \ref{IAcomputation} one obtains
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{IBi_con-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.15})\,{\small {\rm Computing the (i) configuration.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The 5 point graph on the right hand side can not be computed using the $\Lambda-$algorithm presented in section \ref{Lalgorithm}, therefore we use the general KLT-algorithm \cite{humbertoF}.
Following the same procedure used to compute the $(V)$ building block in {\bf Fig.6.7} (general KLT algorithm), we must break the 5 point graph (4-regular graph) into two 2-regular graphs (Left and Right)
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{splitting-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\,\, ,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.16})\,{\small {\rm Splitting the 5 point 4-regular graph in two 2-regular graphs (Left and Right)\,. The ``5" vertex has been fixed by the scale symmetry.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
where we have fixed the vertex number 5 using the scale symmetry. We choose the left and right base as\footnote{Unlike of the general KLT algorithm presented in \cite{humbertoF}, we must keep the initial gauge fixing. This is important because the $\Lambda-$algorithm has generated a massive particle (red vertex). }
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Lbase2-eps-converted-to.pdf}\quad , \quad
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Rbase2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\,\,\, ,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.17})\,{\small {\rm Left and Right base. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
such that the diagrams in the $(L {\cal I_{L}}) $ and $(R {\cal I_{R}}) $ vectors have a Hamiltonian decomposition \cite{graph1,graph2}. Thus, we can write the 5-point diagram in {\bf Fig.7.16} as the matrix product $(L{\cal I_L}) (m^{L|R})^{-1} (R{\cal I_R})$, diagrammatically one has
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{Iv5-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{uL5-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{matrixm5-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{vR5-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.18})\,{\small {\rm General KLT algorithm. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Using the $\Lambda-$algorithm we compute each diagram in {\bf Fig.7.18}, and the result is
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.67]{r_5_mass-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.68]{r_5_mass2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.19})\,{\small {\rm Result from the general KLT algorithm. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Relabeling the (1,2,3) indices one can write the final answer as
\begin{align}
{\cal I_{(B)}}=&\left(
\begin{matrix}
\frac{-1}{k_{456} k_{46}} \\
\frac{1}{k_{456} (k_{16}+k_{26}+k_{36} ) } + \frac{1}{k_{45} (k_{46} + k_{56})}
\end{matrix}
\right)^{\rm T} \\
&
\left[\frac{1}{k_{13}}
\left(
\begin{matrix}
\frac{B[15+35:256]}{k_{26}}
&
\frac{1}{k_{26}k_{256}}\\
\frac{1}{k_{25}(k_{26}+k_{56})} + \frac{1}{k_{256}(k_{16}+k_{36}+k_{46})}
&
\frac{1}{k_{256}(k_{16}+k_{36}+k_{46})}+\frac{B[16+36:26+56]}{k_{25}}
\end{matrix}
\right)^{-1}\right. \nonumber\\
&
+
\frac{1}{k_{23}}
\left(
\begin{matrix}
\frac{B[25+35:156]}{k_{16}}
&
\frac{1}{k_{16}k_{156}}\\
\frac{1}{k_{15}(k_{16}+k_{56})} + \frac{1}{k_{156}(k_{26}+k_{36}+k_{46})}
&
\frac{1}{k_{156}(k_{26}+k_{36}+k_{46})}+\frac{B[26+36:16+56]}{k_{15}}
\end{matrix}
\right)^{-1}\nonumber \\
&
+
\left.\frac{1}{k_{12}}
\left(
\begin{matrix}
\frac{B[25+15:156]}{k_{36}}
&
\frac{1}{k_{36}k_{356}}\\
\frac{1}{k_{35}(k_{36}+k_{56})} + \frac{1}{k_{356}(k_{26}+k_{16}+k_{46})}
&
\frac{1}{k_{356}(k_{26}+k_{16}+k_{46})}+\frac{B[26+16:36+56]}{k_{35}}
\end{matrix}
\right)^{-1}
\right]
\left(
\begin{matrix}
\frac{1}{k_{456} k_{56}} \\
\frac{-1}{k_{456} k_{56}}
\end{matrix}
\right) \nonumber ,
\end{align}
which was checked numerically.
\subsection{Eight-Point}\label{Epoint}
In this section we consider a non-trivial 8 point graph, which has the following left and right decomposition
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{8pt_dec-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.20})\,{\small {\rm Left and Right base. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
In addition to continue testing the power of the algorithm, this kind of graph was chosen in order to use the $(V)$ building block ({\bf Fig.6.7}).
First we fix a gauge such that there is no a singular configuration, for example we choose the gauge fixing
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{8pt-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.21})\,{\small {\rm Gauge Fixing. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Using this gauge we find three types of non-zero allowable configurations
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{8pt_conf-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.22})\,{\small {\rm Non-zero allowable configurations. Type (I): (a) and (b) configurations.\\ Type (II): (1), (2) and (3) configurations. Type(III): (i) configuration. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
Applying the $\Lambda-$algorithm one obtains that from the Type (I), $\{({\rm a}),({\rm b})\}$, arises a 6-point subdiagrams with the graph
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{F_ab-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\,\,\, ,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.23})\,{\small {\rm Six point graph from the Type (I) configuration. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
where we have fixed the ``a"-puncture (by scale symmetry) in order to avoid singular configurations. This graph is very similar to one given in {\bf Fig.7.2} and its computation is totally analog. Using the $\Lambda-$algorithm the result for this graph is the function
\begin{align}
&F_{ab}(k_a,k_b,k_c,k_d,k_e,k_f)= -\left( \frac{k_{df} B[ef:df] }{k_{ab} (k_{ac}+k_{bc})k_{ef}} +
\frac{( k_{af} + k_{bf} + k_{df} ) B[ef:af+bf+df] }{k_{ab} k_{cef} k_{ef}}
\right) \nonumber \\
& \qquad\qquad\qquad\quad -
\left( \frac{ ( k_{af} + k_{df}) B[ef:af+df] }{k_{ad} k_{bc} k_{ef}} +
\frac{( k_{af} + k_{bf} + k_{df} ) B[ef:af+bf+df] }{ k_{ad} k_{cef} k_{ef}}
\right)\nonumber\\
& \qquad\qquad\qquad\quad -
\frac{ k_{df} B[bc:cd+ce+cf ] B[ef : df] }{k_{abc} k{ef} }\,\,.
\end{align}
Therefore, the (a) and (b) configurations can be written as
\begin{align}
({\rm a}) &= -\frac{k_{23} B[12:23]}{k_{123} k_{12}} F_{ab}(k_8,k_1+k_2+k_3 , k_4, k_7 , k_5, k_6),\\
({\rm b}) &= -\frac{k_{57} B[56:57]}{k_{567} k_{56}} F_{ab}(k_4,k_5+k_6+k_7 , k_8, k_3 , k_1, k_2).
\end{align}
From the type (II) configurations, $\{ (1),(2),(3)\}$, one obtains the following 5-point subdiagrams after applying the $\Lambda-$algorithm
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{5pt_subd-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.24})\,{\small {\rm Five point graphs from the Type(II) configurations. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The first one, $F_{13}^5(k_a,k_b,k_c,k_d,k_e)$, is a subdiagram obtained from the $(1)$ and $(3)$ configurations and the second one, $F_{2}^5(k_a,k_b,k_c,k_d,k_e)$, is obtained from the $(2)$ configuration. These two subdiagrams are very similar to one obtained in {\bf Fig.7.8} and their computations are very simple using the $\Lambda-$algorithm. The results for these two graphs are
\begin{align}
F_{13}^5(k_a,k_b,k_c,k_d,k_e) &= -\frac{ k_{ce} B[de:ce] }{k_{ab} k_{de} }
-\frac{ ( k_{ae} + k_{ce} ) B[de: ae+ ce] }{k_{bde} k_{de} }, \\
F_{2}^5(k_a,k_b,k_c,k_d,k_e) &= -\frac{ k_{ce} B[de:ce] }{k_{ab} k_{de} }
-\frac{ ( k_{ae} + k_{ce} ) B[de: ae+ ce] }{k_{ac} k_{de} } .
\end{align}
Note that the two answers are totally different, this is because $k_{ac}\neq k_{bde}$ since there is a massive particle. We can now write the results for the Type (II) configurations, $\{(1), (2), (3)\}$, as
\begin{align}
(1) &= \frac{F_{13}^5(k_4+k_5+k_6+k_7 , k_8,k_3,k_1,k_2) F_{13}^5(k_1+k_2+k_3+k_8 , k_4,k_7,k_5,k_6)}{k_{4567}} , \\
(2) &= \frac{F_{2}^5(k_4,k_5+k_6+k_7 + k_8,k_3,k_1,k_2) F_{2}^5(k_8,k_1+k_2+k_3+k_4 ,k_7,k_5,k_6)}{k_{5678}} , \\
(3) &= \frac{F_{13}^5(k_7,k_8,k_3+k_4 + k_5+k_6,k_1,k_2) F_{13}^5(k_3,k_4,k_1+k_2 + k_7+k_8,k_5,k_6)}{k_{4567}} .
\end{align}
Finally, from the Type (III) configuration, $\{(i)\}$, one obtains the subdiagrams
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{iconfi-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\,\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.7.25})\,{\small {\rm Five point graphs from Type(III) configuration. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The first one, $F_V(k_a,k_b,k_c,k_d,k_e)$, is the $(V)$ building block computed in section \ref{fivebb} and it is given by
\begin{equation}
F_V(k_a,k_b,k_c,k_d,k_e) = \left( \frac{1}{k_{ab} k_{de} } \right)^2 (k_{ae} k_{bd} - k_{bce} k_{be}).
\end{equation}
The second one was also computed in section \ref{fivebb} using the $\Lambda-$algorithm and its result is very simple
\begin{equation}
F^{(i)}(k_a,k_b,k_c,k_d,k_e) = \frac{1}{k_{ab} k_{de} } .
\end{equation}
Thus, the $(i)$ configuration can be read as
\begin{equation}
(i) = \frac{ F_V (k_1, k_2 , k_3+k_4+k_7+k_8 , k_5 , k_6)\,\, F^{(i)} (k_7 , k_8 , k_1+k_2 + k_5+k_6,k_3,k_4 ) }{k_{3478}}
\end{equation}
The full answer is the sum over all configurations given in {\bf Fig.7.22}, i.e.
\begin{align}
{\cal I}_8= & ({\rm a}) + ({\rm b}) + (1) + (2) + (3) +(i) \\
= &-\frac{k_{23} B[12:23]}{k_{123} k_{12}} F_{ab}(k_8,k_1+k_2+k_3 , k_4, k_7 , k_5, k_6)\nonumber\\
& -\frac{k_{57} B[56:57]}{k_{567} k_{56}} F_{ab}(k_4,k_5+k_6+k_7 , k_8, k_3 , k_1, k_2)\nonumber \\
&+ \frac{F_{13}^5(k_4+k_5+k_6+k_7 , k_8,k_3,k_1,k_2) F_{13}^5(k_1+k_2+k_3+k_8 , k_4,k_7,k_5,k_6)}{k_{4567}} \nonumber\\
& + \frac{F_{2}^5(k_4,k_5+k_6+k_7 + k_8,k_3,k_1,k_2) F_{2}^5(k_8,k_1+k_2+k_3+k_4 ,k_7,k_5,k_6)}{k_{5678}} \nonumber \\
& + \frac{F_{13}^5(k_7,k_8,k_3+k_4 + k_5+k_6,k_1,k_2) F_{13}^5(k_3,k_4,k_1+k_2 + k_7+k_8,k_5,k_6)}{k_{4567}} \nonumber\\
&+ \frac{ F_V (k_1, k_2 , k_3+k_4+k_7+k_8 , k_5 , k_6)\,\, F^{(i)} (k_7 , k_8 , k_1+k_2 + k_5+k_6,k_3,k_4 ) }{k_{3478}} \nonumber .
\end{align}
This result was checked numerically.
\section{The Baadsgaard, Bohr, Bourjaily and Damgaard Rules (BBBD) Vs The $\Lambda$-Algorithm}\label{jacobvslambda}
In \cite{jacobrules}, Baadsgaard {\bf et al}, formulated some rules in order to compute the same kind of integrals or diagrams that we have studied so far. Nevertheless, although their rules are a certain sum over all possible factorization limits, similar to the $\Lambda$-algorithm, these two algorithms present important differences. For example, the $\Lambda$-algorithm depends of the gauge fixing, such as it has been explained and shown in section \ref{mainsection}. This particular characteristic is in fact a powerful tool, for instance, using the BBBD rules, which are independent of the choice of gauge, it is not possible to compute directly integrands such as ones given by the diagrams in {\bf Fig. 7.2, 7.8, 7.21, 7.23 or 7.24}. The reason is because there are four or three edges connecting two vertices. Nevertheless, as it has already been shown, these kind of diagrams can be easily computed using the $\Lambda$-algorithm.
At the same way as in \cite{jacobrules}, the $\Lambda$-algorithm can also be directly used to integrands with non trivial numerator. For example, let us consider the same diagram as in \cite{jacobrules}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.53]{numeratorgf-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, ,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.8.1})\,{\small {\rm Gauge fixing for the ${\cal N}_6$ numerator diagram.}}
\end{center}
\end{center}
where the black dotted line counts as negative solid line (antiline), i.e. it carries negative weight. Clearly this diagram corresponds to the integrand
\begin{equation}
H^{{\cal N}_6} =\frac{ (\tau_{1:2}\tau_{2:3}\tau_{3:4}\tau_{4:5}\tau_{5:6}\tau_{6:1}) (\tau_{1:2}\tau_{2:3}\tau_{3:5}\tau_{5:6}\tau_{6:1})(\tau_{2:4}\tau_{4:6}\tau_{6:2})}{(\tau_{2:6}\tau_{6:2})},
\end{equation}
or using the CHY variables one can write it as
\begin{equation}
H^{{\cal N}_6}_{{\rm CHY}}=\frac{(z_2-z_6)}{ (z_1-z_2)^2 (z_1-z_6)^2 (z_2-z_3)^2 (z_5-z_6)^2 (z_2-z_4) (z_3-z_4) (z_3-z_5) (z_4-z_5) (z_4-z_6) }\nonumber .
\end{equation}
Note that the lines and the antilines connecting the same two vertices cancel each other\footnote{This fact means that a numerator cancels with one denominator.}. Moreover,
due to the presence of a non trivial numerator, the
denominator has more factors than otherwise, this is so as to retain the
$SL(2,\mathbb{C})$ invariance.
Obviously, the ${\cal N}_6$ diagram in {\bf Fig.8.1} is not a 4-regular graph, but the subtraction between the number of lines and antilines must always be four (on each vertex) in order to keep the $SL(2,\mathbb{C})$ symmetry.
To compute the ${\cal N}_6$ diagram we are obliged to extend the $\Lambda$-Theorem
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Lambda-${\bf Theorem (Extension)}\qquad\qquad\qquad\\
Let $C$ be an allowable configuration, then the integrand ${\cal I}=|ijk|\Delta_{FP}(ijk,d) \, H(\sigma)$
on the $C$ configuration has the $\Lambda-$behavior
\begin{equation}
\mathcal {I}\,\Big|_{\Lambda\rightarrow 0}^C\, \sim\, \Lambda^{(L-A)-4}\,+\,{\cal O}(\Lambda^{(L-A)-3}),
\end{equation}
around $\Lambda= 0$, where $L$ is the number of lines and $A$ is the number of antilines which are intersected by the red line.
\end{itemize}
Using the $\Lambda-${\bf Theorem\,(Extension)} it is simple to see there are only two non zero allowable configurations
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{acnumerator-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.8.2})\,{\small {\rm Non zero configurations for the ${\cal N}_6$ diagram. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
These two configurations are easily calculated from the rules in section \ref{Lalgorithm}, so the first one configuration reads
\begin{equation}
{\cal N}_6^I=\frac{1}{k_{3456}\, k_{456}\, k_{56}} \,\,\, ,
\end{equation}
and the second one as
\begin{equation}
{\cal N}_6^{II}= \frac{1}{k_{1456}} \left[ \frac{1}{k_{456}\, k_{56}} + \frac{1}{k_{156}}\left(\frac{1}{k_{56}}+\frac{1}{k_{16}} \right) \right].
\end{equation}
Therefore, the final result can be written
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal N}_6 &= & {\cal N}_6^I + {\cal N}_6^{II} \\
&=&\frac{1}{k_{3456}\, k_{456}\, k_{56}} + \frac{1}{k_{1456}} \left[ \frac{1}{k_{456}\, k_{56}} + \frac{1}{k_{156}}\left(\frac{1}{k_{56}}+\frac{1}{k_{16}} \right) \right],
\end{eqnarray}
which is the same answer found in \cite{jacobrules}.
This show how powerful is the $\Lambda-$algorithm, which can be applied to solve highly non trivial integrands.
\section{Discussions}\label{discussion}
In this paper we gave a new representation for the CHY integrals. We call this new representation as the $\Lambda-$prescription. The $\Lambda-$prescription is supported on an algebraic curve of degree two, which is embedded in $\mathbb{C}P^2$, i.e. this is a sphere. This curve can be thought as a Riemann surface with two sheets connected by a branch cut.
The new scattering equations ({\bf the $\Lambda-$scattering equations}) must contain information about the branch where the particles (punctures) are localized. For example, the $\Lambda$ scattering equations are given by the expression
$$
E_a:=\sum_{b\neq a }^n k_a\cdot k_b \,\,\tau_{a:b}, ~~{\rm where} ~ \tau_{a:b}:=\frac{1}{2\,y_a}\left(\frac{y_a+y_b+\sigma_{ab}}{\sigma_{ab}}\right), ~~{\rm and} ~ y_a^2=\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2,
$$
with $a=1,\ldots n$. When $y_a=\sqrt{\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2}$ one says that the particle (puncture) is on the upper sheet and when
$y_a=-\sqrt{\sigma_a^2-\Lambda^2}$ then one says that the particle is on the lower sheet. Note that the quadratic curves, $y_a$, have an additional parameter, $\Lambda$, which controls the opening of the branch cut. When this parameter is promoted as a variable then a new symmetry arise (scale symmetry), which can be used to fix one more particle (puncture).
In section \ref{residuetheorem} we performed the global residue theorem over this new variable, $\Lambda$. After integrating $\Lambda$ one obtains that the $\Lambda$ prescription must be evaluated at the point $\Lambda=0$ ($\Lambda=\infty$), i.e. at the limit when the branch cut collapses in a line. So, the initial integral is broken into two new smaller integrals, which are now written as in the original CHY approach. In addition, these two new integrals are multiplied by a propagator, which is associated to the collapsed branch cut, it is kind a factorization limit. This is an iterative process, i.e. it can be applied over each one of these two new integrals. All this procedure is encoded into what we call the {\bf $\Lambda-$algorithm}.
The $\Lambda-$algorithm allow us to expand a given integral in terms of fundamental building blocks, given in {\bf Fig.6.7}.
Unlike to the other algorithms, the $\Lambda-$algorithm depends totally of the gauge fixing. Although this does not look like to be a good thing, in fact it is. For example, diagrams such as ones given in {\bf Fig.7.1}, which are very complicated using other type of algorithms, they are easily computed from the $\Lambda$ algorithm, obviously, after choosing a good gauge.
The $\Lambda$ algorithm is a powerful, simple and beautiful tool because it is a pictorial algorithm. Nevertheless, this mechanism has some limitations, i.e. there are some CHY integrals which can not be performed just using this algorithm. This is due we do not know the behavior of the {\bf singular allowable configurations}, which is the reason why one must choose a good gauge. It will be very interesting to know how to extend the $\Lambda$ algorithm to singular allowable configurations.
We know that the $\Lambda$ algorithm can be used on a big spectrum of CHY integrals, the main idea is to choose a gauge such that the all allowable configurations will not be singular. In particular, we know diagrams on which this fact always happens. These diagrams are given by all possible combinations of the following two 2-regular graphs
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{poli-poli_buble-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, .
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.9.1})\,{\small {\rm Two 2-regular graphs. ${\cal I}_a$ is a Parker-Taylor graph. ${\cal I}_b$ is a bubble with a regular polygon graph. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
The ${\cal I}_{a}$ graph is clearly a Parker-Taylor factor, therefore, the diagram given by the integrand $H(\sigma)={\cal I}_a ~{\cal I}_a$ is just the $m(\alpha|\beta)$ kernel, which is very simple to compute. The other two options given by the integrands $H(\sigma)={\cal I}_a ~{\cal I}_b$ and $H(\sigma)={\cal I}_b ~{\cal I}_b$, which are non trivial diagrams, they can be easily computed using the $\Lambda$ algorithm.
The $\Lambda$ algorithm has two more advantages. As we saw, some massive particles arise in the process, so this algorithm supports off shell particles. The other one is that this algorithm could be used on integrands with non trivial numerators, such as one given in {\bf Fig.8.1}. These two characteristics are very important in order to compute diagrams at loop level, for example, the diagram given by
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{1_loop_5-eps-converted-to.pdf}\,\, ,
\begin{center}
({\bf Fig.9.2})\,{\small {\rm 5-gon CHY diagram representation. }}
\end{center}
\end{center}
which appears at 1-loop computation of the 5-gon, it can easily be computed using the $\Lambda-$algorithm \cite{humbertoC}.
Finally, note that the integrand in the $\Lambda$ prescription is basically obtained from the original CHY approach just changing the $\frac{1}{z_{ab}}$ form by the $\tau_{a:b}$ form. However, although $\frac{1}{z_{ab}}$ is an antisymmetric form, i.e $\frac{1}{z_{ab}}=-\frac{1}{z_{ba}}$, the $\tau_{a:b}$ form is not, $\tau_{a:b}\neq -\tau_{a:b}$. So, the antisymmetric matrix, $\Psi_{\alpha\beta}$, which was defined in \cite{Cachazo:2013hca}, it is not any more antisymmetric when $(z_{ab})^{-1}$ is replaced by $\tau_{ab}$. Therefore, the Pfaffian of $\Psi_{\alpha\beta}(\tau_{a:b})$ is not well defined. Naively, in order to give an interpretation for the Yang-Mills theory from the $\Lambda$ prescription one can replace the Pfaffian of $\Psi_{\alpha\beta}(z_{a:b})$ by $\sqrt{{\rm det}\,(\Psi_{\alpha\beta}(\tau_{a:b}))}$, but we leave this for future research.
\acknowledgments
The author would like to thank F. Cachazo for his initial collaboration in this paper.
The author thanks to F. Cachazo, C. Cardona and C. Kalousios for carefully reading the draft, for comment and useful discussion.
The author would like to thank the hospitality of Perimeter Institute, Universidade de S\~ao Paulo (USP)
and Universidad Santigo de Cali, where this work was developed. The author thanks to the string theory group of the USP, where this work was presented.
HG is supported by CNPq grant 403178/2014-2.
|
\section{Introduction}
The theory of cosmic inflation \cite{Linde:1983gd, Starobinsky:1980te} has become the leading paradigm to explain the initial conditions of the early universe. Combined with cosmological perturbation theory \cite{Mukhanov:1990me}, it provides a mechanism for seeding structure formation that is in astonishing agreement with recent observations \cite{Bennett:2012zja, Ade:2015lrj, Ade:2015tva}.
Inflation is typically taken to arise from the potential energy of a scalar field mimicking the behaviour and equation of state of a cosmological constant $P_\Lambda=-\rho_\Lambda$. However, radiative corrections to the inflaton mass or generically higher dimensional operators may spoil the required flatness of the inflaton potential. Specifically, the slow-roll parameter $\eta$ may receive corrections of order one and subsequently observationally viable slow-roll inflation is no longer possible; this is referred to as the $\eta$-problem. In order to circumvent this problem, one can invoke an approximate continuous shift symmetry $\chi\rightarrow\chi+ const.$ of the inflaton $\chi$.
An alternative method to ensure the flattening of the scalar potential is by introducing a non-minimal coupling of the inflaton field to gravity. Following previous works \cite{Salopek:1988qh, Bezrukov:2007ep,Kallosh:2013tua}, we consider a Jordan frame in which the non-minimal coupling has a polynomial expansion around the minimum of the potential energy. In this case, a generic polynomial expansion of the non-minimal coupling and the potential energy results in a shift-symmetric Einstein frame that is protected from corrections by the non-minimal coupling strength $\xi$. This ansatz ensures, at least for intermediate fields, the existence of an approximate shift symmetry which then may serve to drive an inflationary phase.
By including the non-minimal coupling, we extend the previous approach to define arbitrary polynomials for the potential (or, equivalently in slow roll inflation, the Hubble function) originating from the Hubble flow code by Kinney \cite{Kinney:2002qn}. In this minimally coupled case, this approach confirmed the prediction from Hoffman and Turner in \cite{Hoffman:2000ue} that a polynomial Hubble function results in the generic shape
\begin{align}
3r=16(1-n_s) \,, \quad \text{or} \quad r=0 \,. \label{min-predictions}
\end{align}
However, this generic result is defined by the polynomial hypothesis \cite{Ramirez:2005cy,Chongchitnan:2005pf,Vennin:2014xta} and the assumption of minimal coupling to gravity, as we will show below. Moreover, these generic predictions are not consistent with the observations from PLANCK \cite{Ade:2015lrj}.
In the current paper, we extend these investigations by including a non-minimal coupling
\begin{align}
\Omega(\phi) = 1 + \xi f(\phi) \,, \label{nonminimal}
\end{align}
that contains an arbitrary polynomial $f$. The main physical parameter in our theory is the strength of the non-minimal coupling $\xi$. It turns out that one can identify a number of distinct regimes for this parameter. A number of these were outlined in \cite{Kallosh:2013tua} for the simple case that the scalar potential and the non-minimal coupling are related by a square relation as
\begin{align}
V_J = \lambda f(\phi)^2 \,. \label{square}
\end{align}
These will be recapped in section 2.
In this paper we focus on the more general case where the scalar potential and the non-minimal coupling are given by different and arbitrary polynomials $f$ and $g$:
\begin{align}
\Omega=1+\xi f(\phi)\thinspace,\quad V_J = \lambda\thinspace g(\phi) \thinspace . \label{general1}
\end{align}
In this case the large-field plateau can be destroyed by the different field dependence of both functions. The point where this happens depends on the non-minimal coupling strength; we identify the following two regimes, where $N_e$ denotes the number of e-folds at horizon exit of the scales now observable through the CMB: at $\xi \sim N_e^2$ there is a universal form for the inflationary predictions which converge for $\xi > N_e^2$ to those identical to the Starobinsky model. We will provide evidence for these two stages both from analytical expressions as well as from numerical investigations; a first illustration can be seen in figure 1. Our study thus lends further support to pinpoint the non-minimal coupling strength to $\xi\simeq 10^4$, following the argument from the scalar amplitude normalization and the toy model discussion of \cite{Broy:2014sia}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figs/Trajectory} \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figs/JCAP}
\caption{\textbf{Left:} \emph{The $n_s, r$ predictions for gradually increased non-minimal coupling $\xi$ at $N_e=55$ of an example with $\Omega = 1 + \xi \phi$ and $V_J=e^\phi-1-\phi$. Note that for lower $\xi$, the predictions are clearly incompatible with observational bounds. }\textbf{Right:} \emph{Predictions of the same model for $N_e^2\leq\xi\lesssim \mathcal O(10^4)$ with $N_e=55$. Increasing $\xi$ to values $\xi\gtrsim\mathcal O(10^4)$ has all further data points precisely cluster at the sweet spot of PLANCK. }}
\label{trajectory}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. We start with a short review of the universal attractor. We continue to generalize this set-up to arbitrary non-minimal coupling functions and potentials and demonstrate how the coupling strength $\xi$ may ensure a sufficient amount of observationally viable inflation. After outlining the analytic approximate expressions for the inflationary observables, we employ numerical methods to scan the landscape of possible inflationary scenarios with arbitrary coefficients. We conclude in the discussion and outline further analytical and numerical evidence in the appendix.
\section{Non-minimally coupled inflation}
We start with a brief recollection of the universal attractor \cite{Kallosh:2013tua}, which may be seen as a generalization of Higgs inflation \cite{Salopek:1988qh, Bezrukov:2007ep}. Consider the Jordan frame Lagrangian
\begin{equation}\label{JordanL}
\frac{\mathcal L_J}{\sqrt{-g_J}}=\frac{1}{2}\Omega(\phi)R_J-\frac{1}{2}\left(\partial\phi\right)^2-V_J(\phi),
\end{equation}
with non-minimal coupling \eqref{nonminimal} and scalar potential \eqref{square}. Going to the Einstein frame via
\begin{equation}
g^E_{\mu\nu}=\Omega(\phi)g^J_{\mu\nu},
\end{equation}
where the superscripts denote Einstein and Jordan frame respectively, the Lagrangian becomes
\begin{equation}\label{EinsteinL}
\frac{\mathcal L_E}{\sqrt{-g_E}}=\frac{1}{2}R_E-\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{1}{\Omega}+\frac{3}{2}\left(\frac{\partial \ln \Omega}{\partial\phi} \right)^2 \right]\left(\partial\phi \right)^2 -\frac{V_J}{\Omega^2}.
\end{equation}
As a function of the coupling strength $\xi$, the main features of this inflationary model are \cite{Kallosh:2013tua}:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\xi = 0$: The minimally coupled case with a random scalar potential yields inflationary predictions $n_s^{(0)}$ and $r^{(0)}$ that interpolate between small-field plateau and large-field chaotic inflation \eqref{min-predictions} \cite{Ramirez:2005cy,Chongchitnan:2005pf,Vennin:2014xta}. Almost all of these are ruled out by the PLANCK results.
\item
Very small $\xi$: At weak coupling, there is a universal behavior for the inflationary predictions. Retaining only linear terms in the coupling strength $\xi$ one finds \cite{Kallosh:2013tua}
\begin{align}
n_s = n_s^{(0)} + \tfrac{1}{16} \xi f r^{(0)} , \quad r = r^{(0)} - \xi f r^{(0)} \,.
\end{align}
Note that the inflationary predictions therefore have the same behaviour in the $(n_s,r)$ plane, corresponding to a downward line with a slope of $-16$.
\item
Finite $\xi< \mathcal{O}(1)$: The original behaviour will be flattened at large field values that are beyond the region probed by the cosmic microwave background (CMB); horizon exit of CMB scales takes place closer to the minimum and hence allows for a wide range of inflationary predictions depending on the specifics of the polynomial potential. In particular, in this regime one looses the simplicity of the linear approximation, resulting in a wide range of different behaviours.
For Higgs inflation, this regime is a particularly simple straight line, again with a slope of $-16$, that interpolates between quartic and Starobinsky inflation; for other starting points, the results of this regime are very different and generically complicated.
\item
Finite $\xi \gtrsim \mathcal{O}(1)$: Increasing the non-minimal coupling to and beyond order-one values pushes the plateau sufficiently close to the minimum of the scalar potential, yielding predictions that are indistinguishable from Starobinsky inflation:
\begin{align} \label{universal}
n_s = 1 - \frac{2}{N_e}+\frac{3}{2}\frac{\log(N_e)}{N_e^2} + \ldots \thinspace ,\quad r= \frac{12}{N_e^2} -18\frac{\log(N_e)}{N_e^3} +\ldots
\end{align}
where $N_e$ denotes the number of e-folds before the end of inflation and we have included subleading corrections from \cite{Roest:2013fha} to the well known leading order result. The exact value of $\xi$ where this happens depends on the specific choice of scalar potential. A derivation of expressions \eqref{universal} (and the later given \eqref{spectralindex}) will be provided in appendix \ref{derivation}.
\end{itemize}
The simplification of the latter limit arise as the first term in the kinetic function is sufficiently suppressed:
\begin{equation}\label{UArelations}
\Omega\ll \frac{3}{2}\Omega\thinspace'^{\thinspace 2} \,.
\end{equation}
In terms of a canonically normalized scalar field $\chi$,
\begin{equation}\label{omega}
\Omega(\chi)=e^{\sqrt{2/3}\chi},
\end{equation}
the scalar potential becomes
\begin{equation}\label{staro}
V_E=\frac{\lambda}{\xi^2}\left(1-e^{-\sqrt{2/3}\thinspace \chi} \right)^2.
\end{equation}
This is conformally dual to $R^2$-inflation \cite{Starobinsky:1980te, Whitt:1984pd}, and results in the relation
\begin{align}
N_e\sim\frac{3}{4}(\Omega-1) \,, \label{N}
\end{align}
for the number of e-folds.
Already in the original paper \cite{Kallosh:2013tua} it was argued that taking an independent scalar potential \eqref{general1} does not change the leading inflationary predictions as long as the function $g(\phi)$ and the square of $f(\phi)$ share the order of their first zero while the non-minimal coupling is taken sufficiently strong. A first quantitative investigation for a toy model of higher order corrections demonstrated that the leading order behaviour of the universal attractor can indeed be made robust once a certain value of the non-minimal coupling $\xi$ is chosen \cite{Broy:2014sia}. Specifically, the Jordan frame potential was taken to be a function of the non-minimal coupling $f(\phi)$, i.e.\
\begin{equation}
V_J(\phi)\rightarrow V_J(f(\phi)).
\end{equation}
This allowed the function $f(\phi)$ to be left completely unspecified. The deviation of $V_J(f)$ from a quadratic function was then used to model corrections to the universal attractor behaviour. Different types of expansions with $\mathcal O(1)$ coefficients were employed, from simple monomials to different series. Remarkably, it was found that a coupling strength of $\xi\sim\mathcal O(10^4)$ was sufficient to maintain the leading order inflationary predictions.
The observation that a sufficiently large $\xi$ can, regardless of an \emph{infinite} tower of higher order corrections with order one coefficients, induce a Starobinsky-like inflationary plateau over a finite field range derives from $\xi$ being able to drive $\Delta\phi<1$ when increased. Hence all higher order terms in the Jordan frame potential are sub-leading. In other words, the effect of higher order terms can simply be pushed far away in canonical field space by sufficiently enlarging the non-minimal coupling strength $\xi$.
The above study was however not conducted with arbitrary coefficients and an expansion of the scalar potential in terms of the non-minimal coupling might not be the most generic. In this work, we aim to study arbitrary corrections with a more generic ansatz and hence to find how to generically alleviate the $\eta$-problem of arbitrary potentials.
\section{Analytic predictions}\label{retain}
The aim of this section is to explicitly show the robustness of the inflationary potential from an arbitrary number of higher order terms. Consider the non-minimal coupling or frame function as well as the potential to be arbitrary polynomials with the only requirement that the Jordan frame potential and the square of the frame function share the order of their first zero for $\phi$; in particular, we require the Jordan frame potential to have a minimum and the frame function to contain a term linear in the Jordan frame field $\phi$. We thus make the following ansatz
\begin{equation}
\label{general}
\Omega(\phi)=1+\xi \sum_{n=1}^{M_\Omega} a_n\phi^n,\quad V_J(\phi)=\lambda \sum_{m=2}^{M_V}b_m\phi^m \,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{itemize}
\item
We have kept the factor $\lambda$ to be consistent with the original work and will assume it to take a natural value of $\lesssim\mathcal O(1)$.
\item
We assume $b_2$ and $a_1$ to be positive in order to ensure a Minkowski minimum at $\phi =0$ and that $\chi$ and $\phi$ both decrease at the same time ($d\phi/d\chi>0$) close to the minimum.
\item
We have introduced $M_{\Omega, V}$ to denote the respective cut-off of both series. These will not play a role in the analytic part; in principle, both polynomials may contain an infinite number of terms.
\end{itemize}
For the general set-up \eqref{general}, and for now assuming to be in the regime $\phi<1$, the expression for the number of e-folds of \eqref{N} obtains corrections as
\begin{equation}\label{importantN}
N_e\sim\frac{3}{4}\thinspace\Omega-\frac{b_3 \Omega^3}{8\thinspace b_2a_1 \xi} + \mathcal O^{(2)}\left(\frac{\Omega^2}{\xi}\right),
\end{equation}
which may be understood as an expansion in $\Omega^2/\xi$. From the zeroth-order relation \eqref{N} for the number of e-folds, we find that the lower bound on the non-minimal coupling strength for generating a sufficient amount of inflation within $\Delta\phi<1$ is
\begin{equation}\label{start}
\xi \gtrsim \mathcal O(N^2_e).
\end{equation}
We will assume this in what follows.
To obtain a value for $\xi$ that ensures the corrections to be sufficiently far away from the inflaton's minimum and to have inflation matching observations by PLANCK, it is most useful to study the inflationary observables and their dependence on the infinite tower of higher order terms.
To leading order, the expressions for the inflationary observables $n_s$ and $r$ of \eqref{general} are given by
\begin{align}\label{spectralindex}\notag
n_s=&1-\frac{2}{N_e}+\frac{64}{27}\frac{b_3}{b_2} \left(\frac{N_e}{a_1\xi} \right)+{\mathcal O}^{(2)}\left( \frac{1}{N_e}, \frac{N_e}{a_1\xi} \right),\\
r=&\frac{12}{N_e^2}+\frac{128}{9}\frac{b_3}{b_2}\left(\frac{1}{a_1\xi}\right)+ {\mathcal O}^{(2)} \left(\frac{N_e}{a_1\xi} \right) \notag \\
&+ {\mathcal O}^{(3)}\left( \frac{1}{N_e}\right)\thinspace ,
\end{align}
which is in line with \cite{Broy:2015qna}.\footnote{For a more detailed derivation, please see appendix \ref{derivation}.} Expressions \eqref{spectralindex} are expansions in $1/N_e$ and $N_e/(a_1\xi)$. For the spectral index $n_s$, the leading order terms are the linear contributions of the $1/N_e$ and the $N_e/(a_1\xi)$ expansions. For the tensor to scalar ratio $r$, the leading order terms are the quadratic and bilinear expressions of both expansions (note that we only give two of these three terms). Further subleading terms stem from higher order and cross terms in $1/(a_1\xi)$ and $N_e/(a_1\xi)$ and are denoted by ${\mathcal O}^{(n)}$. Note that we have omitted the subleading corrections of \cite{Roest:2013fha}, i.e.\ higher order terms in $\log(N_e)/N_e$, for clarity.
For $n_s$ and $r$ to be dominated respectively by the linear and quadratic term in $1/N_e$, i.e.\ for prolonging the intermediate plateau of the Einstein frame potential, we quickly identify the requirement \eqref{start}, self-consistent with the derivation's starting point. This hence marks the onset of a convergence of the inflationary predictions towards the values measured. Moreover, the next to leading order terms come with the same $a_1, b_2, b_3$ dependence. This implies that the ratio of the next to leading order terms has a universal form
\begin{equation}
\frac{\delta r}{\delta n_s}=\frac{6}{N_e} \,. \label{slope}
\end{equation}
This predicts that in the vicinity of the Starobinsky point in an $n_s/r$ scatter plot, there will be deviations to both the bottom left and the top right with a fixed slope that is independent of the specific coefficients. The former of these have $b_3$ negative (note that $a_1$ and $b_2$ have to be positive to guaranty the positivity of the frame function and the potential around the minimum); these corrections induce a hilltop-like deformation to the plateau. Similarly, the predictions to the top right of Starobinsky arise from positive $b_3$ corrections, corresponding to an upward curve in the plateau.
Thus we conclude that in the presence of a {\it generic} non-minimal coupling, to be contrasted to the simpler case satisfying square relation \eqref{square}, we expect the approach to the universal attractor to take place at a later stage (i.e.~larger value of $\xi$) but also in a cleaner manner (i.e.~in a straight line). This is nicely confirmed by figure \ref{fig:nsr_O1}.
Turning to the comparison with observations, for higher order terms not to spoil the value of $n_s$ observed by PLANCK, we consider the 2-$\sigma$ bound by PLANCK of $\delta n_s<0.008$ at $N_e=55$ and find, given $a_1, b_2, b_3 \sim\mathcal O(1)$,
\begin{equation}
\xi\gtrsim 10^4 \,.
\end{equation}
This hence sets, given order one coefficients, a lower bound on the non-minimal coupling strength $\xi$ to realize observationally viable slow-roll inflation. Remarkably, the value of $\xi$ obtained from the requirement of matching the observed spectral index $n_s$ is also similar to the value needed to match COBE normalization\footnote{Recalling $A_s=(24\pi^2)^{-1} V/\epsilon\sim 10^{-9}$ stemming from the CMB temperature data, it readily follows that $\xi\sim 10^5\sqrt{\lambda}$.} (provided the self-coupling $\lambda$ is sub-Planckian). Thus two independent observational indications -- in technical terms the spectral index $n_s$ and the amplitude $A_s$ -- hint towards an otherwise ad hoc value of the theory's parameter. The length and the height of the inflationary plateau are correctly set by the single parameter $\xi$.
The results of \cite{Broy:2014sia} hence nicely carry over to our more general ansatz \eqref{general}: given a scalar field with a minimum and polynomial non-minimal coupling with strength $\xi\gtrsim 10^4$ as required by the COBE normalization and expressions \eqref{spectralindex}, plateau inflation with PLANCK-like observables will be realised.
\section{Numerical results}
We now turn to the numerical body of this work and study the behaviour of ansatz \eqref{general} given arbitrary coefficients. By choosing random values for $a_n, b_m$, a Monte Carlo analysis can be performed using a procedure based on \cite{Hoffman:2000ue, Kinney:2002qn, Ramirez:2005cy, Coone:2015fha}. The prior distribution for $a_n$ and $b_m$ is chosen to be between $[-1/n!,1/n!]$ in order to represent a Taylor series with an increasing convergence range for large truncation order.\footnote{We will comment on the omission of the factorial suppression in section \ref{discussion}.}
Our numerical model closely follows the approach from \cite{Hoffman:2000ue,Kinney:2002qn, Coone:2015fha}, with some modifications to incorporate the non-canonical kinetic term. Thus sampling the current model in the Einstein frame \eqref{EinsteinL}, but without utilizing the canonical normalization \eqref{omega}. With a non-canonical kinetic term the first two slow-roll parameters become
\begin{align}
\epsilon=\frac{1}{2\thinspace K} \left(\frac{1}{V_J}\frac{\partial V_J}{\partial \phi}-\frac{2}{\Omega}\frac{\partial \Omega}{\partial\phi} \right)^2\thinspace,\quad \eta= \frac{\Omega^2}{K\thinspace V_J}\left[\frac{\partial^2}{\partial\phi^2}\left(\frac{V_J}{\Omega^2}\right)-\frac{1}{2\thinspace K}\frac{\partial K}{\partial\phi}\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi}\left(\frac{V_J}{\Omega^2}\right) \right] \,, \label{def_epsi_g}
\end{align}
in terms of the non-canonical kinetic function
\begin{equation}
K=\frac{1}{\Omega}+\frac{3}{2}\left(\frac{1}{\Omega}\frac{\partial\Omega}{\partial\phi}\right)^2 \,.
\end{equation}
The number of e-folds then follows as
\begin{align}
N_e=\int\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\epsilon}}d\chi=\int\frac{\sqrt{K}}{\sqrt{2\epsilon}}d\phi \,,
\end{align}
where $\chi$ is the canonical Einstein frame and $\phi$ the non-canonical Jordan frame inflaton.
Using these expressions for the slow-roll parameters, the rest of the procedure is similar to the ones in \cite{Kinney:2002qn, Coone:2015fha} and is summarized below
\begin{itemize}
\item Draw parameters $a_n$ and $b_m$ from Eq.~(\ref{general}) according to a uniform distribution.
\item Calculate $\epsilon, \eta$ from expressions (\ref{def_epsi_g}).
\item Find the type of the resulting inflationary model (the types will be defined below).
\item In case inflation ends with $\epsilon=1$ and contains $50$ e-folds, calculate $n_s$ and $r$ using $n_s=1+2\eta-6\epsilon$, $r=16\epsilon$.
\end{itemize}
This procedure is iterated $10^6$ times in all ensembles shown. Note that we are expanding $n_s$ and $r$ only to first order in slow roll, while the accuracy of the figures will imply that we need higher precision. We do not add higher order terms since our goal is to see the approach towards the general attractor, and not to obtain very precise high order predictions for $n_s$ and $r$ in the attractor phase. Moreover, at this moment there is no need to use higher orders of slow roll, since the PLANCK bounds on $n_s$ and $r$ are not precise enough. However, the linear terms in the $1/N_e$ expansion of Eq.~(\ref{universal}) will not be enough in comparison with the numerical data, and in principle higher order terms have to be included to match the accuracy in the figures. Performing this analysis we obtain that the so-called `Starobinsky point' will be at $n_s=0.96157, r=0.004192$ for $N_e=50$ to first order in slow roll.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figs/r_changeO}
\caption{\emph{An $r$ density plot, on a linear scale, for different values of $M_\Omega$ with $M_V=10$ and $\xi=10^4$. For $M_\Omega>2$ the system is truncation independent.}}
\label{fig:truncation}
\end{figure}
One should distinguish different late-time behaviours:
\begin{itemize}
\item
The one we are looking for is when $\epsilon$ becomes 1, and then increases to infinity when $\phi\to0$, which we will call a \emph{non-trivial} ending, following the terminology of \cite{Kinney:2002qn}.
\item
In addition there is the possibility that the model does have an inflation phase with $\epsilon=1$ at the end, but does not include the required $50$ e-folds of inflation. Those models are referred to as \emph{insuf}.
\item
Besides the non-trivial and insuf endings, there is a fraction of the configurations with a zero in $\Omega$ or $V$ (or both) before inflation starts. Negative potential and frame function are not allowed during inflation, thus we give them the label \emph{$\Omega, V$-negative}.
\item
Finally, a very small fraction of the models does not include an inflation phase at all, but this fraction is negligibly small for the values of $\xi$ discussed in this work.
\end{itemize}
In what follows, we will focus on the non-trivial trajectories.
Secondly, one should worry about the effects of the truncation of the polynomials in \eqref{general}: do the resulting predictions depend on these? Fortunately, at the large $\xi$ values that we are presently interested in, it is computationally possible to include a sufficient number of terms in both the non-minimal coupling and the scalar potential to render our results truncation independent. This is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:truncation}. In what follows, we will consider the specific case of $M_V = 10$ and $M_\Omega = 5$, but none of our results depend on these specific numbers.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figs/nsr_varxi}
\caption{\emph{The plot shows a scatter plot of $5000$ trajectories from the ensembles with $M_\Omega=5$ and $M_V=10$ for $\xi=10^2$ in green and $\xi=10^4$ in blue. The $\xi=10^2$ points overlap the $\xi=10^4$ points. The red star represents the Starobinsky point $n_s\approx 0.962, r\approx 0.004$.}}
\label{fig:nsr_O1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/ns_xiVar}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/r_xiVar}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/ns_xiVar_zoom}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figs/r_xiVar_zoom}
\caption{\it Density profiles (on a log-scale) for different values of $\xi$. The left frames show the density profile for $n_s$, while the right frames show the density profile for $r$. The bottom frames are a zoom in around the Starobinsky point. Both $n_s$ and $r$ peak at the Starobinsky point for $\xi \gtrsim 10^4$.}
\label{fig:density_profiles}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure*}
Turning to the numerical results, we start with a scatter plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:nsr_O1}, comparing the predictions for $\xi=10^2$ and $\xi=10^4$ with fixed $M_\Omega=5$, $M_V=10$ (and setting $N_e=50$). In perfect agreement with our analytic results, indeed a clearly visible line is present that goes from bottom left to top right through the Starobinsky point shown with a red star. Around this point, its slope is given by \eqref{slope}. Moreover, this line is much more pronounced for the larger value of $\xi$.
Studying models close to the Starobinsky point is difficult using scatter plots, since the finite point size blurs too much information regarding the density of points. Therefore, to be able to make any observation regarding the onset of the universal attractor regime, one should consider the density of the spectrum. For this we binned the data in small bins of $n_s$ ($r$) and counted the number of points within each bin, thereby marginalizing over $r$ ($n_s$). The resulting curve is a rough measure for the probability distribution of the variable, since the number of points over which is sampled is large. For a true measure of the probability, the spectrum has to be normalized. However, we only calculated the number of points in a bin, divided by the total number of points, which actually depends on the chosen binsize; fortunately, this will not influence our conclusions.
The density plots for $n_s$ and $r$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:density_profiles}. In these plots it is clear that for $\xi=10^2$, the Starobinsky point is not of any importance, and the ensemble is most likely to be found in a hilltop state. When $\xi=10^4$ a peak is clearly visible at the Starobinsky point, and this peak sharpens when $\xi$ increases, just as the analysis in section \ref{retain} demonstrated. This centering around the Starobinsky point is a continuous process, starting from around $\xi\approx N_e^2$.
There is one final probe we want to present here that shows the emergence of the attractor phase, and that is the percentage of the number of \emph{non-trivial} outcomes of inflation. As explained before, a random model can have different outcomes of inflation, depending on the shape of the potential and the frame function. However, if the attractor phase is reached at infinite $\xi$, the outcome becomes independent of the model, and hence all models should be non-trivially ending.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs/distribution_xiVar}
\caption{\emph{The occurrence of different late-time behaviours as a function of $\xi$. The circles denote actual data points, the lines are only to guide the eye.}}
\label{fig:distribution}
\end{figure}
To probe this we plot the percentage of the number of outcomes in Fig.~\ref{fig:distribution}. The probability that a model ends non-trivially indeed increases when $\xi$ increases, and the number of models with insufficient e-folds to account for the observations (\emph{insuf}) and the number of models with negative potential and/or frame function during inflation (\emph{Vneg}) decrease.
Note that in Fig.~\ref{fig:distribution} we observe the maximal increase of the number of non-trivial points around $\xi=10^4$. Also $\xi=10^4$ was the location where the peak was first centred around the Starobinsky point. We hence conclude that the lower bound $\xi\gtrsim 10^4$ appears first from CMB normalization arguments and our toy model analysis in subsection \ref{retain} and follows to be a special value also in the numerical study.
\section{Discussion}\label{discussion}
In this work, we have revisited non-minimally coupled inflation models in the spirit of \cite{Salopek:1988qh, Bezrukov:2007ep, Kallosh:2013tua}. Our interest was whether there exists a value of the non-minimally coupling strength that is preferred not only by matching COBE normalisation.
We first described how the non-minimal coupling $\xi$ may be used to induce an effective shift-symmetry which is protected against a possibly infinite tower of higher order corrections. The size of the non-minimal coupling determines the field range of this Einstein frame shift-symmetry. We identified two distinct regimes:
\begin{itemize}
\item
$\xi \sim \mathcal{O}(N^2_e)$: In this regime, the Jordan frame field is mostly sub-Planckian during inflation. As a consequence, it is inherently protected from most higher order terms, and may only be affected by a single correction term to the square relation \eqref{square}. Inflation will be driven by an intermediate plateau of hilltop potential generating at least $N_e$ e-folds. The inflationary predictions will therefore be roughly similar to those of PLANCK.
\item
$\xi > {O}(N^2_e) $: For larger values, the Jordan field only takes small values during inflation, and inflation is therefore protected from any higher-order term and is effectively governed the square relation \eqref{square}. Due to the larger non-minimal coupling, the intermediate plateau is prolonged such that the inflationary observables begin to converge towards the sweet spot of PLANCK. The predictions will have entered the 2-$\sigma$ contours of PLANCK once $\xi\sim\mathcal O(10^4)$. This lower bound is in remarkable agreement with the value of $\xi$ required to match the scalar perturbation amplitude $A_s$ \cite{Bennett:1996ce}.
\end{itemize}
In the numerical component of this work, we parametrized non-minimal coupling functions and potentials as arbitrary polynomials. Drawing the coefficients of the polynomials randomly, we examined the resulting Einstein frame potentials to find out whether observationally viable slow-roll inflation occurs. We found that with increasing non-minimal coupling $\xi$, the number of non-trivial inflationary trajectories increases. Remarkably, this increase is most pronounced in the range $\xi\sim\mathcal O(N_e^2)$ to $\xi\sim\mathcal O(10^4)$. Furthermore, we found that at $\xi\sim\mathcal O(N_e^2)$ there is a transition from a peak at low $n_s$ to a peak at the Starobinsky prediction of $n_s=0.962$.
In other words, a non-minimal coupling $\xi$ can induce a shift-symmetry protected against all higher order terms (i.e.\ length of an inflationary plateau). The preferred value to match the COBE normalization coincides with the inflationary observables taking PLANCK-compatible values.
To have a prediction of the implications of the assumption of factorial fall-off of the coefficients we repeated the analysis with choosing the random interval as $[-1,1]$ for $a_n, b_n$ in \eqref{general}. Though, as will be explained in appendix \ref{higherO}, the low order truncations of this system were different, the truncation independent regime showed the same observations. Thus we conclude that the above analysis is independent of the choice of the prior interval. Regarding the type of series used, for instance using Fourier series instead of polynomials, we expect that our main finding; that for large $\xi$ all models are located around the Starobinsky point, is still valid. However, the approach towards this point, i.e.~the predictions for $\xi\sim\mathcal O(N_e^2)$ and $\xi\sim\mathcal O(10^4)$, might in general be different as well as how these models approach the Starobinsky point, i.e.~Fig \ref{fig:nsr_O1}. Studying the model dependence of the predictions is an interesting follow-up analysis.
\acknowledgments
This work has been supported by the ERC Consolidator Grant STRINGFLATION under the HORIZON 2020 contract no.\ 647995 and by the German Science Foundation (DFG) within the Collaborative Research Center 676 "Particles, Strings and the Early Universe". BB was further supported by a travel grant of the PIER Helmholtz Graduate school and appreciates the RUG HEP theory group's hospitality during his stay.
|
\section{Introduction}
The {\em SP theory of intelligence}, and its realisation in the {\em SP computer model}, is a unique attempt to simplify and integrate observations and concepts across artificial intelligence, mainstream computing, mathematics, and human perception and cognition, with information compression as a unifying theme.
This paper, which derives from \cite[chapter 11]{wolff_2006} with revisions and updates, describes how abstract structures and processes in the SP theory may be realised in terms of neurons, their interconnections, and the transmission of impulses between neurons. This part of the SP theory---called {\em SP-neural}---may be seen as a tentative and partial theory of the representation and processing of knowledge in the brain. As such, it may prove useful as a source of ideas for theoretical and empirical investigations in the future. For the sake of clarity, the abstract parts of the theory, excluding SP-neural, will be referred to as ``SP-abstract''.
It is envisaged that SP-neural will be further developed in the form of a computer model. As with the existing computer model of SP-abstract, the development of this new computer model will help to guard against vagueness in the theory, it will serve as a means of testing ideas to see whether or not they work as anticipated, and it will be a means of demonstrating what the model can do, and validating it against empirical data.
The next section says something about the theoretical orientation of this research. Then SP-abstract will be described briefly as a foundation for the several sections that follow which describe aspects of SP-neural and associated issues.
\section{Theoretical orientation}\label{theoretical_orientation_section}
Cosmologist John Barrow has written that ``Science is, at root, just the search for compression in the world'' \cite[p.~247]{barrow_1992}, an idea which may be seen to be equivalent to Occam's Razor---a good theory should combine conceptual {\em simplicity} with descriptive or explanatory {\em power}. This is because compression of any given body of information, {\bf I}, may be seen as a process of reducing `redundancy' of information in {\bf I} and thus increasing its `simplicity', whilst retaining as much as possible of its non-redundant descriptive and explanatory `power'.
This works best when {\bf I} is large. But this has not always been observed in practice: Newell \cite[p.~303]{newell_1973} urged researchers in psychology to address ``a genuine slab of human behaviour''; and McCorduck \cite[pp.~417 and 424]{mccorduck_2004} has described how research in artificial intelligence became fragmented into many narrow sub-fields.
In the light of these observations, and in the spirit of research on ``unified theories of cognition'' \cite{newell_1990} and ``artificial general intelligence'',\footnote{See, for example, ``Artificial General Intelligence'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1ZxCQPo}{bit.ly/1ZxCQPo}, retrieved 2016-01-19.} the SP programme of research has attempted to simplify and integrate observations and concepts across a broad canvass, resisting the temptation to concentrate only on one small area.
In connection with these ideas, the name ``SP'' may be seen to be short for {\em simplicity} and {\em power}. This is partly because, as we shall see, the SP theory, despite its relative simplicity, has quite a lot to say about a wide range of observations and concepts. But more importantly it is because information compression lies at the heart of how the SP system works.
\section{SP-abstract in brief}\label{sp-abstract_outline_section}
As a basis for the description of SP-neural, this section provides a brief informal account of SP-abstract. The theory is described most fully in \cite{wolff_2006} and quite fully but more briefly in \cite{sp_extended_overview}. Details of other publications in the SP programme, many of them with download links, are shown on the website of CognitionResearch.org (\href{http://bit.ly/1mSs5XT}{bit.ly/1mSs5XT}).
\subsection{Origins and foundations of the SP theory}
The origins of SP theory are mainly in a body of research by Attneave \cite{attneave_1954}, Barlow \cite{barlow_1959,barlow_1969} and others suggesting that much of the workings of brains and nervous systems may be understood as compression of information, and my own research (summarised in \cite{wolff_1988}) suggesting that, to a large extent, language learning may be understood in the same terms. There is more about the foundations of the theory in \cite{sp_foundations}.
\subsection{Elements of SP-abstract}\label{elements_of_sp-a_section}
In SP-abstract, all kinds of knowledge are represented with {\em patterns}, where a pattern is an array of atomic {\em symbols} in one or two dimensions. At present, the SP computer model\footnote{The current version of the SP computer model is SP71, the source code for which may be downloaded via a link from \href{http://bit.ly/1ZHUqPE}{bit.ly/1ZHUqPE}. This version of the computer model is very similar to SP70, described in \cite[Sections 3.9.2 and 9.2]{wolff_2006}.} works only with 1D patterns but it is envisaged that the model will be generalised to work with 2D patterns. In this connection, a `symbol' is simply a `mark' that can make a yes/no match with any other symbol---no other result is permitted.
In most of the examples shown in this paper, symbols are shown as alphanumeric characters or short strings of characters but, when the SP system is used to model biological structures and processes, such representations may be interpreted as low-level elements of perception such as formants or formant ratios in the case of speech or lines and junctions between lines in the case of vision (see also Section \ref{sp-n_sensory_data_receptor_array_section}).
To help cut through mathematical complexities associated with information compression, the SP system---SP-abstract and its realisation in the SP computer model---is founded on a simple, `primitive' idea: that information may be compressed by finding full or partial matches between patterns and merging or `unifying' the parts that are the same. This principle---``Information Compression via the Matching and Unification of Patterns'' (ICMUP)---provides the foundation for a powerful concept of {\em multiple alignment}, borrowed and adapted from bioinformatics. The multiple alignment concept, outlined in Section \ref{sp-a_multiple_alignment_section}, below, is itself central in the workings of SP-abstract and is the key to versatility and adaptability of the SP system. It has the potential to be as significant for the understanding of `intelligence' in a broad sense as is DNA for biological sciences.
\subsection{SP patterns, multiple alignment, and the representation and processing of knowledge}
In themselves, SP patterns are not very expressive. But in the multiple alignment framework (Section \ref{sp-a_multiple_alignment_section}) they become a very versatile medium for the representation of diverse forms of knowledge. And the building of multiple alignments, together with processes for unsupervised learning (Sections \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section} and \ref{sp-a_later_learning_section}), has proved to be a powerful means of modelling diverse kinds of processing.
The two things together---SP patterns and multiple alignment---have the potential to be a ``universal framework for the representation and processing of diverse kinds of knowledge'' (UFK), as discussed in \cite{sp_big_data}.
An implication of these ideas is that there would not, for example, be any difference between the representation and processing of non-syntactic cognitive knowledge and the representation and processing of the syntactic forms of natural language. A framework that can accommodate both kinds of knowledge is likely to facilitate their seamless integration, as discussed in Section \ref{sp-a_evaluation_systems_section}.
\subsection{Early stages of learning}\label{sp-a_early_learning_section}
The SP theory is conceived as a brain-like system that receives {\em New} patterns via its `senses' and stores some or all of them, in compressed form, as {\em Old} patterns. In broad terms, this is how the system learns.
In the SP system, all learning is `unsupervised',\footnote{See ``Unsupervised learning'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/22nEPL2}{bit.ly/22nEPL2}, retrieved 2016-03-17} meaning that it does not depend on assistance by a `teacher', the grading of learning materials from simple to complex, or the provision of `negative' examples of concepts to be learned---meaning examples that are marked as `wrong' ({\em cf}.~\cite{gold_1967}). Notwithstanding the importance of schools and colleges, it appears that most human learning is unsupervised. Other kinds of learning, such as `supervised' learning (learning from labelled examples),\footnote{See ``Supervised learning'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1nR4ybK}{bit.ly/1nR4ybK}, retrieved 2016-03-17.} or `reinforcement' learning (learning with carrots and sticks),\footnote{See ``Reinforcement learning'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1R0RoDv}{bit.ly/1R0RoDv}, retrieved 2016-03-17.} may be seen as special cases of unsupervised learning \cite[Section V]{sp_autonomous_robots}.
At the beginning of processing by the system, when the repository of Old patterns is empty,\footnote{Although it is likely that, contrary to what Noam Chomsky and others have suggested, a newborn child does {\em not} have any kind of detailed knowledge of the structure of natural language, it {\em is} likely he or she does have inborn knowledge such as how to suck milk from a breast. In this respect (and others), the SP theory, insofar it is seen as a model of human cognition, is not entirely accurate.} New patterns are stored as they are received but with the addition of system-generated `ID' symbols at the beginning and end. For example, a New pattern like `\texttt{t h e b i g h o u s e}' would be stored as an Old pattern like `\texttt{A 1 t h e b i g h o u s e \#A}'. Here, the lower-case letters are atomic symbols that may represent actual letters but could represent basic elements of speech (such as formant ratios or formant transitions), or basic elements of vision (such as lines or corners), and likewise with other sensory data.
Later, when some Old patterns have been stored, the system may start to recognise full or partial matches between New and Old patterns. If a New pattern is exactly the same as an Old pattern (excluding the ID-symbols), then frequency measures for that pattern and its constituent symbols are incremented. These measures, which are continually updated at all stages of processing, have an important role to play in calculating probabilities of structures and inferences and in guiding the processes of building multiple alignments (Section \ref{sp-a_multiple_alignment_section}) and unsupervised learning.
With partial matches, the system will form multiple alignments like the one shown in Figure \ref{partial_match_figure}, with a New pattern in row 0 and an Old pattern in row 1.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\fontsize{10.00pt}{12.00pt}
\centering
{\bf
\begin{BVerbatim}
0 t h e s m a l l h o u s e 0
| | | | | | | |
1 A 1 t h e b i g h o u s e #A 1
\end{BVerbatim}
}
\caption{A multiple alignment produced by the SP computer model showing a partial match between a New pattern (in row 0) and an Old pattern (in row 1).}
\label{partial_match_figure}
\end{figure}
From a partial match like this, the system creates Old patterns from the parts that match each other and from the parts that don't. Each newly-created Old pattern will be given system-generated ID-symbols. The result in this case would be patterns like these: `\texttt{B 1 t h e \#B}', `\texttt{C 1 h o u s e \#C}', `\texttt{D 1 s m a l l \#D}', `\texttt{D 2 b i g \#D}'. In addition, the system forms an abstract pattern like this: `\texttt{E 1 B \#B D \#D C \#C \#E}' which records the sequence [`\texttt{B 1 t h e \#B}', (`\texttt{D 1 s m a l l \#D}' or `\texttt{D 2 b i g \#D}'), `\texttt{C 1 h o u s e \#C}'] in terms the ID-symbols of the constituent patterns.
Notice how `\texttt{s m a l l}' and `\texttt{b i g}' have both been given the ID-symbol `\texttt{D}' at their beginnings and the ID-symbol `\texttt{\#D}' at their ends. These additions, coupled with the use of the same two ID-symbols in the abstract pattern `\texttt{E 1 B \#B D \#D C \#C \#E}' has the effect of assigning `\texttt{s m a l l}' and `\texttt{b i g}' to the same syntactic category, which looks like the beginnings of the `adjective' part of speech.
The overall result in this example is a collection of SP patterns that functions as a simple grammar to describe the phrases {\em the small house} and {\em the big house}.
In practice, the SP computer model may form many other multiple alignments, patterns and grammars which are much less tidy than the ones shown. But, as outlined in Sections \ref{sp-a_multiple_alignment_section} and \ref{sp-a_later_learning_section}, the system is able to home in on structures that are `good' in terms of information compression.
As we shall see (Sections \ref{sp-a_multiple_alignment_section}, \ref{sp-a_evaluation_theory_section}, and \ref{sp-n_non-syntactic_knowledge_section}), SP patterns, within the SP system, are remarkably versatile and expressive, with at least the power of context-sensitive grammars \cite[Chapter 5]{wolff_2006}.
\subsection{The multiple alignment concept}\label{sp-a_multiple_alignment_section}
The multiple alignment shown in Figure \ref{partial_match_figure} is unusually simple because it contains only two patterns. More commonly, the system forms `good' multiple alignments like the one shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}, with one New pattern (in row 0) and several Old patterns (one in each of several other rows).\footnote{In this case, the SP computer model was supplied with an appropriate set of Old patterns. It did not learn them for itself.} As a matter of convention, the New pattern is always shown in row 0, but the order of the Old patterns across the other rows is not significant.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\fontsize{06.00pt}{07.20pt}
\centering
{\bf
\begin{BVerbatim}
0 f o r t u n e f a v o u r s t h e b r a v e 0
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 | | | | | | | Vr 6 f a v o u r #Vr | | | | | | | | | 1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
2 | | | | | | | V 7 Vr #Vr s #V | | | | | | | | 2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
3 | | | | | | | VP 3 V #V NP | | | | | | | | #NP #VP 3
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
4 N 4 f o r t u n e #N | | | | | | | | | | | | 4
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
5 NP 2 N #N #NP | | | | | | | | | | | | 5
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
6 S 0 NP #NP VP | | | | | | | | | | #VP #S 6
| | | | | | | | | |
7 | | | | N 5 b r a v e #N | 7
| | | | | | |
8 NP 1 D | | | #D N #N #NP 8
| | | | |
9 D 8 t h e #D 9
\end{BVerbatim}
}
\caption{The best multiple alignment produced by the SP computer model with a New pattern representing a sentence to be parsed and a repository of user-supplied Old patterns representing grammatical categories, including words. In the multiple alignment, the New pattern appears in row 0 and some of the Old patterns supplied to the system appear in rows 1 to 9, one pattern per row.}
\label{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}
\end{figure}
A multiple alignment like the one shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure} is built in stages, using heuristic search at each stage to weed out structures that are `bad' in terms of information compression and retaining those that are `good'. Problems of computational complexity are reduced or eliminated by a scaling back of ambition: instead of searching for theoretically-ideal solutions, one merely searches for solutions that are ``good enough''.
In this example, multiple alignment achieves the effect of parsing the sentence into parts and sub-parts, such as a sentence (`S') defined by the pattern in row 6, one kind of noun phrase (`NP') defined by the pattern that appears in row 5, and another kind of noun phrase shown in row 8, a verb phrase (`VP') defined by the pattern in row 3, nouns (`N') defined by the patterns in rows 4 and 7, and so on. But there is much more than this to the multiple alignment concept as it has been developed in the SP programme. It turns out to be a remarkably versatile framework for the representation and processing of diverse kinds of knowledge---non-verbal patterns and pattern recognition, logical and probabilistic kinds of `rules' and several kinds of reasoning, and more (Sections \ref{sp-a_evaluation_theory_section} and \ref{sp-n_non-syntactic_knowledge_section}).
A point worth mentioning here is that, although the multiple concept is entirely non-hierarchical, it can model several kinds of hierarchy and heterarchy (Section \ref{sp-a_evaluation_theory_section}), as illustrated by the parsing example in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}. And such hierarchies may not always be `strict' hierarchies because any pattern may be aligned with any other pattern and, within one multiple alignment, any pattern may be aligned with two or more other patterns.
\subsection{Deriving a code pattern from a multiple alignment}\label{sp-a_deriving_code_pattern_section}
From a multiple alignment like the one shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}, the SP system may derive a {\em code pattern}---a compressed encoding of the sentence---as follows: scan the multiple alignment from left to right, identifying the ID-symbols that are {\em not} matched with any other symbol and create an SP pattern from the sequence of such symbols. In this case, the result is the pattern `\texttt{S 0 2 4 3 7 6 1 5 \#S}'. This code pattern has several existing or potential uses including:
\begin{itemize}
\item It provides a basis for calculating a `compression score' for the Old patterns in the multiple alignment, meaning their effectiveness as a means of compressing the New pattern. Compression scores like that have a role in sifting out one or more `good' grammars for any given set of New patterns.
\item If the code pattern is treated as a New pattern then, with the same Old patterns as when the code pattern was produced, the SP system can recreate the original sentence, as described in Section \ref{sp-n_output_section}.
\item When SP-abstract is developed to take account of meanings as well as syntax, it is likely that each ID-symbol in the code pattern will take on a dual role: representing each syntactic form (word or other grammatical structure) and representing the meaning of the given syntactic form.
\item It is envisaged that, with further development of the SP computer model, code patterns will enter into the learning process, as outlined in Section \ref{sp-a_later_learning_section}, next.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Later stages of learning}\label{sp-a_later_learning_section}
As we saw in Section \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section}, the earliest stage of learning in SP-neural---when the repository of Old patterns is empty or nearly so---is largely a matter of absorbing New information directly with little modification except for the addition of system-generated ID-symbols. Later, when there are more Old patterns in store, the system begins to create Old patterns from partial matches between New and Old patterns. Part of this process is the creation of abstract patterns that describe sequences of lower-level patterns.
As the system begins to create abstract patterns, it will also begin to form multiple alignments like the one shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}. And, as it begins to form multiple alignments like that, it will also begin to form code patterns, as described in Section \ref{sp-a_deriving_code_pattern_section}.
At all stages of learning, but most prominent in the later stages, is a process of inferring one or more {\em grammars} that are `good' in terms of their ability to encode economically all the New patterns that have been presented to the system. Here, a `grammar' is simply a collection of SP patterns. The term `grammar' has been adopted partly because of the origins of the SP system in research on the learning of natural language \cite{wolff_1988} and partly because the term has come to be used in areas outside computational linguistics, such as pattern recognition.
Inferring grammars that are good in terms of information compression is, like the building multiple alignments, a stage-by-stage process of heuristic search through the vast abstract space of alternatives, discarding `bad' alternatives at each stage, and retaining a few that are `good'. As with the building of multiple alignments, the search aims to find solutions that are ``good enough'', and not necessarily perfect.
It is envisaged that the SP computer model will be developed so that, in this later phase of learning, learning processes will be applied to code patterns as well as to New patterns. It is anticipated that this may overcome two weaknesses in the SP computer model as it is now: that, while it forms abstract patterns at the highest level, it does not form abstract patterns at intermediate levels; and that it does not recognise discontinuous dependencies in knowledge \cite[Section 3.3]{sp_extended_overview}.
In \cite[Chapter 9]{wolff_2006}, there is a much fuller account of unsupervised learning in the SP computer model.
\subsection{Evaluation of SP-abstract}
The SP theory in its abstract form may be evaluated in terms of `simplicity' and `power' of the theory itself (discussed in Section \ref{sp-a_evaluation_theory_section} next), in terms its potential to promote simplification and integration of structures and functions in natural or artificial systems that conform to the theory (Section \ref{sp-a_evaluation_systems_section} below), and in comparison with other AI-related systems.
\subsubsection{Simplicity and power}\label{sp-a_evaluation_theory_section}
In terms of the principles outlined in Section \ref{theoretical_orientation_section}, the SP system, with multiple alignment centre stage, scores well. One relatively simple framework has strengths and potential in the representation of several different kinds of knowledge, in several different aspects of AI, and it has several potential benefits and applications:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Representation and processing of diverse kinds of knowledge}. The SP system (SP-abstract) has strengths and potential in the representation and processing of: class hierarchies and heterarchies, part-whole hierarchies and heterarchies, networks and trees, relational knowledge, rules used in several kinds of reasoning, patterns with pattern recognition, images with the processing of images \cite{sp_vision}, structures in planning and problem solving, structures in three dimensions \cite[Section 6]{sp_vision}, knowledge of sequential and parallel procedures \cite[Section IV-H]{sp_autonomous_robots}. It may also provide an interpretive framework for structures and processes in mathematics \cite[Section 10]{sp_foundations}.
There is a fuller summary in \cite[Section III-B]{sp_big_data} and much more detail in \cite{wolff_2006,sp_extended_overview}.
\item {\em Strengths and potential in AI}. The SP theory has things to about several different aspects of AI, as described most fully in \cite{wolff_2006} and more briefly in \cite{sp_extended_overview}. In addition to its capabilities in parsing, described above, the SP system has strengths and potential in the production of natural language, the representation and processing of diverse kinds of semantic structures, the integration of syntax and semantics, pattern recognition, computer vision and modelling aspects of natural vision \cite{sp_vision}, information retrieval, planning, problem solving, and several kinds of reasoning (one-step `deductive' reasoning; abductive reasoning; reasoning with probabilistic decision networks and decision trees; reasoning with `rules'; nonmonotonic reasoning and reasoning with default values; reasoning in Bayesian networks, including `explaining away'; causal diagnosis; reasoning which is not supported by evidence; and inheritance of attributes in an object-oriented class hierarchy or heterarchy). There is also potential for spatial reasoning \cite[Section IV-F.1]{sp_autonomous_robots} and what-if reasoning \cite[Section IV-F.2]{sp_autonomous_robots}. The system also has strengths and potential in unsupervised learning \cite[Chapter 9]{wolff_2006}.
\item {\em Many potential benefits and applications}. Potential benefits and applications of the SP system include: helping to solve nine problems associated with big data \cite{sp_big_data}; the development of intelligence in autonomous robots, with potential for gains in computational efficiency \cite{sp_autonomous_robots}; the development of computer vision \cite{sp_vision}; it may serve as a versatile database management system, with intelligence \cite{wolff_sp_intelligent_database}; it may serve as an aid in medical diagnosis \cite{wolff_medical_diagnosis}; and there are several other potential benefits and applications, some of which are described in \cite{sp_benefits_apps}.
\end{itemize}
In short, the SP theory, in accordance with Occam's Razor, demonstrates a favourable combination of simplicity and power across a broad canvass. As in other areas of science, this should increase our confidence in the generality of the theory.
\subsubsection{Simplification and integration}\label{sp-a_evaluation_systems_section}
Closely related to simplicity and power in the SP theory are two potential benefits arising from the use of one simple format (SP patterns) for all kinds of knowledge and one relatively simple framework (chiefly multiple alignment) for the processing of all kinds of knowledge:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Simplification}. Those two features (one simple format for knowledge and one simple framework for processing it) can mean substantial simplification of natural systems (brains) and artificial systems (computers) for processing information. The general idea is that one relatively simple system can serve many different functions. In natural systems, there is a potential advantage in terms of natural selection, and in artificial systems there are potential advantages in terms of costs.
\item {\em Integration}. The same two features are likely to facilitate the seamless integration of diverse kinds of knowledge and diverse aspects of intelligence---pattern recognition, several kinds of reasoning, unsupervised learning, and so on---in any combination, in both natural and artificial systems. It appears that that kind of seamless integration is a key part of the versatility and adaptability of human intelligence and that it will be essential if we are to achieve human-like versatility and adaptability of intelligence in artificial systems.
\end{itemize}
With regard to the seamless integration of diverse kinds of knowledge, this is clearly needed in the understanding and production of natural language. To understand what someone is saying or writing, we obviously need to be able to connect words and syntactic structures with their non-syntactic meanings, and likewise, in reverse, when we write or speak to convey some meaning.
This has not yet been explored in any depth with the SP-abstract conceptual framework but preliminary trials with the SP computer model suggest that it is indeed possible to define syntactic-semantic structures in a set of SP patterns and then, with those patterns playing the role of Old patterns, to analyse a sample sentence and to derive its meanings \cite[Section 5.7, Figure 5.18]{wolff_2006}, and, in a separate exercise with the same set of Old patterns, to derive the same sentence from a representation of its meanings ({\em ibid.}, Figure 5.19).
\subsubsection{Distinctive features and advantages of the SP system compared with other AI-related systems}\label{sp-a_distinctive_features_advantages_section}
In several publications, such as \cite{sp_benefits_apps,wolff_medical_diagnosis,wolff_sp_intelligent_database}, potential benefits and applications of the SP system have been described.
More recently, it has seemed appropriate to say what distinguishes the SP system from other AI-related systems and, more importantly, to describe advantages of the SP system compared AI-related alternatives. Those points have now been set out in some detail in {\em The SP theory of intelligence: its distinctive features and advantages} \cite{sp_alternatives}. It is pertinent to mention that Section V of that paper discusses, in some detail, problems with `deep learning in neural networks' and shows how, in the SP system, they are overcome.
Since many AI-related systems may also be seen as models of cognitive structures and processes in brains, this paper may also be seen to demonstrate the relative strength of the SP system in modelling aspects of human perception and cognition.
\section{Introduction to SP-neural}\label{sp-neural_intro_section}
As we have seen in Section \ref{sp-abstract_outline_section}, SP-abstract is a relatively simple system with descriptive and explanatory power across a wide range of observation and phenomena in artificial intelligence, mainstream computing, mathematics, and human perception and cognition. How can such a system have anything useful to say about the extraordinary complexity of brains and nervous systems, both in their structure and in their workings?
An answer in brief is that SP-neural---a realisation of SP-abstract in terms of neurons, their interconnections, and the transmission of impulses between neurons---may help us to interpret neural structures and processes in terms of the relatively simple concepts in SP-abstract. To the extent that this is successful, it may---like any good theory in any field---help us to understand empirical phenomena in our area of interest, it may help us to make predictions, and it may suggest lines of investigation.
It is anticipated that SP-neural will work in broadly the same way as SP-abstract, but the characteristics of neurons and their interconnections raise some issues that do not arise in SP-abstract and its realisation in the SP computer model. These issues will be discussed at appropriate points in this and subsequent sections.
This section introduces SP-neural in outline, and sections that follow describe aspects of the theory in more detail, drawing where necessary on aspects of SP-abstract that have been omitted from or only sketched in Section \ref{sp-abstract_outline_section}.
Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure} shows in outline how a portion of the multiple alignment shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}, may be realised in SP-neural. with associated patterns and symbols.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{the_brave_neural_figure_5.pdf}
\caption{A schematic outline of how part of the multiple alignment shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}, with associated patterns and symbols, may be expressed in SP-neural as neurons and their inter-connections. The meanings of the conventions in the figure, and some complexities that are not shown in the figure, are explained in this main section and ones that follow.}
\label{the_brave_neural_figure}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Sensory data and the receptor array}\label{sp-n_sensory_data_receptor_array_section}
In the figure, `sensory data' at the bottom means the visual, auditory or tactile data entering the system which, in this case, corresponds with the phrase `t h e b r a v e'. In a more realistic illustration, the sensory data would be some kind of analogue signal. Here, the letters are intended to suggest the kinds of low-level perceptual primitives outlined below.
It is envisaged that, with most sensory modalities, the receptor array would be located in the primary sensory cortex. Of course, a lot of processing goes on in the sense organs and elsewhere between the sense organs and the primary sensory cortices. But it seems that most of this early processing is concerned with the identification of the perceptual primitives just mentioned.
As with SP-abstract, it is anticipated that SP-neural will, at some stage, be generalised to accommodate patterns in two dimensions, such as visual images, and then the sensory data may be received in two dimensions, as in the human eye.
Between the sensory data and the {\em receptor array} (above it in the figure), there would be, first, cells that are specialised to receive particular kinds of input (auditory, visual, tactile etc). These send signals to neurons that encode the sensory data as {\em neural symbols}, the neural equivalents of `symbols' in SP-abstract. In the receptor array, each letter enclosed in a solid ellipse represents a neural symbol, expressed as a single neuron or, more likely, a small cluster of neurons. As we shall see (Section \ref{sp-n_encoding_in_receptor_array_section}), the reality is more complex, at least in some cases.
In vision, neural symbols in the receptor array would represent such low-level features as lines, corners, colours, and the like, while in speech perception, they would represent such things as formants, formant ratios and transitions, plosive and fricative sounds, and so on. Whether or how the SP concepts can be applied in the discovery or identification of features like these is an open question \cite[Section 3.3]{sp_extended_overview}. For now, we shall assume that they can be identified and can be used in the creation and use of higher-level structures.
\subsection{Pattern assemblies}\label{sp-n_pattern_assemblies_section}
In the rest of Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}, each broken-line rectangle with rounded corners represents a {\em pattern assembly}---corresponding to a `pattern' in SP-abstract. The word `assembly' has been adopted within the expression `pattern assembly' because the concept is quite similar to Hebb's concept of a `cell assembly'---a cluster of neurons representing a concept or other coherent mental entity. Differences between Hebb's concept of a cell assembly and the SP concept of a pattern assembly are described in Appendix \ref{cell_pattern_assemblies_appendix}.
Within each pattern assembly, as represented in the figure, each character or group of characters enclosed in a solid-line ellipse represents a {\em neural symbol} which, as already mentioned, corresponds to a `symbol' in SP-abstract. As with neural symbols in the receptor array, it is envisaged that each neural symbol would comprise a single neuron or, more likely, a small cluster of neurons.
It is supposed that, within each pattern assembly, there are lateral connections between neural symbols---but these are not shown in the figure.
It is envisaged that most pattern assemblies would represent knowledge that is learned and not inborn, and would be located mainly outside the primary sensory areas of the cortex, in other parts of the sensory cortices. Pattern assemblies that integrate two or more sensory modalities may be located in the `association' areas of the cortex.
Research with fMRI recordings from volunteers \cite{huth_etal_2016} has revealed ``semantic maps'' that ``show that semantic information is represented in rich patterns that are distributed across several broad regions of cortex. Furthermore, each of these regions contains many distinct areas that are selective for particular types of semantic information, such as people, numbers, visual properties, or places. We also found that these cortical maps are quite similar across people, even down to relatively small details.''\footnote{From the website of the Gallant Lab at UC Berkely, retrieved 2016-05-02, \href{http://bit.ly/1WvvLhX}{http://bit.ly/1WvvLhX}. See also ``Brain `atlas' of words revealed'', {\em BBC News}, 2016-04-27, \href{http://bbc.in/1SGESLz}{bbc.in/1SGESLz}.} Of course, this research says nothing about whether or not the knowledge is represented with pattern assemblies and their interconnections. But it does apparently confirm that knowledge is stored in several regions of the cortex and throws light on how it is organised.
Although most parts of the mammalian cerebral cortex has six layers and many convolutions, it may be seen, topologically, as a sheet which is very much broader and wider than it is thick. Correspondingly, it is envisaged that 1D and 2D pattern assemblies will be largely `flat' structures, rather like writing or pictures on a sheet of paper. That said, it is quite possible, indeed likely, that pattern assemblies would take advantage of two or more layers of the cortex, not just one.
Incidentally, since 2D SP patterns may provide a basis for 3D models, as described in \cite[Sections 6.1 and 6.2]{sp_vision}, flat neural structures in the cortex may serve to represent 3D concepts.
\subsection{Connections between pattern assemblies}\label{sp-n_connections_between_pattern_assemblies_section}
In Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}, the solid or broken lines that connect with neural symbols represent axons, with arrows representing the direction of travel of neural impulses. Where two or more connections converge on a neural symbol, we may suppose that, contrary to the simplified way in which the convergence is shown in the figure, there would be a separate dendrite for each connection.
Axons represented with solid lines are ones that would be active when the multiple alignment in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure} is in the process of being identified. Broken-line connections show a few of the many other possible connections.
As mentioned in Section \ref{sp-n_pattern_assemblies_section}, it is envisaged that there would be one or more neural connections between neighbouring neural symbols within each pattern assembly but these are not marked in the figure.
Compared with what is shown in the figure, it likely that, in reality, there would be more `levels' between basic neural symbols in the receptor array and ID-neural-symbols representing pattern assemblies for relatively complex entities like the words `one', `brave', `the', and `table', as shown in the figure. In this connection, it is perhaps worth emphasising that, as with the modelling of hierarchical structures in multiple alignments (Section \ref{sp-a_multiple_alignment_section}), while pattern assemblies may form `strict' hierarchies, this is not an essential feature of the concept, and it is likely that many neural structures formed from pattern assemblies may be only loosely hierarchical or not hierarchical at all.
\subsection{SP-neural, quantities of knowledge, and the size of the brain}
Given the foregoing account of how knowledge may be represented in the brain, a question that arises is ``Are there enough neurons in the brain to store what a typical person knows?'' This is a difficult question to answer with any precision but an attempt at an answer, described in \cite[Section 11.4.9]{wolff_2006}, reaches the tentative conclusion that there are. In brief:
\begin{itemize}
\item Given that estimates of the size of the human brain range from $10^{10}$ up to $10^{11}$ neurons,\footnote{This is consistent with another estimate, not quoted in \cite[Section 11.4.9]{wolff_2006}, that there may be as many as 86 billion neurons in the human brain \cite{herculano-houzel_2012}.} we may estimate, via calculations given in \cite[Section 11.4.9]{wolff_2006}, that the `raw' storage capacity of the brain is between approximately 1000 MB and 10,000 MB.
\item Given a conservative estimate that, using SP compression mechanisms, compression by a factor of 3 may be achieved across all kinds of knowledge, our estimates of the storage capacity of the brain will range from about 3000 MB up to about 30,000 MB.
\item Assuming: 1) That the average person knows only a relatively small proportion of what is contained in the {\em Encyclopaedia Britannica} (EB); 2) That the average person knows lots of `everyday' things that are {\em not} in the EB; 3) That the `everyday' things that we {\em do} know are roughly equal to the things in the EB that we {\em do not} know; Then (4), we may conclude that the size of the EB provides a rough estimate of the volume of information that the average person knows.
\item The EB can be stored on two CDs in compressed form. Assuming that most of the space is filled, this equates to 1300 MB of compressed information or approximately 4000 MB of information in uncompressed form.
\item This 4000 MB estimate of what the average person knows is the same order of magnitude as our range of estimates (3000 MB to 30,000 MB) of what the human brain can store.
\item Even if the brain stores two or three copies of its compressed knowledge---to guard against the risk of losing it, or to speed up processing, or both---our estimate of what needs to be stored (lets say $4000 \times 3 = 12,000$ MB) is still within the 3000 MB to 30,000 MB range of estimates of what the brain can store.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Neural processing}\label{sp-n_neural_processing_section}
In broad terms, it is envisaged that, for a task like the parsing of natural language or pattern recognition:
\begin{enumerate}
\item SP-neural will work firstly by receiving sensory data and interpreting it as neural symbols in the receptor array---with excitation of the neural symbols that have been identified.
Excitatory signals would be sent from those excited neural symbols to pattern assemblies that can receive signals from them directly. In Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}, these would be all the pattern assemblies except the topmost pattern assembly.
Within each pattern assembly, excitatory signals will spread laterally via the connections between neighbouring neural symbols.
Pattern assemblies would become excited, roughly in proportion to the number of excitatory signals they receive.
\item At this stage, there would be a process of selecting amongst pattern assemblies to identify one or two that are most excited.
\item From those pattern assemblies---more specifically, the neural ID-symbols at the beginnings and ends of those pattern assemblies---excitatory signals would be sent onwards to other pattern assemblies that may receive them. In Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}, this would be the topmost pattern assembly (that would be reached immediately after the first pass through stages 2 and 3).
As in stage 1, the level of excitation of any pattern assembly would depend on the number of excitatory signals it receives, but building up from stage to stage so that the highest-level pattern assemblies are likely to be most excited.
\item Repeat stages 2 and 3 until there are no more pattern assemblies that can be sent excitatory signals.
\end{enumerate}
The `winning' pattern assembly or pattern assemblies, together with the structures below them that have, directly or indirectly, sent excitatory signals to them, may be seen as neural analogues of multiple alignments (NAMAs), and we may guess that they provide the best interpretations of a given portion of the sensory data.
If the whole sentence, `\texttt{f o r t u n e f a v o u r s t h e b r a v e}', is processed by SP-neural with pattern assemblies that are analogues of the SP patterns provided for the example shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}, we may anticipate that the overall result would be a pattern of neural excitation that is an analogue of the multiple alignment shown in that figure.
When a neural symbol or pattern assembly has been `recognised' by participating in a winning (neural) multiple alignment, we may suppose that some biochemical or physiological aspect of that structure is increased as an at least approximate measure of the frequency of occurrence of the structure, in accordance with the way in which SP-abstract keeps track of the frequency of occurrence of symbols and patterns (Section \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section}).
Some further possibilities are discussed in Sections \ref{sp-n_more_detail_section} and \ref{sp-n_inhibition_section}.
\section{Some more detail}\label{sp-n_more_detail_section}
The bare-bones description of SP-neural in Section \ref{sp-neural_intro_section} is probably inaccurate in some respects and is certainly too simple to work effectively. This section and the ones that follow describe some other features which are likely to figure in a mature version of SP-neural, drawing on relevant empirical evidence where it is available.
\subsection{Encoding of information in the receptor array}\label{sp-n_encoding_in_receptor_array_section}
With regard to the encoding of information in the receptor array, it seems that the main possibilities are these:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\em Explicit alternatives}. For the receptor array to work as described in Section \ref{sp-neural_intro_section}, it should be possible to encode sensory inputs with an `alphabet' of alternative values at each location in the array, in much the same way that each binary digit (bit) in a conventional computer may be set to have the value 0 or 1, or how a typist may enter any one of an alphabet of characters at any one location on the page. At each location in the receptor array, each option may be provided in the form of a neuron or small cluster of neurons. Here, there seem to be two main options:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\em Horizontal distribution of alternatives}. The several alternatives may be distributed `horizontally', in a plane that is parallel to the surface of the cortex.
\item {\em Vertical distribution of alternatives}. The several alternatives may be distributed `vertically' between the outer and inner surfaces of the cortex, and perpendicular to those surfaces.
\end{enumerate}
\item {\em Implicit alternatives}. At each location there may be a neuron or small cluster of neurons that, via some kind of biochemical or neurophysiological process, may be `set' to any one of the alphabet of alternative values.
\item {\em Rate codes}. Something like the intensity of a stimulus may be encoded via ``an interaction between [the] firing rates and the number of neurons [that are] activated by [the] stimulus.'' \cite[p.~503]{squire_etal_2013}.
\item {\em Temporal codes}. A stimulus that varies with time may be encoded via ``the time-varying pattern of activity in small groups of receptors and central neurons.'' ({\em ibid.}).
\end{enumerate}
In support of option 1.a, there is evidence that neurons in the visual cortex (of cats) are arranged in columns perpendicular to the surface of the cortex, where, for example, all the neurons in a given column respond most strongly to a line at one particular angle in the field of view, that---within a `hypercolumn' containing several columns---the preferred angle increases progressively from column to column, and that there are many hypercolumns across the primary visual cortex \cite{barlow_1982}. ``Hubel and Wiesel point out that the organization their results reveal means that each small region, about $1 mm^2$ at the surface, contains a complete sequence of ocular dominance and a complete sequence of orientation preference.'' \cite[pp.~148--149]{barlow_1982}.
Leaving out the results for ocular dominance, these observations are summarised schematically in Figure \ref{receptor_array_detail_figure}. In terms of this scheme, the way in which the receptor array is shown in Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}, is a considerable simplification---each neural symbol in the receptor array in that figure should really be replaced by a hypercolumn.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{receptor_array_detail_1.pdf}
\caption{Schematic representation of one hypercolumn in the receptor array in the cortex. Each letter represents a neural symbol that responds to a particular small pattern in the sensory data. The ellipsis, `...', in each row and each column represents other neural symbols that would be shown in a more comprehensive representation of the given hypercolumn. Each vertical sequence of letters, all of one kind such as `\texttt{a}' or `\texttt{b}' represents a simple column in the cortex.}
\label{receptor_array_detail_figure}
\end{figure}
With something like the intensity of a stimulus, it seems that, at least in some cases: ``...~activity in one particular population of somatosensory neurons ...~leads the CNS to interpret it as painful stimulus ....'' \cite[p.~503]{squire_etal_2013}, while ``An entirely separate population of neurons ...~would signal light pressure.'' ({\em ibid.}). Since it is likely that relevant receptors appear repeatedly across one's skin, this appears to be another example of option 1.a.
There seems to be little evidence of encoding via option 1.b. Indeed, since the concept of a cortical column is, in effect, defined by the fact that all the neurons in any one column have the same kind of receptive field, this seems to rule out the 1.b option (see also Section \ref{why_multiple_neurons_section}).
But, with respect to option 2, it appears that in some cases, as noted above, the intensity of a stimulus may be encoded via the rates of firing of neurons, together with the numbers of neurons that are activated (option 3). And, since we can perceive and remember time-varying stimuli such as the stroking of a finger across one's skin, or the rising or falling pitch of a note, some kind of temporal encoding must be available (option 4).
Here, it must be acknowledged that options 3 and 4 appear superficially to be outside the scope of the SP theory, in view of the emphasis in many examples on discrete atomic symbols. But, as we know from the success of digital recording, or indeed digital computing, any continuum may be encoded digitally, in keeping with the digital nature of the SP theory. How the SP theory may be applied to the digital encoding and processing of continua has been discussed elsewhere in relation to vision \cite{sp_vision} and the development of autonomous robots \cite{sp_autonomous_robots}.
\subsection{Why are there multiple neurons with the same receptive fields in columns in the cortex?}\label{why_multiple_neurons_section}
As we have seen (Section \ref{sp-n_encoding_in_receptor_array_section}), some aspects of vision are mediated via columns of neurons in the primary visual cortex in which each column contains many neurons with receptive fields that are all the same, all of them responding, for example, to a line in the visual field with a particular orientation.
Why, at each of several locations across the visual cortex, should there be many neurons with the same receptive field, not just one? There seem to be two possible answers to this question (and they are not necessarily mutually exclusive):
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Encoding of sensory patterns}. If, in the receptor array, we wish to encode two or more patterns such as `\texttt{m e t}' and `\texttt{h e m}', they need to be independent of each other, with repetition of the `\texttt{e}' neural symbol, otherwise there will be the possibly unwanted implication that such things as `\texttt{m e m}' or `\texttt{h e t}' are valid patterns.
\item {\em Error-reducing redundancy}. At any given location in the receptor array, multiple instances of a given neural symbol may help to guard against the problems that may arise if there is only neural symbol at that location and if, for any reason, it becomes partially or fully disabled.
\end{itemize}
With regard to the first point, the receptor array may have a useful role to play, {\em inter alia}, as a short-term memory for many sensory patterns pending their longer-term storage (Section \ref{sp-n_speed_expressiveness_section}). In vision, for example, the receptor array may store many short glimpses of a scene, as outlined in Section \ref{sp-n_we_see_less_than_we_think_section}, until such time as further processing may be applied to weld the many glimpses into a coherent structure ({\em ibid.}) and to transfer that structure to longer-term memory.
\subsection{The labelled line principle}\label{sp-n_labelled_line_principle_section}
Section \ref{sp-n_neural_processing_section} suggests that normally, at some early stage in sensory processing, raw sensory data is encoded in terms of the excitation of neuronal symbols in a receptor array, then excited neural symbols send excitatory signals to appropriate neural symbols within pattern assemblies, and pattern assemblies that are sufficiently excited send excitatory signals on to other pattern assemblies, and so on. As we shall see (Section \ref{sp-n_inhibition_section}), it is likely that, in this processing, there will also be a role for inhibitory processes.
At first sight, it may be thought that, in the same way that each location in the receptor array should provide an alphabet of alternative encodings (Section \ref{sp-n_encoding_in_receptor_array_section}), the same should be true for the location of each neural symbol within each pattern assembly. But if a neural symbol in a pattern assembly (let's call it `NS1') receives signals only from neural symbols in the receptor array that represent a given feature, let us say, `a', then, in accordance with the `labelled line' principle \cite[p.~503]{squire_etal_2013}, NS1 also represents `a'.
For most sensory modalities, this principle applies all the way from each sense organ, through the thalamus, to the corresponding part of the primary sensory cortex.\footnote{Thus, for example, ``Even within one function, mappings of neurons [within the thalamus] are preserved so that there is separation of neurons providing touch information from the arm versus from the leg and of neurons responding to low versus high sound frequencies ....'' \cite[p.~507]{squire_etal_2013}. Also, ``Nuclei in the central pathways often contain multiple maps.'' but ``The functional significance of multiple maps in general, however, remains to be clarified.'' ({\em ibid.}).} It seems reasonable to suppose that the same principle will apply onwards from each primary sensory cortex into non-primary sensory cortices and non-sensory association areas.
\subsection{How the ordering or 2D arrangement of neural symbols may be respected}
In SP-neural, as in SP-abstract and the SP computer model, the process of matching one pattern with another should respect the orderings of symbols. For example, `\texttt{A B C D}' matched with `\texttt{A B C D}' should be rated more highly in terms of information compression than, for example, `\texttt{A B C D}' matched with `\texttt{C A D B}'.\footnote{A possible exception is when one pattern is a mirror image or inversion of another, since Leonardo da Vinci, by repute, could read mirror writing as easily as ordinary writing, and it is now well established that people wearing inverting spectacles can learn quite quickly to see the world as if it was the right way up \cite{stratton_1897}.}
It appears that this problem may be solved by the adoption, within SP-neural, of the following feature of natural sensory systems:
\begin{quote}
``Receptors within [the retina and body surface] communicate with ganglion cells and those ganglion cells with central neurons in a strictly ordered fashion, such that relationships with neighbours are maintained throughout. This type of pattern, in which neurons positioned side by side in one region communicate with neurons positioned side-by-side in the next region, is called a {\em typographic pattern}.'' \cite[p.~504]{squire_etal_2013} (emphasis in the original).
\end{quote}
\subsection{How to accommodate the variable sizes of sensory patterns}
A prominent feature of human visual perception is that we can recognise any given entity over a wide range of viewing distances, with correspondingly wide variations in the size, on the retina, of the image of that entity.
For any model of human visual perception that is based on a simplistic or naive process for the matching of patterns, this aspect of visual perception would be hard to reproduce or to explain. But the SP system is different: 1) Knowledge of entities that we may recognise are always stored in a compressed form; 2) The process of recognition is a process of compressing the incoming data; 3) The overall effect is that an image of a thing to be recognised can be matched with stored knowledge of that entity, regardless of the original size of the image.
As an example, consider how the concept of an equilateral triangle (as white space bounded by three black lines all of the same length) may be stored and how an image of such a triangle may be recognised. Regarding storage, there are three main redundancies in any image of that kind of triangle: 1) The white space in the middle may be seen as repeated instances of the symbol `white'; 2) Each of the three sides of the triangle may be seen as repeated instances of the symbol `black' or `point'; and 3) There is redundancy in that the three sides of the triangle are the same.
All three sources of redundancy may be encoded recursively as suggested in Figure \ref{triangle_multiple_alignment_figure}, which shows a multiple alignment modelling the recognition of a one-dimensional analogue of a triangle.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\fontsize{06.50pt}{07.80pt}
\centering
{\bf
\begin{BVerbatim}
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
TR
tr1
SG --------------------------- SG
sg1
CR ----- CR
cr1
corner ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- corner
#CR ---- #CR
LN ------------- LN
ln1
point ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ point
LN ---- LN
ln1
point ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- point
LN
#LN
#LN --- #LN
#LN ------------ #LN
#SG -------------------------- #SG
TR -- TR
tr1
SG -- SG
sg1
CR ----- CR
cr1
corner ------------------------------------------------------ corner
#CR ---- #CR
LN --------------------- LN
ln1
point --------------------------------------- point
LN ---- LN
ln1
point ----------------------------------------------- point
LN
#LN
#LN --- #LN
#LN -------------------- #LN
#SG - #SG
TR --------------------------------- TR
tr1
SG -- SG
sg1
CR ----- CR
cr1
corner ----------------- corner
#CR ---- #CR
LN --------------------- LN
ln1
point -- point
LN ---- LN
ln1
point ---------- point
LN
#LN
#LN --- #LN
#LN -------------------- #LN
#SG - #SG
TR
#TR
#TR -------------------------------- #TR
#TR - #TR
#TR
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
\end{BVerbatim}
}
\caption{A multiple alignment produced by the SP computer model showing how a one-dimensional analogue of how an equilateral triangle may be perceived, as described in the text. Adapted from \cite[Figure 8]{sp_alternatives}, with permission.}
\label{triangle_multiple_alignment_figure}
\end{figure
Column 0 shows information about the triangle to be recognised, comprising three `\texttt{corners}' and three sides of the triangle, each one represented by just two `\texttt{points}'.
The pattern `\texttt{LN ln1 point LN \#LN \#LN}' in columns 1 and 2 is a self-referential and thus recursive definition of a line as a sequence of `\texttt{points}'. It is self-referential because, within the body of the pattern, it contains a reference to itself via the symbols at the beginning and end of the pattern: `\texttt{LN \#LN}'. Because there is no limit to this recursion, it may represent a line containing any number of points. In a similar way, a second side is encoded via the same pattern in columns 6 and 7, and, again with the same pattern, the third line is encoded in columns 12 and 12.
In columns 4, 9 and 15 in the figure, the pattern `\texttt{SG sg1 CR \#CR LN \#LN \#SG}' shows one of the three elements of a triangle as a corner (`\texttt{CR \#CR}') followed by a line (`\texttt{LN \#LN}'). And the recursion to encode multiple instances of that structure is in self-referential occurrences of the pattern `\texttt{TR tr1 SG \#SG TR \#TR \#TR}' in columns 5, 10 and 22. Strictly speaking, the encoding is for a polygon, not a triangle, because there is nothing to stop the recursive repetition of `\texttt{SG sg1 CR \#CR LN \#LN \#SG}'. And, in terms of the problem, as described above, the representation is incomplete because there is nothing to show that the three sides of the triangle are the same.
These encodings account for the redundancy in the repetition of points along a line and also the redundancy in the repetition of three sides of a triangle. In a 2D version, they would also account for the redundancy in the white space within the body of the triangle, because they would allow most of the white space to be eliminated via shrinkage of the representation to the minimum needed to express the concept of a triangle.
\subsection{We see much less than we think we see}\label{sp-n_we_see_less_than_we_think_section}
Most people with normal vision have a powerful sense that their eyes are a window on to a kind of cinema screen that shows what we are looking at with great detail from left to right and from top to bottom. But research shows otherwise:
\begin{itemize}
\item In the phenomenon of {\em inattentional blindness}, people may fail to notice salient things in their visual fields when they are looking for something else, even if they are trained observers. In a recent demonstration \cite{drew_atal_2013}, radiologists were asked to search for lung-nodules in chest x-rays but many of them (83\%) failed to notice the image of a gorilla, 48 times the size of the average nodule, that was inserted into one of the radiographs.
\item In the phenomenon of {\em change blindness}, people often fail to notice large changes to visual scenes. For example, if a conversation between two people---the investigator and the experimental subject---is interrupted by a door being carried between them, the experimental subject may fail to notice, when the door has gone by, that the person they are speaking to is different from the person they were speaking to before \cite{simons_ambinder_2005}.
\item Although each of our eyes has a blind spot\footnote{See ``Blind spot (vision)'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1oI0vyI}{bit.ly/1oI0vyI}, retrieved 2016-04-08.}, we don't notice it, even when we are viewing things with one eye. Apparently, our brains interpolate what is likely to be in the blind part of our visual field.
\end{itemize}
It seems that part of the reason for this failure to see things is that photoreceptors are concentrated at the fovea \cite[p.~502]{squire_etal_2013}, and cones are only found in that region ({\em ibid.}), so that, with two eyes, we are, to a large extent, looking at the world through a keyhole composed of two circumscribed and largely overlapping views, one from each eye.
It seems that our sense that the world is displayed to us on a wide and deep cinema screen is partly because our perception of any given scene draws heavily on our memories of similar scenes and partly because we can piece together what will normally be a partial view of what we are looking at from many short glimpses through the `keyhole' as we move our gaze around the scene.
The SP theory provides an interpretation for these things as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item The theory provides an account in some detail of how New (sensory) information may be related to Old (stored) information and how an interpretation of the New information may be built up via the creation of multiple alignments.
\item The theory provides an account of how we can piece together a picture of something, or indeed a 3D model of something, from many small but partially-overlapping views, in much the same way that: 1) With digital photography, it is possible to create a panoramic picture from several partially-overlapping images; 2) The views in Google's Streetview are built up from many partially-overlapping pictures; 3) A 3D digital image of an object may be created from partially-overlapping images of the object, taken from viewpoints around it. These things are discussed in \cite[Sections 5.4 and 6.1]{sp_vision}.
\end{itemize}
With regard to the second point, it should perhaps be said that partial overlap between `keyhole' views is not an essential part of building up a big picture from smaller views. But if two or more views do overlap, it is useful if they can be stitched together, thus removing the overlap. And partial overlap may be helpful in establishing the relative positions of two or more views.
\subsection{A resolution problem and its possible resolution}\label{sp-n_resolution_problem_section}
As we have seen (Section \ref{sp-n_encoding_in_receptor_array_section}), each hypercolumn in the primary visual cortex of cats occupies about $1 mm^2$ at the surface of the cortex, and it seems likely that each such hypercolumn provides a means of encoding one out of an alphabet of perceptual primitives, such as a line at a particular angle.
Assuming that this interpretation is correct, and if we view the primary visual cortex as if it was film in an old-style camera or the image sensor in a digital camera, it may seem that the encoding of perceptual primitives, with $1 mm^2$ for each one, is remarkably crude. How could such a system---with the area of the primary visual cortex corresponding to the area of our field of view---create that powerful sense that, through our eyes, we see a detailed `cinema screen' view of the world (Section \ref{sp-n_we_see_less_than_we_think_section}).
Part of the answer is probably that we see much less than we think we see (Section \ref{sp-n_we_see_less_than_we_think_section}). But it seems likely that another part of the answer is to reject the assumption that the area of the primary visual cortex corresponding to the area of our field of view. In the light of the remarks in Section \ref{sp-n_we_see_less_than_we_think_section}, it seems likely that, normally, in each of the previously-mentioned glimpses of a scene, most of the primary visual cortex is applied in the assimilation and processing of information capture by the fovea and, perhaps, parts of the retina that are very close to the fovea.\footnote{In support of this idea: ``{\bf Cortical magnification} describes how many neurons in an area of the visual cortex are `responsible' for processing a stimulus of a given size, as a function of visual field location. In the center of the visual field, corresponding to the fovea of the retina, a very large number of neurons process information from a small region of the visual field. If the same stimulus is seen in the periphery of the visual field (i.e. away from the center), it would be processed by a much smaller number of neurons. The reduction of the number of neurons per visual field area from foveal to peripheral representations is achieved in several steps along the visual pathway, starting already in the retina \cite{barghout-stein_1999}.'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1qJsQX1}{bit.ly/1qJsQX1}, emphasis in the original, retrieved 2016-04-14.} In that case, what appears superficially to be a rather course-grained recording and analysis of visual data, may actually be very much more detailed. As described in Section \ref{sp-n_we_see_less_than_we_think_section}, it seems likely that our view of any scene is built up partly from memories and partly from many small snapshots or glimpses of the scene.
\subsection{Grandmother cells, localist and distributed representations}\label{sp-n_grandmother_cells_section}
In terms of concepts that have been debated about how knowledge may be represented in the brain, the ID-neural-symbols for any pattern assembly are very much like the concept of a {\em grandmother cell}---a cell or small cluster of cells in one's brain that represents one's grandmother so that, if the cell or cells were to be lost, one would lose the ability to recognise one's grandmother.
It seems that the weight of observational and experimental evidence favours the belief that such cells do exist \cite{gross_2002}. This is consistent with the observation that people who have suffered a stroke or are suffering from dementia may lose the ability to recognise members of their close family.
Since SP-neural, like Hebb's \cite{hebb_1949} theory of cell assemblies, proposes that concepts are represented by coherent groups of neurons in the brain, it is very much a `localist' type of theory. As such, it is quite distinct from `distributed' types of theory that propose that concepts are encoded in widely-distributed configurations of neurons, without any identifiable location or centre.
However, just to confuse matters, SP-neural does {\em not} propose that all one's knowledge about one's grandmother would reside in a pattern assembly for that lady. Probably, any such pattern assembly would, in the manner of object-oriented design as discussed in Section \ref{sp-n_non-syntactic_knowledge_section} and illustrated in Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_figure}, be connected to and inherit features from a pattern assembly representing grandmothers in general, and from more general pattern assemblies such as pattern assemblies for such concepts as `person' and `woman'. And again, a pattern assembly for `person' would not be the sole repository of all one's knowledge about people. That pattern assembly would, in effect, contain `references' to pattern assemblies describing the parts of a person, their physiology, their social and political life, and so on.
Thus, while SP-neural is unambiguously localist, it proposes that knowledge of any entity or concept is likely to be encoded not merely in one pattern assembly for that entity or concept but also in many other pattern assemblies in many parts of the cortex, and perhaps elsewhere.
\subsection{Positional invariance}\label{sp-n_positional_invariance_section}
With something simple like a touch on the skin, or a pin prick, it is not too difficult to see how the sensation may be transmitted to the brain via any one of many relevant receptors located in many different areas of the skin. But with something more complex, like an image on the retina of a table, a house, or a tree, and so on, it is less straightforward to understand how we might recognise such a thing in any part of our visual field.
For each entity to be recognised, it seems necessary at first sight to provide connections, directly or indirectly, from every part of the receptor array to the relevant pattern assembly. In terms of the schematic representation shown in Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}, it would mean repeating the connections for `\texttt{t h e}' and `\texttt{b r a v e}' in each of many parts of the receptor array. Bearing in mind the very large number of different things we may recognise, the number of necessary connections would become very large, perhaps prohibitively so.
However, things may be considerably simplified via either or both of two provisions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For reasons outlined in Section \ref{sp-n_we_see_less_than_we_think_section}, it seems likely that, with vision, we build up our perception of a scene, partly from memories of similar scenes and partly via many relatively narrow `keyhole' views of what is in front of us. If that is correct, and if, as suggested in Section \ref{sp-n_resolution_problem_section}, most of the primary visual cortex is devoted to analysing information received via the fovea and, perhaps, via parts of the retina that are very close to the fovea, then the need to provide for any given pattern in many parts of the receptor array may be greatly reduced. Since, by moving our eyes, we may view any part of a scene, it is possible that any given entity would need only one or two sets of connections between the receptor array and the pattern assembly for that entity.
\item As noted in Section \ref{sp-n_connections_between_pattern_assemblies_section}, it seems likely that, with regard to Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}, there would, in a more realistic example, be several levels of structure between neural symbols in the receptor array and relatively complex structures like words. At the first level above the receptor array there would be pattern assemblies for relatively small recurrent structures, and the variety of such structures would be relatively small. This should ease any possible problems in connecting the receptor array to pattern assemblies.
\end{enumerate}
If it turns out that the number of necessary connections is indeed too large to be practical, or if there is empirical evidence against such numbers, then a possible alternative to what has been sketched in this paper is some kind of dynamic system for the making and breaking of connections between the receptor array and pattern assemblies. It seems likely that permanent or semi-permanent connections would be very much more efficient and the balance of probabilities seems to favour such a scheme.
In connection with positional invariance, it is relevant to note that ``...~lack of localization is quite common in higher-level neurons: receptive fields become larger as the features they represent become increasingly complex. Thus, for instance, neurons that respond to faces typically have receptive fields that cover most of the visual space. For these cells, large receptive fields have a distinct advantage: the preferred stimulus can be identified no matter where it is located on the retina.'' \cite[p.~579]{squire_etal_2013}. A tentative and partial explanation of this observation is that repetition of neurons that are sensitive to each of several categories of low-level feature---in the receptor array and as ID-neural-symbols for `low-level' pattern assemblies---is what allows positional invariance to develop at higher levels.
\section{Non-syntactic knowledge in SP-neural}\label{sp-n_non-syntactic_knowledge_section}
As was emphasised in Section \ref{sp-abstract_outline_section}, the SP system (SP-abstract) has strengths and potential in the representation and processing of several different kinds of knowledge, not just the syntax of natural language. That versatility has been achieved using the mechanisms in SP-abstract that were outlined in that section. If those mechanisms can be modelled in SP-neural, it seems likely that the several kinds of knowledge that may be represented and processed in SP-abstract may also be represented and processed in SP-neural.
As an illustration, Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_figure}\footnote{Compared with the multiple alignments shown in Figures \ref{partial_match_figure} and \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}, this multiple alignment has been rotated by $90\degree$. The choice between these alternative presentations of multiple alignments depends entirely on what fits best on the page.} shows a simple example of how, via multiple alignment, the SP computer model may recognise an unknown creature at several different levels of abstraction, and Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_neural_figure} suggests how part of the multiple alignment, with associated patterns, may be realised in terms of pattern assemblies and their inter-connections.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\fontsize{10.00pt}{12.00pt}
\centering
{\bf
\begin{BVerbatim}
0 1 2 3 4
T
T1
Tibs
C --------- C
C1
cat
M ---------------- M
M1
mammal
A ------------ A
A1
animal
eats ---------------------------------------------------- eats
breathes
has-senses
#A ----------- #A
furry ------------------------------------ furry
warm-blooded
#M --------------- #M
carnassial-teeth
retractile-claws
purrs ----------------- purrs
#C -------- #C
white-bib - white-bib
tabby
#T
0 1 2 3 4
\end{BVerbatim}
}
\caption{The best multiple alignment found by the SP computer model with four one-symbol New patterns representing attributes of an unknown creature and a collection of Old patterns representing different creatures and classes of creature.}
\label{class_hierarchy_figure}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_figure} shows the best multiple alignment found by the SP computer model with four symbols representing attributes of an unknown creature (shown in column 0) and a collection of Old patterns representing different creatures and classes of creature, some of which are shown in columns 1 to 4, one pattern per column. In a more detailed and realistic example, symbols like `\texttt{eats}', `\texttt{retractile-claws}', and `\texttt{breathes}', would be represented as patterns, each with its own structure.
From this multiple alignment, we can see that the unknown creature has been identified as an animal (column 4), as a mammal (column 3), as a cat (column 2) and as a specific cat, `Tibs' (column 1). It is just an accident of how the SP computer model has worked in this case that the order of the patterns across columns 1 to 4 of the multiple alignment corresponds with the level of abstraction of the classifications. In general, the order of patterns in columns above 0 is entirely arbitrary, with no significance.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{class_hierarchy_neural_figure_2.pdf}
\caption{How part of the multiple alignment shown in Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_figure} may be realised in SP-neural---showing two of the attributes from column 0 in the multiple alignment and with `animal' and `mammal' pattern assemblies corresponding to patterns from columns 4 and 3---with an associated pattern assembly for `reptile'. The conventions are the same as in Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_figure}.}
\label{class_hierarchy_neural_figure}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_neural_figure} shows how part of the multiple alignment from Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_figure} may be realised in SP-neural. The figure contains pattern assemblies for `animal' and `mammal', corresponding to patterns from columns 4 and 3 of the multiple alignment. Notice that the left-right order of the pattern assemblies is different from the order of the patterns in the multiple alignment, in accordance with the remarks, above, about the workings of the SP computer model, and also because there is no reason to believe that pattern assemblies are represented in any particular order.
Neural connections amongst the things that have been mentioned so far are very much the same as alignments between neural symbols in Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_figure}: `eats' on the left connects with `eats' in the `animal' pattern assembly; `furry' connects with `furry' in the `mammal' pattern assembly, and the `A' and `\#A' connections for those two pattern assemblies correspond with the alignments of symbols in the multiple alignment. As in Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}, some neural connections are shown with broken lines to suggest that they would be relatively inactive during the neural processing which identifies one or more `good' NAMAs. And as before, it is envisaged that there would be one or more neural connections between each neural symbol and its immediate neighbours within each pattern assembly, but these are not marked in the figure.
The inclusion of a pattern assembly for `reptile' in Figure \ref{class_hierarchy_neural_figure}, with some of its neural connections, is intended to suggest some of the processing involved in identifying one or more winning NAMAs. In the same way that the pattern for `mammal' is receiving excitatory signals from the pattern for `animal', one would expect excitatory signals to flow to pattern assemblies for the other main groups of animals, including reptiles. Ultimately, `reptile' would fail to feature in any winning NAMA because of evidence from the neural symbols `furry', `purrs' and `white-bib'.
\section{Repetition and recursion}\label{repetition_recursion_section}
Like any good database or dictionary, the repository of Old patterns in SP-abstract should only contain one copy of any given SP pattern. But in something like {\em Jack Sprat could eat no fat, His wife could eat no lean}, the words {\em could}, {\em eat}, and {\em no} each occur twice. With an example like this, it seems reasonable to suppose that there is only one stored pattern for each of the repeated words, and likewise for the many other examples of entities that are repeated within something larger, witness the many legs of a centipede.
In SP-abstract, this apparent difficulty has been overcome by saying that each SP pattern in a multiple alignment is an {\em appearance} of the pattern, not the pattern itself---which allows us to have multiple instances of a pattern in a multiple alignment without breaking the rule that the repository of Old patterns should contain only one copy of each pattern. But in SP-neural, it is not obvious how to create an `appearance' of a pattern assembly that is not also a physical structure of neurons and their interconnections---but the speed with which we can understand natural language seems to rule out what appears to be the relatively slow growth of new neurons and their interconnections.
How we can create new mental structures quickly arises again in other connections, as discussed in Section \ref{sp-n_speed_expressiveness_section}. If we duck these questions for the time being and return to parsing, it may be argued that with something like {\em Jack Sprat could eat no fat, His wife could eat no lean}, the first instance of {\em could} is represented only for the duration of the word by the stored pattern for {\em could}, so that the same pattern can be used again to represent the second instance of {\em could}---and likewise for {\em eat} and {\em no}. But it appears that this line of reasoning does not work with a recursive structure like {\em the very very very fast car}.
Native speakers of English know that with a phrase like {\em the very very very fast car}, the word {\em very} may in principle be repeated any number of times. This observation, coupled with the observation that recursive structures are widespread in English and other natural languages, suggests strongly that the most appropriate parsing of the phrase is something like the multiple alignment shown in Figure \ref{ma_recursion_figure}. Here, the repetition of {\em very} is represented via three appearances of the pattern `\texttt{ri ri1 ri \#ri i \#i \#ri}', a pattern which is self-referential because the inner pair of symbols `\texttt{ri \#ri}' can be matched with the same two symbols, one at the beginning of the pattern and one at the end. Because the recursion depends on at least two instances of `\texttt{ri ri1 ri \#ri i \#i \#ri}' being `live' at the same time, it seems necessary for SP-neural to be able to model multiple appearances of any pattern.
That conclusion, coupled with the above-mentioned arguments from the speed at which we can speak, and the speed with which we can imagine new things, argues strongly that SP-neural---and any other neural theory of cognition---must have a means of creating new mental structures quickly. It seems unlikely that these things could be done via the growth of new neurons and their interconnections.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\fontsize{09.00pt}{10.80pt}
\centering
{\bf
\begin{BVerbatim}
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
np
d --- d
d1
the -------------- the
#d -- #d
ri --------------- ri
ri1
ri --------- ri
ri1
ri --------- ri
ri1
ri
#ri
i ---- i
i1
very --------------------------------------------- very
#i --- #i
#ri -------- #ri
i ---- i
i1
very -------------------------------- very
#i --- #i
#ri -------- #ri
i ---- i
i1
very ------------------- very
#i --- #i
#ri -------------- #ri
a ------------------------------------------------ a
a1
fast ---------------------------------------------------------- fast
#a ----------------------------------------------- #a
n --- n
n1
car -- car
#n -- #n
#np
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
\end{BVerbatim}
}
\caption{A multiple alignment produced by the SP computer model showing how recursion may be modelled in the SP system.}
\label{ma_recursion_figure}
\end{figure}
The tentative answer suggested here is that, in processes like parsing or pattern recognition, including examples with recursion like that shown in Figure \ref{ma_recursion_figure}, virtual copies of pattern assemblies may be created and destroyed very quickly via the switching on and switching off of synapses (see Section \ref{sp-n_speed_expressiveness_section}). Clearly, more detail is needed for a fully satisfactory answer.
Pending that better answer, Figure \ref{neural_recursion_figure} shows tentatively how recursion may be modelled in SP-neural, with neural symbols and pattern assemblies corresponding to selected symbols and patterns in Figure \ref{ma_recursion_figure}. On the left of that figure, we can see how the neural symbol `\texttt{very}' connects with a matching neural symbol in the pattern assembly `\texttt{i i1 very \#i}'. Further right, we can see how the first and last neural symbols in `\texttt{i i1 very \#i}' connect with matching neural symbols in the pattern assembly `\texttt{ri ri1 ri \#ri i \#i \#ri}'.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{very_recursive_1.pdf}
\caption{A schematic example showing how recursive structures may be modelled in SP-neural.}
\label{neural_recursion_figure}
\end{figure}
In the figure, the self-referential nature of the pattern assembly `\texttt{ri ri1 ri \#ri i \#i \#ri}' can be seen in the neural connection between `\texttt{ri}' at the beginning of that pattern assembly and the matching neural symbol in the body of the same pattern assembly, and likewise for `\texttt{\#ri}' at the end of the pattern assembly. Although it is unclear how this recursion may achieve the effect of repeated appearances of the pattern assembly at the speed with which we understand or produce speech, the analysis appears to be sounder than what is described in \cite[Section 11.4.2]{wolff_2006}, especially Figure 11.10 in that section.
\section{SP-neural: an output perspective}\label{sp-n_output_section}
\sloppy An inspection of Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}---showing how, in SP-neural, a small portion of natural language may be analysed by pattern assemblies and their interconnections---may suggest that if we wish to reverse the process---to create language instead of analysing it---then the innervation would need to be reversed: we may guess that two-way neural connections would be needed to support the production of speech or writing as well as their interpretation.
But a neat feature of SP-abstract is that one set of Old patterns, together with the processes for building multiple alignments, will support both the analysis and the production of language. So it is reasonable to suppose that if SP-neural works at all, similar duality will apply to pattern assemblies and their interconnections, without the need for two-way connections amongst pattern assemblies and neural symbols (but see Section \ref{sp-n_efferent_projections_section}).
Of course, speaking or writing would need peripheral motor processes that are different from the peripheral sensory processes required for listening or reading, but, more centrally, the processes for analysing language or producing it may use the same mechanisms.\footnote{Of course, things are a little more complicated with output processes because sensory feedback is normally an important part of speaking or writing. But the central point remains that, peripherally, speaking is not the same as listening to speech, and likewise for writing and reading.}
The reason that SP-abstract, as expressed in the SP computer model, can work in `reverse' so to speak, is that, from a multiple alignment like the one shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}, a code pattern like `\texttt{S 0 2 4 3 7 6 1 8 5 \#S}' may be derived, as outlined in Section \ref{sp-a_deriving_code_pattern_section}. Then, if that code pattern is presented to the SP system as a New pattern, the system can recreate the original sentence, `\texttt{f o r t u n e f a v o u r s t h e b r a v e}', as shown in Figure \ref{output_figure}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\fontsize{06.00pt}{07.20pt}
\centering
{\bf
\begin{BVerbatim}
0 S 0 2 4 3 7 6 1 8 5 #S 0
| | | | | | | | | | |
1 S 0 NP | | #NP VP | | | | | | #VP #S 1
| | | | | | | | | | | |
2 | | | | VP 3 V | | #V NP | | | #NP #VP 2
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
3 | | | | | | Vr 6 f a v o u r #Vr | | | | | | 3
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
4 | | | | V 7 Vr #Vr s #V | | | | | 4
| | | | | | | | |
5 | | | | | | | N 5 b r a v e #N | 5
| | | | | | | | | |
6 | | | | NP 1 D | #D N #N #NP 6
| | | | | | |
7 | | | | D 8 t h e #D 7
| | | |
8 NP 2 N | #N #NP 8
| | |
9 N 4 f o r t u n e #N 9
\end{BVerbatim}
}
\caption{The best multiple alignment produced by the SP computer model with the same Old patterns as for the multiple alignment shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure} but with the New pattern comprising an appropriate sequence of ID-symbols, `\texttt{S 0 2 4 3 7 6 1 8 5 \#S}', as described in the text.}
\label{output_figure}
\end{figure}
It is likely that, in a more fully-developed account, code patterns would represent connections between syntax and semantics so that they may provide the means of generating sentences from meanings. As noted in Section \ref{sp-a_evaluation_systems_section}, preliminary trials show how, with the SP computer model, sentences may be generated from meanings and {\em vice versa}.
\subsection{An answer to the apparent paradox of ``decompression by compression''}
That the SP system should be able to reconstruct a sentence that was originally compressed by means of the same system (Section \ref{sp-n_output_section}) may seem paradoxical. How is it that a system that is dedicated to information compression should be able, so to speak, to drive compression in reverse?
A resolution of this apparent paradox is described in \cite[Section 3.8]{wolff_2006}. In brief, the key to the conjuring trick is to ensure that, after the sentence has been compressed, there is enough residual redundancy in the code pattern to allow further compression, and to ensure that this further compression will achieve the effect of reconstructing the sentence.
\subsection{Meanings in the analysis and production of language}
Of course, parsing a sentence (as shown in Section \ref{sp-a_multiple_alignment_section}) or constructing a sentence from a code pattern (as shown in Section \ref{sp-n_output_section}) are very artificial applications with natural language. Normally, when we read some text or listen to someone speaking, we aim to derive meaning from the writing or the speech. And when we write or speak, it seems, intuitively, that the patterns of words that we are creating are derived from some kind of underlying meaning that we are trying to express.
It is envisaged that, in future development of SP-abstract and the SP computer model, the ID-symbols in code patterns will provide some kind of bridge between syntactic forms and representations of meanings, thus facilitating the processes of understanding the meanings of written or spoken sentences and of creating sentences to express particular meanings.
As noted at the end of Section \ref{sp-a_evaluation_systems_section}, there are preliminary examples of how, with the SP computer model, a sentence may be analysed for its meaning \cite[Section 5.7, Figure 5.18]{wolff_2006}, and how the same sentence may be derived from a representation of its meaning {\em ibid.}, Figure 5.19).
\subsection{But there are projections from the sensory cortex to subcortical nuclei}\label{sp-n_efferent_projections_section}
Although as we have seen earlier in Section \ref{sp-n_output_section}, SP-neural, via principles established in SP-abstract, provides for the creation of language, and other kinds of knowledge, without the need for efferent connections from the cortex back along the path of afferent nerves, there is evidence that such connections do exist:
\begin{quote}
``Neurons of the cerebral cortex send axons to subcortical regions .... Subcortical projections are to those nuclei in the thalamus and brainstem that provide ascending sensory information. By far the most prominent of these is to the thalamus: the neurons of a primary sensory cortex project back to the same thalamic nucleus that provides input to the cortex. This system of descending connections is truly impressive because the number of descending corticothalamic axons greatly exceeds the number of ascending thalamocortical axons. These connections permit a particular sensory cortex to control the activity of the very neurons that relay information to it.'' \cite[p.~509]{squire_etal_2013}.
\end{quote}
But the descending nerves described in this quotation may have a function that is quite different from the creation of sentences or other patterns of activity. One possible role for such nerves may be ``the focussing of activity so that relay neurons most activated by a sensory stimulus are more strongly driven and those in surrounding less well activated regions are further suppressed.'' \cite[p.~509]{squire_etal_2013}.
\section{Possible roles for inhibition in SP-neural}\label{sp-n_inhibition_section}
A familiar observation is that, if something like a fan is switched on near us, we notice the noise for a while and then come to ignore it. And if, later, the fan is switched off, we notice the relative quiet for a while and then cease to be aware of it. In general, it seems that we are relatively sensitive to changes in our environment and relatively insensitive to things that remain constant.
It has been accepted for some time that the way we adapt to constant stimuli is due to inhibitory neural structures and processes in our brains and nervous systems, that inhibitory structures and processes are widespread in the animal kingdom, and that they have a role in reducing the amount of information that we need to process \cite{von_bekesy_1967}.
Regarding the last point, it is clearly inefficient for anyone to be constantly registering, second-by-second, the noise of a nearby fan: `\texttt{noise, noise, noise, noise, noise, ...}' and likewise for the state of relative quietness when the fan is switched off. In terms of information theory, there is {\em redundancy} in the second-by-second recurrence of the noise (or quietness), and we can eliminate most or all of the redundancy---and thus compress the information---by simply recording that the noise is `on' and that it is continuing (and likewise, {\em mutatis mutandis}, for quiet). This is the `run-length encoding' technique for compression of information,\footnote{See ``Run-length encoding'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/21JlB1T}{bit.ly/21JlB1T}, retrieved 2016-03-04.} it is essentially what adaptation does, and, in neural tissue, it appears to be mediated largely by `lateral' inhibition.
With lateral inhibition in sensory neurons, there are inhibitory connections between neighbouring neurons so that, when they are both stimulated, they tend to inhibit each other, and thus reduce their rates of firing where there is strong uniform stimulation. But inhibition is reduced where strong stimulation gives way to weaker stimulation, leading to a local swing in the rate of firing (\cite{ratliff_etal_1963}; see also \cite[Section 2.3.1]{wolff_2006}; there is more about lateral inhibition in \cite[p.~505]{squire_etal_2013}). There are similar effects in the time dimension. Again, Barlow \cite{barlow_1982} says, in connection with neurons in the mammalian cortex that receive inputs from both eyes, ``...~it is now clear that input from one eye can, and frequently does, inhibit the effects of input from the other eye,~...'' (p.~147).
Taking these observations together, we may abstract a general rule: {\em When, in neural processing, two or more signals are the same, they tend to inhibit each other, and when they are different, they don't.} The overall effect should be to detect redundancy in information and to reduce it, whilst retaining non-redundant information, in accordance with the central principle in the SP theory---that much of computing and cognition may, to a large extent, be understood as information compression.
In a similar vein: ``Lateral inhibition represents the classic example of a general principle: most neurons in sensory systems are best adapted for detecting changes in the external environment.~...~As a rule, it is change which has the most significance for an animal ...~This principle can also be explained in terms of information processing. Given a world that is filled with constants---with uniform objects, with objects that move only rarely---it is most efficient to respond only to changes.'' \cite[p.~578]{squire_etal_2013}.
In view of the widespread occurrence of inhibitory mechanisms in the brain,\footnote{``These [aspiny or sparsely spiny nonpyramida] interneurons constitute approximately 15 to 30\% of the total population of cortical neurons, and they appear to be mostly GABAergic, representing the main components of inhibitory cortical circuits ....'' \cite[p.~45]{squire_etal_2013}; ``Synaptic inhibition in the mammalian brain is mediated principally by GABA receptors.'' ({\em ibid.}, p.~169); ``One of the great mysteries of synaptic integration is why there are so many different types of inhibitory interneurons.~...~more than 20 different types of inhibitory interneuron have been described in the CA1 region of the hippocampus alone.'' ({\em ibid.}, p.~249).} and in view of their apparent importance for the compression of information, and thus for selective advantage \cite[Section 4]{sp_foundations}, it is pertinent to ask what role or roles they may play in SP-neural. Here are some possibilities:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Low-level sensory features}. At relatively `low' levels in sensory processing, it appears that, as noted above, lateral inhibition has a role in identifying such things as boundaries between uniform areas, meaning lines. It may also have a role in identifying other kinds of low-level sensory features mentioned in Section \ref{sp-n_sensory_data_receptor_array_section}.
\item {\em Information compression via the matching and unification of patterns (ICMUP)}. As noted in Section \ref{elements_of_sp-a_section}, SP-abstract, and the SP computer model, is founded on the principle that information compression may be achieved by the matching and unification of patterns (ICMUP). Here, there appear to be two possible roles for inhibition:
\begin{itemize}
\item As we have seen, lateral inhibition can have the effect of inhibiting signals from neighbouring sensory neurons when they are receiving stimulation which is the same of nearly so. This may be seen as an example of ICMUP.
\item In accordance with the rule suggested above, inhibitory processes may serve as a means of detecting redundancy between a New pattern assembly like `\texttt{t a b l e}' and an Old pattern assembly like `\texttt{N 9 t a b l e \#N}':
\begin{itemize}
\item We may suppose that there are inhibitory links between neighbouring neural symbols in the Old pattern assembly so that, if all of the neural symbols in the body of the pattern assembly (ie, `\texttt{t a b l e}') are stimulated, or most of them, then mutual inhibition amongst those neural symbols will suppress their response. And, as with lateral inhibition in sensory neural tissue, inhibition in one area can mean enhanced responses at the boundaries with neighbouring areas, which, in this case, would be the ID-symbols `\texttt{N}' and `\texttt{9}' on the left, and `\texttt{\#N}' on the right. Then, excitatory signals from `\texttt{N}' and `\texttt{\#N}' may go on to higher-level patterns that contain nouns, as suggested by the broken-line links from those two neural symbols in Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}. Since there is no link to export excitatory signals from `\texttt{9}', no such signals would be sent.
\item Alternatively, we may suppose that a stored pattern assembly like `\texttt{N 9 t a b l e \#N}' has a background rate of firing and that, when matching stimulation is received for the neural symbols `\texttt{t a b l e}', the background rate of firing in the corresponding neural symbols in `\texttt{N 9 t a b l e \#N}' is reduced, with an associated upswing in the rates of firing of the neural symbols `\texttt{N}' and `\texttt{9}' and `\texttt{\#N}', as before.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\item {\em Sharpening choices amongst alternatives}. As mentioned in Section \ref{sp-n_neural_processing_section}, the process of forming neural analogues of multiple alignments (NAMAs) means identifying one or two of the most excited pattern assemblies, with structures below them that feed excitation to them. Here, inhibition may play a part by enhancing the status of the most excited pattern assemblies and suppressing the rest. How inhibition may achieve that kind of effect is discussed quite fully by von B{\'e}k{\'e}sy \cite[Chapters II and V]{von_bekesy_1967}, and also in \cite{shamma_1985}.
\end{itemize}
More information and discussion about the possible roles of inhibition in the cerebral cortex may be found in \cite{isaacson_scanziani_2011}.
\section{Unsupervised learning in SP-neural}\label{sp-n_unsupervised_learning_section}
This section considers how the learning processes in SP-abstract, which are outlined in Sections \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section} and \ref{sp-a_later_learning_section}, may be realised in SP-neural.
It seems likely that neural structures for the detection of `low level' features like lines and corners in vision, or formant ratios and transitions in hearing, are largely inborn,\footnote{``For all systems except the olfactory, the receptor neurons you were born with are the ones you will live with.'' \cite[p.~503]{squire_etal_2013}} although ``It is a curious paradox that, while [Hubel and Wiesel] have consistently argued for a high degree of ontogenetic determination of structure and function in the visual system, they are also the authors of the best example of plasticity in response to changed visual experience.'' \cite[p.~150]{barlow_1982}, and ``It has ...~been shown convincingly that the orientation preference of cells can be modified, ...'' ({\em ibid.}). Also, ``In the somatosensory system, if input from a restricted area of the body surface is removed by severing a nerve or by amputation of a digit, the portion of the cortex that was previously responsive to that region of the body surface becomes responsive to neighbouring regions ....'' \cite[p.~508]{squire_etal_2013}.
But it is clear that most of what we learn in life is at a `higher' level which, in SP-neural, will be acquired via the the creation and destruction of pattern assemblies, as discussed in the following subsections.
\subsection{Creating Old pattern assemblies}\label{sp-n_creating_old_pattern_assemblies_section}
Let us suppose that a young child hears the speech equivalent of `\texttt{t h e b i g h o u s e}' in accordance with the example in Section \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section}. As we have seen, when the repository of Old patterns is empty or nearly so, New patterns are stored directly as Old patterns, somewhat like a recording machine, but with the addition of ID-symbols at their beginnings and ends.
It seems unlikely that a young child would grow new neurons to store a newly-created Old pattern assembly like `\texttt{A 1 t h e b i g h o u s e \#A}', as discussed in Section \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section}. It seems much more likely that a pattern assembly like that would be created by some kind of modification of pre-existing neural tissue comprising sequences or areas of unassigned neural symbols with lateral connections between them as suggested in Section \ref{sp-n_pattern_assemblies_section}. Pattern assemblies would be created by the switching on and off of synapses at appropriate points, in a manner that is more like a tailor cutting up pre-woven cloth than someone knitting or crocheting each item from scratch.
In accordance with the labelled line principle (Section \ref{sp-n_labelled_line_principle_section}), the meaning of each symbol in a newly-created pattern assembly would be determined by what it is connected to, as described in Section \ref{sp-n_creating_neural_connections_section}.
Similar principles would apply when Old patterns are created from partial matches between patterns, as described in Section \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section}.
\subsection{Creating connections between pattern assemblies}\label{sp-n_creating_neural_connections_section}
As with the laying down of newly-created Old patterns (Section \ref{sp-n_creating_old_pattern_assemblies_section}), it seems unlikely that connections between pattern assemblies, like those shown in Figure \ref{the_brave_neural_figure}, would be created by growing new axons or dendrites. It seems much more likely that such connections would be established by switching on synapses between each of the two neurons to be connected and pre-existing axons or dendrites, somewhat like the making of connections in a telephone exchange (see Section \ref{sp-n_speed_expressiveness_section}).
This idea, together with the suggestions in Section \ref{sp-n_creating_old_pattern_assemblies_section} about how Old pattern assemblies may be created, is somewhat like the way in which an `uncommitted logic array' (ULA)\footnote{See `Gate array', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1UdB46j}{bit.ly/1UdB46j}, retrieved 2016-03-20.} may, via small modifications, be made to function like any one of a wide variety of `application-specific integrated circuits' (ASICs),\footnote{See `Application-specific integrated circuit', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1pUs2y8}{bit.ly/1pUs2y8}, retrieved 2016-03-20.} or how a `field-programmable gate array' (FPGA)\footnote{See `Field-programmable gate array', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1Hgi9iH}{bit.ly/1Hgi9iH}, retrieved 2016-03-20.} may be programmed to function like any one of a wide variety of integrated circuits.
\subsection{Destruction of pattern assemblies and their interconnections}\label{sp-n_destroying_neural_connections_section}
In the SP theory, patterns and pattern assemblies are never modified---they are either created or destroyed. The latter process occurs mainly in the process of searching for `good' grammars to describe a given set of New patterns, as outlined in Section \ref{sp-a_later_learning_section}. At each stage, when a few `good' grammars are retained in the system, the rest are discarded. This means that any pattern assembly in one or more of the `bad' grammars that is not also in one or more of the `good' grammars may be destroyed.
It seems likely that, in a process that may be seen as a reversal of the way in which pattern assemblies and their interconnections are created, the destruction of a pattern assembly does not mean the physical destruction of its neurons. It seems more likely that all neural connections from the pattern assembly are broken by switching off relevant synapses (Sections \ref{sp-n_destroying_neural_connections_section} and \ref{sp-n_speed_expressiveness_section}) and that its constituent neurons are retained for later use in other pattern assemblies.
\subsection{Searching for good grammars}
It must be admitted that, apart from the remarks in forgoing subsections about the creation and destruction of pattern assemblies and their inter-connections, it is unclear how, in SP-neural, one may achieve anything equivalent to the process of searching the abstract space of possible grammars that has been implemented in the SP computer model.
One possibility is to simplify things as follows. Instead of evaluating whole grammars, as in the SP computer model, it may be possible to achieve roughly the same effect by evaluating pattern assemblies in terms of their effectiveness or otherwise for the economical encoding of New information and, periodically, to discard those pattern assemblies that do badly.
\subsection{What about Hebbian learning?}\label{sp-n_hebbian_learning_section}
Readers familiar with issues in AI or neuroscience may wonder what place, if any, there may be in SP-neural for the concept of `Hebbian' learning. This idea, proposed by Hebb \cite{hebb_1949}, is that:
\begin{quote}
``When an axon of cell A is near enough to excite a cell B and repeatedly or persistently takes part in firing it, some growth process or metabolic change takes place in one or both cells such that A's efficiency, as one of the cells firing B, is increased.'' (p.~62).
\end{quote}
\noindent Variants of this idea are widely used in versions of `deep learning' in artificial neural networks \cite{schmidhuber_2015} and have contributed to success with such systems.\footnote{See, for example, ``Don't despair if Google's AI beats the world's best Go player'', {\em MIT Technology Review}, \href{http://bit.ly/1p7Wzb7}{bit.ly/1p7Wzb7}, 2016-03-08; and ``Google unveils neural network with `superhuman' ability to determine the location of almost any image'', {\em MIT Technology Review}, \href{http://bit.ly/1p5qmSe}{bit.ly/1p5qmSe}, 2016-02-24.}
But in \cite[Section V-D]{sp_alternatives} I have argued that:
\begin{itemize}
\item The gradual strengthening of neural connections which is a central feature of Hebbian learning (and deep learning) does not account for the way that people can, very effectively, learn from a single occurrence or experience (sometimes called `one-trial' learning).\footnote{It may be argued that Hebbian learning may apply in such cases because a single experience may be mentally rehearsed. But that begs the question of how the one experience is remembered between when it first occurred and the first rehearsal---and likewise later on. And, while rehearsal may be helpful in some cases, it seems that there are many things we do remember after a single experience, without rehearsal.}
\item Hebb was aware that his theory of learning with cell assemblies would not account for one-trial learning and he proposed a `reverberatory' theory for that kind of learning \cite[p.~62]{hebb_1949}. But, as noted in \cite[Section V-D]{sp_alternatives}, Milner has pointed out \cite{milner_1996} that it is difficult to understand how this kind of mechanism could explain our ability to assimilate a previously-unseen telephone number: for each digit in the number, its pre-established cell assembly may reverberate; but this does not explain memory for the {\em sequence} of digits in the number. And it is unclear how the proposed mechanism would encode a phone number in which one or more of the digits is repeated.
\item One-trial learning is consistent with the SP theory because the direct intake and storage of sensory information is bedrock in how the system learns (Section \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section}).
\item The SP theory can also account for the relatively slow learning of complex skills such as how to talk or how to play tennis at a high standard---because of the complexity of the abstract space of possible solutions that needs to be searched.
\end{itemize}
Does this mean that Hebbian learning is dead? Probably not:
\begin{itemize}
\item In some forms, the phenomena of `long-term potentiation' (LPT) in neural functioning seem to be linked to Hebbian types of learning \cite[pp.~1022-1023]{squire_etal_2013}.
\item Gradual strengthening of neural connections may have a role to play in SP-neural because some such mechanism is needed to record, at least approximately, the frequency of occurrence of neural symbols and pattern assemblies (Sections \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section} and \ref{sp-n_neural_processing_section}).
\end{itemize}
\section{The problems of speed and expressiveness in the creation of neural structures}\label{sp-n_speed_expressiveness_section}
A general issue for any neural theory of the representation and processing of knowledge, is how to account for the speed with which we can create neural structures, bearing in mind that such structures must be sufficiently versatile to accommodate the representation and processing of a wide range of different kinds of knowledge. This issue arises mainly in the following connections:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em One-trial learning}. In keeping with the remarks above about one-trial learning (Section \ref{sp-n_hebbian_learning_section}), it is a familiar feature of everyday life that we can see and hear something happening---a football match, a play, a conversation, and so on---and then, immediately or some time later, give a description of the event. This implies that we can lay down relevant memories at speed.
\item {\em The learning of complex knowledge and skills}. If we accept the view of unsupervised learning which is outlined in Sections \ref{sp-a_early_learning_section}, \ref{sp-a_later_learning_section}, and \ref{sp-n_unsupervised_learning_section}, then it seems necessary to suppose that pattern assemblies are created and destroyed during the search for one or two grammars that provide a `good' description of the knowledge or skills that is being learned---and it seems likely that the creation and destruction of pattern assemblies would be fast.
\item {\em The interpretation of sensory data}. In processes like the parsing of natural language or, more generally, understanding natural language, and in processes like pattern recognition, reasoning, and more, it seems necessary to create intermediate structures like those shown in Figure \ref{fortune_brave_multiple_alignment_figure}, and for those structures to be created at speed.
\item {\em Speech and action}. In a similar way, it seems necessary for us to create mental structures fast in any kind of activity that requires thought, such as speaking in a way that is meaningful and comprehensible, most kinds of sport, most kinds of games, and so on.
\item {\em Imagination}. Most people have little difficulty in imagining things they are unlikely ever to have seen---such as a cat with a coat made of grass instead of fur, or a cow with two tails. We can create such ideas fast and, if we like them well enough, we may remember them for many years.
\end{itemize}
One possible solution, which is radically different from SP-neural, is to suppose that our knowledge is stored in some chemical form such as DNA, and that the kinds of mental processes mentioned above might be mediated via the creation and modification of such chemicals. Another possibility is that learning is mediated by epigenetic mechanisms, as outlined in \cite[Section 7.4]{baars_gage_2010}. Without wishing to prejudge what the primary mechanism of learning may be, or whether perhaps there are several such mechanisms, this paper focusses on SP-neural and how it may combine speed with expressiveness, as seems to be required for the kinds of functions outlined above.
At first sight, the problem of speed in the creation of pattern assemblies and their interconnections is solved via the long-established idea that we can remember things for a few seconds via a `short-term memory'\footnote{``Short-term memory'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1RzAVHN}{bit.ly/1RzAVHN}, retrieved 2016-04-04.} that is distinct from `long-term memory'\footnote{``Long-term memory'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1M9uPhh}{bit.ly/1M9uPhh}, retrieved 2016-04-04.} and `working memory'.\footnote{``Working memory'', {\em Wikipedia}, \href{http://bit.ly/1PQq0UA}{bit.ly/1PQq0UA}, retrieved 2016-04-04.} But there is some uncertainty about the extent to which these three kinds of memory may be distinguished, one from another, and there is considerable uncertainty about how they might work, and how information may be transferred from one kind of memory to another.
As a proffered contribution to discussions in this area, the suggestion here is that, in any or all of short-term memory, working memory, and long-term memory, SP-neural may achieve the necessary speed in the creation of new structures, combined with versatility in the representation and processing of diverse kinds of knowledge, by the creation of pattern assemblies and their interconnections via the switching on and off of synapses in pre-established neural structures and their inter-connections---somewhat like the making and breaking of connections in a telephone exchange or the creation of electronic circuits in ULAs and FPGAs, as outlined in Section \ref{sp-n_creating_neural_connections_section}.
With regard to possible mechanisms for the switching on and off of synapses:
\begin{itemize}
\item It appears that, in the entorhinal cortex between the hippocampus and the neocortex, there are neurons that can be switched ``on'' and ``off'' in an all-or-nothing manner \cite{tahvildari_etal_2007}, and we may suppose that synapses have a role to play in this behaviour.
\item ``The efficacy of a synapse can be potentiated through at least six mechanisms'' \cite[Caption to Figure 47.10]{squire_etal_2013} and it is possible that at least one them has the necessary speed, especially since ``[Long-term potentiation] is defined as a persistent increase in synaptic strength ...~that can be induced {\em rapidly} by a brief burst of spike activity in the presynaptic afferents.'' (emphasis added) \cite[p.~1016]{squire_etal_2013}.
\item ``[Long-term depression] is believed by many to be ...~a process whereby [Long-term potentiation] could be reversed in the hippocampus and neocortex ....'' \cite[p.~1023]{squire_etal_2013}.
\item ``...~it is now evident that [Long-term potentiation], at least in the dentate gyrus, can either be ...~stable, lasting months or longer.'' \cite[Abstract]{abraham_2003}, although there appears to be little or no evidence with a bearing on whether or not there might be an upper limit to the duration of long-term potentiation.
\item There is evidence that the protein kinase M$\zeta$ (PKM$\zeta$) may provide a means of turning synapses on and off, and thus perhaps storing long-term memories \cite{ogasawara_kawato_2010}.
\end{itemize}
With all these possible mechanisms, key questions are: do they act fast enough to account for the speed of the phenomena described above; and can they provide the basis for memories that can last for 50 years or more.
\section{Errors of omission, commission, and substitution}
A prominent feature of human perception is that we have a robust ability to recognise things despite disturbances of various kinds. We can, for example, recognise a car when it is partially obscured by the leaves and branches of a tree, or by falling snow or rain.
One of the strengths of SP-abstract and its realisation in the SP computer model is that, in a similar way, recognition of a New pattern or patterns is not unduly disturbed by errors of omission, commission, and substitution in those data (\cite[Chapter 6]{wolff_2006}, \cite[Section 4.2.2]{sp_extended_overview}). This is because of the way the SP computer model searches for a global optimum in the building of multiple alignments, so that it does not depend on the presence or absence of any particular feature or combination of features in the New information that is being analysed.
In its overall structure, SP-neural seems to lend itself to that kind of robustness in recognition in the face of errors in data. But the devil is in the detail. In further development of the theory, and in the development of a computer model of SP-neural, it will be necessary to clarify the details of how that kind of robustness may be achieved. In shaping this aspect of SP-neural, the principles that have been developed in SP-abstract are likely to prove useful and, with empirical evidence from brains and nervous systems, they may serve as a touchstone of success.
\section{Conclusion}
As was mentioned in the Introduction, SP-neural is a tentative and partial theory. That said, the close relationship between SP-neural and SP-abstract, the incorporation into SP-abstract of many insights from research on human perception and cognition, strengths of SP-abstract in terms of simplicity and power (Section \ref{sp-a_evaluation_theory_section}), and advantages of SP-abstract compared with other AI-related systems (Section \ref{sp-a_distinctive_features_advantages_section})---lend support to SP-neural as it is now as a conceptual model of the representation and processing of knowledge in the brain, and a promising basis for further research.
Naturally, we may have more confidence in some parts of the theory than others. Arguably, the parts that inspire most confidence are these:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Neural symbols and pattern assemblies}. {\em All} knowledge is represented in the cerebral cortex with {\em pattern assemblies}, the neural equivalent of patterns in SP-abstract. Each such pattern assembly is an array of {\em neural symbols}, each of which is a single neuron or a small cluster of neurons---the neural equivalent of a symbol in SP-abstract. Topologically, each array has one or two dimensions, perhaps parallel to the surface of the cortex.
\item {\em Information compression via the matching and unification of patterns}. As in SP-abstract, SP-neural is governed by the overarching principle that many aspects of perception and cognition may be understood in terms of information compression via the matching and unification of patterns.
\item {\em Information compression via multiple alignment}. More specifically, SP-neural is governed by the overarching principle that many aspects of perception and cognition may be understood via a neural equivalent of the powerful concept of {\em multiple alignment}.
\item {\em Unsupervised learning}. As in SP-abstract, unsupervised learning in SP-neural is the foundation for other kinds of learning---supervised learning, reinforcement learning, learning by imitation, learning by being told, and so on. And as in SP-abstract, unsupervised learning in SP-neural is achieved via a search through alternative grammars to find one or two that score best in terms of the compression of sensory information. As noted in Section \ref{sp-n_hebbian_learning_section}, this is quite different from the kinds of `Hebbian' learning that are popular in artificial neural networks.
\item {\em Problems of speed and expressiveness in the creation of pattern assemblies and their interconnections}. To account for the speed with which we can assimilate new information, and the speed of other mental processes (Section \ref{sp-n_speed_expressiveness_section}), it seems necessary to suppose that pattern assemblies and their interconnections may be created from pre-existing neural structures by the making and breaking of synaptic connections, somewhat like the making and breaking of connections in a telephone exchange, or the creation of a bespoke electronic system from an `uncommitted logic array' (ULA) or a `field-programmable gate array' (FPGA).
\end{itemize}
As with SP-abstract, areas of uncertainty in SP-neural may be clarified by casting the theory in the form of a computer model and testing it to see whether or not it works as anticipated. It is envisaged that this would be part of a proposed facility for the development of the SP machine \cite{sp_proposal}, a means for researchers everywhere to explore what can be done with the SP machine and to create new versions of it.
At all stages in its development, the theory may suggest possible investigations of the workings of brains and nervous systems. And any neurophysiological evidence may have a bearing on the perceived validity of the theory and whether or how it may need to be modified.
|
\section{Introduction}
Structured information plays an increasingly important role in applications such as information extraction \cite{dong2014knowledge}, question answering \cite{kalyanpur2012structured} and robotics \cite{beetz2011robotic}. With the notable exceptions of CYC and WordNet, most of the knowledge bases that are used in such applications have at least partially been obtained using some form of crowdsourcing (e.g.\ Freebase, Wikidata, ConceptNet). To date, such knowledge bases are mostly limited to facts (e.g.\ Obama is the current president of the US) and simple taxonomic relationships (e.g.\ every president is a human).
One of the main barriers to crowdsourcing more complex domain theories is that most users are not trained in logic. This is exacerbated by the fact that often (commonsense) domain knowledge is easiest to formalize as defaults (e.g.\ birds typically fly), and, even for non-monotonic reasoning (NMR) experts, it can be challenging to formulate sets of default rules without introducing inconsistencies (w.r.t.\ a given NMR semantics) or unintended consequences.
In this paper, we propose a method for learning consistent domain theories from crowdsourced examples of defaults and non-defaults. Since these examples are provided by different users, who may only have an intuitive understanding of the semantics of defaults, together they will typically be inconsistent. The problem we consider is to construct a set of defaults which is consistent w.r.t.\ the System P semantics \cite{KLM}, and which entails as many of the given defaults and as few of the non-defaults as possible. Taking advantage of the relation between System P and possibilistic logic \cite{benferhat1997nonmonotonic}, we treat this as a learning problem, in which we need to select and stratify a set of propositional formulas.
The contributions of this paper are as follows. First, we show that the problem of deciding whether a possibilistic logic theory exists that perfectly covers all positive and negative examples is $\Sigma_2^P$-complete. Second, we formally study the problem of learning from defaults in a standard learning theory setting and we determine the corresponding VC-dimension, which allows us to derive theoretical bounds on how much training data we need, on average, to obtain a system that can classify defaults as being valid or invalid with a given accuracy level. Third, we introduce a heuristic algorithm for learning possibilistic logic theories from defaults and non-defaults. To the best of our knowledge, our method is the first that can learn a consistent logical theory from a set of noisy defaults. We evaluate the performance of this algorithm in two crowdsourcing experiments. In addition, we show how it can be used for approximating maximum a posteriori (MAP) inference in propositional Markov logic networks \cite{Richardson2006,Saint-cyr94penaltylogic}.
\section{Related work}
Reasoning with defaults of the form ``if $\alpha$ then typically $\beta$'', denoted as $\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$, has been widely studied \cite{KLM,pearl1990system,lehmann1992does,geffner1992conditional,goldszmidt1993maximum,benferhat1997nonmonotonic}. A central problem in this context is to determine what other defaults can be derived from a given input set. Note, however, that the existing approaches for reasoning about default rules all require some form of consistency (e.g.\ the input set cannot contain both $a{\,\mid\!\sim\,} b$ and $a{\,\mid\!\sim\,} \neg b$). As a result, these approaches cannot directly be used for reasoning about noisy crowdsourced defaults.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper that considers a machine learning setting where the input consists of default rules. Several authors have proposed approaches for constructing possibility distributions from data; see \cite{dubois_prade_survey} for a recent survey. However, such methods are generally not practical for constructing possibilistic logic theories. The possibilistic counterpart of the Z-ranking constructs a possibilistic logic theory from a set of defaults, but it requires that these defaults are consistent and cannot handle non-defaults \cite{benferhat1997nonmonotonic}, although an extension of the Z-ranking that can cope with non-defaults was proposed in \cite{booth1998note}. Some authors have also looked at the problem of learning sets of defaults from data \cite{big_stepped,kernDefaultLearning}, but the performance of these methods has not been experimentally tested. In \cite{Serrurier2007939}, a possibilistic inductive logic programming (ILP) system is proposed, which uses a variant of possibilistic logic for learning rules with exceptions. However, as is common for ILP systems, this method only considers classification problems, and cannot readily be applied to learn general possibilistic logic theories. Finally note that the setting of learning from default rules as introduced in this paper can be seen as a non-monotonic counterpart of an ILP setting called {\em learning from entailment} \cite{de1997logical}.
\section{Background}
\subsection{Possibilistic logic}
A stratification of a propositional theory $\mathcal{T}$ is an ordered partition of $\mathcal{T}$. We will use the notation $\textit{Strat}(\mathcal{T})$ to denote the set of all such ordered partitions and $\textit{Strat}^{(k)}(\mathcal{T})$ to denote the set of all ordered partitions into at most $k$ subsets of $\mathcal{T}$. A theory in possibilistic logic \cite{DLP} is a set of formulas of the form $(\alpha,\lambda)$, with $\alpha$ a propositional formula and $\lambda \in ]0,1]$ a certainty weight. These certainty weights are interpreted in a purely ordinal fashion, hence a possibilistic logic theory is essentially a stratification of a propositional theory.
The strict $\lambda$-cut $\Theta_{\overline{\lambda}}$ of a possibilistic logic theory $\Theta$ is defined as
$\Theta_{\overline{\lambda}} = \{\alpha \,|\, (\alpha,\mu)\in \Theta, \mu > \lambda\}$. The inconsistency level $\textit{inc}(\Theta)$ of $\Theta$ is the lowest certainty level $\lambda$ in $[0,1]$ for which the classical theory $\Theta_{\overline{\lambda}}$ is consistent.
An inconsistency-tolerant inference relation $\vdash_{poss}$ for possibilistic logic can then be defined as follows:
\begin{align*}
\Theta \vdash_{poss} \alpha \quad\text{iff}\quad \Theta_{\overline{\textit{inc}(\Theta)}} \models \alpha
\end{align*}
We will write $(\Theta,\alpha)\vdash_{poss} \beta$ as an abbreviation for $\Theta\cup \{(\alpha,1)\} \vdash_{poss} \beta$.
It can be shown that $\Theta \vdash_{poss} (\alpha,\lambda)$ can be decided by making $O(\log_2 k)$ calls to a SAT solver, with $k$ the number of certaintly levels in $\Theta$ \cite{La2001.1}.
There is a close relationship between possibilistic logic and the rational closure of a set of defaults.
Recall that $\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$ is tolerated by a set of defaults $\{\alpha_1{\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta_1,...,\alpha_n{\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta_n\}$ if the classical formula $\alpha \wedge \beta \wedge \bigwedge_i (\neg \alpha_i \vee \beta_i)$ is consistent \cite{pearl1990system}. Let $\Delta$ be a set of defaults. The rational closure of $\Delta$ is based on a stratification $\Delta_1,...,\Delta_k$, known as the Z-ordering, where each $\Delta_j$ contains all defaults from $\Delta\setminus (\Delta_{1}\cup ... \Delta_{j-1})$ which are tolerated by $\Delta\setminus (\Delta_1\cup ... \cup \Delta_{j-1})$. Intuitively, $\Delta_1$ contains the most general default rules, $\Delta_2$ contains exceptions to these rules, $\Delta_3$ contains exceptions to these exceptions, etc. Given the stratification $\Delta_1,...,\Delta_k$ we define the possibilistic logic theory $\Theta = \{(\neg \alpha \vee \beta, \lambda_i) \,|\, (\alpha{\,\mid\!\sim\,}\beta)\in \Delta_i\}$, where we assume $0<\lambda_1<...<\lambda_k \leq 1$. It then holds that $\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$ is in the rational closure of $\Delta$ iff $(\Theta,\alpha)\vdash_{poss} \beta$ \cite{benferhat1998practical}.
\subsection{Learning Theory}
We now cover some basic notions from statistical learning theory \cite{Vapnik:1995:NSL:211359}. We restrict ourselves to binary classification problems, where the two labels are $1$ and $-1$. Let $\mathcal{X}$ be a set of {\em examples}. A {\em hypothesis} is a function $h : \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \{-1,1\}$. A hypothesis $h$ is said to cover an example $e \in \mathcal{X}$ if $h(e) = 1$.
Consider a set $\mathcal{S}\subseteq \mathcal{X} \times \{-1,1\}$ of $n$ labeled examples that have been iid sampled from a distribution $p$.
A hypothesis $h$'s sample error rate is
$
\textit{err}_{\mathcal{S}}(h,\mathcal{S}) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{(x,c) \in \mathcal{S}} \mathbf{1}(h(x) \neq c)
$
where $\mathbf{1}(\alpha)=1$ if $\alpha\equiv\textit{true}$ and $\mathbf{1}(\alpha)=0$ otherwise.
A hypothesis $h$'s expected error w.r.t.\ the probability distribution $p$ is given by
$
\textit{err}_p(h) = \mathbf{E}_{(X,C) \sim p} [\mathbf{1}(h(X) \neq C)].
$
Statistical learning theory provides tools for bounding the probability $P(\sup_{h \in \mathcal{H}}|\textit{err}_p(h)-\textit{err}_\mathcal{S}(h,\mathcal{S})| \geq \epsilon)$, where $\mathcal{S}$ is known to be sampled iid from $p$ but $p$ itself is unknown.
These bounds link $h$'s training set error to its (probable) performance on other examples drawn from the same distribution, and therefore permits theoretically controlling overfitting. The most important bounds of this type depend on the Vapnik-Chervonenkis (VC) dimension \cite{Vapnik:1995:NSL:211359}.
\begin{definition}[Vapnik-Chervonenkis (VC) dimension]
A hypothesis set $\mathcal{H}$ is said to shatter a set of examples $\mathcal{Y}$ if for every subset $\mathcal{Z} \subseteq \mathcal{Y}$ there is a hypothesis $h \in \mathcal{H}$ such that $h(e) = 1$ for every $e \in \mathcal{Z}$ and $h(e) = -1$ for every $e \in \mathcal{Y} \setminus \mathcal{Z}$. The VC dimension of $\mathcal{H}$ is the cardinality of the largest set that is shattered by $\mathcal{H}$.
\end{definition}
\noindent Upper bounds based on the VC dimension are increasing functions of the VC dimension and decreasing functions of the number of examples in the training sample $\mathcal{S}$.
Ideally, the goal is to minimize expected error, but this cannot be evaluated since $p$ is unknown. {\em Structural risk minimization} \cite{Vapnik:1995:NSL:211359} helps with this
if the hypothesis set can be organized into a hierarchy of nested hypothesis classes of increasing VC dimension. It suggests selecting hypotheses that minimize a risk composed of the training set error and a complexity term, e.g.\ if two hypotheses have the same training set error, the one originating from the class with lower VC dimension should be preferred.
\section{Learning from Default Rules}
In this section, we formally describe a new learning setting for possibilistic logic called {\em learning from default rules}.
We assume a finite alphabet $\Sigma$ is given. An example is a default rule over $\Sigma$ and a hypothesis is a possibilistic logic theory over $\Sigma$. A hypothesis $h$ predicts the class of an example $e = \alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$ by checking if $h$ covers $e$, in the following sense.
\begin{definition}[Covering]
A hypothesis $h \in \mathcal{H}$ {\em covers} an example $e = \alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$ if $(h, \alpha) \vdash_{poss} \beta$.
\end{definition}
\noindent The hypothesis $h$ predicts positive, i.e.\ $h(\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta) = 1$, iff $h$ covers $e$, and else predicts negative, i.e.\ $h(\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta) = -1$.
\begin{example}
Let us consider the following set of examples
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{S} =& \{ (\textit{bird} \wedge \textit{antarctic} {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \neg \textit{flies}, 1), (\textit{bird} {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \neg \textit{flies}, -1) \}
\end{align*}
The following hypotheses over the alphabet $\{\textit{bird},\allowbreak \textit{flies},\allowbreak \textit{antarctic} \}$ cover all positive and no negative examples:
\begin{align*}
h_1 &= \{ (\textit{bird}, 1), (\textit{antarctic} \rightarrow \neg \textit{flies}, 1) \}\\
h_2 &= \{ (\textit{flies}, 0.5), (\textit{antarctic} \rightarrow \neg \textit{flies}, 1) \}\\
h_3 &= \{(\textit{antarctic} \rightarrow \neg \textit{flies}, 1) \}
\end{align*}
\end{example}
\noindent The learning task can be formally described as follows.
\begin{description}
\item[Given:] A multi-set $\mathcal{S}$ which is an iid sample from a set of default rules over a given finite alphabet $\Sigma$.
\item[Do:] Learn a possiblistic logic theory that covers all positive examples and none of the negative examples in $\mathcal{S}$.
\end{description}
The above definition assumes that $\mathcal{S}$ is perfectly separable, i.e.\ it is possible to perfectly distinguish positive examples from negative examples. In practice, we often relax this requirement, and instead aim to find a theory that minimizes the training set error.
Similar to learning in graphical models, this learning task can be decomposed into {\em parameter learning} and {\em structure learning}. In our context, the goal of parameter learning is to convert a set of propositional formulas into a possibilistic logic theory, while the goal of structure learning is to decide what that set of propositional formulas should be.
\subsection{Parameter Learning}
Parameter learning assumes that the formulas of the possibilistic logic theory are fixed, and only the certainty weights need to be assigned. As the exact numerical values of the certainty weights are irrelevant, we will treat parameter learning as the process of finding the most suitable stratification of a given set of formulas, e.g.\ the one which minimizes training error or structural risk (cf.\ Section \ref{sec:vc}).
\begin{example}\label{ex:learning1}
Let
$\mathcal{S} = \allowbreak\{ (\textit{penguin} {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \textit{bird}, 1),\allowbreak (\textit{bird} {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \textit{flies}, 1),\allowbreak (\textit{penguin} {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \allowbreak \neg \textit{flies},\allowbreak 1),\allowbreak ({\,\mid\!\sim\,} \textit{bird}, -1),\allowbreak (\textit{bird} {\,\mid\!\sim\,}\allowbreak \textit{penguin},\allowbreak -1) \}$
and $\mathcal{T} = \{ \textit{bird},\allowbreak \textit{flies},\allowbreak \textit{penguin},\allowbreak \neg \textit{penguin} \allowbreak\vee \neg \textit{flies} \}.$
A stratification of $\mathcal{T}$ which minimizes the training error on the examples from $\mathcal{S}$ is
$
\mathcal{T}^* = \{ (\textit{bird},\allowbreak 0.25),\allowbreak (\textit{penguin},\allowbreak 0.25),\allowbreak (\textit{flies},\allowbreak 0.5),\allowbreak (\neg \textit{penguin} \vee \neg \textit{flies},\allowbreak 1) \}
$
which is equivalent to
$\mathcal{T}^{**} = \{(\textit{flies},\allowbreak 0.5),\allowbreak (\neg \textit{penguin} \vee \neg \textit{flies},\allowbreak 1) \}$ because $\textit{inc}(\mathcal{T}^*) = 0.25$. Note that $\mathcal{T}^{**}$ correctly classifies all examples except $(\textit{penguin} {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \textit{bird}, 1)$.
\end{example}
\noindent Given a set of examples $\mathcal{S}$, we write $\mathcal{S}^+=\{\alpha | (\alpha,1) \in \mathcal{S} \}$ and $\mathcal{S}^- = \{ \alpha | (\alpha,-1) \in \mathcal{S} \}$). A stratification $\mathcal{T}^*$ of a theory $\mathcal{T}$ is a {\em separating stratification} of $\mathcal{S}^+$ and $\mathcal{S}^-$ if it covers all examples from $\mathcal{S}^+$ and no examples from $\mathcal{S}^-$.
\begin{example}\label{exZrankingComparison}
Let us consider the following set of examples
$
\mathcal{S} = \{ ({\,\mid\!\sim\,} \neg x, 1), ({\,\mid\!\sim\,} \neg y, 1), (x {\,\mid\!\sim\,} a, 1), (y {\,\mid\!\sim\,} b, 1),
(x \wedge y {\,\mid\!\sim\,} a, -1) \}.
$
Let $\mathcal{T} = \{ \neg x, \neg y, \neg x \vee a, \neg y \vee b \}$.
The following stratification is a separating stratification of $\mathcal{S}^+$ and $\mathcal{S}^-$:
$h = \{ (\neg x, 0.25), (\neg x \vee a, 0.5), (\neg y, 0.75), (\neg y \vee b, 1) \}$. Note that the Z-ranking of $\mathcal{S}^+$ also corresponds to a stratification of $\mathcal{T}$, as $\mathcal{T}$ contains exactly the clause representations of the positive examples. However using the Z-ranking leads to a different stratification, which is:
$h_z = \{ (\neg x, 0.5), (\neg y, 0.5), (\neg x \vee a, 1), (\neg y \vee b, 1) \}.$
Note that $h_z(x \wedge y {\,\mid\!\sim\,} a) = 1$ whereas $h(x \wedge y {\,\mid\!\sim\,} a) = -1$.
\end{example}
\noindent Because arbitrary stratifications can be chosen, there is substantial freedom to ensure that negative examples are not covered. This is true even when the set of considered formulas is restricted to the clause representations of the positive examples, as seen in Example \ref{exZrankingComparison}. Unfortunately, the problem of finding an optimal stratification is computationally hard.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm-complexity}
Deciding whether a separating stratification exists for given $\mathcal{T}$, $\mathcal{S}^+$ and $\mathcal{S}^-$ is a $\Sigma_2^P$-complete problem.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof of the membership result is trivial.
We show the hardness result by reduction from the $\Sigma_2^P$-complete problem of deciding the satisfiability of quantified Boolean formulas of the form $\exists X \forall Y : \Phi(X,Y)$ where $X$ and $Y$ are vectors of propositional variables and $\Phi(X,Y)$ is a propositional formula. Let
$\mathcal{T} = X \cup \{ \neg x : x \in X \} \cup \{ \Phi(X,Y) \rightarrow \textit{aux} \}$
be a propositional theory, let $\mathcal{S}^+ = \{ {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \textit{aux} \}$ and $\mathcal{S}^- = \emptyset$. We need to show that $\exists X \forall Y : \Phi(X,Y)$ is satisfiable if and only if there exists a separating stratification for $\mathcal{T}$, $\mathcal{S}^+$ and $\mathcal{S}^-$. ($\Rightarrow$) Let $\theta$ be an assignment of variables in $X$ such that $\forall Y : \Phi(X\theta,Y)$ is true. Then we can construct the separating stratification as
\begin{align*}
(\{\Phi(X,Y) \rightarrow \textit{aux} \} \cup \{ x \in X : x\theta = 1 \} \\
\cup \{\neg x : x \in X \mbox{ and } x\theta = 0 \}, \\
\{ \neg x : x \in X \mbox{ and } x\theta = 1 \} \cup \{ x \in X : x\theta = 0 \}).
\end{align*}
Since $\Phi(X,Y)$ will always be true in any model consistent with the highest level of the stratification, because of the way we chose $x$ and $\neg x$ for this level, so will $\textit{aux}$.
($\Leftarrow$) Let $\mathcal{T}^*$ be a stratification of $\mathcal{T}$ which entails the default rule ${\,\mid\!\sim\,} \textit{aux}$. We can assume w.l.o.g. that $\mathcal{T}^*$ has only two levels. Since $\mathcal{T}^*$ is a separating stratification, we must have $\mathcal{T}^* \vdash_{poss} \textit{aux}$. Therefore the highest level $L^*$ of $\mathcal{T}^*$ must be a consistent theory and $\Phi(X,Y)$ must be true in all of its models.
Let $X' = \{ x \in X : x \in L^* \mbox{ or } \neg x \in L^* \}$ and $X'' = X\setminus X'$. We can construct an assignment $\theta$ to variables in $X'$ by setting $x\theta = 1$ for $x \in L^*$ and $x\theta = 0$ for $\neg x \in L^*$. It follows from the construction that $\forall X'' \forall Y : \Phi(X\theta,Y)$ must be true.
\end{proof}
\noindent As this result reveals, in practice we will need to rely on heuristic methods for parameter learning. In Section \ref{secHeuristicAlgorithm} we will propose such a heuristic method, which will moreover also include structure learning.
\subsection{VC Dimension of Possibilistic Logic Theories}\label{sec:vc}
We explore the VC dimension of the set of possible stratifications of a propositional theory, as this will allow us to provide probabilistic bounds on the generalization ability of a learned possibilistic logic theory.
Let us write $\textit{Strat}(\mathcal{T})$ for the set of all stratifications of a propositional theory $\mathcal{T}$, and let $\textit{Strat}^{(k)}(\mathcal{T})$ be the set of all stratifications with at most $k$ levels. The following proposition provides an upper bound for the VC dimension and can be proved by bounding the cardinality of $\textit{Strat}^{(k)}(\mathcal{T})$.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:upperbound}
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a set of $n$ propositional formulas. Then $VC(\textit{Strat}^{(k)}(\mathcal{T})) \leq n \log_2{k}$.
\end{proposition}
\noindent In the next theorem, we establish a lower bound on the VC dimension of stratifications with at most $k$ levels which shows that the above upper bound is asymptotically tight.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm-vc2}
For every $k, n$, $k \leq n$, there is a propositional theory $\mathcal{T}$ consisting of $n$ formulas such that $$VC(\textit{Strat}^{(k)}(\mathcal{T})) \geq \frac{1}{4} n (\log_2{k}-1).$$
\end{theorem}
\noindent To prove Theorem \ref{thm-vc2}, we need the following lemmas; some straightforward proofs are omitted due to space constraints.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:orders}
If $\mathcal{S}$ is a totally ordered set, let $\textit{kth}(\mathcal{S},i)$ denote the $i$-th highest element of $\mathcal{S}$.
Let $\mathcal{X} = \{x_1,\dots,x_n\}$ be a set of cardinality $n = 2^m$ where $m \in \mathbb{N}\setminus \{ 0 \}$. Let
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{C} &= \{ x_1 < x_2, x_3 < x_4, \dots, x_{n-1} < x_{n}, \\
&\textit{kth}(\{x_1,x_2\}, 1) < \textit{kth}(\{x_3,x_4\}, 1), \\
&\textit{kth}(\{x_1,x_2\}, 2) < \textit{kth}(\{x_3,x_4\}, 2), \\
&\textit{kth}(\{x_5,x_6\}, 1) < \textit{kth}(\{x_7,x_8\}, 1), \\
&\textit{kth}(\{x_5,x_6\}, 2) < \textit{kth}(\{x_7,x_8\}, 2), \\
&\dots \\
&\textit{kth}(\{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\}, 1) < \textit{kth}(\{x_5,x_6,x_7,x_8\}, 1), \\
&\textit{kth}(\{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\}, 2) < \textit{kth}(\{x_5,x_6,x_7,x_8\}, 2), \\
&\textit{kth}(\{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\}, 3) < \textit{kth}(\{x_5,x_6,x_7,x_8\}, 3), \\
&\textit{kth}(\{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\}, 4) < \textit{kth}(\{x_5,x_6,x_7,x_8\}, 4), \\
&\dots \\
& \textit{kth}(\{x_1,\dots,x_{n/2}\}, n/2) < \textit{kth}(\{x_{n/2+1},\dots,x_{n}\}, n/2) \}
\end{align*}
be a set of $\frac{1}{2} n \log_2{n}$ inequalities. Then for any $\mathcal{C}' \subseteq \mathcal{C}$ there is a permutation of $\mathcal{X}$ satisfying all constraints from $\mathcal{C}'$ and no constraints from $\mathcal{C}\setminus \mathcal{C}'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:pos_order}
Let $\textit{at-least}_{k}(x_1,x_2,\dots,x_n)$ denote a Boolean formula which is true if and only if at least $k$ of the arguments are true. Let $\mathcal{X} = \{x_1,\dots,x_m\}$ be a set of propositional logic variables and $\pi = (x_{i_1}, x_{i_2}, \dots, x_{i_m})$ be a permutation of elements from $\mathcal{X}$. Let $0 \leq k \leq \min\{m_y,m_z\}$. Let $$\mathcal{T}^* = \{(x_{i_1}, 1/m), (x_{i_2},1/(m-1)), \dots, (x_{i_m}, 1)\}$$ be a possibilistic logic theory. Let $\mathcal{Y} = \{y_1,\dots,y_{m_y}\}$ and $\mathcal{Z} = \{z_1,\dots,z_{m_z} \}$ be disjoint subsets of $\mathcal{X}$. Then
\begin{align*}
(\mathcal{T}^*, \textit{at-least}_{m_y-k+1}(\neg y_1,\neg y_2,\dots,\neg y_{m_y})) \vdash_{poss} \\
\textit{at-least}_{k}(z_1,z_2,\dots,z_{m_z})
\end{align*}
iff $\textit{kth}(\{y_1,\dots,y_{m_y}\}, k) < \textit{kth}(\{z_1,\dots,z_{m_z}\},k)$
w.r.t.\ the ordering given by the permutation $\pi$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:vc3}
For every $n = 2^m$ there is a propositional theory $\mathcal{T}$ consisting of $n$ formulas such that $$VC(\textit{Strat}(\mathcal{T})) \geq \frac{1}{2} n \log_2{n}.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal{T} = \{x_1,\dots,x_n\}$ be a set of propositional variables where $n = 2^m$, $m \in N\setminus \{ 0 \}$ and let $\mathcal{C}$ be defined as in Lemma \ref{lemma:orders}. Let $\mathcal{D} = $
\begin{align*}
&\{ \textit{at-least}_{l-k+1}(\neg x_{i_1},\dots,\neg x_{i_l}) {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \textit{at-least}_{k}(x_{j_1},\dots,x_{j_l}) | \\
&\quad\quad(\textit{kth}(\{x_{i_1},\dots,x_{i_l}\}, k) < \textit{kth}(\{x_{j_1},\dots,x_{j_l}\}, k)) \in \mathcal{C}\},
\end{align*}
i.e.\ $\mathcal{D}$ contains one default rule for every inequality from $\mathcal{C}$. It follows from Lemma \ref{lemma:orders} and Lemma \ref{lemma:pos_order} that the set $\mathcal{D}$ can be shattered by stratifications of the propositional theory $\mathcal{T}$. The cardinality of $\mathcal{D}$ is $\frac{1}{2} n \log_2 n$. Therefore the VC dimension of stratifications of $\mathcal{T}$ is at least $\frac{1}{2} n \log_2 n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm-vc2}]
We show that if $k$ and $n$ are powers of two then $\frac{1}{2} n \log_2 k$ is a lower bound of the VC dimension. The general case of the theorem then follows straightforwardly. Let $\mathcal{T} = \bigcup_{i=1}^{\frac{n}{k}}\{ x_{(i-1) \cdot k + 1},\allowbreak\dots,\allowbreak x_{i \cdot k} \}$ and let $\mathcal{D}_i$ be a set of default rules of cardinality $\frac{1}{2} k \log_2 k$ shattered by $\textit{Strat}(\{ x_{(i-1) \cdot k + 1},\dots, x_{i \cdot k} \})$. It follows from Lemma \ref{lemma:vc3} that such a set $\mathcal{D}_i$ always exists. Let $\mathcal{D} = \bigcup_{i=1}^{\frac{n}{k}} \mathcal{D}_i$. Then $\mathcal{D}$ has cardinality $\frac{1}{2} n \log_2 k$ and is shattered by $\textit{Strat}^{(k)}(\mathcal{T})$. To see that the latter holds, note that the sets of formulas $\textit{Strat}(\{ x_{(i-1) \cdot k + 1},\dots, x_{i \cdot k} \})$ are disjoint. Therefore, if we want to find a stratification from $\textit{Strat}^{(k)}(\mathcal{T})$ which covers only examples from an arbitrary set $\mathcal{D}' \subseteq \mathcal{D}$ and no other examples from $\mathcal{D}$ then we can merge stratifications of $\{ x_{(i-1) \cdot k + 1},\dots, x_{i \cdot k} \}$ which cover exactly the examples from $\mathcal{D}_i \cap \mathcal{D}'$, where merging stratifications is done by level-wise unions.
\end{proof}
\noindent Combining the derived lower bounds and upper bounds on the VC dimension together with the structural risk minimization principle, we find that given two stratifications with the same training set error rate, we should prefer the one with the fewest levels.
Furthermore, when structure learning is used, it is desirable for learned theories to be compact. A natural learning problem then consists in selecting a small subset of $\mathcal{T}$, where $\mathcal{T}$ corresponds to the set of formulas considered by the structure learner, and identifying a stratification only for that subset. The results in this section can readily be extended to provide bounds on the VC dimension of this problem. Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a propositional theory of cardinality $n$ and let $m < n$ be a positive integer. The VC dimension of the set of hypotheses involving at most $m$ formulas from $\mathcal{T}$ and having at most $k$ levels is bounded by $m (\log_2 n + \log_2 k)$. This can simply be obtained by upper-bounding the number of the different stratifications with at most $k$ levels and $m$ formulas selected from a set of cardinality $n$, by $n^m \cdot k^m$.
\subsection{Heuristic Learning Algorithm}\label{secHeuristicAlgorithm}
In this section, we propose a practical heuristic algorithm for learning a possibilistic logic theory from a set $\mathcal{S}$ of positive and negative examples of default rules. Our method combines greedy structure learning with greedy weight learning. We assume that every default or non-default $\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$ in $\mathcal{S}$ is such that $\neg \alpha$ and $\beta$ correspond to clauses.
The algorithm starts by initializing the ``working'' stratification $\mathcal{T}^*$ to be an empty list. Then it repeats the following revision procedure for a user-defined number of iterations $n$, or until a timeout is reached. First, it generates a set of candidate propositional clauses $C$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item It samples a set of defaults $\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$ from the examples that are misclassified by $\mathcal{T}^*$.
\item For each default $\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$ which has been sampled, it samples a subclause $\neg\alpha'$ of $\neg\alpha$ and a subclause $\beta'$ of $\beta$. If $\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$ is a positive example then $\neg \alpha' \vee \beta'$ is added to $C$; if it is a negative example, then $\neg \alpha' \vee \beta''$ is added instead, where $\beta''$ is obtained from $\beta'$ by negating each of the literals.
\end{itemize}
The algorithm then tries to add each formula in $C$ to an existing level of $\mathcal{T}^*$ or to a newly inserted level. It picks the clause $c$ whose addition leads to the highest accuracy and adds it to $\mathcal{T}^*$. The other clauses from $C$ are discarded. In case of ties, the clause which leads to the stratification with the fewest levels is selected, in accordance with the structural risk minimization principle and our derived VC dimension. If there are multiple such clauses, then it selects the shortest among them. Subsequently, the algorithm tries to greedily minimize the newly added clause $c$, by repeatedly removing literals as long as this does not lead to an increase in the training set error. Next, the algorithm tries to revise $\mathcal{T}^*$ by greedily removing clauses whose deletion does not increase the training set error. Finally, as the last step of each iteration, the weights of all clauses are optimized by greedily reinserting each clause in the theory.
\section{Experiments}
We evaluate our heuristic learning algorithm\footnote{\label{footnote-online}The data, code, and learned models are available from \url{https://github.com/supertweety/}.} in two different applications: learning domain theories from crowdsourced default rules and approximating MAP inference in propositional Markov logic networks. As we are not aware of any existing methods that can learn a consistent logical theory from a set of noisy defaults, there are no baseline methods to which our method can directly be compared. However, if we fix a target literal $l$, we can train standard classifiers to predict for each propositional context $\alpha$ whether the default $\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} l$ holds. This can only be done consistently with ``parallel'' rules, where the literals in the consequent do not appear in antecedents. We will thus compare our method to three traditional classifiers on two crowdsourced datasets of parallel rules: random forests \cite{breiman.rf}, C4.5 decision trees \cite{quinlan.c4.5}, and the rule learner RIPPER \cite{ripper}. Random forests achieve state-of-the-art accuracy\footnote{A recent large-scale empirical evaluation has shown that variants of the random forest algorithm tend to perform best on real-life datasets \cite{JMLR:v15:delgado14a}.} but its models are difficult to interpret. Decision trees are often less accurate but more interpretable than random forests. Finally, rule learners have the most interpretable models, but often at the expense of lower accuracy. In the second experiment, approximating MAP inference, we do not restrict ourselves to parallel rules. In this case, only our method can guarantee that the predicted defaults will be consistent.
\subsection{Methodology}
Our learning algorithm is implemented in Java and uses the SAT4j library \cite{sat4j}. The implementation contains a number of optimizations which make it possible to handle datasets of thousands of default rules, including caching, parallelization, detection of relevant possibilistic subtheories for deciding entailment queries and unit propagation in the possibilistic logic theories.
We use the Weka \cite{weka} implementations for the three baselines.
When using our heuristic learning algorithm, we run it for a maximum time of 10 hours for the crowdsourcing experiments reported in Section \ref{sec:exp-crowd} and for one hour for the experiments reported in Section \ref{sec:exp-map}. For C4.5 and RIPPER, we use the default settings. For random forests, we used the default settings and set the number of trees to 100
\subsection{Learning from Crowdsourced Examples}\label{sec:exp-crowd}
We used CrowdFlower, an online crowdsourcing platform, to collect expert rules about two domains.
In the first experiment, we created 3706 scenarios for a team on offense in American football by varying the field position, down and distance, time left, and score difference. Then we presented six choices for a play call (punt, field goal, run, pass, kneel down, do not know/it depends) and asked the user to select the most appropriate one. All scenarios were presented to 5 annotators.
A manual inspection of a subset of the rules revealed that they are of reasonably high quality. In a second experiment, users were presented with 2388 scenarios based on Texas hold'em poker situations, where users were asked whether in a given situation they would typically fold, call or raise, with a fourth option again being ``do not know/it depends''. Each scenario was again presented to 5 annotators. Given the highly subjective nature of poker strategy, it was not possible to enforce the usual quality control mechanism on CrowdFlower in this case, and the quality of the collected rules was accordingly found to be more variable.
In both cases, the positive examples are the rules obtained via crowdsourcing, while negative examples are created by taking positive examples and randomly selecting a different consequent.
To create training and testing sets, we divided the data based on annotator ID so that all rules labeled by a given annotated appear only in the training set or only in the testing set, to prevent leakage of information. We added a set of hard rules to the possibilistic logic theories to enforce that only one choice should be selected for a game situation. The baseline methods were presented with the same information, in the sense that the problem was presented as a multi-class classification problem, i.e.\ given a game situation, the different algorithms were used to predict the most typical action (with one additional option being that none of the actions is typical). The results are summarized in Table \ref{tab:mrfs}.
In the poker experiment, our approach obtained slightly higher accuracy than random forest and RIPPER but performed slightly worse than C4.5. However, a manual inspection showed that a meaningful theory about poker strategy was learned.
For example, at the lowest level, the possibilistic logic theory contains the rule ``call'', which makes sense given the nature of the presented scenarios. At a higher level, it contains more specific rules such as ``if you have three of a kind then raise''. At the level above, it contains exceptions to these more specific rules such as ``If you have three of a kind, there are three hearts on the board and your opponent raised on the river then call''.
In the American football experiment, our approach obtained lower accuracy than the competing algorithms. The best accuracy was achieved by C4.5. Again, we also manually inspected the learned possibilistic logic theory and found that it captures some general intuitions and known strategy about the game. For example, the most general rule is "pass" which is the most common play type. Another example is that second most general level has several rules that say on fourth down and long you should punt. More specific levels that allow for cases when you should not punt, such as when you are in field goal range.
Despite not achieving the same accuracy as C4.5 in this experiment, it nonetheless seems that our method is useful for building up domain theories by crowdsourcing opinions. The learned domain theories are easy to interpret (e.g., the size of the poker theory, as a sum of rule lengths, is more than 10 times smaller than the number of nodes in the learned tree) and capture relevant strategies for both games. The models obtained by classifiers such as C4.5, on the other hand, are often difficult to interpret. Moreover, traditional classifiers such as C4.5 can only be applied to parallel rules, and will typically lead to inconsistent logical theories in more complex domains. In contrast, our method can cope with arbitrary default rules as input, making it much more broadly applicable for learning domain theories.
\begin{table}
\center
\begin{tabular}{ l | c c c c}
& Poss. & Rand. F. & C4.5 & RIPPER \\ \hline
Poker & 40.5 & 38.6 & \bf 41.1 & 39.9 \\
Football & 68.3 & 72.4 & \bf 74.6 & 73.1 \\ \hline
NLTCS & \bf 78.1 & 69.6 & 70.2 & 67.7 \\
MSNBC & \bf 62.0 & 61.9 & \bf 62.0 & 48.8 \\
Plants & 73.1 & \bf 77.8 & 71.4 & 53.8 \\
DNA & 52.8 & \bf 56.6 & 54.9 & 51.1 \\
\end{tabular}\caption{Test set accuracies.}\label{tab:mrfs}
\end{table}
\subsection{Approximating MAP Inference}\label{sec:exp-map}
Markov logic networks can be seen as weighted logical theories. The weights assigned to formulas are intuitively seen as penalties; they are used to induce a probability distribution over the set of possible world. Here we are interested in maximum a posteriori (MAP) inference. Specifically, we consider the following entailment relation from \cite{Saint-cyr94penaltylogic}:
$(\mathcal{M},\alpha) \vdash_{\textit{MAP}} \beta \quad\text{iff}\quad \forall \omega \in \max(\mathcal{M},\alpha): \omega \models \beta$
where $\mathcal{M}$ is an MLN, $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are propositional formulas and $\max(\mathcal{M},\alpha)$ is the set of most probable models of $\alpha$, w.r.t.\ the probability distribution induced by $\mathcal{M}$. Note that MAP inference only depends on an ordering of possible worlds. It was shown in \cite{mln2posl} that for every propositional MLN $\mathcal{M}$ there exists a possibilistic logic theory $\Theta$ such that $(\mathcal{M},\alpha) \vdash_{\textit{MAP}} \beta$ iff $(\Theta,\alpha) \vdash_{poss} \beta$. Such a translation can be useful in practice, as possibilistic logic theories tend to be much easier to interpret, given that the weights associated with different formulas in an MLN can interact in non-trivial ways. Unfortunately, in general $\Theta$ is exponentially larger than $\mathcal{M}$. Moreover, the translation from \cite{mln2posl} requires an exact MAP solver, whereas most such solvers are approximate.
Therefore, rather than trying to capture MAP inference exactly, here we propose to learn a possibilistic logic theory from a set of examples of valid and invalid MAP entailments $(\mathcal{M},\alpha) \vdash_{\textit{MAP}} \beta$. Since our learning algorithm can handle non-separable data, we can use approximate MAP solvers for generating these examples, which leads to further gains in scalability.
As is common, the evidence $\alpha$ consists of conjunctions of up to $k$ literals, and the conclusion $\beta$ consists of an individual literal. To create examples, we randomly generate a large number of evidence formulas $\alpha$, each time considering a large number of possible $\beta$s. If $\beta$ is MAP-entailed by $\alpha$, we add $\alpha {\,\mid\!\sim\,} \beta$ to the set of positive examples; otherwise we add it to the set of negative examples. Notice that defaults in these experiments are not restricted to be just ``parallel'' rules.
We considered propositional MLNs learned from NLTCS, MSNBC, Plants and DNA data using the method from \cite{lowd}. These are standard datasets, and have 16, 17, 69 and 180 Boolean random variables, respectively. We used the existing train/tune/test division of the data. For each dataset, we generated 1000 training examples and 1000 testing examples of default rules as described above, and considered evidence formulas $\alpha$ of up 5 literals. We learn the possibilistic logic theory on the training examples, and report results on the held-out testing examples. To use the classical learners, we represent the antecedent using two Boolean attributes for each variable in the domain: the first indicates the variable's positive presence in the antecedent while the second indicates its negative presence. We represent the consequent in the same way. The label of an example is positive if it appears in the default theory and negative otherwise. While this allows us to predict whether a default $a {\,\mid\!\sim\,} b$ should be true, the set of defaults predicted by the classical methods will in general not be consistent.
The last four rows of Table \ref{tab:mrfs} show the test set accuracy for each approach on each domain. Overall, the learned possibilistic logic theories have similar performance to the decision tree and random forest models, and outperform RIPPER. This is quite remarkable, as the possibilistic logic theories are much more interpretable (containing approximately 50\% fewer literals than the decision trees),
which usually means that we have to accept a lower accuracy. Moreover, while the other methods can also be used for predicting MAP entailment, only our method results in a consistent logical theory, which could e.g.\ easily be combined with expert knowledge.
\section{Conclusions}
The aim of this paper was to study the problem of reasoning with default rules from a machine learning perspective. We have formally introduced the problem of learning from defaults and have analyzed its theoretical properties. Among others, we have shown that the complexity of the main decision problem is $\Sigma_2^P$ complete, and we have established asymptotically tight bounds on the VC-dimension. At the practical level, we have proposed practical heuristic learning algorithm, which can scale to datasets with thousands of rules. We have presented experimental results that show the application potential of the proposed learning algorithm, considering two different application settings: learning domain theories by crowdsourcing expert opinions and approximating propositional MLNs. We believe that the methods proposed in this paper will open the door to a wider range of applications of default reasoning, where we see defaults as a convenient interface between experts and learned domain models.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work has been supported by a grant from the Leverhulme Trust (RPG-2014-164). Jesse Davis is partially supported by the KU Leuven Research Fund (C22/15/015), and FWO-Vlaanderen (G.0356.12, SBO-150033).
\ifdefined\ARXIVVERSION
|
\section{Introduction}\label{Intro}
One of the principal problems in mathematical finance is to consider a combination of optimal investment during a fixed investment interval $[0,T]$ and optimal terminal wealth at maturity. In particular, starting with an initial wealth $x$, the investor tries to maximize the following cost function
\begin{equation}
J^\alpha(x):={\bf E}_x \left(\int_0^T U_1(c_t)\mathrm{d} t+U_2(X_T^\alpha)\right),
\label{itro}
\end{equation}
where $U_1,U_2$ are two given utility functions, $c_t$ is the rate of consumption and $X_T^\alpha$ is the terminal wealth depending on the control process $\alpha$. Such problems are of prime interest for institutional investors, selling asset funds
to their customers, who are entitled to certain payment during the duration of an
investment contract and expect a high return at maturity. In reality, financial activities must respect to some mandatory regulations mathematically defined by a risk measure \cite{Artzner99}. Note that Value-at-Risk (VaR) and Expected Shortfall (ES) are such measures endorsed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. However, VaR is not a convex risk measure and only the probability to exceed a VaR bound is considered, not the values of the losses. It has ben shown that ES, defined as the conditional expectation of losses
above VaR, can be employed to fix this limitation. The literature for the problem of optimal portfolio under risk constraints is vast and we refer to \cite{Atkinson05,CuocoHuaIssaenko01, BasakShapiro01, Yiu04,EmmerKlupperbergKorn01}
and the references therein for more detailed discussions.
Note that in order to satisfy the Basel committee requirements, investors must control the
level of loss throughout the investment horizon. This problem is studied by Kl\"{u}ppelberg and Pergamenshchikov \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009,kluppelberg2009b} for power and logarithm utility functions in the class of the nonrandom financial strategies with continuous asset dynamics. Chouaf and Pergamenschikov \cite{Chouaf-Perg} study the optimal investment problem with the
uniformly bounded VaR for random admissible financial
strategies.
Recent research in finance has paid attention to empirical evidence of jumps in stock returns \cite{Eraker03,Eraker04}. In fact, by incorporating jumps into the model we can allow to have sudden but infrequent market movements of large magnitude, and thus capture the skewed and fat-tailed features of stock return distributions. It has been shown by many empirical and theoretical studies
that the jump risk has a substantial impact on portfolio choice,
risk management and option pricing \cite{Merton,DuffiePan01}. In particular, optimal portfolios held by an investor facing jump risks may significantly differ from those in the absence of jumps, and ignoring jumps may lead substantial losses \cite{DasUppal04}. Unlike pure-diffusion models with portfolio constraints, the martingale duality approach \cite{KaratzasShreve1998} may not be applied directly to a jump-diffusion model since the incompleteness caused by jumps in a jump-diffusion model may not be removed through the well-known completion techniques.
Let us only mention some among a vast recent literature of the problem of optimal portfolio choice with jumps. \cite{DuffiePan01} studies approximation for computing value at risk and other risk measures for portfolios that may include options and other derivatives with defaultable counterparties or borrowers. \cite {Framstad98,Framstad01} study the problem of optimal portfolio in a one-dimension jump-diffusion context with or without transaction costs. \cite{liu2003dynamic,DasUppal04, Aitsahalia09} solve the portfolio selection problems in jump-diffusion models with constant coefficients and no portfolio constraints where there is only one type of jumps. \cite{Jin13} considers the dynamic portfolio choice problem in a jump-diffusion model with constraints on portfolio weights using a particularly embedding the constrained problem in an appropriate family of unconstrained ones.
%
In this paper, we extend the results in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009} to a jump-diffusion setting. Let us emphasize that even in the absence of risk constraint, problem \eqref{itro} in jump-diffusion models has not been well studied in the literature. In general, it is challenging to obtain the optimal solution in explicit form when investment and consumption are both considered. For the constrained problem, it is impossible to obtain an explicitly equivalent constraint on portfolio from the given VaR/ES constraint, which is imposed on the wealth process, due to the presence of jumps. As a result, the HJB approach may not be easily applied to solve the problem as e.g. in \cite{Yiu04}.
The finding in this present paper is two-fold. First, we show that, under suitable choices for risk preference and for two identical power utility functions $U_1(x)=U_2(x)=x^{\gamma}$, the optimal solution of the unconstrained problem is still optimal for the constrained problem when jumps in the assets are non negative. When $U_i(x)=x^{\gamma_i}$ with $0<\gamma_1\neq\gamma_2<1$, the impact of constraint is dramatic and it is optimal for the investor to consume all. Second, when negative jumps are allowed in the asset prices, we propose a slightly stricter constraint that takes into account the probability of having negative jumps in the horizon. Thus, the paper may give a reasonable choice to the regulator in designing regulatory policies for models with jumps.
Let us shortly explain our main idea. First, from the regulator's point of view, jumps in the asset are not always unexpected. Roughly speaking, when jumps in asset are non negative (e.g. the markets are blooming), the risk of the investor's portfolio is less or equal to the risk in the absence of jumps if both are constructed optimally. The assumption of non negative jumps is positively correlated to the possibility of investing more in the risky asset. It is then reasonable to look for optimal strategies among those satisfying a constraint with the same confidence level imposed on a ''modified'' wealth process which is simply obtained by ignoring jumps in the initial wealth process. Because jumps are non negative, the corresponding admissible strategies form a subset of the initial admissible set. As explicitly shown in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009}, this admissible subset can be deduced from an equivalent constraint which is directly imposed on the strategy. This then allows to employ the HJB approach or the direct method in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009} to get the optimal solution. In such a jump-diffusion setting but with the same modified constraint as used in the pure diffusion case, the regulator now needs to check whether the constraint is fulfilled by the optimal solution of the unconstrained problem in the jump-diffusion model. This can be confirmed under some condition on the risk preference parameter. Intuitively, the regulator should be more conservative if negative jumps probably happen. In that case, a slightly stricter constraint depending on the probability that there are negative in the risky assets during the investment horizon can be applied to ensure that the analysis for the case of non negative jump is still valid.
\vspace{2mm}
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{Model} formulates the market model. We provide in Section \ref{Noconstr} a complete analysis for the unconstrained problem in jump-diffusion settings. The main results of the paper are reported in Section \ref{Constr}. Section \ref{General} considers the general case when the terminal utility and the consumption functions are different. Section \ref{Negative} studies the case where negative jumps are allowed. Auxiliary results are reported in Appendix.
\section{The market model}\label{Model}
Consider a financial market with $d$ risky assets defined in the horizon $[0,T]$ by the system
\begin{align}
\mathrm{d} S^j_t=S^j_\zs{t^{-}} \left(\mu_t^j \mathrm{d} t+\sum_\zs{i}^d\sigma^{ij}_t \mathrm{d} W^j_t+\int_\zs{{\mathbb R}} z \widetilde{J}^j(\mathrm{d} t\times\mathrm{d} z)\right),\quad S^j_0=s^j>0,
\label{eq:Mol.1}
\end{align}
where
$W_t=(W^1_t,\dots,W^d_t)$ is a standard Brownian motion and $\widetilde{J}^j$ is the compensated random Poisson measure generated by the compound Poisson process
$$
\zeta^j_t=\sum_{k=1}^{N^j_t} \xi_k^j,\quad j=1,\dots,d.
$$
The riskless asset is given by $\mathrm{d} S^0_t= r_t S^0_t,\,S^0_0=1,$ where $r_t$ is the riskless interest rate. We assume furthermore that $\zeta_j=(\zeta^1_t,\dots,\zeta^d_j)$ is of independent component vector process and independent of the Brownian motion $W_t$. Let
$$\nu(\mathrm{d} z)\times\mathrm{d} t= (\nu^1(\mathrm{d} z^1),\dots, \nu^d(\mathrm{d} z^d))\times \mathrm{d} t
$$ be the $d$-dimension L\'evy measure of $\zeta_j$ then it is well-known that for any $j\in[1,\dots,d]$, $\nu^j(\mathrm{d} z^j)=\lambda^j F^j(\mathrm{d} z^j)$, where $F^j$ is the common distribution function of the jump sizes $(\xi_k^j)_\zs{k\ge 1}$ and $\lambda^j$ is the intensity of the Poisson process $N^j_t$. To guarantee the positivity of the stock prices, we assume that
$$
\xi_k^j> -1, \quad \mbox{a.s. for any}\quad 1\le k
$$
and ${\bf E}[\xi_1^j]^2<\infty$ for all $1\le j \le d$.
Denote by $\mu_t=(\mu^1_t,\dots,\mu_t^d)$ the vector of stock appreciation and by $\sigma_t=(\sigma^{ij}_t)_\zs{1\le i,j\le d}$ the matrix of the stock volatilities. We suppose throughout the paper that these processes are deterministic, continuous and $\sigma_t$ is non-singular for Lebesgue almost surely $t\ge 0$.
Let $\phi_t=(\phi_t^0,\phi^1_t,\dots,\phi^d_t)$ be the amount of investment into bond and stocks at time $t\ge 0$. The wealth process is then given by
$$
X_t=\phi^0_t S^0_t+\sum_{j=1}^d \phi_t^j S^j_t.
$$
Assume moreover that consumption is possible and defined by the a progressively measurable non-negative process $c_t$ verifying
$\int_0^T c_t\mathrm{d} t<\infty,\quad a.s.$. The strategy $\phi_t$ is called self-financing if the wealth process $X_t$ satisfies the following equation
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} X_t =\sum_{j=0}^d \phi^j_t \mathrm{d} S^j_t-c_t \mathrm{d} t,\quad X_0=x>0.
\label{eq:Mod.2}
\end{equation}
For $1\le j\le d$, denote by
\begin{equation}
\pi^j_t=\frac{\phi^j_t S^j_t}{\sum_{j=0}^d \phi^j_t \mathrm{d} S^j_t}
\label{eq:Mod.3}
\end{equation}
the fraction of the wealth invested into $j$-th asset. The portfolio process $\pi_t=(\pi_t^1,\dots,\pi_t^d)$ is assumed to be \emph{cadlag} and $\int_0^T \left\|\pi\right \|_t<\infty$ almost surely. For convenience, define
\begin{equation}
y_t=(y_t^1,\dots,y_t^d):=\sigma_t' \pi_t \quad \mbox{and}\quad \theta_t=(\theta_t^1,\dots,\theta_t^d):=\sigma_t^{-1}(\mu_t-r_t{\bf 1}).
\label{eq:Mol.4}
\end{equation}
With these notations, we rewrite \eqref{eq:Mod.2} as
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} X_t =X_t(r_t+y'_t\theta_t)\mathrm{d} t-c_t \mathrm{d} t+X_t y_t^{'}\mathrm{d} W_t+X_\zs{t^{-}} \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\pi_t^{'} z \mathrm{d}\widetilde{J}(\mathrm{d} z\times \mathrm{d} t), \quad X_0=x>0,
\label{eq:Mod.5}
\end{equation}
where $\widetilde{J}(\mathrm{d} z\times \mathrm{d} t):=(\widetilde{J}^1(\mathrm{d} z^1\times \mathrm{d} t),\dots, \widetilde{J}^d(\mathrm{d} z^d\times \mathrm{d} t))$.
Suppose that consumption is a proportion of wealth, i.e. $c_t=v_t X_t$, where $v_t$ is a non-negative deterministic process holding $\int_0^T v_t \mathrm{d} t<\infty$. Define $\alpha_t=(y_t,v_tX_t)$ and use the notation $X^\alpha$ to emphasize that the wealth process is defined with some control $\alpha$. Now, \eqref{eq:Mod.5} can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} X_t^\alpha =X_t^\alpha(r_t+y'_t\theta_t-v_t)\mathrm{d} t+X_t^\alpha y_t^{'}\mathrm{d} W_t+X_\zs{t^{-}}^\alpha \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\pi_t^{'} z \widetilde{J}(\mathrm{d} z\times \mathrm{d} t), \quad X_0^\alpha=x>0.
\label{eq:Mod.6}
\end{equation}
Denote by
\begin{equation}
{\cal E}_t(y)=\exp\left\{\int_0^t y'_s\mathrm{d} W_s -\frac{1}{2}\int_0^t\vert y\vert^2_s \mathrm{d} s\right\}
\label{eq:Mol.6-1}
\end{equation}
the stochastic exponential and put
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\theta}_t:=\sigma_t^{-1}(\mu_t-r_t{\bf 1}- {\xi}_{\lambda})\, \quad \mbox{with}\quad {\xi}_{\lambda}=(\lambda^1{\bf E}\xi^1_1, \lambda^2{\bf E}\xi^2_1,\dots,\lambda^d{\bf E}\xi^d_1).
\label{eq:Mol.6-2}
\end{equation}
Then, by It\^o's formula for jump processes, it is straightforward to see that \eqref{eq:Mod.6} admits the following solution
\begin{equation}
X_t^\alpha =xe^{R_t-V_t+(y,\widehat{\theta})_t} {\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi),
\label{eq:Mol.7}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
R_t=\int_0^t r_s\mathrm{d} s,\quad V_t=\int_0^t v_s \mathrm{d} s, \quad (y,\widehat{\theta})_t=\int_0^t y'_s \widehat{\theta}_s \mathrm{d} s
\label{eq:Mol.8}
\end{equation}
and the jump part $P_t^{\pi}(\xi)$ defined as
\begin{equation}
P_t^{\pi}(\xi)=\exp\left\{\sum_{j=1}^d\int_0^t\int_{{\mathbb R}}\ln(1+\pi^j_sz^j) {J}^j(\mathrm{d} z^j\times \mathrm{d} t)\right\}=\prod_{j=1}^d \prod_{k=1}^{N_t^j} (1+\pi^j_\zs{\tau_k^{j{-}}} \xi^j_k),
\label{eq:Mol.9}
\end{equation}
where $(\tau^j_k)_\zs{k\ge1}$ is the sequence of jump times of $N_t^j$, $1\le j\le d.$
Admissible strategies are specified as follows.
\begin{definition}
The process $\alpha=(\alpha_t)_\zs{0\le t\le T}$ is called \emph{admissible} if
\begin{enumerate}
\item $y_t$ and $c_t$ are predictable,
\item $c_t(\omega)\ge 0$, for a.e. $(t,\omega),$
\item for any $1\le j\le d,$ $\pi_t^j(\omega)\in[0,1] $ for a.e. $(t,\omega),$
\item equation \eqref{eq:Mod.6} admits a unique strong solution $X_t^\alpha$ defined as in \eqref{eq:Mol.7}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
Note that the third condition, interpreted as the short selling prohibition, is necessary to make sure that $X_t^\alpha$ is positive. We denote by ${\cal D}$ the class of all admissible control processes. The effect of no short selling has been investigated for two CRRA utility functions in constant coefficient markets is studied in \cite{Jin2013}.
\begin{remark}
In \cite{Jin2013}, the authors study dynamic optimal portfolio choice in a jump-diffusion with investment constraint including no-short selling and no-borrow constraints. The key idea is to construct a set of fictitious markets by adjusting the interest rate and the drift terms of stock prices. The constrained consumption-investment problem in the original market is converted into an unconstrained one in a set of fictitious markets. Then, the optimality for the original market with investment constraints can be obtained by optimally adjusting the interest rate and the stock price drift terms in the fictitious markets. For detailed discussions, see \cite{Jin2013}.
\end{remark}
Assume now that the investor wants to optimize his expected utility of consumption over the time interval $[0,T]$ and his wealth at terminal horizon. In other words, for an initial endowment $x>0$ and a control process $\alpha_t\in {\cal U}$, we consider the cost function of the form
\begin{equation*}
J^\alpha(x):={\bf E}_x \left(\int_0^T U_1(c_t)\mathrm{d} t+U_2(X_T^\alpha)\right),
\label{eq:Mol.10.0}
\end{equation*}
where $U_i, i=1,2$ are utility functions and ${\bf E}_x$ is the expectation operator conditional on $X_0^\alpha=x$. For power utility functions problems, we choose $U_i(u)=u^{\gamma_i},$ for $u\ge 0$, with $0<\gamma_i\le 1, i=1,2$ and the cost function is then given by
\begin{equation}
J^\alpha(x):={\bf E}_x \left(\int_0^T c^{\gamma_1}_t\mathrm{d} t+(X_T^\alpha)^{\gamma_2}\right).
\label{eq:Mol.10}
\end{equation}
Let us now precise the risk constraints considered in this paper.
The VaR defined below is also known as ''Captial at Risk''. Here we adopt the idea in \cite{EmmerKlupperbergKorn01, KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009}.
\begin{definition}[Value at Risk]\label{Def.1}
For an initial endowment $x>0$, a control $\alpha$ and a real number $0<\beta\le 1/2$, we define the \emph{Value at Risk} (VaR) of the wealth process $X_t^\alpha$ as
\begin{equation}
VaR_t(x,\alpha,\beta):=xe^{R_t}-q_\beta(X^\alpha_t),
\label{eq:Mol.11}
\end{equation}
where $q_\beta(X^\alpha_t)$ is the lower $\beta$-quantile of $X^\alpha_t$.
\end{definition}
For definition of lower quantile we refer to Definition \ref{Def.0-1}. It should be stressed that the above definition is consistent with the setting in the well-known paper \cite{BasakShapiro01} with limit loss $L_t=(1-\kappa) xe^{R_t}$, which needs to be checked dynamically at any time $t\in[0,T]$.
Note that $q_\beta<0$ for $0<\beta<1/2$. The level of risk is characterized by $\kappa x e^{R_t}$ for some coefficient $0<\kappa<1$, which represents a liability level for the investor's portfolio. Now, for some $\kappa$, we look for a strategy $\alpha\in{\cal D}$ for which the Value at Risk is uniformly bounded by $\kappa x e^{R_t}$, i.e. we are working under the following dynamical risk constraint
\begin{equation}
\sup_\zs{0\le t\le T} \frac{VaR_t(x,\alpha,\beta)}{\kappa xe^{R_t}}\le 1.
\label{eq:Mol.13}
\end{equation}
Also remark that the risk level $\beta$ and $\kappa$ are determined by the regulator. In some cases, the investor can take $\kappa$ in a given range. If $\kappa$ is close to 0, risk of the portfolio risk is at low level whereas $\kappa$ is near 1, the portfolio has a high risk of loss as in the unconstrained problem. In the latter case, the risk limit may not be active.
Let us now define the second kind of constraint which, unlike the quantile, focuses on the averaged value of loss.
\begin{definition}
For an initial endowment $x>0$, a control $\alpha$ and a real number $0<\beta\le 1/2$, we define the \emph{Expected Shortfall} ({\bf ES}) of the wealth process $X_t^\alpha$ as
\begin{equation}
{\bf ES}_t(x,\alpha,\beta):=xe^{R_t}-{\bf ES}_\beta(X^\alpha_t),
\label{eq:Mol.14}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf ES}_\beta(X^\alpha_t)$ is the classical expected shortfall.
\end{definition}
For the reader's convenience, the classical definition of expected shortfall is given in Definition \ref{Def.2}. Note that the investor's portfolio can be controlled by imposing continuously the following constraint: ${{\bf ES}_t(x,\alpha,\beta)}\le {\kappa xe^{R_t}} $ for all $t\in[0,T]$. Then, the same interpretation can be observed as in the case of VaR constraint. In Section \ref{Constr}, we study the following constrained problems:
\begin{problem}\label{Prob.2} Given $x>0$ and $0<\kappa<1$, find strategy $\alpha^*\in {\cal D}$ which solves
$$
\max_\zs{\alpha\in {\cal D}} J^{\alpha}(x)\quad \mbox{\normalfont{subject to} }\quad \sup_\zs{0\le t\le T} \frac{VaR_t(x,\alpha,\beta)}{\kappa xe^{R_t}}\le 1;
$$
\end{problem}
\begin{problem}\label{Prob.3}Given $x>0$ and $0<\kappa<1$, find strategy $\alpha^*\in {\cal D}$ which solves
$$
\max_\zs{\alpha\in {\cal D}} J^{\alpha}(x)\quad \mbox{\normalfont{subject to} }\quad \sup_\zs{0\le t\le T} \frac{{\bf ES}_t(x,\alpha,\beta)}{\kappa xe^{R_t}}\le 1.
$$
\end{problem}
Let us make here some comments on the above problems. First, the classical martingale method \cite{KaratzasShreve1998} seems to be impossible for such problems with dynamic risk constraint. Note that in pure diffusion models, it is possible to transform the VaR/ES constraint into a so-called portfolio constraint, i.e. constraint on strategies, then martingale duality might be applied by considering a new artificial market as in Cvitanic and Karatzas \cite{cvitanic1992convex,cvitanic1993}. However, this transformation seems highly challenging in the presence of jumps. Another possibility is to solve the problem approximately, i.e. we first approximate the risk constraint by a portfolio constraint then
consider the corresponding approximate HJB. It is likely that such procedure need to be done in a delicate asymptotic analysis. Lastly, it might be possible to employ the so-called weak dynamic programming principle for state constraint suggested by Bouchard and Nutz \cite{bouchard2012weak}, but then we need to look for optimal solution in the sense of viscosity solution.
Below, wishing to get a closed form of the optimal solution, we adapt the direct
method used by Kluppelberg and Pergamenschikov \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009}.
\section{Optimization problem without constraints}\label{Noconstr}
We provide a detailed analysis for the unconstrained problem
\begin{problem}\label{Prob.1} Given $x>0$ and $0<\kappa<1$, find strategy $\alpha^*\in {\cal D}$ which solves
$$
\max_\zs{\alpha\in {\cal D}} J^{\alpha}(x),
$$
where $ J^{\alpha}(x)$ is the cost function defined in \eqref{eq:Mol.10}.
\end{problem}
Note that there have been very few studies in jump settings where both optimal investment and consumption are combined. Although our main aim is to deal with the constrained problem, this section may be seen as another contribution of the paper. First, the indirect value function is given by
\begin{align}
u(t,x)&:={\bf E} \left(\int_t^T c^{\gamma_1}_s\mathrm{d} s+(X_T^\alpha)^{\gamma_2}\big\vert X_t^\alpha=x \right).
\end{align}
For completeness, we begin with the simplest case $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=1$ thought this case has
economically not much sense without a risk constraint. A detailed proof is given in Appendix \ref{App:1}.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th.Noconstr.1}
Consider Problem \ref{Prob.1} with $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=1$. Assume that $\mu^j_t\ge r_t,$ for all $1\le j\le d$ and $t\in[0,T]$. Then,
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}=0$ then any control $\alpha^*_t=(\pi^*_t,0)$ with $\pi^{*j}\in[0,1]$ is an optimal solution and the corresponding optimal value of $J^\alpha(x)$ is given by $J^*(x)=xe^{R_T}$.
\item If $\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}>0$ then the control $\alpha^*_t=(\pi^*_t,0)$ with
\begin{equation}
\pi^*_t=(\mu_t-r_t{\bf 1})\sqrt{T}\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}^{-1}
\label{eq:No.constr.0-0}
\end{equation}
is the optimal solution and the corresponding optimal value of $J^\alpha(x)$ is given by $J^{*}(x)=xe^{R_T+\sqrt{T}\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\subsection{The case $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=\gamma \in(0,1)$}\label{sec:equalgamma}
We now study the unconstrained problem for the case $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=\gamma \in(0,1)$. Let us first compute the value function. By \eqref{eq:Mol.7} and noting that ${\bf E}{\cal E}_t(\gamma y)=1$ one gets
\begin{equation}
{\bf E} (X_t^\alpha)^\gamma=x^\gamma e^{\gamma (R_t-V_t+(y,\widehat{\theta})_t-\frac{1-\gamma}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2)}{\bf E} P_t^\pi(\gamma\xi).
\label{eq:Noconstr.02}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, by Lemma \ref{Le:Levy}
\begin{align}
{\bf E} P_t^\pi(\gamma\xi)&={\bf E} \exp\left\{\int_0^t\int_{{\mathbb R}^{d}} \ln(1+\pi_s z)^\gamma J(\mathrm{d} z\times\mathrm{d} s)\right\}\notag\\
&={\bf E} \exp\left\{\int_0^t\int_{{\mathbb R}^{d}} ((1+\pi_s z)^\gamma-1) \nu(\mathrm{d} z\times\mathrm{d} s)\right\}.
\label{eq:}
\end{align}
Therefore,
\begin{equation}
{\bf E} (X_t^\alpha)^\gamma=x^\gamma\exp\left\{\gamma D_t+\int_0^t\int_{{\mathbb R}^{d}} Q_s^\pi(z) \nu(\mathrm{d} z\times\mathrm{d} s)\right\},
\label{eq:Noconstr.03}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
D_t=R_t-V_t+(y,{\theta})_t-\frac{1-\gamma}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2, \quad Q_t^\pi(z)=(1+\pi_t z)^\gamma-\gamma\pi_t z-{\bf 1}.
\label{eq:}
\end{equation}
Hence, the value function is given by
\begin{equation}
J^\alpha(x)=x^\gamma \left(\int_0^T e^{\gamma D_t+ \int_0^t\int_{{\mathbb R}^{d}} Q_t^\pi(z) \nu(\mathrm{d} z\times\mathrm{d} t)} v^\gamma_t \mathrm{d} t +e^{\gamma D_T+ \int_0^T\int_{{\mathbb R}^{d}} Q_t^\pi(z) \nu(\mathrm{d} z\times\mathrm{d} t)}\right).
\label{eq:}
\end{equation}
From the dynamics of $X_t^\alpha$ given in \eqref{eq:Mod.6}, one gets the HJB equation for the unconstrained problem
\begin{equation}
\partial_t u(t,x)+\sup_\zs{\alpha\in {\cal D}} \left\{ {\cal A} ^\alpha u(t,x)+ x^\gamma v_t^\gamma\right\}=0, \quad u(T,x)=x^\gamma,
\label{eq:HJB}
\end{equation}
where the generator ${\cal A}^\alpha$ is defined by
\begin{align}
{\cal A}^\alpha u(t,x)&=x(r_t+y'_t \widehat{\theta}_t-v_t)\partial_xu(t,x)+\frac{1}{2}x^2 y_t y'_t\partial_{xx}^2u(t,x)\notag\\
&+\sum_\zs{j=1}^d \int_{\mathbb R} (u(t,x+x\pi^j_tz)-u(t,x)-x\pi^j_tz\partial_xu(t,x))\nu^j(\mathrm{d} z),
\label{eq:Oper}
\end{align}
where $y'_t \widehat{\theta}_t=\sum_\zs{j=1}^d y^j_t \widehat{\theta}^j_t$ is the scalar product.
The optimal necessary condition w.r.t $v$ is given by
$$
-xu_x+x^\gamma v^{\gamma-1}=0 \Longleftrightarrow c=\left(\frac{u_x}{\gamma}\right)^{\frac{1}{\gamma-1}}.
$$
We try to find a solution of the form $u(t,x)=\rho x^\gamma$ (i.e. $c=x\rho^{\frac{1}{\gamma-1}}$), where $\rho$ is a $t$-function to be determined. We have
$$
u_x=\gamma\rho x^{\gamma-1},\quad u_\zs{xx}=\gamma (\gamma-1)\rho x^{\gamma-2}.
$$
Substituting these formulas into \eqref{eq:HJB} we obtain
\begin{align}
\rho\sup_\zs{\alpha\in {\cal D}} \left\{\gamma (r_t+y'_t \widehat{\theta}_t)+\frac{1}{2} y_t^2 \gamma (\gamma-1)
+\sum_\zs{j=1}^d {\bf K}^j(\pi^j_t) \right\}+\rho'+ (1-\gamma)\rho^{\frac{\gamma}{\gamma-1}}=0,
\label{eq:HJB4-0}
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
{\bf K}^j(\pi):=\int_{\mathbb R} [(1+\pi z)^\gamma-1-\gamma\pi z]\nu^j(\mathrm{d} z).
\label{eq:K}
\end{equation}
Let $\sigma_t^{-1}=( \epsilon_{ij}(t))_\zs{d\times d}$ and $\partial \pi^j/ \partial {y_i}= \epsilon_{ij}(t)$ and $q=1/(1-\gamma)$. Now, by the necessary optimal condition in $y$ one has
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\theta}_t^i +(\gamma-1)y_t^i+\sum_\zs{j=1}^d \epsilon_{ij}(t) Q^{j}(\pi^j_t)=0,\quad y^i\ge 0\;, i=\overline{1,d},
\label{eq:HJB3}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
Q^{j}(\pi)=\int_{\mathbb R} [(1+\pi z)^{\gamma-1}-1]z\nu^j(\mathrm{d} z).
\label{eq:HJB4}
\end{equation}
The next step is to solve the system \eqref{eq:HJB3}. Observe first that the functions
${\bf K}^j(\pi), j=1,\dots,d$ are concave on $[0,1]$, hence supremum in \eqref{eq:HJB4-0} is attainable and unique. For the moment, let us assume that $y^*\ge 0$ is a solution of system \eqref{eq:HJB3} and let $h^*$ be the corresponding supremum in \eqref{eq:HJB4-0}. We then get the following Bernoulli equation
\begin{equation}
\rho'(t)+ h^*(t)\rho(t)=(\gamma-1)\rho^{\frac{\gamma}{\gamma-1}}(t)\quad \mbox{with terminal condition}\quad \rho(T)=1.
\label{eq:Bernoulli-1}
\end{equation}
The solution of \eqref{eq:Bernoulli-1} is given by
\begin{equation}
\rho(t)=\left[\frac{g^q(T)+\int_t^T g^q(s)\mathrm{d} s}{g^q(t)}\right]^{1/q}, \quad \text{where}\quad g(t)=e^{\int_0^t h^*(s) \mathrm{d} s }.
\label{eq:rho}
\end{equation}
It follows that the optimal rule is given by $y^*_t$ (which is the solution of \eqref{eq:HJB3}) and
\begin{equation}
v^*_t=\frac{g^q(t)}{g^q(T)+\int_t^T g^q(s)\mathrm{d} s}
\label{eq:HJB5}
\end{equation}
and the optimal value of value function can be determined. Notice that when there is no jumps in the asset prices ($\nu^j=0, \,i=\overline{1,d}$), we obtain
$h^*=\exp\{\gamma R_t+\frac{q-1}{2}\Vert \theta\Vert_t^2\}$ and the optimal value of $J$ is given by
$$J^*(x)=\max_\zs{\alpha\in {\cal D}} J(x,\alpha)=J(x,\alpha^*)=x^\gamma \left(\Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T}+g^q(T)\right)^{1/q},$$
where $\Vert.\Vert_\zs{q,T}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
\Vert f\Vert_\zs{q,T}=\left(\int_0^T\vert f\vert^q\mathrm{d} t\right)^{1/q},
\label{eq:HJB.5-1}
\end{equation}
which means that the result in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009} is recovered.
We summarize the above analysis in the following statement.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th.Noconstr.2}
Assume that $y^*$ is a solution of system \eqref{eq:HJB3} and let $h^*$ be the corresponding supremum in \eqref{eq:HJB4-0}. Then, the optimal rule for the problem $
\max_\zs{\alpha\in {\cal D}} J^{\alpha}(x)
$ is given by $\alpha^*=(y^*,v^*)$ with $v^*$ defined by \eqref{eq:HJB5}. The wealth process is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} X_t^* =X_t^*(r_t+y_t^*\theta_t)\mathrm{d} t-c_t^* \mathrm{d} t+X_t^* y_t^*\mathrm{d} W_t+X_\zs{t^{-}}^* \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\pi_t^* z \mathrm{d}\widetilde{J}(\mathrm{d} z\times \mathrm{d} t), \quad X_0^*=x>0.
\label{eq:HJB.7}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } It it not difficult to check that all necessary conditions for the usual verification theorem (see e.g. \cite{Touzi2004, OksendalSulem07}) are satisfied. \mbox{\ $\qed$}
\begin{remark}
It is instructive to verify the optimality by using the martingale optimality principle: the value function is a supermartingale for any admissible strategy but it becomes a martingale under the optimal strategy. This can be checked by applying It\^o's formula for the process $\rho(t) (X_t^*)^{\gamma}$, where
$\rho(t)$ is given by \eqref{eq:rho}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
The case $\gamma_1\neq\gamma_2$ is more challenging to show since the function $\rho$ in \eqref{eq:rho} should be chosen as an appropriate combination of two functions $g^{q_i}$, $i=1,2$. This could be done using a similar argument of Theorem 2 in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009}. However, it is also possible to see that the corresponding optimal solution does not satisfy the VaR/ES risk constraint. We will show in the next section that the presence of risk constraint has a strong impact on the investor' portfolio so that it is optimal for him to consume all. For that reason, we do not provide a detailed result for the unconstrained in this case and refer to \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009} for a detailed analysis in the pure diffusion case.
\end{remark}
\subsection{One-dimension case}
We provide more analysis about the optimal rule for the case of one dimension.
\begin{theorem}
Assume that for almost surely $t\in[0,1]$,
$$
\mu_t-r_t- {\xi}_{\lambda}>0, \quad \mu_t-r_t- {\xi}_{\lambda} +(\gamma-1)\sigma^2_t + \int_{\mathbb R} [(1+z)^{\gamma-1}-1]z\nu(\mathrm{d} z)<0.
$$
Then there exists a solution $\pi^*\in [0,1]$ to \eqref{eq:One1}. Let $G^*=G(\pi^*)$ be the optimal value of the function $G$ in the HJB equation \eqref{eq:One0} and consider $v^*$ defined by \eqref{eq:HJB5} in which we have replaced $h^*$ with $G^*$. Then, $(\pi^*,v^*)$ is an optimal solution to the problem $
\max_\zs{\alpha\in {\cal D}} J^{\alpha}(x)$ and the wealth process is given as the unique solution of
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} X_t^* =X_t^*(r_t+y_t^*\theta_t)\mathrm{d} t-c_t^* \mathrm{d} t+X_t^* y_t^*\mathrm{d} W_t+X_\zs{t^{-}}^* \int_{{\mathbb R}}\pi_t^* z \mathrm{d}\widetilde{J}(\mathrm{d} z\times \mathrm{d} t), \quad X_0^*=x>0.
\label{eq:HJB.7}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
{\noindent \bf Proof. }
As above, we get corresponding HJB equation
\begin{equation}
\rho'+ (1-\gamma)\rho^{\frac{\gamma}{\gamma-1}}+\rho \sup_\zs{\pi_t\in [0,1]} G(t,\pi_t)=0,
\label{eq:One0}
\end{equation}
where
$$
G(t,\pi):=\gamma r_t+\gamma(\mu_t-r_t- {\xi}_{\lambda})\pi_t +\frac{1}{2}\sigma_t^2 \pi^2_t \gamma (\gamma-1)+{\bf K}(\pi_t),
$$
where ${\bf K}(\pi_t)$ is defined in \eqref{eq:K}.
The necessary condition for optimality is given by $ \eta(\pi_t)=0$, where
\begin{equation}
\eta(\pi)=\partial_\pi G(t,\pi):=\mu_t-r_t- {\xi}_{\lambda} +(\gamma-1)\sigma^2_t \pi_t+Q(\pi_t),
\label{eq:One1}
\end{equation}
where $Q(\pi_t)$ defined by \eqref{eq:HJB4}.
Note that $ \eta$ is continuous on $[0,1]$ with $ \eta(0)=\mu_t-r_t- {\xi}_{\lambda}>0$ and
$$
\eta(1)=\mu_t-r_t- {\xi}_{\lambda} +(\gamma-1)\sigma^2_t + \int_{\mathbb R} [(1+z)^{\gamma-1}-1]z\nu(\mathrm{d} z)<0.
$$
Furthermore,
$$
\eta'(\pi)=(\gamma-1)[\sigma^2_t+ \int_{\mathbb R} [(1+\pi z)^{\gamma-2}z^2\nu(\mathrm{d} z)]<0
$$
since $\pi\in[0,1]$ and the support of $\nu$ is $(-1,\infty)$. So, by the theorem of mean values, for any $t\in [0,T]$, there exists $\pi_t^*$ such that $\partial_\pi G(t,\pi_t^*)=0$. The conclusion then follows the usual verification step. \mbox{\ $\qed$}
\begin{remark}
For infinite horizon cases, extra conditions need to be imposed to get the uniform integrability. For general cadl\`ag coefficients, we can formulate a specific verification theorem as in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009}.
\end{remark}
We now compare the optimal rule obtained above with the no-jump optimal strategy $(\bar{\pi}^*, \bar{v}^*)$ of the classical Merton problem.
\begin{lemma}[comparision]\label{Le:compare}
The presence of jumps reduces the quantity asset and consume more, i.e
$$
{v}^*_t\ge \bar{v}^*_t \quad \mbox{and}\quad {\pi}^*_t\le \bar{\pi}^*_t.
$$
\end{lemma}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } A proof is given in Appendix \ref{App:com}.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
\begin{figure}[H]%
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth,height=7cm]{Jump_Merton_line.png}%
\caption{Optimal policy for the jump-diffusion and the pure diffusion markets}%
\label{}%
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{The optimization problems with risk constraint}\label{Constr}
In this section, we study the Problem \ref{Prob.2} and Problem \ref{Prob.3}. We assume in this section that the following condition holds:
\vspace{2mm}
\noindent{\bf Assumption} $({\bf J})$:{\em The jump sizes of stock prices are non-negative.}
\vspace{2mm}
\noindent As discussed in Section \ref{Intro}, when jumps in the assets are non negative (e.g. the markets are blooming), the risk of the investor's portfolio is smaller or at the same level than in the absence of jumps. Intuitively, positive jumps encourage the agent to invest more in the risky asset. It is then reasonable to look for the optimal strategy satisfying the constraint with the same confidence level but with ignored jumps. Because jumps are non negative, these strategies form a subset of the initial admissible set. As explicitly shown in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009}, this admissible subset can be deduced from an equivalent constraint which is directly imposed on the strategy. This then allows to employ the HJB approach or the direct method in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009} to get the optimal solution.
%
\subsection{The case $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=1$}
To present the results for the Problem \ref{Prob.2} with VaR constraint, we define $K_t=(\theta,\xi_{\lambda})_t \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}^{-1}$ and
\begin{align}\label{eq.Constr.1}
{\rho}^*_\zs{VaR}:=\sqrt{(\Vert {\theta}\Vert_T-\vert q_\beta\vert-K_T)^2-2\ln(1-\kappa)}+\Vert {\theta}\Vert_T-K_T-\vert q_\beta\vert.
\end{align}
\begin{theorem}\label{Th.VaR.1}
Consider Problem \ref{Prob.2} with $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=1$ under Assumption $({\bf J})$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}=0$ then any control $\alpha^*_t=(\pi^*_t,0)$ with positive component vector $\pi^*_t$ satisfying
$$
\Vert y^*\Vert_T\le \min\left(\sqrt{T}\Vert \sigma\Vert_T, \sqrt{(\vert q_\beta\vert+\Vert \widetilde {\xi}_{\sigma}\Vert_T)^2-2\ln(1-\kappa)}-\vert q_\beta\vert-\Vert \widetilde {\xi}_{\sigma}\Vert_T\right),
$$ with $ \widetilde {\xi}_{\sigma}=\xi_{\lambda}\sigma^{-1}$, is an optimal solution and the corresponding optimal value of $J^\alpha(x)$ is given by $J^{\alpha^*}(x)=xe^{R_T}$.
\item Suppose that $\widehat{\theta}_t$ has non-negative components, i.e.
$$
\widehat{\theta}^j\ge 0\quad \mbox{for all} \quad 1\le j\le d
$$
and $ \Vert{\xi}_{\lambda}\Vert$ defined in \eqref{eq:Mol.6-2} is strictly positive. Then, for
\begin{equation}
\max(0, 1-e^{q_\beta^2/2-\vert q_\beta\vert \Vert \theta\Vert_T })<\kappa<1,
\label{eq:Constr.2}
\end{equation}
the control $(y^*_t,v^*_t)$ defined by
\begin{equation}
y^*_t={\theta}_t \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}^{-1}\overline{\rho}^*_\zs{VaR},\quad v^*_t=0
\label{eq:Constr.3}
\end{equation}
is the optimal and $J^{\alpha^*}(x)=xe^{R_T+\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}\overline{\rho}^*_\zs{VaR}}$ is the corresponding optimal value.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } From \eqref{eq:Noconstr.1} one gets an upper bound for the value function
$$
J^\alpha(x)\le xe^{R_T-V_T+(y,{\theta})_T}\le xe^{R_T+(y,{\theta})_T}\le xe^{R_T+\Vert y\Vert_T\Vert{\theta}\Vert_T}.
$$
We show that this upper bound can be attained by choosing the suitable optimal strategy.
\noindent {\bf Step 1}: By the linear property of lower quantile one easily observes that the constraint in Problem \ref{Prob.2} is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs{0\le t\le T} q_{\beta}({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi)) \ge e^{V_t-(y,\widehat{\theta})_t}(1-\kappa).
\label{eq:Constr.4}
\end{equation}
Under assumption $({\bf J})$, the process $P_t^\pi(\xi)$ is bigger than 1 a.s. hence, by Lemma \ref{Le.Mol.2} $q_{\beta}({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi))\ge q_{\beta}({\cal E}_t(y))$. Therefore, if $\alpha^*$ is an optimal solution to Problem \ref{Prob.2} under the weaker constraint
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs{0\le t\le T} q_{\beta}({\cal E}_t(y)) \ge e^{V_t-(y,\widehat{\theta})_t}(1-\kappa),
\label{eq:Constr.5}
\end{equation}
then it is also an optimal solution to Problem \ref{Prob.2} with initial constraint \eqref{eq:Constr.4}. We now solve Problem \ref{Prob.2} with constraint \eqref{eq:Constr.5}, which is now can be transformed into an more explicit form
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs{0\le t\le T} \left\{-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2+q_{\beta}\Vert y\Vert_t-V_t+(y,\widehat{\theta})_t\right\}\ge \ln(1-\kappa).
\label{eq:Constr.6}
\end{equation}
This is exactly the constraint in the diffusion case considered in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009,kluppelberg2009b}.
\noindent{\bf Step 2}: Suppose first that $\Vert \theta\Vert_T=0$ hence $\theta_t=0$ for all $0\le t\le T$. Now, \eqref{eq:Constr.6} becomes
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs{0\le t\le T} \left\{-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2+q_{\beta}\Vert y\Vert_t-V_t-(y,\xi_{\lambda})_t\right\}\ge \ln(1-\kappa),
\label{eq:Constr.7}
\end{equation}
which is satisfied if
$$
-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_T^2+q_{\beta}\Vert y\Vert_T-V_T-\Vert y\Vert_T \Vert\xi_{\lambda}\Vert_T\ge \ln(1-\kappa)
$$
since $q_\beta<0$. The latter inequation has solution $\Vert y\Vert_T \in[0, \rho_0]$, where
\begin{equation}
\rho_0=\sqrt{(\vert q_{\beta}\vert+\Vert\xi_{\lambda}\Vert_T)^2-2\ln(1-\kappa)}-\vert q_{\beta}\vert-\Vert\xi_{\lambda}\Vert_T.
\label{eq:Constr.8}
\end{equation}
Thus, for $\alpha^*=(\pi^*_t,0)$, with any non-negative component vector $\pi^*_t=y_t^*\sigma^{-1}_t$ and $y^*_t$ satisfying $\Vert y\Vert_\zs{T}\le \min({\sqrt{T}\Vert \sigma\Vert_T, \rho_0})$, the value function $J^\alpha(x)$ attains its maximal value $J^*(x)=xe^{R_T}$ and the first case is proved.
\vspace{1mm}
\noindent{\bf Step 3}: Now, suppose that
$\widehat{\theta}_t$ has non-negative components and ${\xi}_{\lambda}$ defined in \eqref{eq:Mol.6-2} is strictly positive. Then, $\Vert\theta_t\Vert_t>0$ for all $0<t\le T$. One will try with strategy $(y^*_t=\theta_t \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}^{-1} \rho$ , $v^*_t=0)$ with possible maximal values of $\rho>0$ such that \eqref{eq:Constr.6} is verified. Substituting this particular candidate into this constraint, we observe that the constraint \eqref{eq:Constr.6} is justified if the following holds
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs{0\le t\le T} \left\{-\frac{1}{2}u_t^2\rho^2+q_{\beta}u_t\rho+ u_t^2 \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}\rho-\rho K_t\right\}\rho\ge \ln(1-\kappa),
\label{eq:Constr.9}
\end{equation}
where $u_t=\Vert \theta\Vert_t \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}^{-1}\in[0,1]$ and $K_t=(\theta,\xi_{\lambda})_t \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}^{-1}\ge0$. By replacing $K_t$ by $K_\zs{T}$ one gets a stronger requirement
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs{0\le t\le T} \left\{-\frac{1}{2}u_t^2\rho^2+q_{\beta}u_t\rho+ u_t^2 \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}\rho-K_\zs{T}\rho\right\}\ge \ln(1-\kappa).
\label{eq:Constr.10}
\end{equation}
Let
$$
g(u,\rho)=-\frac{1}{2}u^2\rho^2+q_{\beta}u\rho+ u^2 \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}\rho-\rho K_T .
$$
Then, $g(0,\rho)=0$ and $g(1, \rho)=-\frac{1}{2}\rho^2+q_{\beta}\rho+ \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}\rho-\rho K_T$.
Note that $g$ is a strictly decreasing function in $u$ in $[0,1]$. To see this, note that
$$
\partial_u g=\rho(-u\rho+q_\beta+2 \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T})<0 \quad \mbox{for all}\quad u\in[0,1]
$$
if $ q_\beta+2\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}<0$, but this is implied by \eqref{eq:Constr.2}.
So, if one chooses $\rho$ such that
\begin{equation}
g(1, \rho)=-\frac{1}{2}\rho^2+q_{\beta}\rho+ \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}\rho-\rho K_T =\ln(1-\kappa)
\label{eq:Constr.11}
\end{equation}
then \eqref{eq:Constr.10} is fulfilled.
Now, equation \eqref{eq:Constr.11} admits a unique positive solution ${\rho}^*_\zs{VaR}$ given by \eqref{eq.Constr.1}. Finally, taking into account the condition $\Vert y\Vert_T\le \sqrt{T}\Vert \sigma\Vert_\zs{T}$ one should choose $\rho=\bar{\rho}^*_\zs{VaR}$ and the proof is completed.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
\vspace{2mm}
Let us now consider Problem \ref{Prob.3} with ES constraint. First, it is useful to rewrite the constraint in the following way
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs {0\le t\le T}e^{-V_t+(y, \widehat{\theta})_t} {\bf ES}_\beta({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi)) \ge (1-\kappa).
\label{eq:ES.1}
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{Le.Mol.2}, one sees that \eqref{eq:ES.1} is deduced from Assumption $({\bf J})$ and the modified constraint which is independent of jumps
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs {0\le t\le T} e^{-V_t+(y, \widehat{\theta})_t} {\bf ES}_\beta({\cal E}_t(y)) \ge (1-\kappa).
\label{eq:ES.2}
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{Le.ES.1} one gets
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs {0\le t\le T}L_t^{v,y}\ge \ln(1-\kappa) \quad \mbox{and}\quad L_t^{v,y}:=-V_t+(y, \widehat{\theta})_t+F_\beta(\Vert y\Vert_t+\vert q_\beta\vert),
\label{eq:ES.3}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
F_\beta(u)=\ln\left(\frac{1}{\beta}\overline{\Phi}(u)\right)\quad \mbox{and}\quad \overline{\Phi}(u)=1-\Phi(u).
\label{eq:ES.4}
\end{equation}
To formulate the optimal results, we denote by ${\rho}^*_\zs{E}$ the solution of the following equation
\begin{equation}
\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T} {\rho}+F_\beta(\rho+\vert q_\beta\vert)-\rho K_T=\ln(1-\kappa).
\label{eq:ES.8}
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem} \label{Th.ES.1}
Consider Problem \ref{Prob.3} with $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=1$ under assumption $({\bf J})$. The result in Theorem \ref{Th.VaR.1} still holds if $\rho^*_\zs{VaR}$ is replaced by $\rho^*_\zs{ES}$.
\end{theorem}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } Also trying with the strategy $(v^*=0, y^*=\theta_t \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}^{-1} \rho)$ we need to choose the possible maximal value of $\rho$ such that the requirement \eqref{eq:ES.3} is checked. By substituting this particular candidate into $L$ one gets
$$
\inf_\zs {0\le t\le T}L_t^*\ge \psi(u_t,\rho),
$$
where $u_t=\Vert\theta\Vert_t \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}^{-1}\in[0,1]$ and
\begin{equation}
\psi(u,\rho):=u^2\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}\rho+F_\beta(u\rho+\vert q_\beta\vert)-\rho K_T.
\label{eq:ES.6}
\end{equation}
One will choose $\rho$ such that $\inf_{u\in[0,1],\rho\ge 0} \psi(u,\rho) \ge \ln(1-\kappa)$.
Clearly, $\psi(0,\rho)=0$ and $\psi(1,\rho)=\widehat{\psi}(\rho)$, where
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\psi}(\rho)=\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T} \rho+F_\beta(\rho+\vert q_\beta\vert)-\rho K_T.
\label{eq:ES.7}
\end{equation}
Our aim is to determine a sufficient condition for $\rho$ such that $\widehat{\psi}(\rho)$ is the minimum of $\psi(u,\rho)$ on $[0,1]$ and this minimum is equal to $\ln(1-\kappa)$. In other words, one choose $\rho=\rho^*_E$, the solution of equation \eqref{eq:ES.8}.
In order to guarantee that this is in fact the minimum of $\psi(u,\rho)$ on $[0,1]$ one needs to check the sign of the first derivative in $u$. One has,
$$\partial_u\psi(u,\rho)=2u\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T} \rho-\rho\varphi(u\rho+\vert q_\beta\vert)\overline{\Phi}^{-1}(u\rho+\vert q_\beta\vert).
$$
Hence, $\widehat{\psi}(\rho)$ is the minimum of $\psi(u,\rho)$ on $[0,1]$ if $\partial_u\psi(u,\rho)<0$ for all $u\in[0,1]$. Using the well-known estimate for the Gaussian integral
\begin{equation}
(z^{-1}-z^{-3})\varphi(z)< \overline{\Phi}(z)< z^{-1}\varphi(z),\quad z>0
\label{eq:ES.9}
\end{equation}
one gets
$$
\partial_u\psi(u,\rho)<2u\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T} \rho-\rho(u\rho+\vert q_\beta\vert)\le \rho(2\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T} c-\vert q_\beta\vert)\le 0,
$$
for all $u\in[0,1]$ if $\vert q_\beta\vert\ge 2\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}$.
Let us verify that equation $\eqref{eq:ES.8}$ has a unique positive solution. To this end, remark that $\widehat{\psi}(0)=0$ and $\widehat{\psi}(\rho)$ is strictly decreasing if $\vert q_\beta\vert\ge \Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}-K_T$. On the other hand, \eqref{eq:ES.9} yields that
$$
\lim_\zs{\rho\to\infty}\widehat{\psi}(\rho)=-\infty.
$$
In summery one should take $\rho=\rho^*_E$ defined by equation \eqref{eq:ES.8}. Taking into account the requirement $\Vert y^*\Vert_T\le \sqrt{T}\Vert \sigma\Vert_T$ one gets the same optimal strategy as in Theorem \ref{Th.VaR.1} where $\rho^*_{VaR}$ is replaced by $\rho^*_E$.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
\subsection{The case $0<\gamma_1=\gamma_2=\gamma<1$}
As in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009}, we show below that under some mild condition on the model parameters the unconstrained solution in Theorem \ref{Th.Noconstr.2} is still optimal.
Consider first the VaR constraint with non negative jumps. By \eqref{eq:HJB3} one has
$$
y_t^{*i}=q\widehat{\theta}_t^i +q M^i_t,
\quad i=\overline{1,d},
$$
where
\begin{equation}
M_t^i:=\sum_\zs{j=1}^d \epsilon_{ij}(t)\int_0^\infty [(1+\pi^{*j}_t z)^{\gamma-1}-1]z\nu^j(\mathrm{d} z).
\label{eq:M}
\end{equation}
Taking into account the above integrals are non positive (since $\gamma<1$), one gets
$y_t^{*i}\le q\widehat{\theta}_t^i$ for all $i=\overline{1,d}$. This implies that
$\Vert y^*\Vert_t^2\le q^2\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_t^2$. By Lemma \ref{Le:basic},
$$
-V_T^*=\frac{g^q(T)}{\Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T}+g^q(T)}:=\ln\chi.
$$
Like in the pure diffusion case, the optimal solutions of the constrained and unconstrained problems coincide.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th.Constr.4}
Assume that jumps in assets are non negative and $1-\chi e^{l*(\gamma)}\le \kappa<1,$ where
\begin{equation}
l^*(\gamma):=-q^2 \Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T^2+q_{\beta} q \Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T.
\label{eq:l}
\end{equation}
Then, under the assumption of Theorem \ref{Th.Noconstr.2} the optimal solution $(y^*,v^*)$ without constraint is also an optimal solution to the corresponding problem with VaR constraint.
\end{theorem}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } We need to check the constraint \eqref{eq:Constr.6} for the optimal solution $(y^*_t,v^*)$ of the problem without constraint. For this aim, it suffices to verify that
$$
-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_T^2+q_{\beta}\Vert y\Vert_T+\ln \chi\ge \ln(1-\kappa),
$$
but this is an direct consequence of relation $\Vert y^*\Vert_t^2\le q^2\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_t^2$ and \eqref{eq:l}. \mbox{\ $\qed$}
Let us consider the problem with ES constraint. To formulate the result, we introduce
\begin{equation}
\widehat{M}_t^\theta:=(\widehat{\theta}, M)_t\quad \mbox{and}\quad M = (M^1_t,\cdots,M^d_t),
\label{eq:}
\end{equation}
where $M^i$ is defined by \eqref{eq:M}. Observe that $\widehat{M}^\theta_t\le 0, \, \forall t\in[0,1]$.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th.Constr.5}
Assume that jumps in assets are non negative, $\vert q_\beta\vert\ge 2\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T$ and the following condition holds
\begin{equation}
1-\chi \exp\{q\Vert \theta\Vert_\zs{T}^2+F_\beta(q\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T+\vert q_\beta\vert)+\widehat{M}_T^\theta\}\le \kappa<1.
\label{eq:M}
\end{equation}
Then, under the assumption of Theorem \ref{Th.Noconstr.2} the optimal solution $(y^*,v^*)$ without constraint is also optimal for the corresponding problem with ES constraint.
\end{theorem}
{\noindent \bf Proof. }
We need to check the risk constraint \eqref{eq:ES.3} for strategy $(y^*,v^*)$ defined by system \eqref{eq:HJB3} and \eqref{eq:HJB5}, i.e.$$
-V_t^*+(y^*, \widehat{\theta})_t+F_\beta(\Vert y^*\Vert_t+\vert q_\beta\vert) \ge \ln(1-\kappa), \forall t\in[0,1].
$$
Taking into account that $(y, \widehat{\theta})_t=\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_t+\widehat{M}^\theta_t$, $\Vert y^*\Vert_t \le q\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_t$ and $F$ is decreasing, we only need to verify that
\begin{equation}
H(\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_t^2)\ge \ln(1-\kappa)\quad \mbox{for all}\quad t\in [0,1],
\label{eq:H1}
\end{equation}
where
$$
H(u):=qu^2+F_\beta(qu+\vert q_\beta\vert)+\widehat{M}^\theta_T+\ln\chi.
$$
Using \eqref{eq:ES.9} one observes that
$$
H'(u)=2qu-q\frac{\varphi(qu+\vert q_\beta\vert)}{\bar{\Phi}(q\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_t+\vert q_\beta\vert)}\le 2qu-q(qu+\vert q_\beta\vert)\le 0 \quad \forall u\ge 0
$$
since $\vert q_\beta\vert\ge 2\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T$ by assumption.
Therefore, $H$ is decreasing in $[0,\infty)$ and \eqref{eq:H1} is verified if $H(\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T)\ge \ln(1-\kappa)$, which can be easily deduced from \eqref{eq:M}.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
\section{The case $0<\gamma_1\neq \gamma_2<1$}\label{General}
We consider the general case where the consumption and bequest functions are different, i.e. $0<\gamma_1\neq \gamma_2<1$. This case is challenging even in pure diffusion models \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009} because the optimal solution without risk constraint does not satisfy the risk constraint. As a matter of fact, the constraint now has a strong impact on the optimal problem. In particular, it was shown in \cite {KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009} that it is optimal to consume all (at the rate $v^*_t$ which is explicitly determined).
Intuitively, the same result is expected for our present model with jumps. In this section we show that this result is still valid in the presence of jumps by adapting the method used in \cite {KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009}.
We first find an upper bound for the cost function and then try to point out an appropriate control at which the cost function attains that upper bound. First, recall that the cost function is given by
\begin{equation}
J^\alpha(x):=x^\gamma_1 \int_0^T (v_t e^{-V_t})^{\gamma_1} e^{\gamma_1 R_t} f_1(t,y) \mathrm{d} t+x_2^{\gamma_2}e^{-\gamma_2V_T}e^{\gamma_2 R_T} f_2(T,y),
\label{eq:Diff.1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
f_i(t,y):=\exp\left\{\gamma_i (y,\widehat{\theta})_t-\frac{\gamma_i(1-\gamma_i)}{2}\Vert y \Vert _t^2+\sum_{j=1}^d\int_0^t\int_{{\mathbb R}}((1+\pi_t^j z)^{\gamma_i}-\gamma_i\pi_t^j z-{\bf 1})\nu^j(\mathrm{d} z)\mathrm{d} t\right\}.
\end{equation*}
\subsection{VaR constraint}
One gets from the risk constraint \eqref{eq:Constr.6} that
$$
-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_T^2+q_{\beta}\Vert y\Vert_T-V_T+\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T \Vert y\Vert_T \ge \ln(1-\kappa).
$$
Put $\eta=1-e^{-V_T}$. The above inequality is verified if
\begin{equation}
\Vert y\Vert_T\le \sqrt{(\vert q_{\beta}\vert-\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T)^2 -2\ln(1-\kappa)+2\ln(1-\eta)}-\vert q_{\beta}\vert+\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T:=\rho(\eta),
\label{eq:Diff.2.1}
\end{equation}
for $0\le \eta\le \kappa$. Now, by Holder's inequality and the equality $\int_0^T (v_t e^{-V_t})\mathrm{d} t=1-e^{-V_T}$, one gets
\begin{equation}
J^\alpha(x)\le [x^\gamma_1 \eta^{\gamma_1} \Vert\widehat{g}\Vert_\zs{q_1,T}^{q_1}+x_2^{\gamma_2}(1-\eta)^{\gamma_2}\widehat{g}_2(T)] \sup_\zs{\Vert y\Vert_T\le \rho(\eta)}\sup_\zs{0\le t\le T} \max(f_1(t,y),f_2(t,y)),
\label{eq:Diff.2}
\end{equation}
where, as in \eqref{eq:HJB.5-1}
$$
\widehat{g}_i(t)=e^{\gamma_i R_t}\quad \mbox{and}\quad \Vert\widehat{g}\Vert_\zs{q,T}^{q}:=\int_0^{T}\vert\widehat{g}(t)\vert^q \mathrm{d} t.
$$
Let us study $\widehat{H}_i(x,\eta):=\sup_\zs{\Vert y\Vert_T\le \rho(\eta)}\sup_\zs{0\le t\le T} f_i(t,y)$. Observe first that for $i=1,2$, the function $f_i(t,y)$ attains maximum on the whole admissible set $\cal D$ at $y^{*i}$ satisfying $\Vert y^{*i}\Vert_T \le q_i \Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T$.
By Lemma \ref{Le:compare}, both $f_i(t,y),\, i=1,2$ are concave functions and $f_i(t,y^*)\le \bar{f}_i(q_i\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T),$ where
\begin{equation*}
\bar{f}_i(b):=\exp\left\{\gamma_i \widehat{\theta}_T b-\frac{\gamma_i(1-\gamma_i)}{2}b^2\right\},\quad i=1,2.
\end{equation*}
Therefore,
$$
\widehat{H}_i(x,\eta)\le \bar{f}_i(\bar{y}_i(\eta)),
$$
where $\bar{y}_i(\eta)=\min(q_i\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T,\rho(\eta))$. It follows that
$$
J^\alpha(x)\le \max_\zs{i=1,2}\sup_\zs{
0\le \eta\le \kappa} \widehat{M}(x,\eta) \bar{f}_i(\bar{y}_i(\eta)),
$$
where
$$
\widehat{M}(x,\eta):=x^\gamma_1 \eta^{\gamma_1} \Vert\widehat{g}\Vert_\zs{q_1,T}^{q_1}+x_2^{\gamma_2}(1-\eta)^{\gamma_2}\widehat{g}_2(T).
$$
\begin{lemma}\label{Le:Diff.1}
Assume that $0<\kappa\le\text{\upshape{argmax}}_\zs{0\le \eta\le 1} \widehat{M}(x,\eta)$ and
\begin{equation}
\vert q_{\beta}\vert\ge \Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T+ (1-\kappa)^{-1}\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T\max(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)\left(\frac{\partial }{\partial\eta}\ln \widehat{M}(x,\eta)\right)^{-1}.
\label{eq:Diff.6}
\end{equation}
Then, $\widehat{M}(x,\kappa)$ is an upper bound of the cost function.
\end{lemma}
{\noindent \bf Proof. }
Consider first the case $\rho(0)\le q_i\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert$. Then $\bar{y}_i(\eta)=\rho(\eta)$ since $\rho$ is decreasing on $[0,\kappa]$. Putting $\widehat{G}_i(x,\eta):=\bar{f}_i(\rho(\eta)) \widehat{H}_i(x,\eta)$, one deduces that
$$
\sup_\zs{
0\le \eta\le \kappa} \bar{f}_i(\bar{y}_i(\eta))\widehat{M}(x,\eta)=\sup_\zs{
0\le \eta\le \kappa} \bar{f}_i(\rho(\eta)) \widehat{M}(x,\eta):=\sup_\zs{
0\le \eta\le \kappa} \widehat{G}_i(x,\eta).
$$
Let us study the monotonicity of $\widehat{G}_i(x,\eta)$. For this aim, we compute its first derivative
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial }{\partial \eta}\widehat{G}_i(x,\eta)= \gamma_i[\rho'(\eta)\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T-(1-\gamma_i)\rho(\eta)] \bar{f}_i(\rho(\eta)) \widehat{M}(x,\eta)+\bar{f}_i(\rho(\eta)) \frac{\partial }{\partial \eta}\widehat{M}(x,\eta).
\label{eq:Diff.3}
\end{equation}
Note that $\widehat{M}(x,\eta)$ is a concave function, which has first positive derivative and negative second derivative on $[0,\kappa]$ provided that $\kappa\in[0, \text{argmax}_\zs{0\le \eta\le 1} \widehat{M}(x,\eta)]$.
Therefore, $\frac{\partial }{\partial_\eta}\widehat{G}_i(x,\eta)\ge 0$ if
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial }{\partial\eta}\ln \widehat{M}(x,\eta)\ge \gamma_i \Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T\sup_\zs{\eta\in[0,\kappa]}\vert\rho'(\eta)\vert.
\label{eq:Diff.4}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, one gets from \eqref{eq:Diff.2.1} that
$$
\rho'(\eta)=-(1-\eta)^{-1}[\vert q_{\beta}\vert-\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T)^2 -2\ln(1-\kappa)+2\ln(1-\eta)]^{-1/2}.
$$
Then,
$$
\sup_\zs{0\le\eta\le \kappa}\vert \rho'(\eta)\vert
\le (1-\kappa)^{-1}(\vert q_{\beta}\vert-\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T)^{-1}.
$$
So, \eqref{eq:Diff.4} holds if
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial }{\partial\eta}\ln \widehat{M}(x,\eta)\ge \gamma_i \Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T (1-\kappa)^{-1}(\vert q_{\beta}\vert-\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T)^{-1}, \quad i=1,2.
\label{eq:Diff.5}
\end{equation}
Observe that \eqref{eq:Diff.5} is equivalent to \eqref{eq:Diff.6}.
Under \eqref{eq:Diff.6}, $\widehat{G}_i(x,\cdot)$ is increasing, which implies that $\sup_\zs{
0\le \eta\le \kappa} \widehat{G}_i(x,\eta)=\widehat{G}_i(x,\kappa)=\widehat{M}_i(x,\kappa)$ since $\bar{f}_i(x,\kappa)=1.$
\vspace{2mm}
Suppose now that $q_i\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert<\rho(0)$. Recall that $\rho$ is decreasing with $\rho(\kappa)=0$. There exists $\eta_i\in[0,\kappa]$ such that $ q_i\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert=\rho(\kappa_i)$. Now,
$$
\sup_\zs{
0\le \eta\le \kappa_i} \bar{f}_i(\bar{y}_i(\eta))\widehat{M}(x,\eta)=\sup_\zs{
0\le \eta\le \kappa_i}\bar{f}_i(\rho(\eta_i))\widehat{M}(x,\eta)=\bar{f}_i(\rho(\eta_i))\widehat{M}(x,\eta)=\widehat{G}_i(x,\eta_i).
$$
On the other hand, observe that $\bar{y}_i(\eta)=\rho(\eta)$ if $\eta\in[\kappa_i,\kappa]$. As already shown above,
$$
\sup_\zs{
\kappa_i\le \eta\le \kappa} \bar{f}_i(\bar{y}_i(\eta))\widehat{M}(x,\eta)=\widehat{G}_i(x,\kappa).
$$
As $\widehat{G}_i(x,\cdot)$ is increasing one concludes that $\sup_\zs{
0\le \eta\le \kappa} \widehat{G}_i(x,\eta) =\widehat{G}_i(x,\kappa)=\widehat{M}(x,\kappa)$.
Hence, $\widehat{M}(x,\kappa)$ is always an upper bound of the cost function.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:Diff.1}
Under the assumptions of Lemma \ref{Le:Diff.1}, $(y^*=0,v^*)$ is the optimal solution for the problem with VaR risk constraint, where
\begin{equation}
v^*_t=\dot{V}^*_t=\frac{\kappa \widehat{g}_1^{q_1}(t)}{\Vert \widehat{g}_1\Vert_\zs{q_1,T}^{q_1}-\kappa\Vert\widehat{g}_1\Vert^{q_1}_\zs{q_1,t}(t)}.
\label{eq:Diff.7}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
{\noindent \bf Proof. }
We need to find an control at which the cost function attains the upper bound $\widehat{M}(x,\kappa)$. Clearly, we should choose $v$ such that
$$
\int_0^T (v_t e^{-V_t})^{\gamma_1} \widehat{g}_1(t)=(1-e^{-V_T})^{\gamma_1} \Vert \widehat{g}_1\Vert_\zs{q_1,T}\quad\mbox{and}\quad V_T=-\ln(1-\kappa).
$$
For this aim, we solves the differential equation on $[0,T]$
$$
\dot{V}_t e^{-V_t}=\frac{\kappa}{\Vert \widehat{g}_1\Vert_\zs{q_1,T}^{q_1}} \widehat{g}^{q_1}_1(t),\quad V_0
=0.
$$
The last differential equation admits solution
$$
V^*_t=-\ln\left(1-\frac{\kappa}{\Vert \widehat{g}_1\Vert_\zs{q_1,T}^{q_1}} \Vert\widehat{g}_1\Vert^{q_1}_\zs{q_1,t}(t)\right),
$$
which gives the optimal consumption rate defined in \eqref{eq:Diff.7}. \mbox{\ $\qed$}
\subsection{ES constraint}
Consider Problem \ref{Prob.3} with ES constraint. An upper bound for the cost function is given by the following.
\begin{lemma}\label{Le:Diff.3}
Assume that $0<\kappa\le\text{\upshape{argmax}}_\zs{0\le \eta\le 1} \widehat{M}(x,\eta)$ and
\begin{equation}
\vert q_{\beta}\vert\ge 2\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T+ (1-\kappa)\Vert\widehat{\theta}\Vert_T\min(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)\left(\frac{\partial }{\partial\eta}\ln \widehat{M}(x,\eta)\right)^{-1}.
\label{eq:Diff.8}
\end{equation}
Then, $\widehat{M}(x,\kappa)$ is an upper bound of the cost function.
\end{lemma}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } Recall that $V_T=\ln(1-\eta)$. First the risk constraint \eqref{eq:ES.3} implies that
\begin{equation}
\Vert y\Vert_t\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T+F_\beta(\Vert y\Vert_t+\vert q_\beta\vert)\ge \ln(1-\kappa)-\ln(1-\eta),\quad \forall t\in[0,1].
\label{eq:Diff.9}
\end{equation}
It is easy to check that the function
$
\widehat{\psi}(\rho):=\Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T \rho+F_\beta(\rho+\vert q_\beta\vert)
$
is strictly decreasing if $\vert q_\beta\vert\ge \Vert \widehat{\theta}\Vert_T$. So, \eqref{eq:Diff.9} is checked if we have
$$
\widehat{\psi}(\Vert y\Vert_T)\ge \ln(1-\kappa)-\ln(1-\eta).
$$ Note that $\widehat{\psi}(\Vert y\Vert_T)\le \widehat{\psi}(0)=F_\beta(q_\beta\vert)=0 $. Therefore, there exists a solution $\widehat{\rho}:=\widehat{\rho}(\eta)$ for equation
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\psi}(\rho)=\ln(1-\kappa)-\ln(1-\eta),\quad 0\le \eta\le \kappa.
\label{eq:Diff.10}
\end{equation}
and $\widehat{\eta}$ is strictly decreasing since $\widehat{\psi}(\rho) $ is decreasing, which implies $\widehat{\eta}\ge \widehat{0}$. Now, taking derivative of two sides \eqref{eq:Diff.10} one gets
$$
\widehat{\rho}'(\eta)\left[\Vert y\Vert_T-\frac{\varphi(\widehat{\eta}+\vert q_\beta\vert)}{\bar{\Phi}(\widehat{\eta}+\vert q_\beta\vert)}\right]=\frac{1}{1-\eta}.
$$
Observe that the expression in the square brackets is bounded by $\Vert y\Vert_T-\vert q_\beta\vert$. It follows that
$$
\vert\widehat{\rho}'(\eta)\le\frac{1}{(1-\eta)(\vert q_\beta\vert-\Vert y\Vert_T)},\quad \eta\in[0,\kappa].
$$
At this stage, the analysis as Lemma \ref{Le:Diff.1} can be applied to show that $\widehat{M}(x,\kappa)$ is an upper bound of the cost function. \mbox{\ $\qed$}
We have proved that under the ES constraint, it is optimal to consume all.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:Diff.2}
Under the assumptions of Lemma \ref{Le:Diff.1}, $(y^*=0,v^*)$ where $v^*$ is given by \eqref{eq:Diff.7}, is the optimal solution for the problem with ES risk constraint.
\end{theorem}
Theorems \ref{Th:Diff.1} and \ref{Th:Diff.2} show that the presence of a dynamical risk constraint has an undesired effect that the investor whose portfolio constitutes in both consumption and investment should optimally consume all. Thus, our results suggest considering the utility maximization problem (optimal investment) and the optimal consumption problem separately. Remark that \cite{Aitsahalia09} considers the unconstrained consumption problem in a similar jump-diffusion setting. In particular, by exploiting differences in the Brownian risk of the asset returns that lies in the orthogonal space, the authors show that optimal policy can be obtained by focusing on controlling the exposure to the jump risk.
\subsection{When consumption is not possible}
Let us consider the following utility maximization problem
$
\sup_{\pi}{\bf E} [U(X_T^\pi)],
$
where the wealth process is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} X_t^\pi =X_t^\pi(r_t+y'_t\theta_t)\mathrm{d} t+X_t^\pi y_t^{'}\mathrm{d} W_t+X_\zs{t^{-}}^\pi \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\pi_t^{'} z \widetilde{J}(\mathrm{d} z\times \mathrm{d} t), \quad X_0^\pi=x>0.
\label{eq:nocons.1}
\end{equation}
One then deduces the HJB equation
\begin{equation}
\partial_t u(t,x)+\sup_\zs{\pi} {\cal A} ^\pi u(t,x)=0, \quad u(T,x)=x^\gamma,
\label{eq:HJB0}
\end{equation}
where the generator ${\cal A}^\alpha$ is defined by as in \eqref{eq:Oper} with $v=0$:
\begin{align}
{\cal A}^\pi u(t,x)&=x(r_t+y'_t \widehat{\theta}_t)\partial_xu(t,x)+\frac{1}{2}x^2 y_t y'_t\partial_{xx}^2u(t,x)\notag\\
&+\sum_\zs{j=1}^d \int_{\mathbb R} (u(t,x+x\pi^j_tz)-u(t,x)-x\pi^j_tz\partial_xu(t,x))\nu^j(\mathrm{d} z),
\label{eq:}
\end{align}
We try to find a solution of the form $u(t,x)=\rho x^\gamma$, and $
u_x=\gamma\rho x^{\gamma-1},\, u_\zs{xx}=\gamma (\gamma-1)\rho x^{\gamma-2},
$
where $\rho$ is a $t$-function to be determined.
Substituting these formulas into \eqref{eq:HJB} we obtain
\begin{align}
\rho'(t)+\rho(t)\sup_\zs{\pi} \left\{\gamma (r_t+y'_t \widehat{\theta}_t)+\frac{1}{2} y_t^2 \gamma (\gamma-1)
+\sum_\zs{j=1}^d {\bf K}^j(\pi^j_t) \right\}=0,
\label{eq:HJBnc}
\end{align}
where ${\bf K}^j$ defined in \eqref{eq:K}. Thus, we get the same necessary optimal condition as in \eqref{eq:HJB3}, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\theta}_t^i +(\gamma-1)y_t^i+\sum_\zs{j=1}^d \epsilon_{ij}(t) Q^{j}(\pi^j_t)=0,\quad y^i\ge 0, \,i=\overline{1,d},
\label{eq:HJB30}
\end{equation}
where $Q^{j}$ defined in \eqref{eq:HJB4}. Direct argument leads to the optimal solution for the unconstrained problem.
\begin{proposition}\label{Pro.Noconsumpt.1}
Assume that $y^*\ge 0$ is a solution of system \eqref{eq:HJB30} and let $h^*$ be the corresponding supremum in \eqref{eq:HJBnc}. Then, the optimal rule for the unconstrained problem is given by $y^*$ and the value function is $e^{\int_t^T h^*(s)\mathrm{d} s} x^{\gamma}$. The wealth process is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{d} X_t^* =X_t^*(r_t+y_t^*\theta_t)\mathrm{d} t+X_t^* y_t^*\mathrm{d} W_t+X_\zs{t^{-}}^* \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}\pi_t^* z \mathrm{d}\widetilde{J}(\mathrm{d} z\times \mathrm{d} t), \quad X_0^*=x>0.
\label{eq:noconsumpt}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } The conclusion follows a similar argument as in Theorem \ref{Th.Noconstr.2} with the remark that $e^{\int_t^T h^*(s)\mathrm{d} s}$ is the solution to the ordinary differential equation $\rho'(t)+\rho(t) h^*(t)=0$.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
Let us turn to the constrained problem $\sup_{\pi}{\bf E} [U(X_T^\pi)]$
under VaR/ES constraint. The following is just a direct consequence of Theorems \ref{Th.Constr.4} and \ref{Th.Constr.5}.
\begin{proposition}\label{Pro.Noconsumpt.2}
Assume that jumps in the assets are non negative and condition \eqref{eq:l} holds. Then the unconstrained solution $y^*$ in Proposition \ref{Pro.Noconsumpt.1} is still optimal solution to the utility maximization problem with VaR constraint. The same conclusion is still true for ES constraint when \eqref{eq:l} is replaced with condition \eqref{eq:M}.
\end{proposition}
Proposition \eqref{Pro.Noconsumpt.2} provides sufficient conditions so that the risk constraints VaR/ES are not active. When these conditions do not hold, it could be possible to incorporate the constraint into the HJB equation. This makes the problem more attractive but more challenging to solve, which we do not pursue it here. In fact, the challenge lies in the fact that the risk constraint is impossible to transformed into an explicit constraint on strategies as in the pure diffusion case due to the presence of jumps. Nevertheless, the HJB equation with investment constraints can be solve numerically as in \cite{EmmerKlupperbergKorn01} with an approximation on jumps sizes. In \cite{DuffiePan01}, the authors provide an analytical method (applying an analytical Fourier-transform) for computing value at risk, and other risk measures that allows for fat-tailed and skewed return distributions.
\section{Negative jumps}\label{Negative}
We examine in this section the effect of negative jumps. In fact, the regulator should be more conservative if negative jumps probably happen. We show below that in that case, a slightly stricter constrained depending on the probability of having negative jumps in the risky assets during the investment horizon $[0,T]$ can be imposed to make the previous analysis still valid.
First, note that we still have $M_t^i\le 0 $ for all $i=\overline{1,d}$ even in the presence of negative jumps. Let us begin by examining the VaR constraint inequality \eqref{eq:Constr.4} by introducing
\begin{equation}
\widehat{P}_t^\pi(\xi):=\frac{1}{\Vert y\Vert_t}\sum_{j=1}^d \sum_{k=1}^{N_t^j} \ln(1+\pi^j_\zs{\tau_k^{j{-}}} \xi^j_k).
\label{eq:Nega1}
\end{equation}
We want to find a lower bound for $q_{\beta}({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi))$. The latter can be written as
$\exp\{-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2+\widehat{q}_{\beta}(t)\Vert y\Vert_t\}$, where
$\widehat{q}_{\beta}(t):=q_{\beta}(Z_t+ \widehat{P}_t^\pi(\xi))$ and $Z_t$ is a ${\cal F}_t$ measurable standard normal variable independent of $\widehat{P}_t^\pi(\xi)$. Denote by $\varepsilon_t:={\bf P}(A_t)$, where
\begin{equation}
A_t:=\{ \text{there are at least one negative jump in the asset prices in}\, [0,t]\}
\label{eq:Nega2}
\end{equation}
Now, the assumption that the jump parts of the risky assets are independent leads to the following elementary property.
\begin{lemma} For any $0\le t\le T$, we have
$$
\epsilon_t=\prod_{i=1}^d (1-e^{-\lambda_i t})\int_{-1}^0 F^i (\mathrm{d} z).
$$
\end{lemma}
Obviously, $\varepsilon_t \nearrow \varepsilon_T$ as $t\to T$. We try to estimate $\widehat{q}_{\beta}(t)$ respect to $\varepsilon_T$. From the quantile definition, we have
\begin{equation}
\beta={\bf P}(Z_t+ \widehat{P}_t^\pi(\xi)\le \widehat{q}_{\beta}(t))
\le
{\bf P}(Z_t+\widehat{P}_t^\pi(\xi)\le \widehat{q}_{\beta}(t), A_t^c)+{\bf P} (A_t).
\label{eq:Nega3}
\end{equation}
On $A_t^c:=\Omega\backslash A_t$ ( which is independent of $Z_t$), $\widehat{P}_t^\pi(\xi)$ is non negative. It follows that
$$
\beta\le {\bf P}(Z_t\le \widehat{q}_{\beta}(t)) {\bf P}(A_t^c)+{\bf P}(A_t)={\bf P}(Z_t\le \widehat{q}_{\beta}(t))(1-\varepsilon_t)+\varepsilon_t,
$$
or $\widehat{q}_{\beta}(t)\ge q_\zs{\widehat{\beta}(\varepsilon_t)}$, where
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\beta}(\varepsilon):=\frac{\beta-\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}.
\label{eq:Nega4}
\end{equation}
Clearly, $\widehat{\beta}'(\varepsilon)=[2\varepsilon-(1+\beta)]/(1-\varepsilon)^2<0$ if $\varepsilon\le (\beta+1)/2$. Thus, $\widehat{\beta}(\varepsilon)$ is decreasing down to $\widehat{\beta}_T:=\widehat{\beta}(\varepsilon_T)$ if $0\le \varepsilon_T\le (\beta+1)/2,$ which implies that $\widehat{q}_{\beta}(t)\ge q_\zs{\widehat{\beta}_T}$.
We then deduce that the risk constraint \eqref{eq:Constr.4} is checked if
\begin{equation}
\inf_\zs{0\le t\le T} \left\{-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2+q_{\widehat{\beta}_T}\Vert y\Vert_t-V_t+(y,\widehat{\theta})_t\right\}\ge \ln(1-\kappa).
\label{eq:Neg.5}
\end{equation}
Hence, we need to replace $q_{\beta}$ with $q_{\widehat{\beta}_T}$ in the analysis before.
Remark that using the modified confidence level $\widehat{\beta}_T\le \beta$ means that the investor' portfolio is more strictly regulatory. In general, during a normal day-life period of time $\varepsilon_T=0$ even though the asset prices are allowed to go down but in a continuous way (predictable). Note that the analysis given in the previous sections can be obtained by sending $\varepsilon_T$ to zero.
\vspace{2mm}
Let us now consider Problem \ref{Prob.3} with ES constraint defined by \eqref{eq:ES.1}. Along the lines in the proof of Lemma \ref{Le.Mol.2} and by the positivity of ${\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi)$ one gets
$$
{\bf ES}_\beta({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi))=\frac{1}{\beta}\int_0^{\beta} q_\delta({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi)) \mathrm{d} \delta\ge \frac{1}{\beta}\int_{\varepsilon_T}^{\beta} q_\delta({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi)) \mathrm{d} \delta.
$$
As above,
$$
q_\delta({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi))\ge q_\zs{\widehat{\delta}_t}({\cal E}_t(y))\ge q_\zs{\widehat{\delta}_T}({\cal E}_t(y)),
$$
where
$$
\widehat{\delta}_t:=\widehat{\delta}(\epsilon_t)=\frac{\delta-\varepsilon_t}{1-\varepsilon_t}.
$$
After changing variable we obtain
$$
{\bf ES}_\beta({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi))\ge \frac{1}{\beta}\int_{\varepsilon_T}^{\beta} q_\zs{\widehat{\delta}_T}({\cal E}_t(y)) \mathrm{d} \delta=\frac{\beta-\varepsilon_T}{\beta} \frac{1}{\widehat{\beta}}\int_{0}^{\widehat{\beta}} q_\zs{\widehat{\delta}_T}({\cal E}_t(y)) \mathrm{d} \widehat{\delta}_T.
$$
In other words,
$$
{\bf ES}_\beta({\cal E}_t(y) P_t^\pi(\xi))\ge \frac{\beta-\varepsilon_T}{\beta} {\bf ES}_\zs{\widehat{\beta}_T}({\cal E}_t(y)),
$$
where $\widehat{\beta}_T$ is defined in \eqref{eq:Nega4}. Now, by Lemma \ref{Le.ES.1}
$$
{\bf ES}_\zs{\widehat{\beta}_T}({\cal E}_t(y))=\frac{1}{\widehat{\beta}_T}(1-\Phi(\vert q_{\widehat{\beta}_T}\vert +\Vert y\Vert_t))=F_{\widehat{\beta}_T}(\Vert y\Vert_t+\vert q_{\widehat{\beta}_T}\vert).
$$
Thus, in the presence of negative jumps, we need to replace the function $F_\beta$ in the risk constraint \eqref{eq:ES.3} with $\widehat{F}_{\widehat{\beta}_T}$, defined by
\begin{equation}
\widehat{F}_{\widehat{\beta}_T}(u):=\frac{\beta-\varepsilon_T}{\beta} F_{\widehat{\beta}_T}(u).
\label{eq:Nega.7}
\end{equation}
Then, the optimal policy can be obtained after a similar procedure.
\vspace{2mm}
In summary, we have proved the following main results.
\begin{theorem}\label{Th:Nega.1}
Assume that negative jumps during the considered horizon $[0,T]$ take place with probability $\varepsilon_T<\beta$. Then, all results obtained in the previous sections for VaR constraint are still valid if we replace the level $\beta$ with $\widehat{\beta}_T$ defined by \eqref{eq:Nega4} in the corresponding risk constraint. For the problem with ES constraint, we have the same result by replacing $F_\beta$ with $\widehat{F}_{\widehat{\beta}_T}$ given in \eqref{eq:Nega.7}.
\end{theorem}
\section{Concluding remark}
We studied the problem of optimal investment and consumption under VaR and ES risk constraints focusing on deterministic strategies. When jumps in asset are non negative, the approach in \cite{KluppelbergPergamenchtchikov2009} can be applied to get the optimal solution among a subset of admissible strategies obtained by ignoring jumps in the constraint but with the same confidence level. In particular, we showed that under some mild condition on the model parameters, the unconstrained solution is still optimal if two identical power utility functions are used. For different utility functions, the impact of constraint is dramatic and it is optimal for the investor to consume all. When negative jumps probably happen, the regulator should be more conservative to impose a slightly stricter constrained depending on the probability of having negative jumps in the risky assets during the investment horizon, to ensure that the analysis for the case of non negative jump is still valid.
It should be noticed that random strategies can be considered, but, to make the HJB approach still valid, it is necessary to modify the definition of quantile or use a relative VaR/ES constraint \cite{Pirvu07}. We also plan to extend the present paper to general Levy's models. In such cases, approximating small jumps needs to be studied and the problem of stability may be interesting to investigate as in \cite{EmmerKlupperbergKorn01,liu2003dynamic}.
\vspace{1.5cm}
\noindent{\bf \Large Appendix: Auxiliary results}
\setcounter{section}{0}
\renewcommand{\thesection}{\Alph{section}}
\section{Quantile and expected shorfall}\label{App}
\begin{definition}[Lower quantile]\label{Def.0-1}
For any random variable $Y$ and $\beta\in(0,1)$, the lower $\beta$-quantile of $Y$ is the number defined by
\begin{equation}
q_\beta(Y)=\inf\{ u: {\bf P}(Y\le u)\ge \beta\}.
\label{eq:Mol.12}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
The following is useful to provide an explicit form for the optimal solution.
\begin{lemma}\label{Le.Mol.1}
Let $q_\beta$ be the lower $\beta$-quantile of the standard normal distribution and ${\cal E}_t(y)$ be the stochastic exponential defined in \eqref{eq:Mol.6-1}. Then,
\begin{equation}
q_\beta({\cal E}_t(y))=\exp\left\{-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2+q_\zs{\beta}\Vert y\Vert_t\right\}.
\label{eq:Mol.6-20}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } It follows directly from the definition of ${\cal E}_t(y)$ and the linearity of lower quantile.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
\begin{definition}[Expected Shorfall]\label{Def.2}
For any random variable $Y$ and $\beta\in(0,1)$, the expected shorfall at $\beta$-quantile of $Y$ is the real number ${\bf ES}_\beta(Y)$ defined by
\begin{equation}
{\bf ES}_\beta(Y)={\bf E}(Y\vert Y\le q_\beta(Y))
\label{eq:Mol.15}
\end{equation}
for some random variable $Y$.
\end{definition}
Again, the following simple result is useful to get the optimal solution in an explicit form.
\begin{lemma}\label{Le.ES.1}
Let $\phi$ be the standard normal distribution function and ${\cal E}_t(y)$ be the stochastic exponential defined in \eqref{eq:Mol.6-1}. For any $\beta\in(0,1)$, we have
\begin{equation}
{\bf ES}_\beta( {\cal E}_t(y))=\frac{1}{\beta}(1-\Phi(\vert q_\beta\vert +\Vert y\Vert_t)),
\label{eq:Mol.15-1}
\end{equation}
where $q_\beta$ is the lower $\beta$-quantile of a standard normal random variable.
\end{lemma}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } The definition \eqref{eq:Mol.15} implies that
$$
{\bf ES}_\beta( {\cal E}_t(y))=e^{-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2}{\bf E}(e^{\Vert y\Vert_t Z}\vert Z\le q_\beta)=\frac{e^{-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2}}{{\bf P}(Z\le q_\beta)} {\bf E}(e^{\Vert y\Vert_t Z}{\bf 1}_\zs{\{Z\le q_\beta\}}),
$$
where $Z\sim N(0,1)$. Direct calculus provides that
${\bf P}(Z\le q_\beta)= \beta$ and
$$
e^{-\frac{1}{2}\Vert y\Vert_t^2}{\bf E}(e^{\Vert y\Vert_t Z}{\bf 1}_\zs{\{Z\le q_\beta\}})=\Phi(\vert q_\beta\vert +\Vert y\Vert_t),
$$
and the conclusion follows.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
Risk of two portfolios can be compared using the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{Le.Mol.2} Let $Y,Z$ be two random variables satisfying $Y\le Z$ a.s. Then, for any $\beta \in (0,1)$,
\begin{equation}
q_\beta(Y)\le q_\beta(Z)\quad \mbox{and}\quad {\bf ES}_\beta(Y)\le {\bf ES}_\beta(Z).
\label{eq:Mol.16}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
{\noindent \bf Proof. }
For any $u\in {\mathbb R}$, one has ${\bf P}(Y\le u) \ge {\bf P}(Z\le u)$ since $Y\le Z$ almost surely. Then,
$$
\{ u: {\bf P}(Z\le u)\ge \beta\}\subset \{ u: {\bf P}(Y\le u)\ge \beta\}
$$
for any $\beta\in(0,1)$ and hence $q_\beta(Y)\le q_\beta(Y)$. Let us prove the last inequality in \eqref{eq:Mol.16}. Clearly,
$$
{\bf P}(Y\le q_\beta(Y))=\beta\quad \mbox{and}\quad q_\beta(Y)=F_Y(\beta),
$$
where $F_Y$ is the distribution function of $Y$. The same representation can be also obtained for $Z$. Now, by definition,
$$
{\bf ES}_\beta(Y)={\bf E}(Y\vert Y\le q_\beta(Y))=\frac{1}{{\bf P}(Y\le q_\beta(Y))}{\bf E}(Y{\bf 1}_\zs{\{ Y\le q_\beta(Y)\}})=\frac{1}{\beta}\int_{-\infty}^{q_\beta(Y)} y F_Y(\mathrm{d} y).
$$
By changing variable $\delta=F_Y(y)\rightarrow y=F_Y^{-1}(\delta)=q_\delta(Y)$ one obtains
$$
{\bf ES}_\beta(Y)=\frac{1}{\beta}\int_0^{\beta} q_\delta(Y) \mathrm{d} \delta \quad\mbox{and}\quad
{\bf ES}_\beta(Z)=\frac{1}{\beta}\int_0^{\beta} q_\delta(Z) \mathrm{d} \delta
$$
and the conclusion follows by the first inequality.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
\section{Geometric L\'evy martingale}
\begin{lemma}\label{Le:Levy}
Let $a:[0,T]\times {\mathbb R} \to {\mathbb R}$ be a function satisfying
$$
{\bf E}\Big[\exp\Big\{\int_0^T\int_{{\mathbb R}}(e^{a(t,z)}-1) \nu (\mathrm{d} z) \mathrm{d} t\Big\}\Big]<\infty.
$$
Then, the process $X_t$ defined by $ \mathrm{d} X_t=X_t^{-} \int_{{\mathbb R}}(e^{a(t,z)}-1) \widetilde{J}(\mathrm{d} z\times \mathrm{d} t)$ is a martingale and
$$
{\bf E}\Big[\exp\Big\{\int_0^T\int_{{\mathbb R}}{a(t,z)}{J}(\mathrm{d} z\times \mathrm{d} t) \Big\}\Big]={\bf E}\Big[\exp\Big\{\int_0^T\int_{{\mathbb R}}(e^{a(t,z)}-1) \nu (\mathrm{d} z) \mathrm{d} t\Big\}\Big]<\infty.
$$
\end{lemma}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } See exercise 1.6 in \cite{OksendalSulem07}. \mbox{\ $\qed$}
\section{Exponential of optimal consumption rate}
\begin{lemma}\label{Le:basic} For $v_t^*$ defined in \eqref{eq:HJB5} we have
\begin{equation}
e^{-V_T^*}=\frac{g^q(T)}{\Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T}+g^q(T)}
\label{eq:}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
{\noindent \bf Proof. } It seems that a direct verification using \eqref{eq:HJB5} is technically hard. We may proceed as follows. Provided $\pi=\pi^*$ is an optimal portfolio, we need to choose $v$ such that the cost function is maximal, i.e.
$$
\max_\zs{v}\int_0^T v^{\gamma}_te^{-\gamma V_t} g(t) \mathrm{d} t+e^{-\gamma V_T} g(T),
$$
where $g$ is defined by \eqref{eq:rho}. This variation problem can be solved in two steps. First, By Holder's inequality the above formula is bounded by
$$
\int_0^T v^{\gamma}_te^{-\gamma V_t} g(t) \mathrm{d} t \le \int_0^T v_te^{- V_t} \mathrm{d} t \Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T}+e^{-\gamma V_T} g(T).
$$
The equality happens when $v^{\gamma}_te^{-\gamma V_t}$ and $g(t)$ are linearly independent in $L^1$, i.e., $v_te^{-V_t}=b g^q(t)$ a.s. on $[0,1]$, where $b$ is a positive constant. It follows that
$$
1-e^{-V_T}=\int_0^T v_te^{-V_t} \mathrm{d} t=b \Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T},
$$
which implies that $e^{-V_T}=1-b \Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T}$ and the cost function is now given by
$$
f(b)=b^\gamma \Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T}+(1-b \Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T})^\gamma g(T).
$$
It remains to maximize $f(b)$ by choosing an appropriate $b>0$. As $f$ is concave, its maximum attains at the zero point of the first derivative $f'(b^*)=0$, where
$
b^*=[{g^q(T)+\Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T}}]^{-1}.
$
Thus, $$e^{-V_T^*}=1-b^* \Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T}=\frac{g^q(T)}{g^q(T)+\Vert g\Vert ^q_\zs{q,T}}.\mbox{\ $\qed$}
$$
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{Th.Noconstr.1}}\label{App:1}
By \eqref{eq:Mol.7}, one has
\begin{equation}
{\bf E} X_t^\alpha= xe^{R_t-V_t+(y,\widehat{\theta})_t} {\bf E}{\cal E}_t(y) {\bf E} P_t^\pi(\xi)=xe^{R_t-V_t+(y,\widehat{\theta})_t}{\bf E} P_t^\pi(\xi)
\label{eq:Noconstr.01}
\end{equation}
since ${\bf E}{\cal E}_t(y)=1$. Taking into account the independency of the terms in \eqref{eq:Mol.9} one obtains
\begin{equation}
{\bf E} P_t^\pi(\xi)=\exp\left\{\sum_{j=1}^d\int_0^t\int_{{\mathbb R}}\pi^j_s z^j \nu^j(\mathrm{d} z^j) \mathrm{d} t\right\}=\exp\left\{\int_0^t\pi_s {\xi}_{\lambda} \mathrm{d} s\right\}.
\label{eq:Noconstr.0}
\end{equation}
Therefore,
\begin{equation}
{\bf E} X_t^\alpha= xe^{R_t-V_t+(y,\widehat{\theta})_t+(\pi, {\xi}_{\lambda})_t}=xe^{R_t-V_t+(y,{\theta})_t}=xe^{R_t-V_t+(\pi,\mu-r{\bf 1})_t},
\label{eq:Noconstr.1}
\end{equation}
which is bounded by $xe^{R_T} e^{-V_t+\Vert\pi\Vert_\zs{T}\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}}.$
We then deduce that
\begin{align*}
J^\alpha(x)&=\int_0^T {\bf E} X^\alpha_t v_t \mathrm{d} t+{\bf E} X^\alpha_T \\
&\le xe^{R_T+\Vert\pi\Vert_\zs{T}\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}}\left(\int_0^T e^{-V_t}v_t \mathrm{d} t+e^{-V_T}\right)
=xe^{R_T+\Vert\pi\Vert_\zs{T}\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}}.
\end{align*}
Hence, $xe^{R_T+T\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}}$ is an upper bound of $J^\alpha(x)$ since $\Vert\pi\Vert_\zs{T}\le \sqrt{T}$.
Now, if $\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}=0$, the upper bound is attainable for any admissible strategy $\pi^*$ with $\pi^{*j}_t\in[0,1]$ and $v^*_t=0$. In the contrary case if $\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}>0$, then the upper bound is attained for $\pi^*_t=(\mu_t-r_t{\bf 1})\Vert \mu-r{\bf 1}\Vert_\zs{T}^{-1}\sqrt{T}$ and $v^*_t=0$. \mbox{\ $\qed$}
\section{Proof of Lemma \ref{Le:compare}}\label{App:com}
Recall that $\pi_t^*$ and $\bar{\pi}_t^*$ are respectively maximal points of
$$
G(t,\pi)=\gamma r_t+\gamma(\mu_t-r_t)\pi +\frac{1}{2}\sigma_t^2 \pi^2 \gamma (\gamma-1)+{\bf K}(\pi_t)
$$
and
$$
\bar{G}(t,\pi):=\gamma r_t+\gamma(\mu_t-r_t)\pi+\frac{1}{2}\sigma_t^2 \pi^2 \gamma (\gamma-1).
$$
In other words, they are solutions to equations $\kappa:=\partial_\pi G(t,\pi)=0$ and $\bar{\kappa}(\pi)=0$, where
$$
\kappa(\pi):=\gamma[\mu_t-r_t +(\gamma-1)\sigma^2_t \pi+ \int_{\mathbb R} [(1+\pi z)^{\gamma-1}-1]z\nu(\mathrm{d} z)]
$$
and
$$
\bar{\kappa}(\pi):=\mu_t-r_t+(\gamma-1)\sigma^2_t \pi.
$$
Clearly, $\kappa (\pi)\le \bar{\kappa}(\pi),\,\forall \pi\in [0,1]$ and those two functions are decreasing. One obtains that $\pi^*\le \bar{\pi}^*$. Moreover, as both $G$ and $\bar{G}$ are concave in $[0,1]$ one has $$G^*:=\max G(t,\pi)\le \bar{G}^*_t:=\max \bar{G}(t,\pi),$$
which in turn leads to the comparison $\rho(t)\le \bar{\rho}(t)$ (see the defintion in \eqref{eq:HJB5}). Taking into the negative sign of $\gamma-1$ one gets $v^*_t=\rho(t)^{1/(\gamma-1)}\ge \bar{v}^*_t=\bar{\rho}(t)^{1/(\gamma-1)}$. \mbox{\ $\qed$}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
Nonlinear systems are known to exhibit rich and complex dynamical behaviors, which linear systems cannot. These behaviors include, for instance, modal interactions, detached resonance curves, quasiperiodic oscillations, bifurcations and chaos. Even though periodic solutions represent only a subset of the dynamical attractors of nonlinear systems, their computation and interpretation usually provide great insight into the system's dynamics. Different algorithms and numerical methods for the computation of periodic solutions can be found in the literature. Most of them build on a continuation procedure \cite{padmanabhan1995}, as a means of studying the evolution of the periodic solutions with respect to the frequency of the harmonic forcing or a design parameter.
Time-domain methods, which deal with the resolution of a boundary value problem (BVP), have proven effective for low-dimensional problems. When applied to larger systems, their computational burden can become substantial. For example, the shooting technique requires numerous time integrations that can slow down the algorithm. Efforts have been undertaken to make shooting less computationally intensive by using parallelization \cite{stoykov} and sensitivity analysis \cite{peeters2009}. Methods based on orthogonal collocation are utilized in several software for bifurcation detection and tracking, e.g., \textsc{auto} \cite{doedel1997}, \textsc{colsys} \cite{ascher1979}, \textsc{content} \cite{kuznetsov1995}, \textsc{matcont} \cite{dhooge2003}, and, more recently, \textsc{coco} \cite{dankowicz2011}. In spite of its high accuracy and ability to address stiff problems, orthogonal collocation is rarely employed for large systems, which can be explained by the considerable memory space required for the discretization of the BVP.
Among all methods in the frequency domain, harmonic balance (HB) is certainly the most widely used method. It is also known as the Fourier--Galerkin method, since it consists in the application of the Galerkin method with Fourier basis and test functions. The periodic signals are approximated with their Fourier coefficients, which become the new unknowns of the problem. The term `harmonic balance' was first introduced by Krylov and Bogoliubov \cite{krylov1943} who performed linearization of nonlinear dynamical equations with single-harmonic approximations. In the 1960s a demonstration of the convergence of the method for Fourier approximations truncated to several harmonics was offered by Urabe \cite{urabe1965}. The main advantage of HB is when low orders of approximation are sufficient to obtain an accurate solution, which usually holds for smooth nonlinearities. In this case, the method involves algebraic equations with less unknowns than for orthogonal collocation. The reader can refer to \cite{karkar2014} for a comparison between HB and orthogonal collocation applied to smooth and nonsmooth nonlinearities.
Several improvements and adaptations to the HB method were brought in the literature during the last couple of decades. The incremental HB applies the incremental procedure to the equations of motion before the harmonic approximation and balance (see \cite{lau1981,cheung1982} or, more recently, \cite{sze2005}). Taking advantage of the fast Fourier transform, Cameron \textit{et al.} proposed the alternating frequency-time domain (AFT) method that evaluates the nonlinear terms of the equations in the time domain where their analytical expression is known \cite{cameron1989}. Since then, many studies utilized the AFT method \cite{cardona1998,sinou2007,jaumouille2010}. Similar developments led to the hybrid frequency-time domain method, with applications to systems with dry friction \cite{guillen1999,poudou2003}. HB was also coupled with continuation schemes, e.g., with arc-length continuation \cite{vongroll2001} or the so-called asymptotic numerical method \cite{arquier2007,cochelin2009} in the \textsc{manlab} package. In \cite{grolet2012}, a new adaptive HB method was proposed for which the number of harmonics for each degree of freedom (DOF) is automatically selected during the continuation process.
HB has enjoyed numerous applications in the literature. In electrical engineering, Kundert \textit{et al.} reported its superiority over time-domain techniques for the simulation of nonlinear circuits \cite{kundert1986}. Using a well-known variant of the method based on single-harmonic approximations, the so-called describing function (DF) method, Genesio \textit{et al.} \cite{genesio1992} provided analytical expressions for regions of chaotic behavior of Lur'e systems. Other studies were carried out, e.g., for piezoelectric inertial generators \cite{stanton2012} or DC-DC converters \cite{fang2012}.
Following a pioneer work on wing-control surface flutter \cite{shen1959}, the HB method was successfully applied to aeroelastic systems, e.g., to airfoils with freeplay \cite{liu2005} and cubic stiffness \cite{lee2005}. A comparative review of HB applied to limit cycle oscillations can be found in \cite{dimitriadis2008}. More recently, fluid dynamics problems where unsteady flows are periodic in time were also tackled. In \cite{hall2002}, Hall \textit{et al.} formulated the HB method for the Navier-Stokes equations, and applications can be found for flows in multi-stage turbomachinery \cite{gopinath2007,clark2015} and helicopter blades \cite{ekici2008}.
In mechanical engineering, Cardona \textit{et al.} developed a multi-harmonic resolution scheme for vibration analysis with nonsmooth nonlinear functions \cite{cardona1994}. The HB method was then applied to realistic examples including bladed disks \cite{petrov2003}, bolted joints \cite{jaumouille2010,suss2015}, rotor/stator contacts \cite{vongroll2001}, vibro-impact systems \cite{woo2000,peter2014}, geometrically nonlinear beams \cite{lewandowski1997} and plates \cite{ribeiro1999}. The dynamics of complete vehicles \cite{barillon2013} and full-scale aircraft \cite{senechal2014} were also examined with HB, which demonstrates its effectiveness when applied to reduced finite element models. Comparisons between experiments and the results of HB simulations gave further evidence of the accuracy of the method \cite{claeys2014,claeys2014b}.
Beyond applications to classical vibration problems, HB was exploited for extending linear modal analysis to nonlinear systems \cite{kerschen2009}. Specifically, thanks to its natural filtering property, the computation of nonlinear normal modes (NNMs) and their interactions could be substantially improved \cite{krack2013b,detroux2014}. As a result, HB formed the basis of a NNM-based model updating strategy and of convergence studies for nonlinear reduced order models \cite{kuether2014}. Nonlinear Fourier-based modal analysis was adapted to non-conservative autonomous dynamical systems in \cite{laxalde2009} thanks to generalized Fourier series with slow and fast time scales. Through this approach, refined later in \cite{krack2013}, NNMs of damped systems could be constructed and were found to give an accurate approximation of nonlinear resonances. By extending the spectral basis to two incommensurate frequencies, quasiperiodic (QP) oscillations can be studied, e.g., for monoharmonic \cite{schilder2005,peletan2014} and bi-periodic excitations \cite{guskov2012,liao2014}. Another interesting feature of nonlinear systems, namely the presence of co-existing periodic solutions and detached resonance curves, was studied in \cite{grolet2013} by coupling HB with Groebner bases.
The stability of nonlinear solutions can be studied by embedding Floquet theory within the HB formalism \cite{vongroll2001}, which is referred to as Hill's method \cite{hill1886}. In \cite{lanza2007}, Lanza \textit{et al.} provided an analytical approximation of Floquet exponents using the DF method. A semi-analytical version was developed by Bonani and Gilli for an arbitrary number of harmonics \cite{bonani1999}. However, these developments are limited to systems expressed in Lur'e form. Recently, more general theories have been proposed to compute Floquet exponents for autonomous \cite{traversa2008} and nonautonomous \cite{lazarus2010,traversa2012} systems.
Beside stability, bifurcations play a key role in the analysis of nonlinear systems. For example, fold bifurcations translate into a stability change of the periodic solutions, whereas QP oscillations are created or eliminated through Neimark-Sacker (NS) bifurcations. However, even if there exists a large body of literature on HB applied to nonlinear systems, very few studies attempted to use the method for tracking bifurcations.
In \cite{lanza2007}, bifurcation tracking is limited to single-harmonic approximations. Piccardi \cite{piccardi1994} proposed a procedure to obtain flip and fold curves (and even conditions for codimension-2 bifurcations \cite{piccardi1996}), but this procedure cannot describe NS bifurcations. Traversa \textit{et al.} developed a bifurcation tracking technique adapted to fold, flip and NS bifurcations \cite{traversa2008} by appending to the HB equation system an equation which describes the considered bifurcations through the Floquet multipliers. However, the resolution of the extra equation with the secant method makes the implementation inefficient when the size of the system increases.
In this context, the main contribution of the present paper is to adapt classical tools for bifurcation analysis in codimension-2 parameter space to the HB formalism. Because we target large-scale mechanical systems with localized nonlinearities, an algorithm that efficiently combines the computation of the Floquet exponents and bordering techniques is developed. A new procedure for the tracking of NS bifurcations that exploits the properties of eigenvalue derivatives is also proposed.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 recalls the theory of HB and its formulation in the framework of a continuation algorithm. In Section 3, Hill's method is introduced for assessing the stability of periodic solutions and for detecting their bifurcations. The proposed bifurcation tracking procedure is then presented with its adaptations for fold, branch point and NS bifurcations. The overall methodology is demonstrated using numerical experiments of a spacecraft structure that possesses a nonlinear vibration isolation device. Finally, the conclusions of the present study are summarized in Section 5.
\section{Harmonic balance for periodic solutions}\label{HBmethod}
\subsection{Formulation of the dynamics in the frequency domain}\label{HB_theory}
We consider nonautonomous nonlinear dynamical systems with $n$ DOFs governed by the equations of motion
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{M}\ddot{\textbf{x}}+\textbf{C}\dot{\textbf{x}}+\textbf{K}\textbf{x} + \textbf{f}_{nl}(\textbf{x},\dot{\textbf{x}}) = \textbf{f}_{ext}(\omega,t)
\label{eom}
\end{equation}
where $\textbf{M}$, $\textbf{C}$ and $\textbf{K}$ are the mass, damping and stiffness matrices, respectively. Vectors $\textbf{x}$, $\textbf{f}_{nl}$ and $\textbf{f}_{ext}$ represent the displacements, the nonlinear forces and the periodic external forces that are considered to be harmonic with frequency $\omega$ herein. The dots refer to the derivatives with respect to time $t$.
The periodic signals $\textbf{x}(t)$ and $\textbf{f}(\textbf{x},\dot{\textbf{x}},\omega,t)=\textbf{f}_{ext}(\omega,t)-\textbf{f}_{nl}(\textbf{x},\dot{\textbf{x}})$ in Equation (\ref{eom}) are approximated by Fourier series truncated to the $N_{H}$-th harmonic:
\medskip
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{x}(t) &=& \frac{\textbf{c}^{x}_{0}}{\sqrt{2}} + \sum_{k = 1}^{N_{H}}{\left(\textbf{s}^{x}_{k}\sin\left(\frac{k\omega t}{\nu}\right)+\textbf{c}^{x}_{k}\cos\left(\frac{k\omega t}{\nu}\right)\right)}\label{seriex}\\ \nonumber \\
\textbf{f}(t) &=& \frac{\textbf{c}^{f}_{0}}{\sqrt{2}} + \sum_{k = 1}^{N_{H}}{\left(\textbf{s}^{f}_{k}\sin\left(\frac{k\omega t}{\nu}\right)+\textbf{c}^{f}_{k}\cos\left(\frac{k\omega t}{\nu}\right)\right)}
\label{serie}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\textbf{s}_{k}$ and $\textbf{c}_{k}$ represent the vectors of the Fourier coefficients related to the sine and cosine terms, respectively, and the integer $\nu$ accounts for subharmonics of the excitation frequency $\omega$. The Fourier coefficients of $\textbf{f}\left(t\right)$, $\textbf{c}^{f}_{k}$ and $\textbf{s}^{f}_{k}$, depend on the Fourier coefficients of the displacements $\textbf{x}\left(t\right)$, $\textbf{c}^{x}_{k}$ and $\textbf{s}^{x}_{k}$, which represent the new unknowns of the problem. These coefficients are gathered into the $\left(2N_{H}+1\right)n \times 1$ vectors
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{z} = \left[\begin{array}{cccccc}\left(\textbf{c}^{x}_{0}\right)^T & \left(\textbf{s}^{x}_{1}\right)^T & \left(\textbf{c}^{x}_{1}\right)^T & \hdots & \left(\textbf{s}^{x}_{N_{H}}\right)^T & \left(\textbf{c}^{x}_{N_{H}}\right)^T \end{array}\right]^T
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\textbf{b} = \left[\begin{array}{cccccc}\left(\textbf{c}^{f}_{0}\right)^T & \left(\textbf{s}^{f}_{1}\right)^T & \left(\textbf{c}^{f}_{1}\right)^T & \hdots & \left(\textbf{s}^{f}_{N_{H}}\right)^T & \left(\textbf{c}^{f}_{N_{H}}\right)^T \end{array}\right]^T
\end{equation}
The displacements and forces are recast into a more compact form
\medskip
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{x}(t) &=& \left(\textbf{Q}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{z}\label{approx_serie_dep}\\
\textbf{f}(t) &=& \left(\textbf{Q}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{b}\label{approx_serie_f}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\otimes$ and $\mathbb{I}_n$ stand for the Kronecker tensor product and the identity matrix of size $n$, respectively, and $\textbf{Q}(t)$ is a matrix containing the sine and cosine series
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{Q}(t) = \left[\begin{array}{cccccc}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} & \sin\left(\frac{\omega t}{\nu}\right) & \cos\left(\frac{\omega t}{\nu}\right) & \hdots & \sin\left(N_H\frac{\omega t}{\nu}\right) & \cos\left(N_H\frac{\omega t}{\nu}\right) \end{array}\right]
\end{equation}
Velocities and accelerations can also be defined using the Fourier series \cite{jaumouille2010}, with
\medskip
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\textbf{x}}(t) &=& \left(\dot{\textbf{Q}}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{z}=\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}\right) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{z}\label{approx_serie_vel}\\
\ddot{\textbf{x}}(t) &=& \left(\ddot{\textbf{Q}}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{z}=\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}^2\right) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{z}\label{approx_serie_acc}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ccc}
\boldsymbol{\nabla} = \left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0 & & & & \\ & \ddots & & & \\ & & \boldsymbol{\nabla}_k & & \\ & & & \ddots & \\ & & & & \boldsymbol{\nabla}_{N_H}\end{array}\right], & & \boldsymbol{\nabla}\boldsymbol{\nabla} = \boldsymbol{\nabla}^2 = \left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0 & & & & \\ & \ddots & & & \\ & & \boldsymbol{\nabla}^2_k & & \\ & & & \ddots & \\ & & & & \boldsymbol{\nabla}^2_{N_H}\end{array}\right]
\end{array}
\end{equation}
with
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ccc}
\boldsymbol{\nabla}_k = \left[\begin{array}{cc}0 & -\frac{k\omega}{\nu}\\ \frac{k\omega}{\nu} & 0\end{array}\right], & & \boldsymbol{\nabla}^2_k = \left[\begin{array}{cc}-\left(\frac{k\omega}{\nu}\right)^2 & 0\\ 0 & -\left(\frac{k\omega}{\nu}\right)^2\end{array}\right]
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Substituting expressions (\ref{approx_serie_dep})-(\ref{approx_serie_f}) and (\ref{approx_serie_vel})-(\ref{approx_serie_acc}) in the equations of motion (\ref{eom}) yields
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{M}\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}^2\right) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{z} + \textbf{C}\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}\right) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{z}+\textbf{K}\left(\textbf{Q}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{z} = \left(\textbf{Q}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{b} \label{eom_v2}
\end{equation}
Considering the mixed-product property of the Kronecker tensor product $\left(\textbf{A} \otimes \textbf{B}\right)\left(\textbf{C} \otimes \textbf{D}\right) = \left(\textbf{A}\textbf{C}\right) \otimes \left(\textbf{B}\textbf{D}\right)$ yields
\medskip
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{M}\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}^2\right) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right) &=& \left(1 \otimes \textbf{M}\right)\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}^2\right) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right) = \left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}^2\right) \otimes \textbf{M} \\
\textbf{C}\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}\right) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right) &=& \left(1 \otimes \textbf{C}\right)\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}\right) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right) = \left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}\right) \otimes \textbf{C} \\
\textbf{K}\left(\textbf{Q}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right) &=& \left(1 \otimes \textbf{K}\right)\left(\textbf{Q}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right) = \textbf{Q}(t)\otimes \textbf{K}
\end{eqnarray}
These expressions are plugged into Equation (\ref{eom_v2}), which gives
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}^2\right) \otimes \textbf{M}\right)\textbf{z}+\left(\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\boldsymbol{\nabla}\right) \otimes \textbf{C}\right)\textbf{z}+\left(\textbf{Q}(t)\otimes \textbf{K}\right)\textbf{z} = \left(\textbf{Q}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{b} \label{eom_v3}
\end{equation}
In order to remove the time dependency and to obtain an expression relating the different Fourier coefficients, a Galerkin procedure projects Equation (\ref{eom_v3}) on the orthogonal trigonometric basis $\textbf{Q}(t)$
\medskip
\begin{multline}
\left(\left(\frac{2}{T}\int_{0}^{T}{\textbf{Q}^T(t)\textbf{Q}(t)\,dt}\,\boldsymbol{\nabla}^2\right) \otimes \textbf{M}\right)\textbf{z}+\left(\left(\frac{2}{T}\int_{0}^{T}{\textbf{Q}^T(t)\textbf{Q}(t)\,dt}\,\boldsymbol{\nabla}\right) \otimes \textbf{C}\right)\textbf{z}+\hdots \\ \left(\left(\frac{2}{T}\int_{0}^{T}{\textbf{Q}^T(t)\textbf{Q}(t)\,dt}\right)\otimes \textbf{K}\right)\textbf{z} = \left(\left(\frac{2}{T}\int_{0}^{T}{\textbf{Q}^T(t)\textbf{Q}(t)\,dt}\right) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{b}\label{eom_v4}
\end{multline}
where $T$ is the period of the external force. Considering that
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\frac{2}{T}\int_{0}^{T}{\textbf{Q}^T(t)\textbf{Q}(t)dt} = \mathbb{I}_{2N_H+1}
\end{equation}
the equations of motion expressed in the frequency domain are eventually obtained
\begin{equation}
\left(\boldsymbol{\nabla}^2\otimes \textbf{M}\right)\textbf{z}+\left(\boldsymbol{\nabla}\otimes \textbf{C}\right)\textbf{z}+\left(\mathbb{I}_{2N_H+1}\otimes \textbf{K}\right)\textbf{z} = \left(\mathbb{I}_{2N_H+1} \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{b}
\end{equation}
or, in a more compact form,
\begin{equation}
\textbf{h}(\textbf{z},\omega) \equiv \textbf{A}(\omega)\textbf{z}-\textbf{b}(\textbf{z}) = \textbf{0}
\label{eomf}
\end{equation}
where $\textbf{A}$ is the $\left(2N_{H}+1\right)n \times \left(2N_{H}+1\right)n$ matrix describing the linear dynamics
\medskip
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{A} &=& \nonumber \boldsymbol{\nabla}^2\otimes \textbf{M}+\boldsymbol{\nabla}\otimes \textbf{C}+\mathbb{I}_{2N_H+1}\otimes \textbf{K}\\
&=& \left[ \begin{array}{cccc}
\textbf{K} & & & \\
& \begin{array}{cc}\textbf{K}-\left(\frac{\omega}{\nu}\right)^{2}\textbf{M} & -\frac{\omega}{\nu} \textbf{C}\\ \frac{\omega}{\nu} \textbf{C} & \textbf{K}-\left(\frac{\omega}{\nu}\right)^{2}\textbf{M}\end{array} & & \\
& & \ddots & \\
& & & \begin{array}{cc}\textbf{K}-\left(N_{H}\frac{\omega}{\nu}\right)^{2}\textbf{M} & -N_{H}\frac{\omega}{\nu} \textbf{C}\\ N_{H}\frac{\omega}{\nu} \textbf{C} & \textbf{K}-\left(N_{H}\frac{\omega}{\nu}\right)^{2}\textbf{M}\end{array} \\
\end{array}
\right] \nonumber \\
& &
\end{eqnarray}
Expression (\ref{eomf}) can be seen as the equations of amplitude of (\ref{eom}), i.e., if $\textbf{z}^{*}$ is a root of (\ref{eomf}), then the time signals $\textbf{x}^{*}$ constructed from $\textbf{z}^{*}$ with (\ref{seriex}) are solutions of (\ref{eom}).
\subsection{Analytical expression of the nonlinear terms and of the jacobian matrix of the system}
Equation (\ref{eomf}) is nonlinear and has to be solved iteratively (e.g., with a Newton-Raphson procedure, or with the hybrid Powell nonlinear solver \cite{powell1970,nacivet2003}). At each iteration, an evaluation of $\textbf{b}$ and of $\partial \textbf{h}/\partial \textbf{z}$ has to be provided. When $\textbf{f}$ can be accurately approximated with a few number of harmonics and when its analytical sinusoidal expansion is known \cite{lee2005}, or for some types of restoring force \cite{petrov2003}, analytical expressions relating the Fourier coefficients of the forces $\textbf{b}$ and of the displacements $\textbf{z}$ can be obtained together with the expression of the Jacobian matrix of the system. Otherwise, the alternating frequency/time-domain (AFT) technique \cite{cameron1989} can be used to compute $\textbf{b}$:
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{z} \xrightarrow[]{\mbox{FFT}^{-1}} \textbf{x}(t) \xrightarrow[]{} \textbf{f}\left(\textbf{x},\dot{\textbf{x}},\omega,t\right) \xrightarrow[]{\mbox{FFT}} \textbf{b}(\textbf{z})
\end{equation}
The Jacobian matrix of the system can then be computed through finite differences, which is computationally demanding.
An efficient alternative consists in rewriting the inverse Fourier transform as a linear operator $\boldsymbol{\Gamma}\left(\omega\right)$. First proposed by Hwang \cite{Hwang1991}, the method, also called \textit{trigonometric collocation}, was adapted to the AFT technique \cite{Xie1996}, and has been widely used since then \cite{bonani1999,narayanan1998,duan2005,kim2005}. Denoting $N$ as the number of time samples of a discretized period of oscillation, one defines vectors $\tilde{\textbf{x}}$ and $\tilde{\textbf{f}}$ containing the concatenated $nN$ time samples of the displacements and the forces, respectively, for all DOFs:
\medskip
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{\textbf{x}} &=& \left[\begin{array}{ccccccc}x_{1}\left(t_{1}\right) & \hdots & x_{1}\left(t_{N}\right) & \hdots & x_{n}\left(t_{1}\right) & \hdots & x_{n}\left(t_{N}\right) \end{array}\right]^T\\
\tilde{\textbf{f}} &=& \left[\begin{array}{ccccccc}f_{1}\left(t_{1}\right) & \hdots & f_{1}\left(t_{N}\right) & \hdots & f_{n}\left(t_{1}\right) & \hdots & f_{n}\left(t_{N}\right) \end{array}\right]^T
\end{eqnarray}
The inverse Fourier transform can then be written as a linear operation:
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\textbf{x}} = \boldsymbol{\Gamma}\left(\omega\right)\textbf{z}
\end{equation}
with the $nN \times \left(2N_{H}+1\right)n$ sparse operator
\medskip
\begin{multline}
\boldsymbol{\Gamma}\left(\omega\right) = \left[\begin{array}{cccc}\mathbb{I}_{n}\otimes \left[\begin{array}{c} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ \vdots \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \end{array} \right] & \mathbb{I}_{n}\otimes \left[\begin{array}{c} \sin\left(\frac{\omega t_{1}}{\nu}\right) \\ \sin\left(\frac{\omega t_{2}}{\nu}\right) \\ \vdots \\ \sin\left(\frac{\omega t_{N}}{\nu}\right) \end{array} \right] & \mathbb{I}_{n}\otimes \left[\begin{array}{c} \cos\left(\frac{\omega t_{1}}{\nu}\right) \\ \cos\left(\frac{\omega t_{2}}{\nu}\right) \\ \vdots \\ \cos\left(\frac{\omega t_{N}}{\nu}\right) \end{array} \right] & \hdots \end{array}\right. \\ \\ \left. \begin{array}{cc} \mathbb{I}_{n}\otimes \left[\begin{array}{c} \sin\left(N_{H}\frac{\omega t_{1}}{\nu}\right) \\ \sin\left(N_{H}\frac{\omega t_{2}}{\nu}\right) \\ \vdots \\ \sin\left(N_{H}\frac{\omega t_{N}}{\nu}\right) \end{array} \right] & \mathbb{I}_{n}\otimes \left[\begin{array}{c} \cos\left(N_{H}\frac{\omega t_{1}}{\nu}\right) \\ \cos\left(N_{H}\frac{\omega t_{2}}{\nu}\right) \\ \vdots \\ \cos\left(N_{H}\frac{\omega t_{N}}{\nu}\right) \end{array} \right] \end{array} \right]
\end{multline}
Figure \ref{fourier_mat} represents the inverse transformation matrix for the case $n = 2$, $N = 64$, and $N_{H} = 5$.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{fourier_mat_V2.eps}
\caption{Illustration of the inverse Fourier transformation matrix $\boldsymbol{\Gamma}\left(\omega\right)$ for $n = 2$, $N = 64$, and $N_{H} = 5$.} \label{fourier_mat}
\end{figure}
The direct Fourier transformation is written
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{z} = \left(\boldsymbol{\Gamma}\left(\omega\right)\right)^{+}\tilde{\textbf{x}}
\end{equation}
where $^{+}$ stands for the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse $\boldsymbol{\Gamma}^{+} = \boldsymbol{\Gamma}^{T}\left(\boldsymbol{\Gamma}\boldsymbol{\Gamma}^{T}\right)^{-1}$. The Fourier coefficients of the external and nonlinear forces are simply obtained by transforming the signals in the time domain back to the frequency domain:
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{b}(\textbf{z}) = \left(\boldsymbol{\Gamma}\left(\omega\right)\right)^{+}\tilde{\textbf{f}}
\end{equation}
The Jacobian matrix of expression (\ref{eomf}) with respect to the Fourier coefficients $\textbf{z}$, denoted as $\textbf{h}_{z}$, can be computed as in \cite{bonani1999,narayanan1998,kim2005}
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{h}_{z} = \frac{\partial\textbf{h}}{\partial\textbf{z}} = \textbf{A} - \frac{\partial\textbf{b}}{\partial\textbf{z}} = \textbf{A} - \frac{\partial\textbf{b}}{\partial\tilde{\textbf{f}}}\frac{\partial\tilde{\textbf{f}}}{\partial\tilde{\textbf{x}}}\frac{\partial\tilde{\textbf{x}}}{\partial\textbf{z}}=\textbf{A} - \boldsymbol{\Gamma}^{+}\frac{\partial\tilde{\textbf{f}}}{\partial\tilde{\textbf{x}}}\boldsymbol{\Gamma}
\end{equation}
In general, the derivatives of the forces with respect to the displacements in the time domain can be expressed analytically, which leads to a very effective computation of the Jacobian matrix. These derivatives have to be evaluated only for the nonlinear DOFs.
\subsection{Continuation procedure}
Usually, the frequency response is to be computed in a range of frequencies, rather than for a single frequency $\omega$. In this paper, a continuation procedure based on tangent predictions and Moore-Penrose corrections, as in the software \textsc{matcont} \cite{dhooge2003}, is coupled to HB. The search for a tangent vector $\textbf{t}^{(i)}$ at an iteration point $\left(\textbf{z}^{(i)},\omega^{(i)}\right)$ along the branch reads
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\left[\begin{array}{cc}\textbf{h}_{z} & \textbf{h}_{\omega} \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{t}^{T}_{(i-1)}}\end{array}\right] \textbf{t}_{(i)} = \left[\begin{array}{c}\textbf{0} \\ 1\end{array}\right]
\label{tangent}
\end{equation}
where $\textbf{h}_{\omega}$ stands for the derivative of $\textbf{h}$ with respect to $\omega$,
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{h}_{\omega} = \frac{\partial \textbf{h}}{\partial \omega} = \frac{\partial \textbf{A}}{\partial \omega}\textbf{z}
\end{equation}
The last equation in (\ref{tangent}) prevents the continuation procedure from turning back. For the first iteration of the procedure, the sum of the components of the tangent is imposed to be equal to 1.
The correction stage is based on Newton's method. Introducing new optimization variables $\textbf{v}_{(i,j)}$ initialized as $\textbf{v}_{(i,1)} = \textbf{t}_{(i)}$, and $\textbf{y}_{(i,j)} = \left[\textbf{z}_{(i,j)} \ \omega_{(i,j)}\right]^{T}$, the Newton iterations are constructed as follows:
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\textbf{y}_{(i,j+1)} = \textbf{y}_{(i,j)} - \textbf{G}_{y}^{-1}\left(\textbf{y}_{(i,j)},\textbf{v}_{(i,j)}\right)\textbf{G}\left(\textbf{y}_{(i,j)},\textbf{v}_{(i,j)}\right)\\
\textbf{v}_{(i,j+1)} = \textbf{v}_{(i,j)} - \textbf{G}_{y}^{-1}\left(\textbf{y}_{(i,j)},\textbf{v}_{(i,j)}\right)\textbf{R}\left(\textbf{y}_{(i,j)},\textbf{v}_{(i,j)}\right)\\
\end{array}
\label{corr_cont1}
\end{equation}
with
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{c}
\begin{array}{ccc}\textbf{G}\left(\textbf{y},\textbf{v}\right) = \left[\begin{array}{c} \textbf{h}\left(\textbf{y}\right)\\ \textbf{0}\end{array}\right], & & \textbf{G}_{y}\left(\textbf{y},\textbf{v}\right) = \left[\begin{array}{c} \begin{array}{cc}\textbf{h}_{z}\left(\textbf{y}\right) & \textbf{h}_{\omega}\left(\textbf{y}\right)\end{array}\\ \textbf{v}^{T}\end{array}\right],\end{array} \\ \\ \textbf{R}\left(\textbf{y},\textbf{v}\right) = \left[\begin{array}{c} \left[\begin{array}{cc}\textbf{h}_{z}\left(\textbf{y}\right) & \textbf{h}_{\omega}\left(\textbf{y}\right)\end{array}\right]\textbf{v}\\ \textbf{0}\end{array}\right]
\end{array}
\label{corr_cont2}
\end{equation}
\section{Harmonic balance for bifurcation detection and tracking}
\subsection{Stability analysis}\label{stab_anal_sec}
The continuation procedure presented in Section \ref{HBmethod} does not indicate if a periodic solution is stable or not. In the case of time-domain methods, such as the shooting technique, a by-product of the continuation procedure is the monodromy matrix of the system \cite{peeters2009}. Its eigenvalues are termed the \textit{Floquet multipliers} from which the stability of the solution can be deduced. For frequency-domain techniques, one can use a variant of the Floquet theory, the so-called \textit{Hill's method}, whose coefficients are also obtained as a by-product of the calculations. Hill's method is known to give accurate results for a reasonable number of harmonics $N_H$, and to be effective for large systems \cite{peletan2013}.
Following the procedure described in \cite{vongroll2001}, a periodic solution $\textbf{x}^*(t)$ satisfying (\ref{eom}) is perturbed with a periodic solution $\textbf{s}(t)$ modulated by an exponential decay:
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{p}(t) = \textbf{x}^*(t)+e^{\lambda t}\textbf{s}(t)
\label{perturb}
\end{equation}
Introducing this perturbation into expression (\ref{eom}) yields
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{M}\ddot{\textbf{x}}^*+\textbf{C}\dot{\textbf{x}}^*+\textbf{K}\textbf{x}^*+\left(\lambda^2\textbf{M}\textbf{s}+\lambda\left(2\textbf{M}\dot{\textbf{s}}+\textbf{C}\textbf{s}\right)+\textbf{M}\ddot{\textbf{s}}+\textbf{C}\dot{\textbf{s}}+\textbf{K}\textbf{s}\right)e^{\lambda t}=\textbf{f}\left(\textbf{p},\dot{\textbf{p}},\omega,t\right)
\end{equation}
By approximating the solution and the perturbation as Fourier series truncated to the $N_H$-th order, i.e., $\textbf{x}^*(t)= \left(\textbf{Q}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{z}^*$ and $\textbf{s}(t)=\left(\textbf{Q}(t) \otimes \mathbb{I}_n\right)\textbf{u}$, and by applying a Galerkin procedure as in Section \ref{HB_theory}, we obtain
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{A}\textbf{z}^*+\left(\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{2}\lambda^2+\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{1}\lambda+\textbf{A}\right)e^{\lambda t}\textbf{u} = \textbf{b}\left(\textbf{z}^*+e^{\lambda t}\textbf{u}\right)
\label{hill_prev}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{1} &=& \boldsymbol{\nabla}\otimes 2\textbf{M}+\mathbb{I}_{2N_H+1}\otimes \textbf{C} \\
&=& \left[\begin{array}{cccc}
\textbf{C} & & & \\
& \begin{array}{cc}\textbf{C} & -2\frac{\omega}{\nu}\textbf{M}\\ 2\frac{\omega}{\nu}\textbf{M} & \textbf{C}\end{array} & & \\
& & \ddots & \\
& & & \begin{array}{cc}\textbf{C} & -2N_{H}\frac{\omega}{\nu}\textbf{M}\\ 2N_{H}\frac{\omega}{\nu}\textbf{M} & \textbf{C}\end{array}
\end{array}
\right]\nonumber\\
\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{2} &=& \mathbb{I}_{2N_{H}+1} \otimes \textbf{M}
\end{eqnarray}
The right-hand side of Equation (\ref{hill_prev}) is evaluated through a Taylor series expansion around the solution $\textbf{z}^*$
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{b}\left(\textbf{z}^*+e^{\lambda t}\textbf{u}\right) = \textbf{b}\left(\textbf{z}^*\right)+\left.\frac{\partial\textbf{b}}{\partial\textbf{z}}\right|_{\textbf{z} = \textbf{z}^*}\left(e^{\lambda t}\textbf{u}\right)
\label{taylor_b}
\end{equation}
Since $\textbf{A}\textbf{z}^*-\textbf{b}\left(\textbf{z}^*\right)$ is equal to zero by definition, and given that
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{A}-\left.\frac{\partial\textbf{b}}{\partial\textbf{z}}\right|_{\textbf{z} = \textbf{z}^*} = \textbf{h}_z
\end{equation}
replacing (\ref{taylor_b}) in (\ref{hill_prev}) yields
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\left(\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{2}\lambda^2+\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{1}\lambda+\textbf{h}_z\right)e^{\lambda t}\textbf{u} = \textbf{0}
\end{equation}
Hill's coefficients $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ are thus the solutions of the quadratic eigenvalue problem
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{2}\lambda^{2}+\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{1}\lambda+\textbf{h}_{z} = \textbf{0}
\label{quad_pvp}
\end{equation}
When embedded in a continuation scheme, $\textbf{h}_{z}$ is already obtained from the correction stage (\ref{corr_cont1}-\ref{corr_cont2}). Since $\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{1}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{2}$ are easily computed, the main computational effort amounts to solving a quadratic eigenvalue problem, which can be rewritten as a linear eigenvalue problem of double size
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{B}_{1}-\gamma\textbf{B}_{2} = \textbf{0}\label{eigenprob}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ccc}
\textbf{B}_{1} = \left[\begin{array}{cc}\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{1} & \textbf{h}_{z}\\ -\mathbb{I} & \textbf{0}\end{array}\right], & & \textbf{B}_{2} = -\left[\begin{array}{cc}\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{2} & \textbf{0} \\ \textbf{0} & \mathbb{I}\end{array}\right]
\end{array}\label{eqB1}
\end{equation}
The coefficients $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ are found among the eigenvalues of the $\left(2N_{H}+1\right)2n \times \left(2N_{H}+1\right)2n$ matrix
\medskip
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{B} &=& \textbf{B}_{2}^{-1}\textbf{B}_{1}\label{eqB2}\\\label{DerivB}
&=& \left[\begin{array}{cc}-\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{2}^{-1}\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{1} & -\boldsymbol{\Delta}_{2}^{-1}\textbf{h}_{z}\\ \mathbb{I} & \textbf{0}\end{array}\right]
\end{eqnarray}
However, only $2n$ eigenvalues among the complete set $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ approximate the Floquet exponents $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ of the solution $\textbf{x}^*$ \cite{lazarus2010}. The other eigenvalues are spurious and do not have any physical meaning; their number also increases with the number of harmonics $N_H$. Moore \cite{moore2005} showed that the Floquet exponents $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ are the $2n$ eigenvalues with the smallest imaginary part in modulus. The diagonal matrix
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\textbf{B}} = \left[
\begin{array}{cccc}
\tilde{\lambda}_1 & & & \\
& \tilde{\lambda}_2 & & \\
& & \ddots & \\
& & & \tilde{\lambda}_{2n}
\end{array}\right]
\end{equation}
gathers the Floquet exponents and will play a key role for the detection and tracking of bifurcations in Sections \ref{bifdetection} and \ref{biftracking}.
Eventually, the stability of a periodic solution can be assessed, i.e., if at least one of the Floquet exponents has a positive real part, then the solution is unstable, otherwise it is asymptotically stable.
\subsection{Detection of bifurcations}\label{bifdetection}
To detect bifurcations, \textit{test functions} $\phi$ are evaluated at each iteration of the numerical continuation process \cite{dhooge2003}. The roots of these test functions indicate the presence of bifurcations.
A fold bifurcation is simply detected when the $i_{\omega}$-th component of the tangent prediction related to the active parameter $\omega$ changes sign \cite{govaerts2011}. A suitable test function is thus
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\phi_{F} = \textbf{t}_{i_{\omega}}
\end{equation}
According to its algebraic definition \cite{seydel2010}, we note that a fold bifurcation is characterized by a rank deficiency of 1 of the Jacobian matrix $\textbf{h}_{z}$, with $\textbf{h}_{\omega} \notin \text{range}\left(\textbf{h}_{z}\right)$. Another (more computationally demanding) test function is therefore
\medskip
\begin{equation}\label{Fold2}
\phi_{F} = \left|\textbf{h}_z\right|
\end{equation}
Similarly, the Jacobian matrix is rank deficient for branch point (BP) bifurcations, with $\textbf{h}_{\omega} \in \text{range}\left(\textbf{h}_{z}\right)$. They can be detected using the test function for fold bifurcations (\ref{Fold2}), but a more specific test function is \cite{govaerts2011}
\medskip
\begin{equation}\label{BPtest}
\begin{array}{l}
\phi_{BP} = \left|\begin{array}{cc}\textbf{h}_{z} & \textbf{h}_{\omega} \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{t}^{T}}\end{array}\right|
\end{array}
\end{equation}
The Neimark-Sacker (NS) bifurcation is the third bifurcation studied in this paper. It is detected when a pair of Floquet exponents crosses the imaginary axis as a pair of complex conjugates. According to \cite{guckenheimer1997}, the bialternate product of a $m \times m$ matrix $\textbf{P}$, $\textbf{P}_{\odot} = \textbf{P} \odot \mathbb{I}_{m}$, has a dimension $m(m-1)/2$ and has the property to be singular when two eigenvalues of $\textbf{P}$ are two purely imaginary complex conjugates. As a result, the test function for NS bifurcations is
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\phi_{NS} = \left|\tilde{\textbf{B}}_{\odot}\right|
\end{equation}
The size of the bialternate product rapidly increases with the number of DOFs $n$, but the diagonal shape of $\tilde{\textbf{B}}$ implies that $\tilde{\textbf{B}}_{\odot}$ is also diagonal, which allows for a fast evaluation of its terms.
To overcome the issue of computing determinants for large-scale systems, the so-called \textit{bordering technique} replaces the evaluation of the determinant of a matrix $\textbf{G}$ with the evaluation of a scalar function $g$ which vanishes at the same time as the determinant \cite{beyn2002}. The function $g$ is obtained by solving the bordered system
\medskip
\begin{equation}\label{BorderedS}
\left[\begin{array}{cc}\textbf{G} & \textbf{p}\\\textbf{q}^{*} & 0\end{array}\right]\left[\begin{array}{c}\textbf{w}\\g\end{array}\right] = \left[\begin{array}{c}\textbf{0}\\1\end{array}\right]
\end{equation}
where $^{*}$ denotes conjugate transpose, and vectors $\textbf{p}$ and $\textbf{q}$ are chosen to ensure the nonsingularity of the system of equations. When $\textbf{G}$ is almost singular, $\textbf{p}$ and $\textbf{q}$ are chosen close to the null vectors of $\textbf{G}^{*}$ and $\textbf{G}$, respectively. For instance, for NS bifurcations $\textbf{G} = \tilde{\textbf{B}}_{\odot}$.
\subsection{Tracking of bifurcations}\label{biftracking}
Once a bifurcation is detected, it can be tracked with respect to an additional parameter. To continue codimension-1 bifurcations with respect to two parameters, such as, e.g., the frequency and amplitude of the external forcing, the equation defining the bifurcation $g=0$ is appended to (\ref{eomf})
\medskip
\begin{equation}\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\textbf{h} \equiv \textbf{A}\textbf{z}-\textbf{b} = 0\vspace{2mm}\\
g = 0
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
For fold and BP bifurcations, $g$ is the solution of the bordered system (\ref{BorderedS}) with $\textbf{G}=\textbf{h}_{z}$. For NS bifurcations, $\textbf{G}=\tilde{\textbf{B}}_{\odot}$ is considered in the bordered system.
During the continuation procedure, the computation of the derivatives of the additional equation is required. As shown in \cite{beyn2002}, analytical expressions for the derivatives of $g$ with respect to $\alpha$, where $\alpha$ denotes a component of $\textbf{z}$ or one of the two active parameters, are found as
\medskip
\begin{equation}
g_{\alpha} = -\textbf{v}^{*}\textbf{G}_{\alpha}\textbf{w}
\end{equation}
where $\textbf{G}_{\alpha}$ is the derivative of \textbf{G} with respect to $\alpha$, and where $\textbf{w}$ and $\textbf{v}$ comes from the resolution of the bordered system and its transposed version:
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\left[\begin{array}{cc}\textbf{G} & \textbf{p}\\\textbf{q}^{*} & 0\end{array}\right]\left[\begin{array}{c}\textbf{w}\\g\end{array}\right] = \left[\begin{array}{c}\textbf{0}\\1\end{array}\right]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\left[\begin{array}{cc}\textbf{G} & \textbf{p}\\\textbf{q}^{*} & 0\end{array}\right]^{*}\left[\begin{array}{c}\textbf{v}\\e\end{array}\right] = \left[\begin{array}{c}\textbf{0}\\1\end{array}\right]
\end{equation}
As a result, the only term that has to be evaluated is $\textbf{G}_{\alpha}$. For fold and BP bifurcations,
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\textbf{G}_{\alpha} = \textbf{h}_{z\alpha}
\end{equation}
where $\textbf{h}_{z\alpha}$ is the derivative of the Jacobian $\textbf{h}_{z}$ with respect to $\alpha$ and is computed through finite differences.
For NS bifurcations,
\medskip
\begin{equation}\label{eigen_deriv}
\begin{array}{lll}
\textbf{G}_{\alpha} & = & \frac{\partial}{\partial \alpha}\left(\tilde{\textbf{B}}_{\odot}\right) = \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial \alpha}\left(\tilde{\textbf{B}}\right)\right)_{\odot}=\left[
\begin{array}{cccc}
\frac{\partial\tilde{\lambda}_1}{\partial\alpha} & & & \\
& \frac{\partial\tilde{\lambda}_2}{\partial\alpha} & & \\
& & \ddots & \\
& & & \frac{\partial\tilde{\lambda}_{2n}}{\partial\alpha}
\end{array}\right]_{\odot}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Finite differences could be used to compute the derivatives of the Floquet exponents. However, this means that the eigenvalue problem (\ref{eigenprob}) has to be solved for each perturbation of the components of $\textbf{z}$, and for the perturbation of the two continuation parameters. This represents a total of $n\left(2N_H+1\right)+2$ resolutions of the eigenvalue problem per iteration, which is cumbersome for large systems. Instead, we propose to compute the derivatives in (\ref{eigen_deriv}) using the properties of eigenvalue derivatives demonstrated by Van der Aa \textit{et al.} \cite{vanderaa2007}. Denoting as $\boldsymbol{\Lambda}$ the eigenvector matrix of $\textbf{B}$, and $\boldsymbol{\xi}$ the localization vector containing the index of the $2n$ Floquet exponents $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ among the eigenvalues $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$, i.e., $\tilde{\lambda}_i = \lambda_{\xi_i}$, the eigenvalues derivatives can be computed as
\medskip
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial\tilde{\lambda}_i}{\partial\alpha} = \left(\boldsymbol{\Lambda}^{-1}\frac{\partial\textbf{B}}{\partial\alpha}\boldsymbol{\Lambda}\right)_{\left(\xi_i,\xi_i\right)}
\end{equation}
An analytical expression relating the derivative of $\textbf{B}$ with respect to $\alpha$ in function of $\textbf{h}_{z\alpha}$ can be obtained from Equation (\ref{DerivB}). As for fold and BP bifurcations, $\textbf{h}_{z\alpha}$ is computed through finite differences.
From the computational viewpoint, the evaluation of the $\left(2N_H+1\right)n+2$ terms $g_{\alpha}$ represents the main burden of the method when there is a large number of nonlinear DOFs (e.g., in the case of distributed nonlinearities). In this case, parallel computing could help reduce the computational cost
of the algorithm. For localized nonlinearities, one can take advantage of the fact that $\textbf{h}_{z\alpha}$ is a null matrix when $\alpha$ corresponds to Fourier coefficients of linear DOFs.
\section{Bifurcation analysis of a satellite structure}
\subsection{Description of the SmallSat spacecraft}
The effectiveness of the proposed HB method is demonstrated using the \textit{SmallSat}, a spacecraft structure conceived by EADS-Astrium (now Airbus Defence and Space). The spacecraft is $1.2\,$m in height and $1\,$m in width. A prototype of the spacecraft with a dummy telescope is represented in Figure \ref{smallsat_fig}(a). The nonlinear component, the so-called \textit{wheel elastomer mounting system} (WEMS), is mounted on a bracket connected to the main structure and loaded with an $8$-kg dummy inertia wheel, as depicted in Figure \ref{smallsat_fig}(b). The WEMS device acts a mechanical filter which mitigates the on-orbit micro-vibrations of the inertia wheel through soft elastomer plots located between the metallic cross that supports the inertia wheel and the bracket. To avoid damage of the elastomer plots during launch, the axial and lateral motions of the metallic cross are limited by four nonlinear connections labelled NC1 -- 4. Each NC comprises two mechanical stops that are covered with a thin layer of elastomer to prevent metal-metal impacts.
A finite element model (FEM) was built to conduct numerical experiments. Linear shell elements were used for the main structure and the instrument baseplate, and a point mass represented the dummy telescope. Proportional damping was considered for these components. As shown in Figure \ref{wems_restoring_f}(a), the metallic cross of the WEMS was also modeled using linear shell elements whereas the inertia wheel was seen as a point mass owing to its important rigidity. To achieve tractable calculations, the linear elements of the FEM were condensed using the Craig-Bampton reduction technique. Specifically, the FEM was reduced to 10 internal modes and 9 nodes (excluding DOFs in rotation), namely both sides of each NC and the inertia wheel. In total, the reduced-order model thus contains 37 DOFs.
Each NC was then modeled using a trilinear spring in the axial direction (elastomer in traction/compression plus two stops), a bilinear spring in the radial direction (elastomer in shear plus one stop) and a linear spring in the third direction (elastomer in shear). The values of the spring coefficients were identified from experimental data \cite{noel2014}. For instance, the stiffness curve identified for NC1 is displayed in Figure \ref{wems_restoring_f}(b). To avoid numerical issues, regularization with third-order polynomials was utilized in the close vicinity of the clearances to implement $C^1$ continuity. The dissipation in the elastomer plots was modeled using lumped dashpots. We note that the predictions of the resulting nonlinear model were found in good agreement with experimental data \cite{noel2014,renson2014}.
For confidentiality, clearances and displacements are given through adimensionalized quantities throughout the paper.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{smallsat_V2.eps} &
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{wems.eps} \\ \\
(a) & (b) \\ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{SmallSat spacecraft. (a) Photograph; (b) Schematic of the WEMS, the nonlinear vibration isolation device. } \label{smallsat_fig}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{wems_model.eps} \\ \\
(a) \\ \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{restoring_f.eps} \\ \\
(b) \\ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{WEMS. (a) Modeling of the device using shell elements, a point mass, linear and nonlinear springs. The linear and nonlinear springs are represented with squares and circles, respectively. (b) Identified stiffness curve of NC1 (in black) and fitting with a trilinear model (in red).} \label{wems_restoring_f}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Frequency response, Floquet exponents and bifurcation detection}
The forced response of the satellite for harmonic forcing applied to the vertical DOF of the inertia wheel is computed using HB with $N_H = 9$ harmonics and $N = 1024$ points per period. Figure \ref{low_high_forcing_level} depicts the system's frequency response curves at NC1-$X$ and NC1-$Z$ for two forcing amplitudes, $F = 50$ and $155\,$N. For a clear assessment of the effects of the nonlinearities, the response amplitudes are normalized with the forcing amplitude $F$ in this figure. Because the normalized responses for the two forcing amplitudes coincide up to 23 Hz, one can conclude that the motion is purely linear in this frequency range. Conversely, the mode with a linear resonance frequency of $28.8\,$Hz is greatly affected by the WEMS nonlinearities, which can be explained by the fact that this mode combines bracket deflection with WEMS motion \cite{renson2014}.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{FRF_f_50N_155N_cax_63_NH9_npw2_10_DOF14_norm_adim_.eps} \\ \\
(a) \\ \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{FRF_f_50N_155N_cax_63_NH9_npw2_10_DOF15_norm_adim_.eps} \\ \\
(b) \\ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Normalized frequency response at NC1. (a) NC1-$X$; (b) NC1-$Z$. The solid and dashed lines represent forcing amplitude of $F = 50\,$N and $F = 155\,$N, respectively. }\label{low_high_forcing_level}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{freq_resp_curve}(a) presents a close-up of this nonlinear resonance at NC1-Z where stability and bifurcations are also indicated. The evolution of the normalized harmonic coefficients
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{i} = \frac{\phi_{i}}{\sum_{k = 0}^{N_H}{\phi_{i}}} \ \ \left(i = 0,\hdots,N_H\right)
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\phi_{0} = \frac{c_0^x}{\sqrt{2}},\quad \phi_{i} = \sqrt{\left(s_i^x\right)^2+\left(c_i^x\right)^2} \ \ \left(i = 1,\hdots,N_H\right)
\end{equation}
is shown in Figure \ref{freq_resp_curve}(b). From $20$ to $23\,$Hz, only the fundamental harmonic is present in the response. In the resonance region, the SmallSat nonlinearities activate other harmonics in the response. Even harmonics contribute to the dynamics because of the asymmetric modeling of the NCs of the WEMS. From the figure, it is also clear that the 6th and higher harmonics have a negligible participation in the response; for this reason, $N_H = 5$ is considered throughout the rest of the paper.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{FRF_f_155N_cax_63_NH9_npw2_10_adim_stability_V2_.eps} \\ \\
(a) \\ \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{freq_resp_harmonic.eps} \\ \\
(b) \\ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Frequency response at NC1-$Z$ for $F = 155\,$N. (a) Displacement. Circle and triangle markers represent fold and NS bifurcations, respectively. The solid and dashed lines represent stable and unstable solutions, respectively. (b) Harmonic coefficients.} \label{freq_resp_curve}
\end{figure}
The nonlinear resonance has a complex and rich topology. Not only the frequency response curve was found to fold backwards, but bifurcations were detected along the branch by the HB algorithm in Figure \ref{freq_resp_curve}(a). Fold bifurcations are generic for nonlinear resonances and are responsible for stability changes. NS bifurcations imply that further investigation of the dynamics should be carried out in the corresponding range of frequencies, because a branch of quasiperiodic solutions bifurcates out from the main branch. To this end, the response to a swept-sine excitation with a forcing amplitude $F = 155\,$N and with a sweep rate of $0.5\,$Hz/min was computed with a Newmark time integration scheme. The sampling frequency was chosen very high, i.e., $3000\,$Hz, to guarantee the accuracy of the simulation in Figure \ref{freq_resp_comparison}(a). The first observation is that overall the frequency response computed using HB provides a very accurate estimation of the envelope of the swept-sine response. In addition, a modulation of the displacement's envelope is clearly noticed between the two NS bifurcations highlighted by HB, and the close-up in Figure \ref{freq_resp_comparison}(b) confirms the presence of quasiperiodic oscillations. Interestingly, the amplitudes associated with these oscillations are slightly larger than those at resonance, which shows the importance of a proper characterization of these oscillations.
Figure \ref{freq_resp_comparison}(c) shows a subset of Hill's coefficients $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ and Floquet exponents $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ obtained with Hill's method ($N_H = 5$ and $N = 1024$) for the stable periodic solution at $28\,$Hz in Figure \ref{freq_resp_comparison}(a). Floquet exponents $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}_{TI}$ are also calculated from the monodromy matrix evaluated with a Newmark time integration scheme as in \cite{peeters2009}; they serve as a reference solution. The comparison demonstrates that the actual Floquet exponents corresponds to the Hill's coefficients that are the closest ones to the real axis, which validates the sorting criterion discussed in Section \ref{stab_anal_sec}. The other coefficients are spurious, but they seem to be aligned according to the same pattern as that of the actual Floquet exponents. The location of all exponents in the left-half plane indicates that the solution at $28\,$Hz is indeed stable.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{f_155N_cax_63_NH5_npw2_10_freqresp_adim_stability_V3_.eps} & \includegraphics[scale=0.65]{f_155N_cax_63_NH5_npw2_10_freqresp_adim_stability_V2_closeup.eps} \\ \\
(a) & (b)\\ \\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Comparison_Floquet_exponents_NH5_28Hz_.eps}} \\ \\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{(c)} \\ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Bifurcations, quasiperiodic oscillations and Floquet exponents. (a) Comparison between HB (black) and a swept-sine response calculated using Newmark's algorithm (blue) for $F = 155\,$N at NC1-$Z$. Circle and triangle markers depict fold and NS bifurcations, respectively. The solid and dashed lines represent stable and unstable solutions, respectively. (b) Close-up of the quasiperiodic oscillations. (c) Periodic solution at $28\,$Hz: Hill's coefficients $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ (crosses), Floquet exponents $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ obtained with Hill's method (circles), and Floquet exponents $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}_{TI}$ obtained from the monodromy matrix (dots).}\label{freq_resp_comparison}
\end{figure}
The evolution of Hill's coefficients and Floquet exponents in the vicinity of the first NS bifurcation is given in Figures \ref{floquet_comp}(a-b). Before the bifurcation, the Floquet exponents lie all in the left-half plane in Figure \ref{floquet_comp}(a), which indicates a stable solution. We stress that a pair of Hill's coefficients has already crossed the imaginary axis in this figure, which evidences that considering all Hill's coefficients can thus lead to misjudgement. After the bifurcation, a pair of complex conjugates Floquet exponents now lie in the right-half plane in Figure \ref{floquet_comp}(b), which means that the system underwent a NS bifurcation and lost stability. A similar scenario is depicted for the first fold bifurcation in Figures \ref{floquet_comp}(c-d) with the difference that a single Floquet exponent crosses the imaginary axis through zero.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Comparison_Floquet_NS_avant_.eps} & \includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Comparison_Floquet_NS_apres_.eps} \\ \\
(a) & (b)\\ \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Comparison_Floquet_F_avant_.eps} & \includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Comparison_Floquet_F_apres_.eps}\\ \\
(c) & (d) \\ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Floquet exponents in the vicinity of the fold and NS bifurcations. (a) Before the NS bifurcation at $\omega = 29.11\,$Hz, stable region. (b) After the NS bifurcation at $\omega = 29.8\,$Hz, unstable region. (c) Before the fold bifurcation at $\omega = 34.25\,$Hz, stable region. (d) After the fold bifurcation at $\omega = 34.28\,$Hz, unstable region. Hill's coefficients $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ and Floquet exponents $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}$ obtained with Hill's method are denoted with crosses and circles, respectively.}\label{floquet_comp}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Bifurcation tracking}
The fold bifurcations revealed in the previous section are now tracked in the codimension-2 forcing frequency-forcing amplitude space using the algorithm presented in Section \ref{biftracking}. Figure \ref{LP_tracking}(a) represents the resulting fold curve, together with the frequency responses of the system for different forcing amplitudes. Very interestingly, the algorithm initially tracks the fold bifurcations of the main frequency response, but it then turns back to reveal a \textit{detached resonance curve} (DRC), or \textit{isola}. Such an attractor is rarely observed for real structures in the literature. Figure \ref{LP_tracking}(b), which shows the projection of the fold curve in the forcing amplitude-response amplitude plane, highlights that the DRC is created when $F = 158\,$N. The DRC then expands both in frequency and amplitude until $F = 170\,$N for which merging with the resonance peak occurs. Because the upper part of the DRC is stable, the resonance peak after the merging is characterized by a greater frequency and amplitude. This merging process is further illustrated in Figure \ref{jump_phenomenon}, where the responses to swept-sine excitations of amplitude $168$, $170$, $172$ and $174\,$N are superimposed. Moving from $F = 170\,$N to $F = 172\,$N leads to a sudden `jump' in resonance frequency and amplitude.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{3D_plot_tracking_F_adim_.eps} \\ \\
(a) \\ \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{LP_tracking_2D_cax_63_NH5_npw10_adim_V2_.eps} \\ \\
(b) \\ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Tracking of the fold bifurcations of the resonance peak. (a) Three-dimensional space. Orange line: branch of fold bifurcations; black lines: frequency responses at NC1-$Z$ for $F = 155\,$N, $160\,$N, $170\,$N and $175\,$N. Circle markers depict fold bifurcations. (b) Two-dimensional projection of the branch of fold bifurcations.} \label{LP_tracking}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.65]{sinesweep_cax_63_comparison_adim_V2_.eps}
\caption{NC1-$Z$ displacement for swept-sine excitations with $F = 168\,$N (purple), $170\,$N (black), $172\,$N (orange) and $174\,$N (green).} \label{jump_phenomenon}
\end{figure}
Bifurcation tracking is not only useful for understanding the system's dynamics and revealing additional attractors, but it can also be used for engineering design. For instance, we use it herein to study the influence of the axial dashpot $c_{ax}$ of the WEMS device on the quasiperiodic oscillations. Figure \ref{NS_tracking}(a) depicts the NS curve in the codimension-2 forcing frequency-axial damping space to which frequency responses computed for $c_{ax} = 63\,$Ns/m (reference), $80\,$Ns/m and $85\,$Ns/m are superimposed. The projection in the $c_{ax}$-response amplitude plane in Figure \ref{NS_tracking}(b) shows that the two NS bifurcations, and hence quasiperiodic oscillations, can be completely eliminated for $c_{ax}=84\,$Ns/m.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{3D_plot_tracking_cax_adim_V2_.eps} \\ \\
(a) \\ \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{NS_tracking_2D_c_ax_NH5_npw10_adim_V2_.eps} \\ \\
(b) \\ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Tracking of the NS bifurcations. (a) Three-dimensional space. Blue line: branch of NS bifurcations; black lines: frequency responses of the at NC1-$Z$ for $F = 155\,$N and for $c_{ax} = 63\,$Ns/m, $80\,$Ns/m and $85\,$Ns/m. Triangle markers depict NS bifurcations. (b) Two-dimensional projection of the branch of NS bifurcations.} \label{NS_tracking}
\end{figure}
Finally, the convergence of the algorithm is assessed in Figure \ref{LP_NS_convergence}, for which the fold and NS curves presented in Figures \ref{LP_tracking} and \ref{NS_tracking} were recomputed for a number of harmonics $N_H$ varying from $1$ to $9$. In both cases, a clear convergence of the results is observed. These figures also confirm that retaining $5$ harmonics in the Fourier series leads to an error less than 1\%.
\begin{figure}[h!t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Isola_creation_merging_cax_63_npw10_NH_comparison2_.eps} \\ \\
(a) \\ \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{NS_elimination_f_155_npw10_NH_comparison2_.eps} \\ \\
(b) \\ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Convergence of the bifurcation tracking algorithm with respect to the number of harmonics $N_H$. (a) Fold bifurcations: the solid line with diamond markers corresponds to the creation of the DRC, whereas the dashed line with square markers corresponds to the merging of the DRC with the main resonance. (b) NS bifurcations: the solid line with stars markers corresponds to the elimination of the bifurcations. For both figures, the red lines gives $+1\%$ and $-1\%$ variations with respect to $N_H$ = 5.} \label{LP_NS_convergence}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
\section{Conclusions}
The purpose of this paper was to exploit the harmonic balance method for the computation of periodic solutions and their bifurcations in codimension-2 parameter space. Particular attention was devoted to the computational efficiency of the algorithm, which motivated the use of a bordering technique and the development of a new procedure for Neimark-Sacker bifurcations exploiting the properties of eigenvalue derivatives.
The method was demonstrated using a real satellite example possessing several mechanical stops. By combining the proposed algorithm with Craig-Bampton reduction, we showed that bifurcation tracking of large-scale structures with localized nonlinearities is now within reach; it represents a particularly effective tool both for uncovering dynamical attractors and for engineering design.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\medskip
The authors Thibaut Detroux, Luc Masset and Gaetan Kerschen would like to acknowledge the financial support of the European Union (ERC Starting Grant NoVib 307265). The author L. Renson is a Marie-Curie COFUND Postdoctoral Fellow of the University of Liège, co-funded by the European Union.
|
\section{Introduction}
Entity type classification is the task of assigning semantic types to mentions of entities in sentences.
Identifying the types of entities is useful for various natural language processing tasks, such as relation extraction \cite{ling2012fine}, question answering \cite{lee2006fine}, and knowledge base population \cite{carlson2010coupled}.
Unfortunately, most entity type classification systems use a relatively small number of types (e.g. {\tt person}, {\tt organization}, {\tt location}, {\tt time}, and {\tt miscellaneous} \cite{grishman1996message}) which may be too coarse-grained for some NLP applications \cite{sekine2008extended}.
To address this shortcoming, a series of recent work has investigated entity type classification with a large set of fine-grained types \cite{lee2006fine,ling2012fine,yosef2012hyena,yogatama2015embedding,del2015finet}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{model.pdf}
\centering
\caption{An illustration of our proposed model predicting fine-grained semantic types for the mention ``New York'' in the sentence ``She got a Ph.D from New York in Feb. 1995.''.}
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure}
Existing fine-grained entity type classification systems have used approaches ranging from sparse binary features to dense vector representations of entities to model the entity mention and its context.
However, no previously proposed system has attempted to learn to recursively compose representations of entity context.
For example, one can see that a phrase ``got a Ph.D. from'' is indicative of the next words being an educational institution, something which would be helpful for fine-grained entity type classification.
In this work our main contributions are two-fold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{A first model for fine-grained entity type classification that learns to recursively compose representations for the context of each mention and attains state-of-the-art performance on a well-established dataset.}
\item{The observation that by incorporating an attention mechanism into our model, we not only achieve better performance, but also are able to observe that the model learns contextual linguistic expressions that indicate fine-grained category memberships of an entity.}
\end{enumerate}
\section{Related Work}
To the best of our knowledge, \newcite{lee2006fine} were the first to address the task of fine-grained entity type classification.
They defined 147 fine-grained entity types and evaluated a conditional random fields-based model on a manually annotated Korean dataset.
\newcite{sekine2008extended} advocated the necessity of a large set of types for entity type classification and defined $200$ types which served as a basis for future work on fine-grained entity type classification.
\newcite{ling2012fine} defined a set of $112$ types based on Freebase and created a training dataset from Wikipedia using a distant supervision method inspired by \newcite{mintz2009distant}.
For evaluation, they created a small manually annotated dataset of newspaper articles and also demonstrated that their system, FIGER, could improve the performance of a relation extraction system by providing fine-grained entity type predictions as features.
\newcite{yosef2012hyena} organised $505$ types in a hierarchical taxonomy, with several hundreds of types at different levels.
Based on this taxonomy they developed a multi-label hierarchical classification system.
In \newcite{yogatama2015embedding} the authors proposed to use label embeddings to allow information sharing between related labels.
This approach lead to improvements on the FIGER dataset, and they also demonstrated that fine-grained labels can be used as features to improve coarse-grained entity type classification performance.
\newcite{del2015finet} introduced the most fine-grained entity type classification system to-date, it operates on the the entire WordNet hierarchy with more than $16,000$ types.
While all previous models relied on hand-crafted features, \newcite{dong2015hybrid} defined $22$ types and created a two-part neural classifier.
They used a recurrent neural networks to recursively obtain a vector representation of each entity mention and used a fixed-size window to capture the context of each mention.
The key difference between our work and theirs lies in that we use recursive neural networks to compose context representations and that we employ an attention mechanism to allow our model to focus on relevant expressions.
\section{Models}
\subsection{Task Formulation}
We formulate the entity type classification problem as follows.
Given an entity mention and its left and right context, our task is to predict its types.
Formally, the input is $l_{1},...,l_{C},m_{1},...,m_{M},r_1,...,r_C$,
where $C$ is the window size of the left and right context, $l_{i}$ and $r_{i}$ represents a word in those contexts, $M$ is the window size of the mention, and $m_i$ is a mention word.
If a context or a mention extends beyond the sentence length, a padding symbol is used in-place of a word.
Given this input we compute a probability $y_{k} \in \mathbb{R}$ for each of the $K$ types.
At inference, the type $k$ is predicted if $y_{k}$ is greater than $0.5$ or $y_{k}$ is the maximum value $\forall k \in K$.
The motivation of the former is that it acts as a cut-off, while the latter enforces the constraint that each mention is assigned at least one type.
\subsection{General Model}
While both mentions and contexts play important roles in determining the types, the complexity of learning to represent them are different.
During initial experiments, we observed that our model could learn from mentions significantly easier than from the context, leading to poor model generalization.
This motivated us to use different models for modeling mentions and contexts.
Specifically, all of our models described below firstly compute a mention representation $v_m \in \mathbb{R}^{D_m \times 1}$ and context representation $v_c \in \mathbb{R}^{D_c \times 1}$ separately, and then concatenate them to be passed to the final logistic regression layer with weight matrix $W_y \in \mathbb{R}^{ K \times (D_m+D_c) }$:
\begin{equation}
y = \frac{1}{1 + \exp \left( -W_y \left[ \begin{array}{c} v_{m} \\ v_{c}\\ \end{array} \right] \right)}
\end{equation}
Note that we did not include a bias term in the above formulation since the type distribution in the training and test corpus could potentially be significantly different due to domain differences.
That is, in logistic regression, a bias fits to the empirical distribution of types in the training set, which would lead to bad performance on a test set that has a different type distribution.
The loss $L$ for a prediction $y$ when the true labels are encoded in a binary vector $t \in \{0,1\}^{K \times 1}$ is the following cross entropy loss function:
\begin{equation}
L(y,t) = \sum_{k=1}^K - t_{k}\log(y_{k}) - (1 - t_{k})\log(1 - y_{k})
\end{equation}
\subsection{Mention Representation}
Mention representations are computed by averaging all the embeddings of the words in the mention.
Let the vocabulary be $V$ and the function $u : V \mapsto \mathbb{R}^{D_m \times 1}$ be a mapping from a word to its embedding.
Formally, the mention representation $v_m$ is obtained as follows.
\begin{equation}
v_{m} = \frac{1}{M} \sum_{i=1}^{M} u(m_{i})
\end{equation}
During our experiments we were surprised by the fact that unlike the observations made by \newcite{dong2015hybrid}, complex neural models did not work well for learning mention representations compared to the simpler model described above.
One possible explanation for this would be labeling discrepancies between the training and test set.
For example, the label {\tt time} is assigned to days of the week (e.g. ``Friday'', ``Monday'', and ``Sunday'') in the test set, but not in the training set, whereas explicit dates (e.g. ``Feb. 24'' and ``June 4th'') are assigned the {\tt time} label in both the training and test set.
This may be harmful for complex models due to their tendency to overfit on the training data.
\subsection{Context Representation}
We compare three methods for computing context representations.
\subsubsection{Averaging Encoder}
Applying the same averaging approach as for the mention representation for both the left and right context.
Thus, the concatenation of those two vectors becomes the representation of the context:
\begin{eqnarray}
v_c = \frac{1}{C} \sum_{i=1}^{C} \left[ \begin{array}{c} u(l_{i}) \\ u(r_{i}) \\ \end{array} \right]
\end{eqnarray}
\subsubsection{LSTM Encoder}
The left and right context are encoded recursively using an LSTM cell \cite{hochreiter1997long}.
Given an input embedding $u_i \in \mathbb{R}^{D_m \times 1}$, the previous output $h_{i-1} \in \mathbb{R}^{D_h \times 1}$, and the previous cell state $s_{i-1} \in \mathbb{R}^{D_h \times 1}$, the high-level formulation of the recursive computation by an LSTM cell is as follows:
\begin{equation}
h_i, s_i = lstm(u_i,h_{i-1},s_{i-1})
\end{equation}
For the left context, the model reads sequences $ l_{1},...,l_{C} $ from left to right to produce the outputs
$\overrightarrow{h_{1}^l},..., \overrightarrow{h_{C}^l}$.
For the right context, the model reads sequences $ r_{C},...,r_{1} $ from right to left to produce the outputs
$\overleftarrow{h_{1}^r},..., \overleftarrow{h_{C}^r}$.
Then the representation $v_c$ is obtained by concatenating $\overrightarrow{h_{C}^l}$ and $\overleftarrow{h_{1}^r}$:
\begin{equation}
v_c = \left[ \begin{array}{c} \overrightarrow{h_{C}^l} \\ \overleftarrow{h_{1}^r} \\ \end{array} \right]
\end{equation}
A more detailed formulation of the LSTM used in this work can be found in \newcite{sak2014long}.
\subsubsection{Attentive Encoder}
While an LSTM can encode sequential data, it still finds it difficult to learn long-term dependencies.
Inspired by recent work using attention mechanisms for natural language processing \cite{hermann2015teaching,rocktaschel2015reasoning}, we circumvent this problem by introducing a novel attention mechanism.
We also hypothesize that by incorporating an attention mechanism the model can recognize informative expressions for the classification and make the model behavior more interpretable.
The computation of the attention mechanism is as follows.
Firstly, for both the right and left context, we encode the sequences using bi-directional LSTMs \cite{graves2012supervised}.
We denote the outputs as $\overrightarrow{h_{1}^l},\overleftarrow{h_{1}^l},..., \overrightarrow{h_{C}^l},\overleftarrow{h_{C}^l}$
and $\overrightarrow{h_{1}^r},\overleftarrow{h_{1}^r},..., \overrightarrow{h_{C}^r},\overleftarrow{h_{C}^r}$.
For each output layer of the bi-directional LSTMs, we compute a scalar value $\tilde{a}_{i} \in \mathbb{R}$ using a two-layer feed forward neural network $e_i \in \mathbb{R}^{D_a \times 1}$ and weight matrices $W_e \in \mathbb{R}^{ D_a \times 2D_h }$ and $W_a \in \mathbb{R}^{ 1 \times D_a}$.
We then normalize these scalar values such that they sum to $1$.
We refer to these normalized scalar values $a_i \in \mathbb{R}$ as attentions.
Lastly, we take a weighted sum of the output layers of the bidirectional LSTMs as the representation of the context weighted by the attentions $a_i$:
\begin{eqnarray}
e_{i}^l &=& \tanh \left( W_e \left[ \begin{array}{c} \overrightarrow{h_i^l} \\ \overleftarrow{h_i^l} \\ \end{array} \right] \right) \\
\tilde{a}_{i}^l &=& \exp(W_a e_i^l) \\
a_{i}^l &=& \frac{\tilde{a}_{i}^l}{\sum_{i=1}^C \tilde{a}_{i}^l + \tilde{a}_{i}^r} \\
v_{c} &=& \sum_{i=1}^{C} a_{i}^l \Biggl[ \begin{array}{c} \overrightarrow{h_i^l} \\ \overleftarrow{h_i^l} \\ \end{array} \Biggr]
+ a_{i}^r \Biggl[ \begin{array}{c} \overrightarrow{h_i^r} \\ \overleftarrow{h_i^r} \\ \end{array} \Biggr]
\end{eqnarray}
The equations for computing $e_{i}^r$, $\tilde{a}_{i}^r$, and $a_{i}^r$ were omitted for brevity and the overall picture of our proposed model is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:model}.
\section{Experiment}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[width=16cm]{examples.png}
\centering
\caption{Examples of our model attending over contexts for a given mention.}
\label{fig:examples}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Dataset}
To train and evaluate our model we use the publicly available FIGER dataset with 112 fine-grained types from \newcite{ling2012fine}.
The sizes of our datasets are $2,600,000$ for training, $90,000$ for development, and $563$ for testing.
Note that the train and development sets were created from Wikipedia, whereas the test set is a manually annotated dataset of newspaper articles.
\subsection{Pre-trained Word Embeddings}
The only features used by our model are pre-trained word embeddings that were not updated during training to help the model generalize for words not appearing in the training set.
Specifically, we used the freely available $300$ dimensional cased word embeddings trained on 840 billion tokens from the Common Crawl supplied by \newcite{pennington2014glove}.
As embeddings for out-of-vocabulary words, we used the embedding of the ``unk'' token from the pre-trained embeddings.
\subsection{Evaluation Criteria}
Following \newcite{ling2012fine}, we evaluate the model performances by strict, loose macro, and loose micro measures.
For the $i$-th instance, let the set of the predicted types be $\hat{T}_i$, and the set of the true types be $T_i$.
Then the precisions and recall for each measure are computed as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item strict \begin{equation} Precision = Recall = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \delta (\hat{T}_i=T_i) \end{equation}
\item loose macro \begin{eqnarray} Precision = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \frac{|\hat{T}_i \cap T_i|}{|\hat{T}_i|} \\
Recall = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \frac{|\hat{T}_i \cap T_i|}{|T_i|}
\end{eqnarray}
\item loose micro \begin{eqnarray} Precision = \frac{ \sum_{i=1}^N |\hat{T}_i \cap T_i| }{ \sum_{i=1}^N |\hat{T}_i|} \\
Recall = \frac{ \sum_{i=1}^N |\hat{T}_i \cap T_i| }{ \sum_{i=1}^N |T_i|}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{itemize}
Where $N$ is the total number of instances.
\subsection{Hyperparameter Settings}
As hyperparameters, all three models used the same $D_m = 300$ dimensional word embeddings, the hidden-size of the LSTM was set to $D_h = 100$, and the hidden-layer size of the attention module was set to $D_a = 50$.
We used Adam \cite{kingma2014adam} as our optimization method with a learning rate of $0.005$ with a mini-batch size of $1,000$.
As a regularizer we used dropout with probability $0.5$ applied to the mention representation.
The context window size was set to $C=15$ and mention window size was set to $M=5$.
It should be noted that our approach is not restricted to using fixed window sizes, rather this is an implementation detail arising from current limitations of the machine learning library used when handling dynamic-width recurrent neural networks.
For each epoch we iterated over the training data set ten times and then evaluated the model performance on the development set.
After training we picked up the best model on the development set as our final model and report the performance on the test set.
Our model implementation was done in Python using the TensorFlow \cite{abadi2015tensorflow} machine learning library.
\subsection{Results}
The performance of the various models are summarized Tables~\ref{results} and~\ref{results2}.
We see that the Averaging base line performs well in spite of its relative simplicity, the LSTM model shows some improvements, and the attention model performs better than any previously proposed method.
In Figure~\ref{fig:examples}, we visualize the attentions for several instances that were manually selected from the development set.
It is clear that our proposed model is attending over expressions relevant for the entity types such as immediately adjacent to the mention such as ``starring'' and ``Republican Governor'', as well as more distant expressions such as ``filmmakers''.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|}
\hline
Models & P & R & F1 \\ \hline
\newcite{ling2012fine} & - & - & 69.30 \\ \hline
\newcite{yogatama2015embedding} & \bf{82.23} & 64.55 & 72.35 \\ \hline
Averaging Encoder & 68.63 & 69.07 & 68.65 \\ \hline
LSTM Encoder & 72.32 & 70.36 & 71.34 \\ \hline
Attentive Encoder & 73.63 & \bf{76.29} & \bf{74.94} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Loose Micro Precision (P), Recall (R), and F1-score on the test set}
\label{results}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|}
\hline
Models & Strict & \shortstack{Loose \\ Macro} & \shortstack{Loose \\ Micro} \\ \hline
\newcite{ling2012fine} & 52.30 & 69.90 & 69.30 \\ \hline
\newcite{yogatama2015embedding} & - & - & 72.25 \\ \hline
Averaging Encoder & 51.89 & 72.24 & 68.65 \\ \hline
LSTM Encoder & 55.60 & 73.95 & 71.34 \\ \hline
Attentive Encoder & \bf{58.97} & \bf{77.96} & \bf{74.94} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Strict, Loose Macro and Loose Micro F1-scores}
\label{results2}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we proposed a novel state-of-the-art neural network architecture with an attention mechanism for the task of fine-grained entity type classification.
We also demonstrated that the model can successfully learn to attend over expressions that are important for the classification of fine-grained types.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by CREST-JST, JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 15H01702, a Marie Curie Career Integration Award, and an Allen Distinguished Investigator Award.
We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and Koji Matsuda for their helpful comments and feedback.
|
\section{Motivating study and background}
Melanoma is the least common but most deadly type of skin cancer and occurs in melanocytes, which are cells that produce the skin pigment melanin \citep{Jerant-etal-2000}.
A systematic review of published studies by \cite{Xing-etal-2011} has examined the accuracy of contemporary diagnostic imaging modalities for detecting metastases in patients with melanoma and identified 60 cohort and 43 case-control studies.
\cite{Xing-etal-2011} applied the generalized linear mixed model (GLMM), proposed by \cite{Chu&Cole2006}, to account for the association between the sensitivity and specificity across studies.
However, it is reported in the literature that the assumption of independence between the sensitivity/specificity with disease prevalence in the bivariate GLMM is likely to be violated
\citep{brenner-gefeller-1997,leeflang-etal-2009,Leeflang-etal-2013}. By fitting the bivariate GLMM
the information on prevalence of melanoma, which is available only in cohort studies, has been totally neglected, and, thus an important amount of data has been wasted.
\cite{chu-etal-2009} extended the bivariate GLMM to a trivariate GLMM by also accounting for disease prevalence.
Nevertheless, this model can only meta-analyse data from the cohort studies, since the disease prevalence is not available in case-control studies. Very recently, \cite{chen-etal-2015-jrssc} developed a hybrid model that exploits the use of both the bivariate and trivariate GLMM for combining case-control and cohort studies (hereafter hybrid GLMM) and applied the model to fully analyse the systematic review of published studies in \cite{Xing-etal-2011} Due to the fact that they noticed computational problems such as non-convergence and singularities, they developed a composite likelihood (CL) method to overcome the computational difficulties on the estimation of the hybrid GLMM. The CL method is well established in the statistical literature as a surrogate alternative of maximum likelihood (ML) when the joint likelihood is too difficult to compute \citep{varin08,Varin-etal2011}. The advantage of the CL approach in this application domain is that the likelihood can be derived conveniently under the assumption of independence between the random effects, i.e., the latent vector of transformed sensitivity, specificity, and disease prevalence.
\cite{Chen-etal-smmr-2014}
proposed a CL method even for the estimation of the GLMM to overcome practical `issues' in the joint likelihood inference such as computational difficulty caused by a double integral in the joint likelihood function. Our view is that
GLMM can only be unstable if there are too many parameters in the covariance
matrix of the random effects or too many random effects for a small
sample \citep{Demidenko04}, which is not the case in this application domain.
\cite{Nikoloulopoulos2015b,
Nikoloulopoulos2015c}
proposed copula mixed models for bivariate and trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies and made the argument for moving to the general class of copula random effects models.
The copula mixed models include the bivariate and trivariate GLMMs \citep{Chu&Cole2006,chu-etal-2009}
as special cases, can also operate on the original scale of sensitivity, specificity, and disease prevalence, and their estimation can be successfully approached by ML estimation.
In this paper building in the aforementioned papers, we propose a hybrid copula mixed model to combine case-control and cohort studies. We combine the bivariate and trivariate copula mixed model for the data from the case-control studies and cohort studies, respectively.
The hybrid copula mixed has as special case the hybrid GLMM and features several other advantages: (a) the random effects distributions are expressed via copulas which allow for flexible dependence modelling, different from assuming simple linear correlation structures, normality and tail independence (b) can also operate on the original scale of sensitivity, specificity, and prevalence, and (c) estimation can be approached by the `gold standard' ML method.
The remainder of the paper proceeds as follows. Section \ref{sec-model} introduces the hybrid copula mixed model for diagnostic test accuracy (case-control and cohort) studies.
An ML estimation technique and computational details are provided in Section \ref{sec-est}. Section \ref{sec-sim} contains small-sample efficiency calculations
to investigate the effect of misspecifying the random effects distributions and compare the proposed methodology to the CL approach proposed by \cite{chen-etal-2015-jrssc}.
In Section \ref{sec-app} we analyse the systematic review of the accuracy of contemporary diagnostic imaging modalities for detecting metastases in patients with melanoma and show efficiency gains with respect to the CL approach.
We conclude with some discussion in Section \ref{sec-disc}.
\section{\label{sec-model}The hybrid copula mixed model}
In this section we introduce the hybrid copula mixed model. Before that we provide some background about important tools to form the hybrid copula mixed model. These are a brief introduction to copulas in Subsection \ref{overview}, the bivariate copula mixed model in Subsection \ref{2model}, and the vine copula mixed model in Subsection \ref{3model}.
\subsection{\label{overview}Overview and relevant background for copulas}
A copula is a multivariate cdf with uniform $U(0,1)$ margins \citep{joe97,joe2014,nelsen06}.
If $F$ is a $d$-variate cdf with univariate margins $F_1,\ldots,F_d$,
then Sklar's (1959)\nocite{sklar1959} theorem implies that there is a copula $C$ such that
$$F(x_1,\ldots,x_d)= C\Bigl(F_1(x_1),\ldots,F_d(x_d)\Bigr).$$
The copula is unique if $F_1,\ldots,F_d$ are continuous.
If $F$ is continuous and $(Y_1,\ldots,Y_d)\sim F$, then the unique copula
is the distribution of $(U_1,\ldots,U_d)=\left(F_1(Y_1),\ldots,F_d(Y_d)\right)$ leading to
$$C(u_1,\ldots,u_d)=F\Bigl(F_1^{-1}(u_1),\ldots,F_d^{-1}(u_d)\Bigr),
\quad 0\le u_j\le 1, j=1,\ldots,d,$$
where $F_j^{-1}$ are inverse cdfs \citep{nikoloulopoulos&joe12}. For example,
if $\Phi_d(\cdot;\mathbf{R})$
is the MVN cdf with correlation matrix $$\mathbf{R}=(\rho_{jk}: 1\le j<k\le d)$$ and
N(0,1) margins, and $\Phi$ is the univariate standard normal cdf,
then the MVN copula is
\begin{equation}\label{MVNcdf}
C(u_1,\ldots,u_d)=\Phi_d\Bigl(\Phi^{-1}(u_1),\ldots,\Phi^{-1}(u_d);\mathbf{R}\Bigr).
\end{equation}
In the bivariate case there are many parametric families of copulas.
However,
their multivariate extensions have limited dependence structures. An approach to successfully subside this restriction is the vine pair-copula construction \citep{Kurowicka-Joe-2011,joe2014}
which is based on $d(d-1)/2$ bivariate copulas, of which some are
used to summarize conditional dependence.
Vine copulas include the MVN as special case, but can also cover reflection
asymmetry and have upper/lower tail dependence parameters being different
for each bivariate margin \citep{joeetal10}.
Vines require a decision on the indexing of variables. For example, for a 3-dimensional vine copula there are $3$ distinct permutations: $$\{12,13,23|1\}, \qquad \{12,23,13|2\}, \quad \mbox{and} \quad \{13,23,12|3\}.$$
For each of them, the 3-dimensional vine is decomposed on $3$ bivariate copulas, of which the one is
used to summarize conditional dependence; see \cite{Nikoloulopoulos2015c} for more details.
Table \ref{2fam} provides a sufficient list of bivariate copulas for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies \citep{Nikoloulopoulos2015b,
Nikoloulopoulos2015c}.
These copula families have different strengths of tail behaviour and tail dependence is a property to consider when choosing amongst different families of copulas and the concept of upper/lower tail dependence is one way to differentiate families. \cite{Nikoloulopoulos&karlis08CSDA} have shown that it is hard to choose a copula with similar properties from real data, since copulas with similar (tail) dependence properties provide similar fit.
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
\begin{table}[!h]
\caption{\label{2fam}Parametric families of bivariate copulas and their Kendall's $\tau$ as a strictly increasing function of the copula parameter $\theta$.}
\begin{small}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
Copula & $C^{-1}(v|u;\theta)$&
$\tau$\\\hline
BVN & $\Phi\Bigl(\sqrt{1-\theta^2}\Phi^{-1}(v)+\theta\Phi^{-1}(u)\Bigr)$
&$\frac{2}{\pi}\arcsin(\theta)\quad ,\quad -1\leq\theta\leq1$\\
Frank &$
-\frac{1}{\theta}\log\left[1-\frac{1-e^{-\theta}}{(v^{-1}-1)e^{-\theta u}+1}\right]
$
&$\begin{array}{ccc}
1-4\theta^{-1}-4\theta^{-2}\int_\theta^0\frac{t}{e^t-1}dt &,& \theta<0\\
1-4\theta^{-1}+4\theta^{-2}\int^\theta_0\frac{t}{e^t-1}dt &,& \theta>0\\
\end{array}$\\
Clayton &$\Bigl\{(v^{-\theta/(1+\theta)}-1)u^{-\theta}+1\Bigr\}^{-1/\theta}$
&$\theta/(\theta+2)\quad ,\quad \theta>0$\\
Clayton by 90 &$\Bigl\{(v^{-\theta/(1+\theta)}-1)(1-u)^{-\theta}+1\Bigr\}^{-1/\theta}$&
$-\theta/(\theta+2)\quad ,\quad \theta>0$\\
Clayton by 180 &$1-\Bigl[\bigl\{(1-v)^{-\theta/(1+\theta)}-1\bigr\}(1-u)^{-\theta}+1\Bigr]^{-1/\theta}$
&$\theta/(\theta+2)\quad ,\quad \theta>0$\\
Claytonby 270 &$1-
\Bigl[\bigl\{(1-v)^{-\theta/(1+\theta)}-1\bigr\}u^{-\theta}+1\Bigr]^{-1/\theta}$
&$-\theta/(\theta+2)\quad ,\quad \theta>0$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{small}
\end{table}
\subsection{\label{2model}Bivariate copula mixed model}
For each study $i$, the within-study model assumes that the number of true positives $Y_{i1}$ and true negatives $Y_{i2}$ are conditionally independent and binomially distributed given $\mathbf{X}=\mathbf{x}$, where $\mathbf{X}=(X_1,X_2)$ denotes the bivariate latent (random) pair of (transformed) sensitivity and specificity. That is
\begin{eqnarray}\label{withinBinom}
Y_{i1}|X_{1}=x_1&\sim& \mbox{Binomial}\Bigl(n_{i1},l^{-1}(x_1)\Bigr);\nonumber\\
Y_{i2}|X_{2}=x_2&\sim& \mbox{Binomial}\Bigl(n_{i2},l^{-1}(x_2)\Bigr),
\end{eqnarray}
where $l(\cdot)$ is a link function.
The stochastic representation of the between studies model takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{copula-between}
\Bigl(F\bigl(X_1;l(\pi_1),\delta_1\bigr),F\bigl(X_2;l(\pi_2),\delta_2\bigr)\Bigr)\sim C(\cdot;\theta),
\end{equation}
where $C(\cdot;\theta)$ is a parametric family of copulas with dependence parameter $\theta$ and $F(\cdot;l(\pi),\delta)$ is the cdf of the univariate distribution of the random effect. The copula parameter $\theta$ is a parameter of the random effects model and it is separated from the univariate parameters, the univariate parameters $\pi_1$ and $\pi_2$ are the meta-analytic parameters for the sensitivity and specificity, and $\delta_1$ and $\delta_2$ express the variability between studies.
For $N$ studies with data $(y_{ij}, n_{ij}),\, i = 1, \ldots ,N,\, j=1,2$, the models in (\ref{withinBinom}) and (\ref{copula-between}) together specify a copula mixed model with joint likelihood
\begin{equation}\label{mixed-cop-likelihood}
L(\pi_1,\pi_2,\delta_1,\delta_2,\theta)=\prod_{i=1}^{N}\int_{0}^{1}\int_{0}^{1}
\prod_{j=1}^2g\Bigl(y_{ij};n_{ij},l^{-1}\bigl(F^{-1}(u_j;l(\pi_j),\delta_j)\bigr)\Bigr)c(u_1,u_2;\theta)du_1du_2,
\end{equation}
where $c(u_1,u_2;\theta)=\partial^2 C(u_1,u_2;\theta)/\partial u_1\partial u_2$ is the copula density and $g\bigl(y;n,\pi\bigr)=\binom{n}{y}\pi^y(1-\pi)^{n-y},\quad y=0,1,\ldots,n,\quad 0<\pi<1,$
is the binomial probability mass function (pmf).
The choices of the $F\bigl(\cdot;l(\pi),\delta\bigr)$ and $l$ are given in Table \ref{choices}.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\caption{\label{choices}The choices of the $F\bigl(\cdot;l(\pi),\delta\bigr)$ and $l$ in the copula mixed model.}
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline $F\bigl(\cdot;l(\pi),\delta\bigr)$ & $l$ & $\pi$ & $\delta$\\\hline
$N(\mu,\sigma)$ & logit, probit, cloglog & $l^{-1}(\mu)$&$\sigma$\\
Beta$(\pi,\gamma)$ & identity & $\pi$ & $\gamma$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{\label{3model}Trivariate copula mixed model}
For each study $i$, the within-study model assumes that the number of true positives $Y_{i1}$, true negatives $Y_{i2}$, and diseased persons $Y_{i3}$ are conditionally independent and binomially distributed given $\mathbf{X}=\mathbf{x}$, where $\mathbf{X}=(X_1,X_2,X_3)$ denotes the trivariate latent (random) vector of (transformed) sensitivity, specificity, and disease prevalence. That is
\begin{eqnarray}\label{withinBinom3}
Y_{i1}|X_{1}=x_1&\sim& \mbox{Binomial}\Bigl(n_{i1},l^{-1}(x_1)\Bigr);\nonumber\\
Y_{i2}|X_{2}=x_2&\sim& \mbox{Binomial}\Bigl(n_{i2},l^{-1}(x_2)\Bigr);\\
Y_{i3}|X_{3}=x_3&\sim& \mbox{Binomial}\Bigl(n_{i3},l^{-1}(x_3)\Bigr),\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $l(\cdot)$ is a link function.
The stochastic representation of the between studies model takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{copula-between-norm}
\Bigl(F\bigl(X_1;l(\pi_1),\delta_1\bigr),F\bigl(X_2;l(\pi_2),\delta_2\bigr)
,F\bigl(X_3;l(\pi_3),\delta_3\bigr)\Bigr)\sim C(\cdot;\boldsymbol{\theta}),
\end{equation}
where $C(\cdot;\boldsymbol{\theta})$ is a vine copula with dependence parameter vector $\boldsymbol{\theta}=(\theta_{12},\theta_{13},\theta_{23|1})$ and $F(\cdot;l(\pi),\delta)$ is the cdf of the univariate distribution of the random effect. To be concrete, we use the permutation $\{12,13,23|1\}$. The theory though also apply to the other two permutations.
The joint density $f_{123}(x_1,x_2,x_3)$ of the transformed latent proportions is:
\begin{multline}\label{jointdensityNCMM}
f_{123}(x_1,x_2,x_3;\pi_1,\pi_2,\pi_3,\delta_1,\delta_2,\delta_3,\theta,\theta_{12},\theta_{13})=\\
c_{12}\Bigl(F\bigl(x_1;l(\pi_1),\delta_1\bigr),F\bigl(x_2;l(\pi_2),\delta_2\bigr)
;\theta_{12}\Bigr)\times\\ c_{13}\Bigl(F\bigl(x_1;l(\pi_1),\delta_1\bigr),F\bigl(x_3;l(\pi_3),\delta_3\bigr);\theta_{13}\Bigr)
\prod_{j=1}^3f\bigl(x_j;l(\pi_j),\delta_j\bigr),
\end{multline}
where $f(\cdot;l(\pi),\delta)$ is the density of $F$.
In (\ref{jointdensityNCMM}) we assume conditional independence between $X_1$ and $X_3$ given $X_2$, i.e., the density of the (independence) copula $C_{13|2}(u,v)=uv$ is $c_{13|2}(u,v)=1$. Here we are making the simplifying assumption that the conditional copula does not depend on $X_2$. We use simplified vines to keep them tractable for inference and model selection. The simplifying assumption, that copulas of conditional distributions do not depend on the values of the variables which they are conditioned on, is popular \citep{aasetal09} and not restrictive in practice \citep{Stober-joe-czado2013}.
\cite{joeetal10} show that in order for a (simplified) vine copula to have (tail) dependence for all bivariate margins, it is only necessary the non-conditional bivariate copulas to have (tail) dependence and it is not necessary for the conditional bivariate copulas to have tail dependence. That provides the theoretical justification for the idea of conditional independence. For more details see \cite{Nikoloulopoulos2015c}.
For $N$ studies with data $(y_{ij}, n_{ij}),\, i = 1, \ldots ,N,\, j=1,2,3$, the models in (\ref{withinBinom3}) and (\ref{copula-between-norm}) together specify a vine copula mixed model with joint likelihood
\begin{multline}\label{mixed-cop-likelihood}
L(\pi_1,\pi_2,\pi_3,\delta_1,\delta_2,\delta_3,\theta_{12},\theta_{13})=\\
\prod_{i=1}^{N}\int_{0}^{1}\int_{0}^{1}\int_{0}^{1}
\prod_{j=1}^3g\Bigl(y_{ij};n_{ij},l^{-1}\bigl(F^{-1}(u_j;l(\pi_j),\delta_j)\bigr)\Bigr)c_{12}(u_1,u_2;\theta_{12})c_{13}(u_1,u_3;\theta_{13})du_j.
\end{multline}
The choices of the $F\bigl(\cdot;l(\pi),\delta\bigr)$ and $l$ are the same as in the bivariate case; see Table \ref{choices}.
\subsection{Hybrid copula mixed model}
To form the hybrid copula mixed model we combine the aforementioned models. For ease of exposition, let the first $N_1$ studies be the case-control studies and the remaining $N_2$ studies be the cohort studies. A combination of the bivariate likelihood for the data from $N_1$ case-control studies and the trivariate likelihood for the data from $N_2$ cohort studies leads to
\begin{multline}\label{beta-mixed-cop-likelihood}
L(\pi_1,\pi_2,\pi_3,\delta_1,\delta_2,\delta_3,\theta,\theta_{12},\theta_{13})=\\
\prod_{i=1}^{N_1}\int_0^1\int_0^1
\prod_{j=1}^2g\Bigl(y_{ij};n_{ij},F^{-1}\bigl(u_j;l(\pi_j),\delta_j\bigr)\Bigr)c(u_1,u_2;\theta)du_j\quad\times\\
\prod_{i=N_1+1}^{N_1+N_2}\int_0^1\int_0^1\int_0^1
\prod_{j=1}^3g\Bigl(y_{ij};n_{ij},F^{-1}\bigl(u_j;l(\pi_j),\delta_j\bigr)\Bigr)c_{12}(u_1,u_2;\theta_{12})c_{13}(u_1,u_3;\theta_{13})du_j.
\end{multline}
Our general statistical model allows for selection of $c(\cdot;\theta)$, $c_{12}(\cdot;\theta_{12})$ and $c_{13}(\cdot;\theta_{13})$ independently among a variety of parametric copula families, i.e., there are no constraints in the choices of parametric copulas.
\section{\label{sec-est}Maximum likelihood estimation and computational details}
Estimation of the model parameters $(\pi_1,\pi_2,\pi_3,\delta_1,\delta_2,\delta_3,\theta,\theta_{12},\theta_{13})$ can be approached by the standard ML method, by maximizing the logarithm of the joint likelihood in (\ref{beta-mixed-cop-likelihood}).
The estimated parameters can be obtained by
using a quasi-Newton \citep{nash90} method applied to the logarithm of the joint likelihood.
This numerical method requires only the objective
function, i.e., the logarithm of the joint likelihood, while the gradients
are computed numerically and the Hessian matrix of the second
order derivatives is updated in each iteration. The standard errors (SE) of the ML estimates can be also obtained via the gradients and the Hessian computed numerically during the maximization process.
Numerical evaluation of the mixed joint pmf is easily done with a combination of the algorithms in \cite{Nikoloulopoulos2015b,Nikoloulopoulos2015c}:
\begin{enumerate}
\itemsep=0pt
\item Calculate Gauss-Legendre quadrature points $\{u_q: q=1,\ldots,n_q\}$
and weights $\{w_q: q=1,\ldots,n_q\}$ in terms of standard uniform; see e.g., \cite{Stroud&Secrest1966}.
\item
\begin{enumerate}
\itemsep=0pt
\item Convert from independent uniform random variables $\{u_{q_1}: q_1=1,\ldots,n_q\}$ and $\{u_{q_2}: q_2=1,\ldots,n_q\}$ to dependent uniform random variables $\{u_{q_1}: q_1=1,\ldots,n_q\}$ and $\{C^{-1}(u_{q_2}|u_{q_1};\theta): q_1=q_2=1,\ldots,n_q\}$ that have distribution $C(\cdot;\theta)$.
The inverse of the conditional distribution $C(v|u;\theta)=\partial C(u,v;\theta)/\partial u$ corresponding to the copula $C(\cdot;\theta)$ is used to achieve this.
\item Convert from independent uniform random variables $\{u_{q_1}: q_1=1,\ldots,n_q\}$, $\{u_{q_2}: q_2=1,\ldots,n_q\}$, and $\{u_{q_3}: q_3=1,\ldots,n_q\}$ to dependent uniform random variables $\{v_{q_1}=u_{q_1}: q_1=1,\ldots,n_q\}$, $\bigl\{v_{q_2|q_1}=C^{-1}_{12}(u_{q_2}|u_{q_1};\theta_{12}): q_1=q_2=1,\ldots,n_q\bigr\}$, and
$\Bigl\{v_{q_2q_3|q_1}=C^{-1}_{13}\Bigl(C^{-1}_{23|1}(u_{q_3}|u_{q_2};$ $\theta_{23|1}\to 0)|u_{q_1};\theta_{13}\Bigr): q_1=q_2=q_3=1,\ldots,n_q\Bigr\}$ that have vine distribution $C(\cdot;\theta_{12},\theta_{13})$.
The simulation algorithm of a C-vine copula in \cite{joe2010a} is used to achieve this.
\end{enumerate}
\item
\begin{enumerate}
\itemsep=0pt
\item Numerically evaluate the bivariate pmf
$$\int_0^1\int_0^1
\prod_{j=1}^2g\Bigl(y_{j};n_{j},F^{-1}\bigl(u_j;l(\pi_j),\delta_j\bigr)\Bigr)c(u_1,u_2;\theta)du_1du_2$$
in a double sum:
$$\sum_{q_1=1}^{n_q}\sum_{q_2=1}^{n_q}w_{q_1}w_{q_2}
g\Bigl(y_1;n_{1},F^{-1}\bigl(u_{q_1};l(\pi_1),\delta_1\bigr)\Bigr)g\Bigl(y_{2};n_{2},F^{-1}\bigl(C^{-1}(u_{q_2}|u_{q_1};\theta);l(\pi_2),\delta_2\bigr)\Bigr).$$
\item Numerically evaluate the trivariate pmf
$$\int_0^1\int_0^1\int_0^1
\prod_{j=1}^3g\Bigl(y_{ij};n_{ij},F^{-1}\bigl(u_j;l(\pi_j),\delta_j\bigr)\Bigr)c_{12}(u_1,u_2;\theta_{12})c_{13}(u_1,u_3;\theta_{13})du_1du_2du_3$$
in a triple sum
$$\sum_{q_1=1}^{n_q}\sum_{q_2=1}^{n_q}\sum_{q_3=1}^{n_q}w_{q_1}w_{q_2}w_{q_3}
\,g\Bigl(y_1;n_{1},F^{-1}\bigl(v_{q_1};l(\pi_1),\delta_1\bigr)\Bigr)
g\Bigl(y_2;n_{2},F^{-1}\bigl(v_{q_2|q_1};l(\pi_2),\delta_2\bigr)\Bigr)\times
$$$$g\Bigl(y_3;n_{3},F^{-1}\bigl(v_{q_2q_3|q_1};l(\pi_3),\delta_3\bigr)\Bigr)
$$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\vspace{-1cm}
\noindent The inverse conditional copula cdfs $C^{-1}(v|u;\theta)$ are given in Table \ref{2fam}.
With Gauss-Legendre quadrature, the same nodes and weights
are used for different functions;
this helps in yielding smooth numerical derivatives for numerical optimization via quasi-Newton.
Our
extensive comparisons with more quadrature points, show that $n_q=21$ is adequate with good precision to at least at four decimal places.
The developed algorithm for the calculation of a bivariate or a trivariate integral overcomes the convergence problems that have been reported in the literature \citep{chu-etal-2009,Chen-etal-smmr-2014,chen-etal-2015-jrssc}. Our Gauss-Legendre quadrature algorithm for hybrid copula mixed models (including the hybrid GLMM) is stable. The crucial step is to convert from independent to dependent quadrature points.
\section{\label{sec-sim}Small-sample efficiency--Misspecification}
An extensive simulation study is conducted
(a) to gauge the small-sample efficiency of the ML
method, and
(b) to investigate in detail
the misspecification of the parametric margin or family of copulas of the random effects distributions.
To generate the data we have combined the simulation algorithms in \cite{Nikoloulopoulos2015b,Nikoloulopoulos2015c}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $i=1,\ldots,N_1$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Simulate the study size $n$ from a shifted gamma distribution, i.e., $n\sim \mbox{sGamma}(\boldsymbol{\alpha}=1.2,\beta=0.01,\mbox{lag}=30)$ and round off to the nearest integer.
\item Simulate $(u_1,u_2)$ from a parametric family of copulas $C(;\tau)$; $\tau$ is converted
to the copula parameter $\theta$ via the relations in Table \ref{2fam}.
\item Convert to beta or normal realizations via $x_j=l^{-1}\Bigl(F_j^{-1}\bigl(u_j,l(\pi_j),\delta_j\bigr)\Bigr)$ for $j=1,2$.
\item Draw the number of diseased $n_{1}$ from a $B(n,0.43)$ distribution.
\item Set $n_2=n-n_1$, $y_j=n_jx_j$ and then round $y_j$ for $j=1,2$.
\end{enumerate}
\item For $i=N_1+1,\ldots,N_1+N_2$
\begin{enumerate}
\item Simulate the study size $n$ from a shifted gamma distribution, i.e., $n\sim \mbox{sGamma}(\boldsymbol{\alpha}=1.2,\beta=0.01,\mbox{lag}=30)$ and round off to the nearest integer.
\item Simulate $(u_1,u_2,u_3)$ from a C-vine $C(;\tau_{12},\tau_{13},\tau_{23|1}=0)$ via the algorithm in Joe\cite{joe2010a}; $\tau$'s are converted
to $\theta$'s via the relations in Table \ref{2fam}.
\item Convert to beta or normal realizations via $x_j=l^{-1}\Bigl(F_j^{-1}\bigl(u_j,l(\pi_j),\delta_j\bigr)\Bigr)$ for $j=1,2$.
\item Set number of diseased and non-diseased as $n_{1}=nx_3$ and $n_2=n-n_1$, respectively.
\item Set $y_j=n_jx_j$ and then round $y_j$ for $j=1,2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
Tables \ref{sim-norm} and \ref{sim-beta} contain the
resultant biases, root mean square errors (RMSE), and standard deviations (SD) for the MLEs under different copula and marginal choices from $1000$ randomly generated samples of size $N_1=N_2=25$ from the hybrid copula mixed model with normal and beta margins, respectively. The true (simulated) copula distributions are the Clayton and Clayton rotated by 90 degrees for the $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ copulas, respectively.
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
\begin{landscape}
\begin{table}[!h]
\centering
\caption{\label{sim-norm} Biases, root mean square errors (RMSE) and standard deviations (SD) for the ML estimates under different copula choices and margins and CL estimates under normal margins from small sample of sizes $N_1 = N_2=25$ simulations ($10^3$ replications) from the hybrid copula mixed model with normal margins.
The true (simulated) copula distributions are the Clayton and Clayton rotated by 90 degrees for the $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ copulas, respectively. }
\begin{tabular}{llccccccccc}
\hline
\multicolumn{11}{l}{Biases scaled by 50 for the estimates under different copula and margin choices}\\
\multicolumn{11}{l}{ True model: Clayton for $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and Clayton rotated by 90 degrees for $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ and normal margins} \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{True model parameters:} &$\pi_1=0.7$ & $\pi_2=0.9$ & $\pi_3=0.7$ & $\sigma_1=1.5$ & $\sigma_2=1$ & $\sigma_3=1.5$ & $\tau_{12}=0.5$ & $\tau_{13}=-0.5$ & $\tau=-0.5$ \\\hline
\rowcolor{gray} {Clayton by 0/90} & {Normal} & {0.04} & {-0.39} & {-0.29} & {-1.38} & {-4.12} & {0.01} & {0.83} & {0.92} & {-6.62} \\
{} & {Beta} & {-2.74} & {-1.96} & {-1.69} & {-} & {-} & {-} & {1.24} & {1.23} & {-5.74} \\
\rowcolor{gray} {BVN} & {Normal} & {-0.06} & {-0.39} & {-0.26} & {-2.72} & {-5.46} & {-3.19} & {4.38} & {-2.22} & {-6.47} \\
{} & {Beta} & {-2.74} & {-1.90} & {-1.63} & {-} & {-} & {-} & {4.76} & {-2.03} & {-5.04} \\
\rowcolor{gray} {Clayton by 180/270} & {Normal} & {-0.20} & {-0.32} & {-0.08} & {-2.20} & {-6.17} & {-3.13} & {7.06} & {-2.16} & {-4.97} \\
{} & {Beta} & {-2.96} & {-1.75} & {-1.22} & {-} & {-} & {-} & {7.38} & {-2.02} & {-2.84} \\
\rowcolor{gray} {Independence (CL)} & {Normal} & {-0.64} & {-0.15} & {-0.21} & {-6.08} & {-7.15} & {-5.01} & {-} & {-} & {-} \\\hline
\multicolumn{11}{l}{SDs scaled by 50 for the estimates under different copula and margin choices}\\
\multicolumn{11}{l}{ True model: Clayton for $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and Clayton rotated by 90 degrees for $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ and normal margins} \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{True model parameters:} &$\pi_1=0.7$ & $\pi_2=0.9$ & $\pi_3=0.7$ & $\sigma_1=1.5$ & $\sigma_2=1$ & $\sigma_3=1.5$ & $\tau_{12}=0.5$ & $\tau_{13}=-0.5$ & $\tau=-0.5$ \\\hline
\rowcolor{gray} {Clayton by 0/90} & {Normal} & {1.79} & {0.50} & {3.05} & {8.98} & {6.52} & {11.51} & {12.68} & {7.49} & {6.45} \\
{} & {Beta} & {1.52} & {0.69} & {2.15} & {2.16} & {1.29} & {2.62 } & {13.85} & {7.14} & {6.32} \\
\rowcolor{gray} {BVN} & {Normal} & {1.72} & {0.50} & {2.83} & {8.39} & {6.07} & {9.83} & {8.70} & {6.01} & {7.02} \\
{} & {Beta} & {1.44} & {0.69} & {2.06} & {2.09} & {1.15} & {2.21} & {9.16} & {5.92} & {6.46} \\
\rowcolor{gray} {Clayton by 180/270} & {Normal} & {1.75} & {0.51} & {2.86} & {8.67} & {6.39} & {9.62} & {7.10} & {5.20} & {11.47} \\
{} & {Beta} & {1.47} & {0.69} & {2.13} & {2.16} & {1.16} & {2.16} & {6.73} & {5.35} & {10.49} \\
\rowcolor{gray} {Independence (CL)} & {Normal} & {2.22} & {0.63} & {3.41} & {7.77} & {5.96} & {9.67} & {-} & {-} & {-} \\
\hline
\multicolumn{11}{l}{RMSEs scaled by 50 for the estimates under different copula and margin choices}\\
\multicolumn{11}{l}{ True model: Clayton for $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and Clayton rotated by 90 degrees for $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ and normal margins} \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{True model parameters:} &$\pi_1=0.7$ & $\pi_2=0.9$ & $\pi_3=0.7$ & $\sigma_1=1.5$ & $\sigma_2=1$ & $\sigma_3=1.5$ & $\tau_{12}=0.5$ & $\tau_{13}=-0.5$ & $\tau=-0.5$ \\\hline
\rowcolor{gray} {Clayton by 0/90} & {Normal} & {1.79} & {0.64} & {3.07} & {9.08} & {7.71} & {11.51} & {12.71} & {7.55} & {9.24} \\
{} & {Beta} & {3.13} & {2.08} & {2.74} & {-} & {-} & {-} & {13.90} & {7.25} & {8.54} \\
\rowcolor{gray} {BVN} & {Normal} & {1.72} & {0.64} & {2.84} & {8.82} & {8.16} & {10.34} & {9.74} & {6.40} & {9.54} \\
{} & {Beta} & {3.10} & {2.02} & {2.63} & {-} & {-} & {-} & {10.32} & {6.25} & {8.19} \\
\rowcolor{gray} {Clayton by 180/270} & {Normal} & {1.76} & {0.60} & {2.86} & {8.95} & {8.88} & {10.12} & {10.02} & {5.63} & {12.50} \\
{} & {Beta} & {3.31} & {1.88} & {2.45} & {-} & {-} & {-} & {9.99} & {5.72} & {10.87} \\
\rowcolor{gray} {Independence (CL)} & {Normal} & {2.31} & {0.65} & {3.42} & {9.87} & {9.31} & {10.89} & {-} & {-} & {-} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{footnotesize}
Clayton by $\alpha/\beta$ denotes a hybrid copula mixed with copula distributions the Clayton rotated by $\alpha$ and $\beta$ degrees for the $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ copulas, respectively.
\end{footnotesize}
\end{table}
\end{landscape}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
\begin{landscape}
\begin{table}[!h]
\centering
\caption{\label{sim-beta} Biases, root mean square errors (RMSE) and standard deviations (SD) for the ML estimates under different copula choices and margins and CL estimates under beta margins from small sample of sizes $N_1 = N_2=25$ simulations ($10^3$ replications) from the hybrid copula mixed model with normal margins.
The true (simulated) copula distributions are the Clayton and Clayton rotated by 90 degrees for the $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ copulas, respectively. }
\begin{tabular}{llccccccccc}
\hline
\multicolumn{11}{l}{Biases scaled by 50 for the estimates under different copula and margin choices}\\
\multicolumn{11}{l}{ True model: Clayton for $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and Clayton rotated by 90 degrees for $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ and beta margins} \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{True model parameters:} &$\pi_1=0.7$ & $\pi_2=0.9$ & $\pi_3=0.7$ & $\gamma_1=0.15$ & $\gamma_2=0.1$ & $\gamma_3=0.15$ & $\tau_{12}=0.5$ & $\tau_{13}=-0.5$ & $\tau=-0.5$ \\\hline
Clayton by 0/90 & Normal & 1.64 & 1.43 & 0.66 & - & - & - & 2.17 & 0.45 & -7.40 \\
\rowcolor{gray} & Beta & 0.00 & -0.16 & -0.19 & -0.39 & -0.58 & -0.09 & 2.38 & 0.90 & -7.43 \\
BVN & Normal & 1.57 & 1.46 & 0.76 & - & - & - & 4.95 & -2.49 & -7.04 \\
\rowcolor{gray} & Beta & 0.02 & -0.09 & -0.09 & -0.75 & -0.85 & -0.72 & 4.98 & -2.53 & -6.49 \\
Clayton by 180/270 & Normal & 1.45 & 1.47 & 0.82 & - & - & - & 7.12 & -3.54 & -6.36 \\
\rowcolor{gray} & Beta & -0.08 & -0.05 & 0.09 & -0.62 & -0.89 & -0.69 & 7.36 & -3.61 & -4.93 \\
Independence (CL) & Normal & 1.38 & 1.59 & 0.80 & - & - & - & - & - & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{11}{l}{SDs scaled by 50 for the estimates under different copula and margin choices}\\
\multicolumn{11}{l}{ True model: Clayton for $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and Clayton rotated by 90 degrees for $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ and beta margins} \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{True model parameters:} &$\pi_1=0.7$ & $\pi_2=0.9$ & $\pi_3=0.7$ & $\gamma_1=0.15$ & $\gamma_2=0.1$ & $\gamma_3=0.15$ & $\tau_{12}=0.5$ & $\tau_{13}=-0.5$ & $\tau=-0.5$ \\\hline
Clayton by 0/90 & Normal & 1.08 & 0.46 & 1.90 & 7.05 & 8.17 & 8.23 & 11.66 & 9.29 & 6.71 \\
\rowcolor{gray} & Beta & 1.04 & 0.57 & 1.64 & 1.56 & 1.19 & 2.01 & 12.89 & 9.21 & 6.62 \\
BVN & Normal & 1.03 & 0.45 & 1.76 & 6.13 & 7.49 & 6.94 & 8.03 & 6.61 & 7.67 \\
\rowcolor{gray} & Beta & 0.99 & 0.54 & 1.53 & 1.35 & 1.05 & 1.58 & 8.38 & 6.51 & 7.38 \\
Clayton by 180/270 & Normal & 1.09 & 0.46 & 1.76 & 6.02 & 7.88 & 7.00 & 7.49 & 5.76 & 12.37 \\
\rowcolor{gray} & Beta & 1.05 & 0.54 & 1.56 & 1.42 & 1.10 & 1.55 & 7.12 & 5.87 & 12.10 \\
Independence (CL) & Normal & 1.41 & 0.57 & 2.13 & 5.64 & 7.33 & 6.70 & & & \\
\hline
\multicolumn{11}{l}{RMSEs scaled by 50 for the estimates under different copula and margin choices}\\
\multicolumn{11}{l}{ True model: Clayton for $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and Clayton rotated by 90 degrees for $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ and beta margins} \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{True model parameters:} &$\pi_1=0.7$ & $\pi_2=0.9$ & $\pi_3=0.7$ & $\gamma_1=0.15$ & $\gamma_2=0.1$ & $\gamma_3=0.15$ & $\tau_{12}=0.5$ & $\tau_{13}=-0.5$ & $\tau=-0.5$ \\\hline
Clayton by 0/90 & Normal & 1.96 & 1.50 & 2.01 & - & - & - & 11.86 & 9.30 & 9.99 \\
\rowcolor{gray} & Beta & 1.04 & 0.59 & 1.65 & 1.61 & 1.33 & 2.01 & 13.11 & 9.26 & 9.95 \\
BVN & Normal & 1.88 & 1.53 & 1.92 & - & - & - & 9.43 & 7.06 & 10.41 \\
\rowcolor{gray} & Beta & 0.99 & 0.55 & 1.53 & 1.55 & 1.35 & 1.74 & 9.75 & 6.98 & 9.83 \\
Clayton by 180/270& Normal & 1.81 & 1.54 & 1.94 & - & - & - & 10.33 & 6.76 & 13.91 \\
\rowcolor{gray} & Beta & 1.06 & 0.55 & 1.56 & 1.55 & 1.41 & 1.70 & 10.24 & 6.89 & 13.06 \\
Independence (CL) & Normal & 1.97 & 1.69 & 2.28 & - & - & - & - & - & - \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{footnotesize}
Clayton by $\alpha/\beta$ denotes a hybrid copula mixed with copula distributions the Clayton rotated by $\alpha$ and $\beta$ degrees for the $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ and $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ copulas, respectively.
\end{footnotesize}
\end{table}
\end{landscape}
We also report these summaries for the CL estimates in \cite{chen-etal-2015-jrssc} to allow for a comprehensive comparison.
In \cite{chen-etal-2015-jrssc} it has been assumed that the association $\tau_{12}$ between sensitivity and specificity for cohort studies is the same as the association $\tau$ between sensitivity and specificity for case-control studies, i.e., $\tau=\tau_{12}$. This is a strong assumption given the fact that the sensitivity/specificity depends on disease prevalence in cohort studies, thus the association between sensitivity and specificity is likely to be affected. In our simulations we emphasize that by allowing heterogeneity in association in cohort and case control studies.
Any comparison of the likelihood methods in terms of computing time is a digression and not included here. It is obvious that the CL method is faster than the ML method and not in need of a comparison, since the idea is to replace a numerically more difficult high-dimensional probability calculation with a much simpler probability calculation assuming independence among random effects.
Conclusions from the values in the tables are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item ML with the true hybrid copula mixed model is highly efficient according to the simulated biases and standard deviations.
\item The CL method yields estimates that are almost as good as the ML estimates for the meta-analytic parameters under the assumption of normal margins.
\item The CL method slightly underestimates the between-studies variability parameters.
\item The ML estimates of the meta-analytic parameters are slightly underestimated under copula misspecification.
\item The SDs are rather robust to the copula misspecification.
\item The meta-analytic ML and CL estimates are not robust to the margin misspecification, while
the ML estimate of $\tau$ is.
\end{itemize}
The meta-analytic parameters are a univariate inference, and hence it is the univariate marginal distribution that matters and not the type of the copula; see also \cite{Nikoloulopoulos2015b,
Nikoloulopoulos2015c}. \cite{chen-etal-2015-jrssc} constraint themselves to normal margins; this it is too restrictive and as shown in Table \ref{sim-beta} leads to overestimation of the meta-analytic parameters when the true univariate distribution of the latent sensitivity, specificity, and disease prevalence is beta.
\section{\label{sec-app}Systematic review of modern diagnostic imaging modalities for surveillance of melanoma patients}
To assess the diagnostic imaging modalities for the surveillance of melanoma patients we apply hybrid copula mixed models.
The diagnostic modalities under investigation are ultrasonography (US) for regional lymph node metastasis ($N_1=6,N_2=15$) and
positron emission tomography (PET) for both regional ($N_1=5,N_2=17$) and distant ($N_1=15,N_2=15$) lymph node metastasis.
We fit the hybrid copula mixed model for all different permutations, choices of parametric families of copulas and margins.
To make it easier
to compare strengths of dependence, we convert from $\theta$'s to $\tau$'s via the relations in Table \ref{2fam}.
Since the number of parameters is the same between the models, we use the maximized log-likelihood that corresponds to the estimates as a rough diagnostic measure for goodness of fit between the models. We also estimate the model parameters with the CL method in \cite{chen-etal-2015-jrssc}.
Finally, we demonstrate summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves and summary operating points (a pair of average sensitivity and specificity) with a confidence region and a predictive region \citep{Nikoloulopoulos2015b}.
In Table \ref{US} we report the resulting maximized log-likelihoods, estimates, and standard errors of the hybrid copula mixed models with different choices of parametric families of copulas and margins for the US modality to diagnose regional lymph node metastasis.
All models roughly agree on the estimated sensitivity $\hat\pi_1$ and specificity $\hat\pi_2$, but the estimate of disease prevalence is higher when beta margins are assumed. In fact, the log-likelihoods show that a hybrid copula mixed with copula distributions the Clayton rotated by 180 and 270 degrees for the $C_{13}(;\tau_{13})$ and $\{C(;\tau),C_{12}(;\tau_{12})\}$ copulas, respectively, and beta margins provides the best fit.
It is also provides better inferences than a hybrid copula-based mixed model with independence among the random effects since the likelihood has been improved by $6.9=-190.98-(-197.88)$ units. This is also confirmed by a likelihood ratio test ($p$-value $\leq 0.001$).
Hence apparently, the CL method in Chen et al.\cite{chen-etal-2015-jrssc} underestimates the disease prevalence of metastases. This has also to do with the incorrect assumption of a normal margin in addition to the assumption of independence among random effects. Figure \ref{US-SROC} shows the fitted SROC curves along with their confidence and prediction regions for the best fitted hybrid copula mixed model with beta margins for both case-control and cohort studies.
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\begin{table}[!h]
\centering
\caption{\label{US}Maximised ML and CL log-likelihoods, estimates and standard errors (SE) of the hybrid copula mixed models with different choices of parametric families of copulas and margins for the US modality to diagnose regional lymph node metastasis.}
\vspace{1cm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccccccc}
\hline
& \multicolumn{14}{c}{Normal margins} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 180/270} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 180/90} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 0/270} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 0/90} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{CL} \\
& Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE \\\hline
$\pi_1$ & 0.68 & 0.11 & 0.69 & 0.10 & 0.71 & 0.10 & 0.68 & 0.11 & 0.74 & 0.09 & 0.64 & 0.13 & 0.68 & 0.11 \\
$\pi_2$ & 0.98 & 0.01 & 0.98 & 0.01 & 0.98 & 0.01 & 0.98 & 0.01 & 0.98 & 0.01 & 0.98 & 0.01 & 0.98 & 0.01 \\
$\pi_3$ & 0.19 & 0.06 & 0.15 & 0.06 & 0.15 & 0.05 & 0.15 & 0.05 & 0.13 & 0.05 & 0.18 & 0.09 & 0.15 & 0.08 \\
$\sigma_1$ & 1.94 & 0.37 & 1.91 & 0.37 & 1.97 & 0.42 & 2.01 & 0.43 & 1.92 & 0.41 & 2.03 & 0.43 & 1.97 & 0.14 \\
$\sigma_2$ & 1.54 & 0.37 & 1.54 & 0.36 & 1.53 & 0.35 & 1.56 & 0.41 & 1.53 & 0.35 & 1.53 & 0.38 & 1.42 & 0.06 \\
$\sigma_3$ & 2.53 & 0.57 & 2.59 & 0.57 & 2.56 & 0.55 & 2.56 & 0.55 & 2.57 & 0.56 & 2.54 & 0.57 & 2.58 & 0.15 \\
$\tau_{12}$ & -0.26 & 0.16 & -0.31 & 0.17 & -0.28 & 0.17 & -0.21 & 0.19 & -0.28 & 0.16 & -0.21 & 0.16 & 0.00 & - \\
$\tau_{13}$ & 0.01 & 0.16 & -0.05 & 0.20 & -0.15 & 0.17 & -0.13 & 0.24 & -0.25 & 0.11 & 0.09 & 0.16 & 0.00 & - \\
$\tau$ & -0.40 & 0.34 & -0.37 & 0.35 & -0.47 & 0.30 & -0.22 & 0.46 & -0.46 & 0.31 & -0.23 & 0.43 & 0.00 & - \\\hline
$\log L$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-194.38} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{193.94} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-193.59} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-194.96} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-193.05} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-195.22} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-197.88} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccccc}
& \multicolumn{12}{c}{Beta margins} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 180/270} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 180/90} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 0/270} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 0/90} \\
& Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE \\\hline
$\pi_1$ & 0.61 & 0.07 & 0.61 & 0.07 & 0.63 & 0.07 & 0.61 & 0.07 & 0.63 & 0.07 & 0.60 & 0.08 \\
$\pi_2$ & 0.95 & 0.02 & 0.96 & 0.01 & 0.95 & 0.01 & 0.95 & 0.02 & 0.95 & 0.01 & 0.95 & 0.02 \\
$\pi_3$ & 0.28 & 0.05 & 0.27 & 0.06 & 0.26 & 0.07 & 0.26 & 0.05 & 0.29 & 0.06 & 0.27 & 0.06 \\
$\gamma_1$ & 0.36 & 0.07 & 0.36 & 0.07 & 0.38 & 0.08 & 0.38 & 0.08 & 0.36 & 0.07 & 0.37 & 0.08 \\
$\gamma_2$ & 0.10 & 0.04 & 0.09 & 0.04 & 0.09 & 0.04 & 0.10 & 0.05 & 0.09 & 0.04 & 0.10 & 0.05 \\
$\gamma_3$ & 0.35 & 0.09 & 0.36 & 0.08 & 0.35 & 0.08 & 0.35 & 0.08 & 0.35 & 0.08 & 0.36 & 0.09 \\
$\tau_{12}$ & -0.27 & 0.16 & -0.32 & 0.16 & -0.30 & 0.16 & -0.19 & 0.16 & -0.30 & 0.16 & -0.19 & 0.17 \\
$\tau_{13}$ & -0.04 & 0.18 & -0.01 & 0.14 & -0.19 & 0.12 & -0.16 & 0.14 & -0.08 & 0.15 & 0.00 & 0.16 \\
$\tau$ & -0.42 & 0.33 & -0.38 & 0.34 & -0.49 & 0.29 & -0.25 & 0.43 & -0.48 & 0.29 & -0.23 & 0.44 \\\hline
$\log L$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-191.98} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-191.68} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-190.98} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-192.68} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-191.24} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-192.95} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{footnotesize}
Cln $\alpha/\beta$ denotes a hybrid copula mixed with copula distributions the Clayton rotated by $\alpha$ and $\beta$ degrees for the $C_{13}(;\tau_{13})$ and $\{C(;\tau),C_{12}(;\tau_{12})\}$ copulas, respectively.
\end{footnotesize}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|}
\hline
Cohort studies& Case-Control studies\\\hline
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{US-cohort.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{US-cc.eps}\\
\hline\end{tabular}
\end{footnotesize}
\caption{\label{US-SROC}Contour plots (predictive region) and quantile regression curves from the hybrid copula mixed model with copula distributions the Clayton rotated by 180 and 270 degrees for the $C_{13}(;\tau_{13})$ and $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ copulas, respectively and beta margins for the US modality to diagnose regional lymph node metastasis. Red and green lines represent the quantile regression curves $x_1:=\widetilde{x}_1(x_2,q)$ and $x_2:=\widetilde{x}_2(x_1,q)$, respectively; for $q=0.5$ solid lines and for $q\in\{0.01,0.99\}$ dotted lines (confidence region).}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
In Table \ref{PET-CT-regional} we report the resulting maximized log-likelihoods, estimates, and standard errors of the hybrid copula mixed models with different choices of parametric families of copulas and margins for the PET
modality to diagnose regional lymph node metastasis.
All models roughly agree on the estimated sensitivity $\hat\pi_1$, and disease prevalence $\hat\pi_3$, but the estimate $\hat\pi_2$ of specificity is smaller when beta margins are assumed. The log-likelihoods show that a hybrid copula mixed model with Frank copulas and normal margins provides the best fit.
It is also provides better inferences than a hybrid copula-based mixed model with independence among the random effects since the likelihood has been improved by $3.86=-154.12-(-157.98)$ units. This is also confirmed by a likelihood ratio test ($p$-value $=0.005$).
Figure \ref{PET-regional-SROC} shows the fitted SROC curves along with their confidence and prediction regions for the best fitted hybrid copula mixed model with normal margins for both case-control and cohort studies.
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{8pt}
\begin{table}[!h]
\centering
\caption{\label{PET-CT-regional}Maximised ML and CL log-likelihoods, estimates and standard errors (SE) of the hybrid copula mixed models with different choices of parametric families of copulas and margins for the PET
modality to diagnose
regional lymph node metastasis.}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccc}
\hline
& \multicolumn{10}{c}{Normal margins} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Clayton} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Clayton 180} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{CL} \\
& Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE \\\hline
{$\pi_1$} & 0.50 & 0.14 & 0.52 & 0.14 & 0.50 & 0.13 & 0.56 & 0.14 & 0.47 & 0.13 \\
{$\pi_2$} & 0.96 & 0.02 & 0.96 & 0.02 & 0.96 & 0.02 & 0.95 & 0.02 & 0.97 & 0.02 \\
{$\pi_3$} & 0.37 & 0.04 & 0.37 & 0.04 & 0.36 & 0.04 & 0.37 & 0.04 & 0.35 & 0.05 \\
{$\sigma_1$} & 2.33 & 0.55 & 2.22 & 0.53 & 2.32 & 0.50 & 2.44 & 0.53 & 2.27 & 0.13 \\
{$\sigma_2$} & 1.67 & 0.54 & 1.69 & 0.58 & 1.72 & 0.52 & 1.51 & 0.45 & 1.75 & 0.29 \\
{$\sigma_3$} & 0.65 & 0.16 & 0.64 & 0.15 & 0.68 & 0.16 & 0.64 & 0.16 & 0.71 & 0.04 \\
{$\tau_{12}$} & 0.02 & 0.18 & -0.01 & 0.20 & 0.00 & 0.12 & -0.05 & 0.19 & 0.00 & - \\
{$\tau_{13}$} & 0.54 & 0.17 & 0.54 & 0.16 & 0.60 & 0.17 & 0.55 & 0.20 & 0.00 & - \\
{$\tau$} & 0.50 & 0.45 & 0.35 & 0.79 & 0.38 & 0.43 & 0.63 & 0.36 & 0.00 & - \\\hline
{$\log L$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-154.45} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-154.12} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-154.80} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-154.33} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-157.98} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
& \multicolumn{8}{c}{Beta margins} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Clayton} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Clayton 180} \\
& Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE \\\hline
{$\pi_1$} & 0.50 & 0.07 & 0.51 & 0.07 & 0.49 & 0.07 & 0.49 & 0.07 \\
{$\pi_2$} & 0.89 & 0.03 & 0.89 & 0.04 & 0.89 & 0.03 & 0.90 & 0.03 \\
{$\pi_3$} & 0.38 & 0.04 & 0.38 & 0.04 & 0.38 & 0.04 & 0.37 & 0.04 \\
{$\gamma_1$} & 0.44 & 0.09 & 0.42 & 0.08 & 0.44 & 0.08 & 0.43 & 0.07 \\
{$\gamma_2$} & 0.22 & 0.07 & 0.22 & 0.07 & 0.22 & 0.07 & 0.24 & 0.08 \\
{$\gamma_3$} & 0.08 & 0.04 & 0.08 & 0.03 & 0.09 & 0.04 & 0.07 & 0.03 \\
{$\tau_{12}$} & 0.02 & 0.18 & -0.02 & 0.20 & 0.00 & 0.10 & 0.04 & 0.20 \\
{$\tau_{13}$} & 0.55 & 0.17 & 0.54 & 0.16 & 0.60 & 0.17 & 0.52 & 0.19 \\
{$\tau$} & 0.44 & 0.44 & 0.26 & 0.77 & 0.36 & 0.39 & -0.32 & 0.14 \\\hline
{$\log L$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-157.36} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-157.03} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-157.69} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-156.74} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:addlabel}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|}
\hline
Cohort studies& Case-Control studies\\\hline
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{PET-R-cohort.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{PET-R-cc.eps}\\
\hline\end{tabular}
\end{footnotesize}
\caption{\label{PET-regional-SROC}Contour plots (predictive region) and quantile regression curves from the hybrid copula mixed model with Frank copulas and normal margins for the PET modality to diagnose regional lymph node metastasis. Red and green lines represent the quantile regression curves $x_1:=\widetilde{x}_1(x_2,q)$ and $x_2:=\widetilde{x}_2(x_1,q)$, respectively; for $q=0.5$ solid lines and for $q\in\{0.01,0.99\}$ dotted lines (confidence region).}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
Comparing the results in Tables \ref{US} and \ref{PET-CT-regional} for the surveillance of regional lymph node metastasis, US has the highest sensitivity (63\%; 95\% confidence interval CI = 50--77\%) and specificity (95\%; 95\% CI = 93--97\%). In contrast, patients diagnosed by PET have higher estimated prevalences of metastasis (37\%; 95\% confidence interval CI = 29--45\%), compared with patients diagnosed by US (26\%; 95\% confidence interval CI = 12--40\%).
Finally, in Table \ref{PET-CT-distant} we report the resulting maximized log-likelihoods, estimates, and standard errors of the hybrid copula mixed models with different choices of parametric families of copulas and margins for the for the PET
modality to diagnose
distant
lymph node metastasis.
All models roughly agree on the estimated sensitivity $\hat\pi_1$, specificity $\hat\pi_2$ and disease prevalence $\hat\pi_3$ for the surveillance of regional lymph node metastasis. The log-likelihoods show that a hybrid copula mixed model with Frank copulas and normal margins provides the best fit.
It is also provides better inferences than a hybrid copula-based mixed model with independence among the random effects since the likelihood has been improved by $4.34=-174.46-(-178.8)$ units. This is also confirmed by a likelihood ratio test ($p$-value $=0.003$).
Figure \ref{PET-distant-SROC} shows the fitted SROC curves along with their confidence and prediction regions for the best fitted hybrid copula mixed model with normal margins for both case-control and cohort studies.
In this dataset it revealed that there is heterogeneity in association between cohort and case control studies, i.e. $\hat\tau$ is positive, while $\hat\tau_{12}$ is negative.
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\begin{table}[!h]
\centering
\caption{\label{PET-CT-distant}Maximised ML and CL log-likelihoods, estimates and standard errors (SE) of the hybrid copula mixed models with different choices of parametric families of copulas and margins for the PET
modality to diagnose
distant
lymph node metastasis. }
\vspace{1cm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccccccc}
\hline
& \multicolumn{14}{c}{Normal margins} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln180/270} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 180/90} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 0/270} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 0/90} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{CL} \\
& Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE \\\hline
$\pi_1$ & 0.82 & 0.02 & 0.82 & 0.02 & 0.83 & 0.03 & 0.82 & 0.02 & 0.82 & 0.03 & 0.82 & 0.02 & 0.85 & 0.02 \\
$\pi_2$ & 0.87 & 0.02 & 0.87 & 0.02 & 0.87 & 0.03 & 0.87 & 0.02 & 0.87 & 0.03 & 0.87 & 0.02 & 0.88 & 0.02 \\
$\pi_3$ & 0.57 & 0.06 & 0.56 & 0.06 & 0.57 & 0.06 & 0.55 & 0.06 & 0.59 & 0.07 & 0.59 & 0.06 & 0.59 & 0.07 \\
$\sigma_1$ & 0.65 & 0.16 & 0.65 & 0.16 & 0.65 & 0.17 & 0.64 & 0.15 & 0.68 & 0.17 & 0.65 & 0.15 & 0.64 & 0.09 \\
$\sigma_2$ & 0.94 & 0.21 & 0.91 & 0.20 & 0.94 & 0.23 & 1.01 & 0.22 & 0.93 & 0.23 & 0.99 & 0.21 & 0.89 & 0.10 \\
$\sigma_3$ & 0.87 & 0.20 & 0.93 & 0.21 & 0.94 & 0.21 & 0.92 & 0.21 & 0.89 & 0.22 & 0.84 & 0.19 & 0.97 & 0.18 \\
$\tau_{12}$ & -0.31 & 0.25 & -0.45 & 0.27 & -0.19 & 0.40 & -0.28 & 0.25 & -0.27 & 0.38 & -0.30 & 0.27 & 0.00 & - \\
$\tau_{13}$ & 0.52 & 0.20 & 0.51 & 0.21 & 0.51 & 0.21 & 0.46 & 0.21 & 0.53 & 0.22 & 0.49 & 0.22 & 0.00 & - \\
$\tau$ & 0.60 & 0.41 & 0.57 & 0.36 & 0.63 & 0.61 & 0.73 & 0.32 & 0.63 & 0.59 & 0.72 & 0.32 & 0.00 & - \\\hline
$\log L$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-174.50} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-174.46} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-175.98} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-175.03} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-174.93} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-173.93} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-178.80} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccccc}
& \multicolumn{12}{c}{Beta margins} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 180/270} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 180/90} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 0/270} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Cln 0/90} \\
& Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE & Est. & SE \\\hline
$\pi_1$ & 0.80 & 0.03 & 0.80 & 0.03 & 0.81 & 0.03 & 0.80 & 0.02 & 0.80 & 0.03 & 0.80 & 0.02 \\
$\pi_2$ & 0.84 & 0.03 & 0.83 & 0.03 & 0.84 & 0.03 & 0.84 & 0.03 & 0.83 & 0.03 & 0.84 & 0.03 \\
$\pi_3$ & 0.56 & 0.05 & 0.55 & 0.05 & 0.55 & 0.05 & 0.54 & 0.05 & 0.57 & 0.06 & 0.58 & 0.05 \\
$\gamma_1$ & 0.06 & 0.03 & 0.06 & 0.03 & 0.06 & 0.03 & 0.05 & 0.02 & 0.06 & 0.03 & 0.06 & 0.03 \\
$\gamma_2$ & 0.10 & 0.04 & 0.09 & 0.04 & 0.10 & 0.04 & 0.11 & 0.04 & 0.10 & 0.04 & 0.10 & 0.04 \\
$\gamma_3$ & 0.14 & 0.05 & 0.15 & 0.05 & 0.16 & 0.05 & 0.15 & 0.05 & 0.15 & 0.06 & 0.13 & 0.05 \\
$\tau_{12}$ & -0.31 & 0.24 & -0.46 & 0.27 & -0.23 & 0.49 & -0.26 & 0.25 & -0.29 & 0.38 & -0.27 & 0.25 \\
$\tau_{13}$ & 0.53 & 0.20 & 0.53 & 0.21 & 0.51 & 0.21 & 0.47 & 0.21 & 0.55 & 0.22 & 0.50 & 0.22 \\
$\tau$ & 0.65 & 0.38 & 0.60 & 0.35 & 0.66 & 0.58 & 0.76 & 0.30 & 0.67 & 0.56 & 0.76 & 0.30 \\\hline
$\log L$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-175.76} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-175.69} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-177.17} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-176.37} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-176.14} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-175.33} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{footnotesize}
Cln $\alpha/\beta$ denotes a hybrid copula mixed with copula distributions the Clayton rotated by $\alpha$ and $\beta$ degrees for the $\{C(;\tau),C_{13}(;\tau_{13})\}$ and $C_{12}(;\tau_{12})$ copulas, respectively.
\end{footnotesize}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{tabular}{|cc|}
\hline
Cohort studies& Case-Control studies\\\hline
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{PET-D-cohort.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{PET-D-cc.eps}\\
\hline\end{tabular}
\end{footnotesize}
\caption{\label{PET-distant-SROC}Contour plots (predictive region) and quantile regression curves from the hybrid copula mixed model with Frank copulas and normal margins for the PET modality to diagnose distant lymph node metastasis. Red and green lines represent the quantile regression curves $x_1:=\widetilde{x}_1(x_2,q)$ and $x_2:=\widetilde{x}_2(x_1,q)$, respectively; for $q=0.5$ solid lines and for $q\in\{0.01,0.99\}$ dotted lines (confidence region).}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
In all the meta-analyses, improvement over the
hybrid copula mixed model composed of BVN copulas and normal margins, that is the same with the hybrid GLMM in \cite{chen-etal-2015-jrssc}, has been revealed in terms of the likelihood principle.
\cite{chen-etal-2015-jrssc}, instead of relying to separate meta-analyses for each type of imaging modality and type of metastasis, analyzed all the data by assuming normal margins for the random effects with equal between-studies variances
in transformed sensitivity, specificity, and disease prevalence for different imaging modalities or stages of metastasis. These assumptions are quite strong and we have shown, with the subgroup analysis in Tables \ref{US}-\ref{PET-CT-distant}, that are substantially violated. In fact,
between study variances are distinct in each type of imaging modality or stage of metastasis and for the US imaging modality even the assumption of normal margins is not valid.
\section{\label{sec-disc}Discussion}
We have proposed a hybrid copula mixed model for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. It jointly models the disease prevalence along with diagnostic test sensitivity and specificity in cohort studies, and sensitivity and specificity in case-control studies.
Our general model includes the hybrid GLMM \citep{chen-etal-2015-jrssc} as a special case and can provide an improvement over the latter based on log-likelihood. Hence, a better statistical inference for the meta-analytic parameters and their between-study variances is achieved. Nevertheless the meta-analytic parameters are a univariate inference, and hence it is the univariate marginal distribution that matters the most and not the type of the copula. The proposed hybrid copula mixed model calls on both normal and beta univariate margins and thus can operate on the transformed and original scale of sensitivity, specificity and disease prevalence, respectively.
Though typically the focus of meta-analysis has been to derive the summary-effect estimates, there is increasing interest in drawing predictive inference.
In fact, if the interest is only to overall sensitivity, specificity and prevalence then the overall test accuracy across studies will not be clearly defined. Different studies use different thresholds for a positive test result, thus the overall summary-effect estimates do not make sense.
Instead, some form of SROC curve makes much more sense and will help decision makers to assess the actual diagnostic accuracy of a diagnostic test \citep{Nikoloulopoulos2016-letter-smmr}.
SROC curves are deduced for our model through the quantile regression techniques developed by \cite{Nikoloulopoulos2015b}.
For the hybrid copula mixed model, the model parameters (including dependence parameters), the choice of the copula, and the choice of the margin affect the shape of the SROC curve.
Among the parametric families of copulas in Table \ref{2fam} the tail dependence varies, and is a property to consider when choosing amongst different families of copulas, and, hence affects the shape of SROC curves, i.e., prediction. SROC will essentially show the
effect of different model (random effect distribution) assumptions, since it is an inference that depends on the joint distribution \citep{Nikoloulopoulos2015b}.
Given that the CL estimation assumes independence among the random effects, it provides identical fit for any copula mixed model, since all the parametric families of copulas in Table \ref{2fam} contain the independence copula as a special case.
Hence, the big limitation of the CL method is that it cannot be used to produce the SROC curves, since the dependence parameters affect the shape of the SROC curve and these are set to independence by definition.
It has been reported in the literature that in the trivariate GLMM \citep{chu-etal-2009} and hybrid GLMM \citep{chen-etal-2015-jrssc} estimation problems relating to the correlation parameters exist, such as non-convergence. Here instead of a trivariate normal distribution we use a vine copula distribution, and in particular a truncated at level-1 vine copula (conditional independence), which allows both parsimony and flexible (tail) dependence. In fact, we propose a numerically stable ML estimation technique based on Gauss-Legendre quadrature; the crucial step is to convert from independent to dependent quadrature points.
However, the additional feature of having to estimate the associations among the random effects has been found to require larger sample sizes than in CL estimation where these parameters are set to independence. The application example includes cases with an adequate number of individual studies per study design. For meta-analyses with fewer (especially cohort) studies the bivariate copula mixed model to obtain estimates of diagnostic sensitivity and specificity but not prevalence should be fitted instead. Future research will deal with the development of penalized likelihood methods for optimising inference about the association parameters of the hybrid copula mixed model when the number of available study summaries is small.
We also plan to provide extensions of the model to account for partial verification bias. This is a feature that has been already developed for the hybrid GLMM \citep{ma-etal-2014-smmr}.
\section*{\label{software}Software}
{\tt R} functions to implement the hybrid vine copula mixed model for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy case-contol and cohort studies are part of the {\tt R} package {\tt CopulaREMADA} \citep{Nikoloulopoulos-2015}.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
We would like to thank Dr Yong Chen (University of Texas) and Professor Haitao Chu (University of Minnesota) for providing the melanoma data.
|
\section{Introduction}
This paper draws motivation from an ancient question studied by Poincar\'e, Autonne, Painlev\'e and others: Is it possible to decide if all the orbits of a polynomial vector field on the complex affine plane are algebraic ?
Poincar\'e observes \cite{PoincarePalermoI} that in order to provide a positive answer to the above question it suffices to bound the degree of the general orbit. Even if Poincar\'e is not explicit on which parameters the bound should depend on, in general, examples as simple as linear vector fields on $\mathbb C^2$ show that such bound must depend on combinatorial data attached to the singularities of the vector field like their resolution process and quotients of eigenvalues of the resulting foliation. Soon after the appearance of Poincar\'e's paper, Painlev\'e writes in \cite[pp. 216--217]{zbMATH02673308} the following paragraph.
\begin{quotation}
J’ajoute qu’on ne peut esp\'erer r\'esoudre d’un coup qui consiste \`a limiter $n$. L'\'enonc\'e vers lequel il faut tendre doit avoir la forme suivante: ``On sait reconna\^itre si l’int\'egrale d’une \'equation $F(y\prime,y,x)=0$ donn\'ee est alg\'ebrique ou ramener l’\'equation aux quadratures.'' Dans ce dernier cas, la question reviendrait \`a reconna\^itre si une certaine int\'egrale ab\'elienne (de premi\`ere ou de troisi\`eme esp\`ece) n’a que deux ou une p\'eriodes.
\end{quotation}
Painlev\'e suggests that one should first ask whether or not a
given polynomial vector field admits a first integral ``expressed through quadratures''; and only then,
having this special first integral at hand, decide whether or not the leaves are algebraic. To put
things in perspective it is useful to notice that the strategy to deal with the analogous problem for linear differential equations with rational coefficients is in accordance with Painlev\'e's suggestion cf. \cite{MR527825}.
The vague terminology first integral ``expressed through quadratures'' can be formalized in several distinct ways.
One possible interpretation is that one should look for
first integrals belonging to a Liouvillian extension of the differential field
$(\mathbb C(x,y),\{ \partial_x, \partial_y\})$. For a precise definition and thorough discussion of this concept
we refer to \cite{MR1062869} and \cite{MR2276503}.
More recently, it came to light a family of examples \cite{MR1914932} showing the impossibility of giving bounds for the degree a general algebraic orbit depending only on the analytical type of the singularities of the foliation/vector field. They consist on one parameter families of holomorphic foliations
with fixed analytical type of singularities, such that the general foliation has only finitely many algebraic leaves and, in contrast, for a dense set of the parameter space the corresponding foliation has all its leaves algebraic. These families of examples highlight the difficulties of Poincar\'e original problem, and at the same time provides evidence for the effectiveness of the approach suggested by Painlev\'{e} as all the members of the families admit Liouvillian first integrals and each of these families share the very same integrating factor.
\subsection{Invariant algebraic curves of small degree}
Our main results provide further evidence in favor of Painlev\'e's strategy. The first one
shows that foliations on the projective plane admitting a Liouvillian first integral, but which do
not admit a rational first integral, always have an algebraic invariant curve of comparatively small degree.
\begin{THM}\label{THM:A}
Let $\mathcal F$ be a foliation of degree $d\ge2$ on the projective plane $\mathbb P^2$.
Assume that $\mathcal F$ admits a Liouvillian first integral but does not admit a rational
first integral. Then $\mathcal F$ admits an algebraic invariant curve of degree at most $12(d-1)$.
\end{THM}
We point out that in general it is impossible to bound the degree of the support of the integrating
factor only in function of the degree of the foliation. For instance
\cite[Section 5, Example 3]{MR1913040} presents a family of foliations of degree $4$ deduced from
Gauss hypergeometric equation, for which the (unique) integrating factor has support on three lines and a rational
curve of arbitrarily high degree. Nevertheless, in this family of examples the analytic/combinatorial type of
singularities varies.
The starting point of the proof of Theorem \ref{THM:A} is Singer's Theorem \cite{MR1062869} which says that the existence of a Liouvillian first integral for a foliation on a projective surface is equivalent to
the existence of a meromorphic transverse affine structure for the foliation. Recent results on structure of transversely affine foliations, \cite{MR3294560} and \cite{LPT}, say that a transversely affine foliation on a projective surface is either the pull-back under a rational map of a Riccati foliation; or is birationally equivalent to a finite quotient of a foliation defined by a closed rational $1$-form. In both cases our strategy consists in looking for sections of powers of the canonical of the foliation vanishing along invariant algebraic curves. To achieve this in the case of pull-back of Riccati foliations we explore the description of the positive part of the Zariski decomposition of the canonical bundle of foliations of Kodaira dimension one due to McQuillan, see \cite{MR2435846} and \cite{MR2071237}, in order to prove that, for some $k\le 12$, $|\KF^{\otimes k}|$ defines a map to a curve which will contain the sought curves among the irreducible components of its fibers. The case of finite quotients of foliation defined by closed rational $1$-forms is trickier and makes use of the nonexistence of rational first integral to guarantee the existence of a non-trivial representation of the fundamental group of the complement of the polar divisor of the transverse affine structure.
We first study the case where the foliation is defined by a closed rational $1$-form. In this case, the non-trivial representation of the fundamental group allows us to produce logarithmic $1$-forms generically transverse to the foliation and tangent to the zero divisor of the closed rational $1$-form defining it. In the general case one is asked to understand cyclic quotients of foliations defined by closed rational $1$-forms. The proof goes on by studying the action of the relevant cyclic group on the space of symmetric logarithmic differentials and showing the existence of an invariant symmetric logarithmic differential of degree $\le 12$. The restriction of this symmetric logarithmic differential to the
leaves of the foliation defines an invariant (holomorphic) section of a power of the canonical which descends to a section of $\KF^{\otimes k}\simeq \mathcal O_{\mathbb P^2}(k(d-1))$, for some $k\le 12$, which cuts
out some invariant algebraic curves.
Of course it would be highly desirable to have a similar result for foliations admitting a rational first integral but unfortunately
our method to establish Theorem \ref{THM:A} exploits extensively the nonexistence of rational first integrals.
Nevertheless, its use can be avoided in the case
of foliations of Kodaira dimension zero or one. As a consequence
we obtain a similar result for foliations admitting a rational first integral such that the underlying fibration
is isotrivial with fibers of genus $g\ge 2$; or the underlying fibration has elliptic fibers.
\begin{THM}\label{THM:A2}
Let $\F$ be a foliation on $\mathbb P^2$ admitting a rational first integral and of intermediate Kodaira dimension, i.e.
$\kod(\F) \in \{ 0, 1\}$. Then the following assertions hold true.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\F$ is birationally equivalent to an isotrivial fibration of genus $1$ then
$\F$ admits an invariant algebraic curve of degree at most $6(d-1)$.
\item If $\F$ is birationally equivalent to an non-isotrivial fibration of genus $1$ then
any irreducible algebraic curve invariant by $\mathcal F$ has degree at most $12(d-1)$.
\item If $\F$ is birationally equivalent to an isotrivial fibration of genus $g\ge 2$ then $\F$
admits an invariant algebraic curve of degree at most $42(d-1)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{THM}
It is seems reasonable to conjecture that foliations of degree $d$ on $\mathbb P^2$
admitting a rational first integral always have an invariant algebraic curve of degree at most
$C_d$ where $C_d$ is a constant depending only on $d$. It is conceivable that a form of Theorem \ref{THM:A2}
holds without hypothesis on the nature of the fibration, giving in particular that we can take $C_d = 42(d-1)$ for arbitrary fibrations.
\subsection{Acknowledgements} We are grateful to the mathoverflow community in general
and to David Speyer in special for providing valuable and substantial help toward the
proof of Theorem \ref{T:Speyer2}.
\section{Structure of transversely affine foliations}
This section starts by recalling the basic definitions and properties of transversely affine foliations and then
review the structure of this class of foliations following \cite{MR3294560} and \cite{LPT}.
\subsection{Definition}\label{S:definition}
Let $\F$ be a codimension one holomorphic foliation on a complex manifold $X$ with normal bundle $\NF$, i.e. $\F$ is defined by a holomorphic section $\omega$ of $\NF\otimes \Omega^1_X$ with zero locus of codimension $\geq 2$ and satisfying $\omega \wedge d \omega =0$. A singular transverse affine structure for $\mathcal F$ is a meromorphic flat connection
\[
\nabla :\NF \longrightarrow \NF \otimes \Omega^1_X(*D), \mbox{ satisfying } \nabla(\omega)=0; \,
\]
where $D$ is a reduced divisor on $X$ and $\Omega^1_X(*D)$ is the sheaf of meromorphic $1$-forms on $X$ with poles (of arbitrary order)
along $D$.
We will always take $D$ minimal, in the sense that the connection form of $\nabla$ is not holomorphic in any point of $D$. The divisor $D$ is the {singular divisor} of
the transverse affine structure.
A foliation $\mathcal F$ is a {singular transversely affine foliation} if it admits a singular transverse affine structure. Aiming at simplicity, from now on, when talking about singular transverse affine structures and singular transversely affine foliations, we will
omit the adjective singular.
When $X$ is an algebraic manifold, the transverse affine structure can be defined by rational $1$-forms.
If $\alpha$ is a rational $1$-form defining $\F$ then the existence of a meromorphic flat connection on $\NF$ satisfying $\nabla(\omega)=0$
is equivalent to the existence of a rational $1$-form $\eta_0$ such that
\[
d \alpha = \alpha \wedge \eta_0 \quad \text{ and } \quad d \eta_0 = 0.
\]
Indeed, if $U$ is an arbitrary open subset of a complex manifold $X$ where $\NF$ is trivial then a meromorphic connection on a trivialization of $\NF$ over $U$
can be expressed as
\[
\nabla_{|U} ( f ) = df + f \otimes \eta_0 \, ,
\]
where $\eta_0$ is a closed meromorphic $1$-form which belongs to $H^0(U,\Omega^1_X(*D))$. If $\alpha$ represents $\omega$ in this very same trivialization
then $\nabla_{|U}(\alpha) = d \alpha + \eta_0 \wedge \alpha$ and $\nabla(\omega)=0$ is equivalent to $d \alpha = \alpha \wedge \eta_0$. If $X$ is
algebraic we can trivialize $N\mathcal F$ in the Zariski topology and get the sought pair of rational $1$-forms.
The equality $d \omega_0 = \alpha \wedge \eta_0$ implies that the (multi-valued) $1$-form $ \exp(\int \eta_0) \omega_0$ is closed.
Its primitives are first integrals for the
foliation $\F$. These first integrals belong to a Liouvillian extension of the field of rational functions on $X$, and conversely
the existence of a non-constant Liouvillian first integral for $\mathcal F$ implies that $\mathcal F$ is transversely affine, see \cite{MR1062869}.
Even if $\omega_0$ and $\eta_0$ may have poles in the complement of $D$, the multi-valued function $\int \exp(\int \eta_0) \omega_0$ coincides with the developing map of $\F_{\vert X-(D\cup \sing\F)}$ and extends holomorphically to the whole of $X-D$. For any given base point $q \in X -D$, its monodromy is an anti-representation $\varrho$ of the fundamental group of the complement of
$D$ in $X$ to the affine group $\Aff = \mathbb C^* \ltimes \mathbb C$. The linear part of $\varrho$ will
be denoted by $\rho$. The abelian representation $\rho$ coincides with the monodromy of $\nabla$.
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\matrix (m) [matrix of math nodes,row sep=3em,column sep=4em,minimum width=2em]
{
\pi_1(X-D) & \Aff \\
\, & \mathbb C^* \\};
\path[-stealth]
(m-1-1) edge node [above] {$\varrho$} (m-1-2)
edge node [below] {$\rho$} (m-2-2)
(m-1-2) edge node [below] {} (m-2-2) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
Here and throughout the paper we will deliberately omit the base point of the fundamental groups. Hopefully no confusion will arise.
\subsection{Singular divisor and residues}
Recall from the previous section that the singular divisor of a transverse affine structure $\nabla$ is nothing but
the reduced divisor of poles of $\nabla$. A simple computation shows that the irreducible components of the singular divisor $D$ of a transverse affine structure $\nabla$
for a foliation $\mathcal F$ are invariant by $\mathcal F$, cf. \cite[Proposition 2.1]{MR3294560}.
Since $\nabla$ is flat we can attach to each irreducible component $C$ of $D$ a complex number $\Res_C(\nabla)$, defined as the residue
of any local meromorphic $1$-form $\eta_0$ defining $\nabla$ at a general point of $C$. The residues of $\nabla$ determine the Chern
class of $\NF$ as the next proposition shows. For a proof see \cite[Proposition 2.2]{MR3294560}.
\begin{prop}\label{P:residues}
Let $X$ be a projective manifold. If $\nabla$ is any flat meromorphic connection on a line-bundle $\mathcal L$ then the class of
$-\sum \Res_{C}(\nabla) [C]$ in $H^2(X,\mathbb C)$, with the summation ranging over the irreducible components of the singular divisor $D$, coincides with the Chern
class of $\mathcal L$. Reciprocally, given a $\mathbb C$-divisor $R=\sum \lambda_C C$ with the same class in $H^2(X, \mathbb C)$ as a line bundle $\mathcal L$ then there exists a flat meromorphic connection $\nabla_{\mathcal L}$ on
$\mathcal L$ with logarithmic poles and $\Res(\nabla_{\mathcal L})=-R$.
\end{prop}
\subsection{Structure Theorem}
The global structure theorem of transversely affine foliations is described by the next result.
\begin{thm}\label{T:structure}
Let $X$ be a projective manifold and $\mathcal F$ be a singular transversely affine foliation on $X$. Then at least one of following assertions holds true.
\begin{enumerate}
\item There exists a generically finite Galois morphism $p:Y\to X$ such that
$p^*\mathcal F$ is defined by a closed rational $1$-form.
\item There exists a transversely affine Ricatti foliation $\mathcal R$ on a surface $S$ and
a rational map $p:X \dashrightarrow S$ such that $p^* \mathcal R = \mathcal F$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
This result was first established in \cite{MR3294560} under the additional assumption that $H^1(X,\mathbb C)=0$.
The version stated above is proved in \cite{LPT}.
The first assertion holds true for a foliation on an arbitrary projective manifold if and only there exists a transversely
affine structure $\nabla$ for $\mathcal F$ which has finite monodromy and at worst logarithmic poles, see \cite[Example 2.10 and proof of Theorem 5.2]{MR3294560}. If
we restrict to projective manifolds with $H^1(X,\mathbb C)=0$ then the finiteness of the monodromy is equivalent to the rationality of
the residues.
In the simplest case where the residues of $\nabla$ are integers then the poles of the closed rational $1$-form defining $p^*\mathcal F$
lie over the irreducible components of $\Res(\nabla)$ with negative coefficients. The codimension one zeros of the same closed rational $1$-form lie over
the irreducible components of $\Res(\nabla)$ with positive coefficients.
\subsection{Finite Galois morphism}\label{S:finitegalois}
As in the sequel we are going to deal exclusively with foliations on projective surfaces,
we will restrict ourselves to the two dimensional case from now on.
Let $\mathcal F$ be a transversely affine foliation on a projective surface $X$ with transversely affine structure given by a logarithmic connection
$\nabla$ with rational residues and finite monodromy. We will give details on the construction the generically finite Galois morphism $p: Y \to X$ appearing in the statement
of the structure Theorem \ref{T:structure}.
Decompose $\Res(\nabla)$ as $\Res_{\mathbb Z} + \Res_{\mathbb Q}$ where $\Res_{\mathbb Z}$ is the round-down of $\Res(\nabla)$ and
$\Res_{\mathbb Q}$ is the fractional part of $\Res(\nabla)$. According to our definition the coefficients of $\Res_{\mathbb Q}$ lie in
$[0,1) \cap \mathbb Q$.
If $\Res_\Q \neq 0$ let $m = m(\nabla)$ be the smallest positive integer such that $m \Res_\Q$ is a divisor with integral coefficients.
Notice that the $m$-th power of the monodromy representation $\rho: \pi_1(U) \to \mathbb C^*$ of $\nabla$, extends to a representation
$\rho^m: \pi_1(X) \to \mathbb C^*$. If $\rho^m$ is trivial then $m$ is the order of $\rho$, in general $\ord(\rho) = m \ord(\rho^m)$.
Before proceeding, replace $X$ by the finite \'{e}tale covering determined by $\ker \rho^m$, in order to have the equality $m=\ord(\rho)$.
Once we have done this, we obtain that $\mathcal L= \NF^* \otimes \mathcal O_X( - \Res_\Z)$ is a $m$-th root of $m \Res_\Q$, i.e.
\[
\mathcal L^{\otimes m} = \mathcal O_X(m \Res_\Q) \, .
\]
Let $p : Y \to X$ be the branched covering of degree $m=\ord(\rho)$ determined by $\mathcal L$ branched along the effective divisor $m \Res_\Q$,
see \cite[Chapter I, Section 17]{MR2030225}. If $\sigma \in H^0(X, \mathcal L^{\otimes m})$ is the section vanishing along $m\Res\Q$ and $L$ (respectively $L_m$) is the total space of $\mathcal L$ (respectively $\mathcal L^{\otimes m}$) then $Y$ is the normalization of the pre-image of the graph of $\sigma$ under the morphism $\theta_m :L_M \to L$ defined fiberwise by $t\mapsto t^m$. Of course, $\theta_m$ commutes with the projections to $X$. Notice that $p: Y \to X$ is Galois, more precisely there exists $\varphi: Y \to Y$ an automorphism of order $m$
such that $p \circ \varphi = p$.
The monodromy of this covering coincides with the monodromy of the local system of
flat sections of the connection $\nabla$. An alternative construction of $Y$ is given by taking the \'{e}tale Galois covering $\tilde U \to U$ determined by
$\ker \rho$ and then compactifying in an equivariant way respecting the compactification $X$ of $U$, see for instance \cite[Theorem 1.3.8]{MR933557}.
Over smooth points of the divisor $\Res_\Q$ the surface $Y$ is smooth, and over normal crossing singularities it has cyclic quotient singularities.
We can avoid the appearance of the quotient singularities if we replace $X$ by a blow-up $\tilde X$, in such a way that the resulting foliation on $\tilde X$ have a transversely affine structure $\tilde \nabla$ with support
of $\Res_{\mathbb Q}(\tilde \nabla)$ equal to a disjoint union of smooth curves. It will be convenient to replace $X$ by $\tilde X$, i.e., from now on we will assume
that the support of the non-integral part of the residue divisor $\Res_{\mathbb Q}$ is a disjoint union of smooth curves, and in particular $Y$ is smooth.
Let $\mathcal G = p^* \mathcal F$. Since $p$ ramifies only over irreducible components of $\Res_{\Q}$ and contracts no curve, we have the formula \cite[Chapter 2, Section 3]{MR3328860}.
\[
\NG = p^* \NF \otimes \mathcal O_X\left( \sum_{C_0 \subset |\Res_{\Q}|} (p^*C_0)_{red} - p^* C_0 \right) \, .
\]
Indeed, if $C$ is an irreducible component of $p^*\Res_{\Q}$
dominating $C_0 \subset X$ and $\omega \in H^0(X,\Omega^1_X \otimes \NF)$ is a twisted $1$-form defining $\mathcal F$ then the vanishing order of $(p^*\omega)$ along $C$ is equal to $q(\nabla,C_0) - 1$ where $q(\nabla,C_0)$ is the order of $\Res_{C_0}(\nabla)$ in the group $\Q/ \Z$.
Therefore the connection $\nabla_{\mathcal G}$ on $\NG$ satisfies
\[
\Res_C(\nabla_{\mathcal G}) = q(\nabla,C_0) \big( \Res_{C_0}(\nabla) + 1 \big) -1
\]
and in particular all its residues are integers. Moreover
\[
\begin{array}{ccc}
\Res_C(\nabla_{\mathcal G}) < 0 & \text{ if and only if }&\Res_{C_0}(\nabla) \le -1 ; \quad \text{ and }\\
\Res_C(\nabla_{\mathcal G}) =-1 & \text{ if and only if }&\Res_{C_0}(\nabla) =-1 ; \quad \text{ and } \\
\Res_C(\nabla_{\mathcal G}) \ge 0 & \text{ if and only if }&\Res_{C_0 }(\nabla) \ge \displaystyle{\frac{1 - q(\nabla,C_0) }{q(\nabla,C_0) }} .\\
\end{array}
\]
Therefore we have a closed rational $1$-form $\omega_{\mathcal G}$ defining $\mathcal G$ with poles over
the irreducible components of $\Res(\nabla)$ with residues smaller than or equal to $-1$; and leaving
invariant the curves over the irreducible components of $\Res(\nabla)$ with residues strictly greater than $-1$.
Notice that the deck transformation $\varphi:Y \to Y$ and the closed rational $1$-form $\omega_{\mathcal G}$ are related through the identity
$\varphi^* \omega_{\mathcal G} = \xi_m \omega_{\mathcal G}$ for some $m$-th root of the unity $\xi_m=\rho(\gamma) \in \mathbb C^*$.
\smallskip
We summarize the discussion above in the following proposition.
\begin{prop}\label{P:covering}
Let $\mathcal F$ be a transversely affine foliation on a simply connected projective surface $X$ with logarithmic transversely affine structure $\nabla$
with rational residues. Let $m$ be the order in $\Q / \Z$ of the group generated by the residues of $\nabla$.
Then there exists a birational morphism $r : \tilde X \to X$ and a ramified cyclic covering $ p : Y \to \tilde X$ from a smooth projective surface $Y$ to $\tilde X$
of degree $m$ such that $( p \circ r)^* \mathcal F$ is defined by a closed rational $1$-form $\alpha$.
Moreover, if $\varphi : Y \to Y$ generates the group of automorphism of the covering $p$ then $\varphi^* \alpha = \exp(2 i \pi k /m) \alpha$
for some integer $k$ relatively prime to $m$.
\end{prop}
The restriction to simply-connected surfaces in the result above is necessary only to control
the order $m$ of the monodromy on $\nabla$ in terms of the order in $\mathbb Q/\mathbb Z$ of the group generated by the residues of $\nabla$.
\section{Cyclic quotients of transversely Euclidean foliations}\label{S:closed}
This section is devoted to the proof of a particular case of Theorem \ref{THM:A}. Here
we will investigate transversely affine foliations which do not admit a rational first integral
and are defined by a closed rational $1$-form on a suitable ramified covering
of the initial ambient space. A precise statement is provided in \S \ref{S:Synthesis} below.
\subsection{Zeros, poles and invariant algebraic curves of closed rational $1$-forms}
We start things off by observing that the divisor of poles of closed rational $1$-forms
defining reduced foliations do not intersect the invariant algebraic curves not contained in it.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:zerosandpoles}
Let $\omega$ be a closed rational $1$-form on a projective surface $S$
and consider the foliation $\F$ defined by it.
If $\F$ is reduced in Seidenberg's sense
then any germ of irreducible $\F$-invariant curve is either contained in $(\omega)_{\infty}$ or does not intersect it.
In particular, the zero divisor $(\omega)_0$ does not intersect the polar divisor $(\omega)_{\infty}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\omega$ is closed it is clear that any irreducible component of $(\omega)_0$ or of $(\omega)_{\infty}$ is $\F$-invariant. Thus the last conclusion of the statement follows immediately from the first.
Let $C$ be a germ of irreducible $\F$-invariant curve not contained in $(\omega)_{\infty}$.
Aiming at a contradiction assume $C$ is a germ centered at a point $p \in |(\omega)_{\infty}|$. Notice that $p \in \sing(\F)$.
Since there are at most two germs of $\F$-invariant curves centered at reduced singularity, it turns out that the polar locus is smooth at
$p$. Thus, at a neighborhood of $p$, we can write $\omega$ as
\[
\lambda \frac{df}{f} + d\left( \frac{g}{f^k} \right)
\]
where $\lambda \in \mathbb C$, $k\in \mathbb N$, $f$ is an irreducible germ of holomorphic function cutting out $(\omega)_{\infty}$, and $g$ is a holomorphic germ
relatively prime to $f$.
A simple computation, using that $p \in \sing(\F)$, shows that $g(p)=0$.
If the linear parts of $f$ and $g$ at $p$ are proportional (in particular if $g$ has trivial linear part) then the singularity is nilpotent. If instead the linear parts of $f$ and $g$ at $p$
are linearly independent then we obtain a non-reduced singularity with quotient of eigenvalues equal to $k^{\pm 1}$. All possibilities contradict our assumptions.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Quasi-abelian varieties and Iitaka-Albanese morphism}
For further use we briefly review Iitaka’s theory of quasi-Albanese maps \cite{MR0429884}.
Let $X$ be a projective manifold and $D$ a simple normal crossing divisor on $X$. The Iitaka-Albanese variety
of the pair $(X,D)$ is by definition the quotient of $H^0(X, \Omega^1_X(\log D))^*$ by the image of the map
\begin{align*}
H_1(X-D,\mathbb Z) & \longrightarrow H^0(X, \Omega^1_X(\log D))^* \\
\gamma & \mapsto \left( \alpha \mapsto \int_{\gamma} \alpha \right) \, .
\end{align*}
We will denote the Iitaka-Albanese variety by $\Alb(X,D)$. It is a connected abelian algebraic group
which comes with a surjective morphism to the Albanese variety of $X$ with fibers isomorphic to
algebraic tori $(\mathbb G_m)^r \simeq (\mathbb C^*)^r$ of dimension $r = h^1(X-D, \mathbb C) - h^1(X,\mathbb C)$.
The Iitaka-Albanese variety is an example of a quasi-abelian variety (in the sense of Iitaka). By definition a quasi-abelian variety is an abelian connected
algebraic group which fibers over an abelian variety with algebraic tori as fibers.
The holomorphic map
\begin{align*}
X - D & \longrightarrow \Alb(X,D) \\
x &\mapsto \left( \alpha \mapsto \int_{x_0}^x \alpha \right)
\end{align*}
extends to a rational map $\alb(X,D) : X \dashrightarrow \Alb(X,D)$. This is the
Iitaka-Albanese map of the pair $(X,D)$. It depends on the choice of a base point $x_0 \in X-D$ but
any two choices lead to maps that differ by translations. Notice that the image of $\alb(X,D)$ is non-degenerate, i.e. is not contained in any proper subgroup of $\Alb(X,D)$.
One of the key properties of $\alb(X,D)$ is that the pull-back through it of the translation invariant forms on $\Alb(X,D)$
coincides with $H^0(X, \Omega^1_X(\log D))$. It will be convenient to denote the translation invariant holomorphic $1$-forms
on a quasi-abelian variety $A$ by $\h0A$.
Let $A$ be a quasi-abelian variety. By an automorphism of a quasi-abelian variety
we mean a biholomorphic map which respects the group law, we will denote the group of automorphisms of $A$ by $\Aut(A)$ .
If $G \subset \Aut(A)$ is a finite group we will denote by $A_G$ the set of points in $A$ with non-trivial $G$-isotropy group.
In other words $x \in A$ belongs to $A_G$ if and only if there exists an element $g \in G$ different from the identity such that $g(x)=x$.
The next two results are stated in \cite{MR1703549} for Abelian varieties.
The proofs easily adapt to the more general case of quasi-abelian varieties.
We start with \cite[Theorem 2.1]{MR1703549}.
\begin{thm}\label{T:autA}
Let $A$ be a quasi-abelian variety and $G=<\alpha>$ a cyclic group of automorphisms.
Suppose $1 \le d_1 < d_2 < \ldots < d_r$ are the orders of eigenvalues of $\alpha^* : \h0A \to \h0A$.
Then there are $G$-stable quasi-abelian subvarieties $A_1, \ldots, A_r$ of $A$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\alpha_i =\alpha_{|A_i}$ is of order $d_i$;
\item $(A_1)_{<\alpha_1>}$ is $A_1$ if $d_1=1$, otherwise $(A_1)_{<\alpha_1>}$ is finite;
\item for $i>1$, $(A_i)_{<\alpha_i>}$ is always finite;
\item the addition map $A_1 \times \cdots \times A_r \to A$ is an isogeny.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{remark}
The proof of the Theorem \ref{T:autA} does not rely on Poincar\'{e}'s complete reducibility Theorem.
It constructs the abelian/quasi-abelian subvarieties $A_i$ concretely by looking at fixed points
of iterates of $\alpha$, see \cite{MR1703549} for details.
Beware that the obvious analogue of Poincar\'{e}'s complete reducibility theorem does not hold for
quasi-abelian varieties in general. There exists a quasi-abelian variety $A$ containing a quasi-abelian
subvariety $B$ for which there is no quasi-abelian subvariety $C \subset A$ such that $A$ is isogeneous to
$B \times C$, cf. \cite[Example 2.4]{MR1312575}. Nevertheless if $B \subset A$ is an abelian (not just quasi-abelian)
subvariety of a quasi-abelian variety $A$ then there exists a quasi-abelian subvariety $C$ such that $A$ is isogeneous
to $B \times C$, see \cite[Proposition 2.3]{MR1312575}.
\end{remark}
Denote by $\varphi$ the Euler totient function, i.e. $\varphi(d)$ is the number of primitive roots
of unity of order $d$. The next result corresponds to \cite[Proposition 1.8]{MR1703549}.
\begin{prop}\label{P:autA}
Suppose $\alpha$ is an automorphism of order $d$ of a quasi-Abelian variety $A$ of dimension $g$.
If $A_{<\alpha>}$ is finite then the set $\Phi_{\alpha} = \{ \text{eigenvalues of } \alpha^* : \h0A \to \h0A \}$
contains $\varphi(d)/2$ distinct and pairwise non complex conjugate primitive $d$-th roots of unity.
\end{prop}
\subsection{Foliations defined by closed rational $1$-forms} We study first the case of foliations defined by closed rational $1$-forms.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:ntkernel}
Let $X$ be a projective manifold and $D$ be a simple normal crossing divisor on $X$.
Suppose $C \subset X-D$ is a compact curve such that the restriction morphism $H^1(X -D, \mathbb C) \to H^1(C, \mathbb C)$
has non-trivial kernel. Then the restriction morphism $H^0(X,\Omega^1_X(\log D)) \to H^0(C,\Omega^1_C)$
also has non-trivial kernel.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If the kernel of $H^0(X, \Omega^1_X) \to H^0(C, \Omega^1_C)$ is non-trivial then there is nothing to prove.
Assume the contrary and notice that the kernel of
$H^1(X,\mathcal O_X) \to H^1(C, \mathcal O_C)$ is also trivial thanks to
the functoriality of Hodge decomposition $H^1(X,\mathbb C) \simeq H^0(X,\Omega^1_X) \oplus H^1(X, \mathcal O_X)$.
Hodge Theory gives the existence of a decomposition, as real vector spaces, $H^1(X-D,\mathbb C) = H^0(X, \Omega^1_X(\log D)) \oplus \sqrt{-1} H^1(X,\mathbb R)$, see for instance \cite[Proposition 3.6]{MR3035328}
\cite[proof of Proposition V.1.4]{MR1487227}.
Therefore the non-injectivity of $H^1(X -D, \mathbb C) \to H^1(C, \mathbb C)$ implies the existence of a logarithmic differential with poles on $D$
and non-zero residues. From the long exact sequence in cohomology deduced from
\[
0 \to \Omega^1_X \to \Omega^1_X(\log D) \to \oplus \mathcal O_{D_i} \to 0
\]
we infer that the first boundary map $\oplus H^0(D_i, \mathcal O_{D_i}) \to H^1(X,\Omega^1_X)$ also has non-trivial kernel.
Since this boundary map is nothing but the Chern class of the corresponding divisor, we obtain a divisor $E \neq 0$ with vanishing Chern class and
support contained in the support of $D$. If we consider the unitary flat connection
on $\mathcal O_X(E)$ and pull it back to $\mathcal O_X$ through a section $s$ of $\mathcal O_X(E)$ such that $E = (s)_0 - (s)_{\infty}$, we obtain a
logarithmic differential on $X$ with poles on $E$ such that all its periods (including the ones around irreducible components of $E$) are
purely imaginary. In the notation of \cite[Section 3]{MR2177196}, this is the unique logarithmic $1$-form $\omega_E$ with $\Res(\omega_E) = E$
and purely imaginary periods. We can apply \cite[Proposition 3.3]{MR2177196} to conclude that $\omega_E$ vanishes identically when pulled-back to
$C$. This concludes the proof of the non-injectivity of $H^0(X,\Omega^1_X(\log D)) \to H^0(C,\Omega^1_C)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{P:chave}
Let $\mathcal F$ be a reduced foliation on a projective surface $X$ defined by a closed rational $1$-form $\omega$ with polar divisor $D$.
Assume $\mathcal F$ does not admit a rational first integral and let $C$ be the maximal compact $\mathcal F$-invariant
algebraic curve contained in $X-D$. Then there exists a quasi-abelian variety $A$ and a non-constant morphism from $r: X-D \to A$
with image not contained in the translate of any proper quasi-abelian subvariety
which contracts all the irreducible components of $C$ to points.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We will construct $r: X - D \to A$ as a quotient of the Iitaka-Albanese morphism of $X- D$.
Consider the representation of $\pi_1(X-D)$ in $\mathbb C$ defined by integration of $\omega$. Since $\mathcal F$
does not admit a rational first integral this representation must be infinite. Therefore $H^1(X-D,\mathbb C)$ is
infinite as well. Consider the restriction morphism $H^1(X -D, \mathbb C) \to H^1(C, \mathbb C)$. Since $C$ is $\mathcal F$
invariant the representation defined by $\omega$ is in the kernel of this morphism.
Lemma \ref{L:ntkernel} implies that the restriction morphism $H^0(X,\Omega^1_X(\log D)) \to H^0(C,\Omega^1_C)$ has non-trivial kernel.
Dualizing it, we deduce that
\[
H^0(C,\Omega^1_C)^* \to H^0(X,\Omega^1_X(\log D))^*
\]
is not surjective. Therefore the induced morphism
\[
\Alb(C) = \oplus \Alb(C_i) \to \Alb(X,D)
\]
is not surjective.
We define the quasi-abelian variety $A$ as the cokernel of this morphism.
The Iitaka-Albanese morphism $X- D \to \Alb(X,D)$ composed with the natural projection
$\Alb(X,D) \to A$ gives rise to the sought morphism.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{C:chave}
Notation as in Proposition \ref{P:chave}. If
$V_C \subset H^0(X, \Omega^1_X(\log D))$ is the vector subspace consisting of logarithmic $1$-forms which are
identically zero when pulled-back to (all the irreducible components of) $C$,
then the dimension of $V_C$ is at least one. Moreover, if $\omega \in V_C$ then $\dim V_C \ge 2$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $r : X-D \to A$ be the morphism produced by Proposition \ref{P:chave}.
Let $\h0A$ be the vector space of
translation invariant $1$-forms on $A$.
Since the image of $r$ is not contained
in any proper quasi-abelian subvariety it follows that the pull-back map
$ r^* : \h0A \to H^0(X, \Omega^1_X(\log D)) $
is injective. Moreover, by construction, its image coincides exactly with $V_C$. This is sufficient to prove that $\dim V_C \ge 1$.
Suppose now that $\omega \in V_C$. Observe that $r$ extends to a rational
map $\overline r: X \dashrightarrow A$. If the dimension of $A$ is one then
the composition of $\overline r$ with any non-constant rational function $f \in \mathbb C( A)$
would be a rational first integral for $\F$. Since we are assuming that such a first integral does not exist,
we conclude that $\dim V_C\ge 2$ when $\omega \in V_C$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{P:cotasimples}
Let $\mathcal F$ be a reduced foliation on a projective surface $X$
defined by a closed rational $1$-form $\omega$ with polar divisor $D$.
If $\mathcal F$ does not admit a rational first integral then there exists a section
of $\KF$ vanishing along the compact curves contained in $X-D$ and invariant by $\mathcal F$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
According to Corollary \ref{C:chave} there exists a logarithmic $1$-form $\alpha \in H^0(X, \Omega^1_{X}(\log D))$
such that the foliation defined by $\alpha$ is distinct from the foliation defined by $\omega$ and which vanishes when pulled-back to
every compact curve in $X-D$ invariant by $\mathcal F$. If $v \in H^0(X, TX \otimes \KF)$
is a twisted vector field defining $\mathcal F$ then the contraction of $\alpha$ and $v$ gives a section $\sigma$ of $\KF$
vanishing along the compact curves contained in $X-D$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
Let $\mathcal F$ be a degree $d$ foliation on $\mathbb P^2$ given by a closed rational $1$-form $\omega$.
If $\mathcal F$ does not admit a rational first integral then the (reduced) support of the zero divisor of $\omega$
has degree at most $d-1$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $\pi: (Y, \mathcal G) \to (\mathbb P^2, \mathcal F)$ be a reduction of singularities of $\mathcal F$.
The $1$-form $\pi^* \omega$ defines $\mathcal G$. According to Lemma \ref{L:zerosandpoles} the zero divisor of $\pi^*\omega$ is disjoint from the polar locus of $\pi^* \omega$. Proposition \ref{P:cotasimples} gives a section $\sigma$ of $\KG$ vanishing along the zero divisor of $\pi^* \omega$. This section descends to a section
of $\KF$ vanishing along the zero divisor of $\omega$. To conclude
it suffices to observe that $\KF = \mathcal O_{\mathbb P^2}(d-1)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Finding invariant symmetric differentials} To reduce the case of foliations defined by closed rational $1$-forms after a ramified covering to the case just studied, we will now show how to produce logarithmic symmetric differentials vanishing along the compact curves. In the case $\omega \notin V_C$ (notation as in the previous subsection) this is achieved through a direct application of the result below which is due to D. Speyer, see \cite{136310}.
\begin{thm}\label{T:Speyer}
Let $2\le m \in \mathbb N$ be a natural number and $\Phi$ be a subset of the set $P(m)\subset \mathbb C^*$ of primitive $m$-th roots of the unity. If
$P(m)$ is the disjoint union of $\Phi$ and $\Phi^{-1}$ then
\[
1 \in \Phi^N = \underbrace{\Phi \cdot \cdots \cdot \Phi}_{N \, \mathrm{ times }} \,
\]
for some $N\le 6$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The complete proof can be found in \cite{136310}. We will not reproduce it
because the proof of Theorem \ref{T:Speyer2} below follows very closely Speyer's arguments.
Here we will only deal with the case $m = 2^k$ for $k\ge 2$ since
it will be used in what follows.
For $m=2^2$ the result is clear. It suffices to take any element of $\Phi$ and raise it
to the $4$-th power.
Suppose now that $m=2^k$ with $k \ge 3$. Notice that the set $\Phi^3 = \Phi \cdot \Phi \cdot \Phi$ is contained in $P(m)$.
Aiming at a contradiction assume that $\Phi^3 \subset \Phi$. If $a,b \in \Phi$ then
then $a^2 b \in \Phi$. Hence for any $a \in \Phi$ we deduced that $a^{2l + 1}$ also belongs to $\Phi$. This
shows that $\Phi = P(m)$. Contradiction.
Since $\Phi^3$ is not contained in $\Phi$ we can find three elements in $\Phi$, say $a,b,c$ and
one element $d$ in $\Phi^{-1}$ such that $abc = d$. Since $d^{-1}\in \Phi$ we obtain that $abcd^{-1} =1 $
as wanted.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
Let $A$ be a quasi-abelian variety and $\alpha$ be a finite automorphism of $A$. Then
there exists a non-zero holomorphic section of $\Sym^k \Omega^1_A$ invariant by $\alpha$ for some
$k \le 6$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
If the only eigenvalue of $\alpha^* : \h0A \rightarrow \h0A$ is $d_1=1$ then, by Theorem \ref{T:autA}, $A_1=A$, $\alpha$ is the identity, and any $1$-form is invariant.
Otherwise, some eigenvalue $d_i$ of $\alpha^*$ is not $1$, Let $A_i \subset A$ be the abelian subvariety associated to $d_i$ in Theorem \ref{T:autA}.
By Theorem \ref{T:autA} (3), ${A_i}_{<\alpha_i>}$ is finite and, by Proposition \ref{P:autA}, $\alpha_i^*$ has $\varphi(n)/2$ distinct eigenvalues.
Let $\lambda$ be such an eigenvalue, associated to the eigenvector $\gamma$ of $\alpha_i^* : \ih0A \rightarrow \ih0A$.
Then $\gamma$ extends to an element $\hat{\gamma} \in \h0A$ such that $\alpha^*\hat{\gamma}=\lambda \hat{\gamma}$. In particular, $\alpha^*$ also possesses $\varphi(n)/2$ distinct eigenvalues and application of Theorem \ref{T:Speyer} produces an $\alpha^*$-invariant symmetric differential of the required degree.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{T:Speyer2}
Let $m \in \mathbb N$ be a natural number satisfying $\varphi(m) \ge 4$, $\Phi$ be a subset of the set $P(m)\subset \mathbb C^*$ of primitive $m$-th roots of the unity,
and $\lambda$ be an element of $P(m)$.
If $P(m) = \Phi \cup \Phi^{-1} \cup \{ \lambda, \lambda^{-1} \}$ then
\[
1 \in \Phi^N = \underbrace{\Phi \cdot \cdots \cdot \Phi}_{N \, \mathrm{ times }} \,
\]
for some $N\le 12$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If $\varphi(m)=4$ then $m \in \{ 5,8,10,12\}$ and the result is a trivial consequence of $\xi^m=1$.
It will be convenient to adopt the additive notation.
Let $C(m)=\mathbb Z/m\mathbb Z$ denote the cyclic group with $m$ elements, and $U(m)$ be the set of its generators, i.e. $U(m) = (\mathbb Z/m\mathbb Z)^*$.
For $p$ a prime number we have the exact sequence
\[
0 \to C(p) \to C(mp) \xrightarrow{\pi} C(m) \to 0 \, .
\]
If $y \in U(m)$ then the cardinality of $\pi^{-1}(y)\cap U(mp)$ is $p$ if $p$ divides $m$, and $p-1$ otherwise.
Let $A \subset U(mp)$ be a set and $\lambda \in U(mp)$ an element such that
\[
U(mp) = A \coprod - A \coprod \{ \lambda \} \coprod \{ - \lambda \} \, .
\]
Notice that, for every $y \in U(m) - \{ \pi(\lambda) , \pi(-\lambda) \}$, we have the identity
\[
\# ( \pi^{-1}(y) \cap A ) + \# (\pi^{-1} (y) \cap -A) = p \text{ or } p-1 \, ,
\]
according to whether $p$ divides $m$ or not.
Suppose that the result holds true for $m$ where $m$ is an integer satisfying $\varphi(m) \ge 4$. We will
now show that the result also holds for $mp$ where $p$ is any odd prime.
Let $\mu=\pi(\lambda)$ and define $ B \subset U(m)$ such that for every $y \in B$ the cardinality of $\pi^{-1}(y) \cap A$
is at least $(p-1)/2$ and
\[
U(m) = B \coprod - B \coprod \{ \mu \} \coprod \{ - \mu \} \, .
\]
Suppose there exists $b_1, \ldots, b_N \in B$ such that $b_1 + \ldots + b_N = 0$. Choose $c_1, \ldots, c_N \in C(mp)$ such that
$c_i \in \pi^{-1}(b_i)$ and $c_1 + \ldots + c_N=0$. Set $X_i = ( \pi^{-1}(b_i) \cap A) - c_i$ and notice that by construction
$X_i \subset C(p)$. By Cauchy-Davenport Theorem (see for instance \cite[Lemma 2.14]{MR628618}) we have that
\[
\# ( X_1 + \ldots + X_N ) \ge \min \{ p, N(p-1)/2 - (N-1) \} \, .
\]
Therefore if $p \ge 3 + 4/(N-2)$ ( i.e. $N \ge 3$ and $p\ge 7$; or $N \ge 4$ and $p\ge 5$) then
\[
\# ( X_1 + \ldots + X_N ) =p \, .
\]
Under this condition, we can take $x_i \in X_i$ summing up to zero. Since $x_i + c_i \in \pi^{-1}(b_i) \cap A$ and
$\sum (x_i + c_i) = 0$, we have proved the claim for $p\ge 5$.
If $p=3$ then either $\# ( \pi^{-1}(y) \cap A) \ge 2$ for every $y \in B$, or there exists $y\in B$ such that $\pi^{-1}(y) \cap A$
and $\pi^{-1}(-y) \cap A$ are both non-empty. In the first case for any $N \ge 2$, $\# (X_1 + \ldots + X_N)=3$ and therefore the $N$ that works for $B$ also works for $A$.
In the second case, for any $a_1 \in \pi^{-1}(y)\cap A$ and $a_2 \in \pi^{-1}(-y) \cap A$ we have that $a_1 + a_2$ belongs to $C(3)$. This shows that $N=6$ works
in the second case.
An adaptation of this argument shows that $N=8$ works for numbers of the form $m=2^{k}$ for $k\ge 3$.
We already now that this holds true for $m = 2^3$. Assuming that it works for $2^k$, consider the quotient map $\pi:C(2^{k+1}) \to C(2^k)$.
Notice that $U(2^{k+1})$ is mapped to $U(2^k)$ and that $\pi(\lambda) \neq \pi(-\lambda)$.
Therefore any decomposition $U(2^{k+1}) = A \coprod -A \coprod \{ \lambda \} \coprod \{ -\lambda\}$
allows us to produce a decomposition of $U(2^k) = B \coprod -B$ such that the fibers
of $\pi$ over points of $B$ intersect $A$. Theorem \ref{T:Speyer} tells us that we can choose points $b_i \in B$ such that
$b_1 + \ldots + b_4 =0$. As above choose $c_i \in \pi^{-1}(b_i)$ satisfying $c_1 + \ldots + c_4=0$. We consider $X_i = ( \pi^{-1}(b_i) \cap A) - c_i$ as before.
Of course, $X_i \subset \ker(\pi)$ and consequently $X_1 + \ldots + X_4$ is formed by $2$-torsion points. Therefore $0 \in 2 (X_1 + \ldots + X_4)$ and
we can produce $8$ elements of $A$ summing up to zero.
It remains to check that the result holds for numbers of the form $mp$ with $\varphi(mp)> 4$, $\varphi(m)\le 2$ and $p\ge 3$.
For numbers of the form $mp$ with $\varphi(m)=2$ and $\varphi(pm) > 4$ we proceed as follows. Notice that $\varphi(m)=2$ implies $m \in \{ 3, 4, 6\}$.
If $p = 3$ then $\varphi(m)=2$ and $\varphi(pm) > 4$ implies $m \in \{ 3, 6 \}$ and $pm \in \{ 9,18 \}$. A direct study of these
two particular cases shows that $N=6$ works for them. So we can
further assume that $p \ge 5$.
Let $\pi: C(pm) \to C(m)$. The image $\pi(A)$ has cardinality $1$ or $2$. Therefore for some $y \in \pi(A) \subset C(m)$ we have that the cardinality of $\pi^{-1}(y) \cap A$ is
at least $(\varphi(pm) - 2 )/4 = \frac{p-2}{2}$. Since $p$ is odd and the cardinality is an integer,
we get that the cardinality of $\pi^{-1}(y) \cap A$ is actually bounded from below by $\frac{p-1}{2}$.
Since $m y =0$ we can choose $c_1, \ldots, c_m \in \pi^{-1}(y)$ such that $c_1 + \ldots +c_m =0$. Consider $X_i = A \cap \pi^{-1}(y) -c_i \subset C(p)$.
Cauchy-Davenport implies that $0 \in X_1 + \ldots + X_m$ if $m \ge 4$, or $0 \in 2 X_1 + 2X_2 +2X_3$ if $m=3$.
As before, we conclude that $N \in \{ 4, 6\}$ works in this case.
Finally, assume that $\varphi(m)=1$, i.e. $m=2$. In this case $\varphi(mp)> 4$ implies that $p\ge 7$.
Consider the map $\pi: C(2p)\to C(2)$. Clearly, $\pi(A) = 1$ in this case. Let $c_1, \ldots, c_6 \in \pi^{-1}(1)$ be elements summing up to zero and set $X_i= A -c_i$. The sets $X_i$ have
each cardinality $(p-3)/2$, and Cauchy-Davenport tells us that $0 \in X_1 + \ldots + X_6$. Thus $N=6$ works in this case.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{C:Speyer}
Let $\F$ be a reduced foliation defined by a closed rational $1$-form $\omega$ on a projective surface $X$.
Assume that $\mathcal F$ does not admit a rational first integral. Let $D=(\omega)_{\infty}$ be the polar divisor of $\omega$.
If $\varphi: X \to X$ is an automorphism of $\mathcal F$ of finite order then, for some natural number $k\le 12$, there exists
an element of $\beta \in H^0(X, \Sym^k \Omega^1_X(\log D))$ such that $\varphi^* \beta = \beta$ and
the contraction of $\beta$ with a twisted vector field
$v \in H^0(X,TX \otimes \KF)$ defining $\mathcal F$ gives rise to a section of $H^0(X,\KF^{\otimes k})$ vanishing
along any irreducible $\F$-invariant invariant compact curve contained in $X-D$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $C \subset X- D$ be the maximal $\F$-invariant compact curve contained in $X-D$.
By Corollary \ref{C:chave}, the vector space $V_C$ of logarithmic $1$-forms with poles on $D$ and with trivial restriction to $C$ is the image of $r^* : \h0A \to H^0(X,\Omega^1_X(\log D)$, for a certain non-constant rational map $r: X\dasharrow A$ to a quasi-abelian variety $A$. In particular $V_C$ is nontrivial.
Since $\F$ does not admit a rational first integral, the pull-back $\varphi^* \omega$ is a complex multiple of $\omega$. In particular, $\varphi^*$ preserves the divisor $D$
and also $C$, the maximal $\F$-invariant compact curve contained in $X-D$.
Hence $V_C$ is also invariant under $\varphi^*$. Let $\varphi_*$ be the automorphism of the
quasi-abelian variety $\Alb(X,D)= H^0(X, \Omega^1_X(\log D))^*/H_1(X-D,\mathbb Z)$ induced by $\varphi^*$.
Since $\varphi^*$ preserves $V_C$, it follows that the action of $\varphi_*$ on $\Alb(X,D)$ preserves the image of
$\Alb(C) = \oplus \Alb(C_i)$ in $\Alb(X,D)$. We obtain in this way an induced action of $\varphi_*$ on the quasi-abelian variety $A = \mathrm{coker}( \Alb(C) \to \Alb(X,D))$. This action
of $\varphi_*$ has the same eigenvalues as the action of $\varphi^*$ on $V_C$.
Therefore the action of $\varphi^*$ on $V_C$ has eigenvalues described by Proposition \ref{P:autA}. We can apply Theorem \ref{T:Speyer2}
in order to produce a symmetric differential $\beta \in \Sym^k V_C$ for some $k \le 12$ which is invariant under $\varphi$, vanishes when restricted to $C$ and does not vanish identically along the leaves of $\F$. Thus the restriction of $\beta$ to the leaves of $\mathcal F$ (i.e. contraction of $\beta$ with a twisted vector field defining $\F$) gives to a holomorphic section of $\KF^{\otimes k}$ with the sought properties.
Notice that in the case
$\omega \notin V_C$, we can apply Theorem \ref{T:Speyer} instead of Theorem \ref{T:Speyer2} in order to get a section of $\KF^{\otimes k}$ for some $k\le 6$ with the required properties.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Synthesis}\label{S:Synthesis} The next result builds on the discussion carried out in this section. It goes a long way toward the
proof of Theorem \ref{THM:A}.
\begin{thm}\label{T:transEuclidean}
Let $\F$ be a reduced transversely affine foliation on a projective surface $X$ with transverse structure defined by a logarithmic connection $\nabla$ on $N\mathcal F$ with finite monodromy. Assume that $\F$ does not admit a rational first integral then for some $k\le 12$ there exists a non-zero section $s$ of $\KF^{\otimes k}$.
Moreover, the section $s$ vanishes on
all irreducible components of $(\nabla)_{\infty}$ with residue strictly greater than $-1$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $\pi : Y \to X$ be the ramified covering defined by the kernel of the monodromy of $\nabla$. As explained in \S \ref{S:finitegalois},
there is no loss of generality in assuming that $Y$ is smooth. Let us denote by $\varphi \in \Aut(Y)$ the automorphism of the ramified covering $\pi$ and
by $\G$ the pull-back foliation $\pi^* \F$.
By assumption $\G$ is defined by a closed rational $1$-form $\omega$ with polar set $E$.
Let $C \subset Y$ be the maximal compact curve invariant by $\G$ and with no irreducible component contained in $E$. Lemma \ref{L:zerosandpoles} implies that $C$, if not empty, is a compact curve contained in $Y-E$. Notice that the pull-back to $Y$ of the irreducible
components of $(\nabla)_{\infty}$ with
residue strictly greater than $-1$ are contained in $C$.
Let $v\in H^0(Y,TY\otimes \KG)$ be a twisted vector field defining $\G$.
Corollary \ref{C:Speyer} produces a logarithmic symmetric differential $\sigma \in H^0(Y, \Sym^k \Omega^1_Y(log E))$ invariant under $\varphi$ whose contraction with $v$ vanishes along $C$. Let $\sigma_{\vert T\G}\in H^0(Y,\KG ^{\otimes k})$ denote this contraction.
The $\varphi$ invariance of $\sigma$
implies the $\varphi$ invariance of $\sigma_{|T\G}$. According to \cite[Chapter 2, Example 3.4]{MR3328860} $\KG = \pi^* \KF$, therefore $\sigma_{|T\G}$ is the pull-back under $\pi$ of a section $s$ of $H^0(X, \KF^{\otimes k})$. As $\sigma_{|T\G}$ vanishes along $C$ and $\pi_{|C}$ is generically a submersion to $\pi(C)$, the section $s$ must vanish along all the irreducible components of $(\nabla)_{\infty}$ with
residue strictly greater than $-1$.
\end{proof}
\section{Foliations of Kodaira dimension one}
In this section we will investigate foliations of Kodaira dimension one (not necessarily transversely affine). The study carried out here will be relevant to our proof of Theorems \ref{THM:A} and \ref{THM:A2}.
\subsection{Classification} The classification of foliations of Kodaira dimension one
is due to Mendes \cite{MR1785264}. The particular case of foliations of Kodaira dimension one admitting a rational first integral goes back to the work of Serrano.
\begin{thm}\label{T:kod1}
Let $\F$ be a reduced foliation on a projective surface $X$. If $\kod(\F)= 1$ and $f: X \to C$ is the
pluricanonical fibration of $\F$ then
\begin{enumerate}
\item The fibration $f$ is a non-isotrivial elliptic fibration and $\F$ is the foliation defined by $f$.
\item The fibration $f$ has rational fibers and $\F$ is a Riccati foliation relative to $f$.
\item The fibration $f$ is an isotrivial elliptic fibration and $\F$ is a turbulent foliation relative to $f$.
\item The fibration $f$ is an isotrivial hyperbolic fibration and $\F$
is also an isotrivial hyperbolic fibration but $\F$ does not coincide with the foliation defined by $f$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
We will now obtain effective bounds on the least natural number $k$ such that $h^0(X , \KF^{\otimes k}) \ge 2$
analysing separately each of the four cases predicted by Theorem \ref{T:kod1}.
\subsection{Non-isotrivial elliptic fibrations}
The case of non-isotrivial elliptic fibrations is well-known. For instance it is implicitly treated in \cite{CasciniFloris}. Yet, for the
sake of completeness we state and prove the following result.
\begin{prop}
Let $\F$ be the reduced foliation subjacent to a non-isotrivial elliptic fibration $f:X \to C$ on
a projective surface $X$. Then $h^0(X, \KF^{\otimes 12})\ge 2$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The positive part of the Zariski decomposition of $\KF$ coincides with $f^* M_C$, where $M_C$ is the moduli
part in the canonical bundle formula $K_{X/C} = f^*(M_C + B_C)$ of Kodaira, see \cite[Lemma 2.22]{CasciniFloris}.
Moreover $|12M_C|$ is Cartier and base point free. More precisely, $12M_C$ coincides
with $J^* \mathcal O_{\mathbb P^1}(1)$ where $J:C \to \mathbb P^1$ is the $j$-invariant of the fibration according
to \cite[Theorem 2.9]{MR816221}. Therefore $H^0(X, \KF^{\otimes 12}) = H^0(C, M_C^{\otimes 12}))$ and the result follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Riccati foliations}
Let $\F$ be a Riccati foliation of Kodaira dimension one
on a projective surface $X$. In what follows we will assume that $\F$ is its own nef model, i.e. the canonical bundle (indeed $\mathbb Q$-bundle)
is nef. Let $f:X \to C$ be the reference fibration.
The canonical bundle of $\F$ is described in \cite[IV.4]{MR2435846}. We present an equivalent description below
following Brunella's paper \cite[Section 7]{MR2071237}. We start by recalling the classification of the fibers
of the reference fibration $f$. They are divided in $5$ classes labeled (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e).
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] Smooth fibers of $f$ transverse to $\F$.
\item[(b)] Singular fibers of $f$ transverse to $\F$ with two cyclic quotient singularities of the same order $o$.
\item[(c)] Smooth fibers of $f$ invariant by $\F$ with two non-degenerate saddles or one saddle-node
with multiplicity two.
\item[(d)] Smooth fibers of $f$ invariant by $\F$ with two saddle-nodes with the same multiplicty $m$.
\item[(e)] Singular fibers of $f$ invariant by $\F$ with one saddle-node of multiplicity $l$ and two
quotient singularities of order $2$.
\end{enumerate}
The quotient singularities over fibers of $f$ of type $(b)$ and $(e)$
induce a natural orbifold structure $\Corb$ on $C$ where the points below $(b)$ have multiplicity $o$
and the points below $(e)$ have multiplicity $2$. Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{E:KF}
K_{\Corb} = K_C + \sum_{(b)} \frac{o_j-1}{o_j}b_j+\sum_{(e)} \frac{e_j}{2} \,
\end{equation}
where the points $b_j,e_j \in C$ are below the fibers of type $(b)$ and $(e)$ respectively.
Similarly, the direct image of the canonical bundle of $\KF$ can be expressed as
\[
f_* \KF = K_{\Corb} + \sum_{(c)} c_j+\sum_{(d)} m_j d_j+\sum_{(e)} \frac{l_j}{2}e_j
\]
where $c_j,d_j$ and $e_j$ run respectively among the points of $C$ below fibers of type (c),(d) and (e). For a precise description of the coefficients $m_j$, $l_j$, $o_j$ the reader can consult Brunella's paper. For our purposes, it is sufficient to know that $o_j>1$ is equal to the finite order of the local monodromy around the fiber over $b_j$ and $m_j$, $l_j$ are positive integers.
\begin{prop}
Let $\F$ be a reduced Riccati foliation of Kodaira dimension one
on a projective surface $X$. Then $h^0(X, \KF^{\otimes k}) \ge 2$ for some $k \le 42$.
Moreover, if $\F$ is a transversely affine Riccati foliation without a rational first
integral then we obtain the sharper bound $k\le 8$.
\end{prop}
The proof of this proposition relies on an analysis of the formula for $f_* \KF$ presented above.
We will split it in four lemmas. The first three determine $k$ according to the genus of the base of the reference fibration $f:X \to C$.
The last one deals with transversely affine Riccati foliations.
The starting point of all the three lemmas is the same. For every $k \in \mathbb N$, we have an
inclusion
\[
H^0(C , \lfloor (f_* \KF)^{\otimes k} \rfloor) \xrightarrow{f^*} H^0(X, \KF^{\otimes k}) \, ,
\]
where $\lfloor (f_* \KF)^{\otimes k}) \rfloor$ is the divisor deduced from Equation (\ref{E:KF}) by rounding down to integers the rational coefficients.
\begin{lemma}\label{E:HH}
If $C$ has genus at least two then $h^0(X, \KF) \ge 2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to notice that the natural composition
$f^* \Omega^1_C \to \Omega^1_X \to \KF$ induces an injection of $H^0(C, \Omega^1_C)$ into $H^0(X,\KF)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:HE}
If $C$ has genus one then $h^0(X, \KF^{\otimes k})\ge 2$ for some $k\le 4$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\F$ has Kodaira dimension we see that $\deg f_* \KF>0$. We claim that it
suffices to determine $k\ge 1$ such that $\deg \lfloor (f_* \KF)^{\otimes k}\rfloor \ge 2$.
Indeed if $L$ is a line bundle over a curve $C$ of genus $1$ satisfying $\deg(L)>0$ then Riemann-Roch
implies that $h^0(C,L) = \deg L+h^0(C,K_C\otimes L^*) = \deg(L)$. Since
all the coefficients in Equation (\ref{E:KF}) are at least $1/2$ and $K_C$ does not contribute to the computation
of the degree, it is clear that $\deg \lfloor (f_* \KF)^{\otimes k}\rfloor \ge 2$ for some $k\le 4$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:HP1}
If $C$ is a rational curve then $h^0(X, \KF^{\otimes k})\ge 2$ for some $k \le 42$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If we set $\delta = \deg(f_* \KF)$ and $\delta_k = \deg( \lfloor (f_*\KF)^{\otimes k}\rfloor )$ then
from Equation (\ref{E:KF}) we deduce that
\[
\delta_k=-2k+\sum_{(b)}\lfloor k\frac{o_j-1}{o_j}\rfloor+\sigma_k,
\]
with
\[
\sigma_k=\sum_{(c)}k+\sum_{(d)}km_j+\sum_{(e)}\lfloor k\frac{l_j+1}{2}\rfloor.
\]
We proceed according to the value of $\sigma= \sum_{(c)} 1+\sum_{(d)} m_j+\sum_{(e)} \frac{l_j+1}{2} \in \mathbb Q$.
We will denote by $k_{min}$ be the smallest $k$ such that $\delta_k\ge 1$.
If $\sigma>2$ then automatically $\sigma\geq \frac{5}{2}$. In particular if $k>0$ is even
then $\sigma_k=k\sigma\geq\frac{5k}{2}$, $-2k+\sigma_k\geq 1$, $\delta_k\geq 1$ and we conclude $k_{min}\leq 2$ when $\sigma>2$.
If $\sigma\leq 2$ then $\sigma \in \{2, 3/2,1,0\}$. We will now analyze each one of this possibilities.
If $\sigma=2$ then, for $k$ positive and even, $-2k+\sigma_k=0$ and $\delta_k\geq 1$ amounts to $\sum_{(b)}\lfloor k\frac{o_j-1}{o_j}\rfloor\geq 1$.
This sum possesses at least one term, as $\delta=deg(f_*\KF)$ is positive. This term is $\lfloor k\frac{o_j-1}{o_j}\rfloor\geq\lfloor k/2\rfloor\geq 1$.
We thus also have $k_{min} \leq 2$ when $\sigma=2$.
If $\sigma=\frac{3}{2}$ then, for $k>0$ even, $\delta_k=-\frac{k}{2}+ \sum_{(b)}\lfloor k\frac{o_j-1}{o_j}\rfloor\geq -\frac{k}{2}+ \sum_{(b)}\frac{k}{2}$.
If there are two fibers of type (b), we obtain $\delta_k\geq 1$ and $k\leq 2$.
If there are less than two fibers of type (b) then $\delta>0$ imposes $-\frac{k}{2}+\sum_{(b)}\lfloor k\frac{o_j-1}{o_j}\rfloor\geq -\frac{k}{2}+\lfloor\frac{2k}{3}\rfloor$ and $k=6$ yields
$\delta_k\geq1$. Hence $k_{min}\leq 6$ for $\sigma=3/2$.
If $\sigma=1$, $\delta>0$ forces $\sum_{(b)}\frac{o_j-1}{o_j}>1$, and if $k=6l, l>0$, then $\delta_k\geq -k+\frac{k}{2}+\frac{2k}{3}$ and $k=6$ yields $\delta_k\geq 1$.
Therefore $k_{min}\leq 6$ when $\sigma=1$.
It remains to analyze the possibilities for $\sigma=0$. In this case there are only fibers of type (a) and (b).
The condition $\delta>0$ means that $\Corb$ is a hyperbolic orbifold.
It is well known this forces the presence of at least $3$ fibers of type $(b)$.
If there are at least four such fibers, and $k=6l, l>0$, then $\delta>0$ implies $\delta_k\geq -2k+\frac{3k}{2}+\frac{2k}{3}$ and $k=6$ yields $\delta_k\geq 1$, hence $k_{min}\leq 6$.
Suppose there are exactly three fibers of type (b). We consider $k_{min}$, $\delta$ and $\delta_k=\delta_k(o_1,o_2,o_3)$ as functions of the three weights $(o_1,o_2,o_3)$.
We will always suppose the triples satisfy $o_1\leq o_2\leq o_3$.
We will write $(l_1,l_2,l_3)\geq(o_1,o_2,o_3)$ when $l_j\geq o_j$ for all $j\in \{1,2,3\}$.
The key observation is that $(l_1,l_2,l_3)\geq(o_1,o_2,o_3)$ implies $\delta_k(l_1,l_2,l_3) \geq \delta_k(o_1,o_2,o_3)$ and thus $k_{min}(l_1,l_2,l_3) \leq k_{min}(o_1,o_2,o_3)$.
If $o_1\geq 3$ then $\delta(o_1,o_2,o_3)>0$ imposes $(o_1,o_2,o_3)\geq(3,3,4)$. Direct computation shows $k_{min}(3,3,4)=12$, hence $o_1\geq 3$ implies $k_{min}(o_1,o_2,o_3)\leq12$.
If $o_1\leq 2$, then $\delta(o_1,o_2,o_3)>0$ imposes $(o_1,o_2,o_3)\geq(2,3,7)$ or $(o_1,o_2,o_3)\geq(2,4,5)$. Direct computation shows $k_{min}(2,3,7)=42$ and $k_{min}(2,4,5)=20$. Thus in any case $k_{min} \le 42$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Pushing further the analysis above one can obtain the following more precise picture.
If there is at least one fiber which is not of type (a) or (b) then $k_{min}\leq6.$
If there are only fibers of type (a) and (b) then $\Corb$ is a hyperbolic orbifold and as such contains at least $3$ non-smooth points.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\roman*)]
\item if $\Corb$ contains strictly more than $3$ non-smooth points points then $k_{min}\leq6$.
\item if $\Corb$ contains exactly $3$ points then
$k_{min}=42$ for $(2,3,7)$;
$k_{min}=24$ for $(2,3,8)$;
$k_{min}=20$ for $(2,4,5)$;
$k_{min}=18$ for $(2,3,9), (2,3,10)$ and $(2,3,11)$; and $k_{min}\leq 12$ for any other case.
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:4.8}
Let $\F$ be a reduced Riccati foliation of Kodaira dimension one on a projective surface.
Assume that $\F$ is transversely affine and that $\F$ does not have a rational first integral.
Then $h^0(X, \KF^{\otimes k}) \ge 2$ for some $k \le 8$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to analyze the case where the base
$C$ of the reference fibration is a $\mathbb P^1$ and we have only fibers of type (a) and (b) and exactly three
fibers of type (b). Otherwise the previous results implies that some $k\le 6$ does the job.
Notice that the local monodromy of $\F$ around fibers of type (b) is finite. Since $\F$ is transversely affine and does not admit a rational first integral its monodromy
is an infinite solvable subgroup of $\PSL$ generated by two elements of finite order
whose product is still of finite order.
Therefore its action on $\mathbb P^1$ must fix one point. Since the order of the elements coincides
with order of the derivative at this fixed point it follows that the weights of orbifold structure
must be of the form $(o_1,o_2, \lcm(o_1,o_2))$ where $\lcm$ stands for the least common multiple.
Let $(o_1,o_2,o_3)$ be a triple of positive integers with $o_1\leq o_2\leq o_3= \lcm(o_1,o_2)$ and $\delta(o_1,o_2,o_3)>0$.
If $o_1\geq 4$, then $k_{min}(o_1,o_2,o_3)\leq k_{min}(4,4,4)=4$.
If $o_1<4$ then $(o_1,o_2,o_3)\geq(2,5,10)$ unless $(o_1,o_2,o_3)$ belongs to the set $\{(2,6,6),(2,8,8),(3,4,12),(3,6,6),(3,9,9)\}$.
For these five special triples, we can check directly that $k_{min}(o_1,o_2,o_3)\leq 6$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Turbulent foliations}
The picture in the case of turbulent foliations is very similar to the one drawn above for Riccati foliations, see \cite[IV.4]{MR2435846} and \cite[Section 7]{MR2071237}.
There exists a nef model and a precise description of the fibers of the reference fibration $f:X \to C$ very similar to the
one for Riccati foliations. A key difference is that the multiplicity of fibers of $f$, unlikely in the case of Riccati foliations,
are uniformly bounded. The only possibilities are $\{1,2,3,4,6\}$ (possible orders of automorphisms of an elliptic curve fixing a point).
\begin{prop}
Let $\F$ be a reduced turbulent foliation of Kodaira dimension one on a projective surface.
Then $h^0(X, \KF^{\otimes k}) \ge 2$ for some $k \le 12$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Since the multiplicities of multiple fibers belong to $\{1,2,3,4,6\}$ , we deduce that $(f_* \KF)^{\otimes 12}$ is an effective $\mathbb Z$-divisor of positive degree. Consequently, we must
have $\deg((f_* \KF)^{\otimes 12}) \ge 1$. As before if the base $C$ is hyperbolic then we already have that $h^0(X,\KF)\ge 2$.
If it is rational then we also have $h^0(X,\KF^{\otimes 12})\ge 2$.
If instead the base is an elliptic curve then either some $k\le 6$ suffices to ensure that $(f_* \KF)^{\otimes k}$ is a $\mathbb Z$-divisor of positive
degree or there at least two distinct orbifold points on $C$. In any case we guarantee that $h^0(X,\KF^{\otimes 12})\ge 2$ arguing as in Lemma \ref{L:HE}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Isotrivial hyperbolic fibrations} It remains to analyze the case of
isotrivial hyperbolic fibrations.
\begin{prop}
Let $\F$ be an isotrivial hyperbolic fibration.
Then $h^0(X, \KF^{\otimes k}) \ge 2$ for some $k \le 42$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
As in the case of Riccati foliations there is no uniform bound for the multiplicity of the fibers.
Nevertheless there exists a nef model, and all the fibers of the pluricanonical fibration $f:X\to C$ on the nef model
are transverse to the foliation. The multiple fibers induce an orbifold structure on $C$ and $f_* \KF = K_{\Corb}$.
The analysis carried out above for Riccati foliations shows that $h^0(C, K_{\Corb}^{\otimes k}) \ge 2$ for some $k\le 42$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Synthesis} We collect the results spread over the four previous subsections in the statement below.
\begin{thm}\label{T:Kod1}
Let $\F$ be a reduced foliation of Kodaira dimension one on a projective surface $X$.
Then $h^0(X, \KF^{\otimes k})\ge 2$ for some $k \le 42$. Moreover, if $\F$ is
a transversely affine Riccati foliation of Kodaira dimension one which does not admit a rational first integral then we can take $k \le 8$.
\end{thm}
\section{Proof of the main results}
\subsection{Auxiliary results} We collect here some auxiliary results which will be needed in the proof
of the main results.
\begin{prop}\label{P:kod0}
Let $\F$ be a reduced foliation of Kodaira dimension zero on a projective surface $X$.
Then $\F$ is transversely affine and admits a transverse structure determined by a logarithmic
connection $\nabla$ with finite monodromy and at worst logarithmic poles.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
According to \cite[Fact IV.3.3]{MR2435846}, there exists a smooth projective surface $Y$ and a generically finite rational map $\pi:Y \dashrightarrow X$ such that
$\G =\pi^* \F$ is defined
by a holomorphic vector field $v$. Consider the one parameter subgroup of $\Aut(X)$ generated by
$v$. Its Zariski closure is an abelian subgroup $H$ of $\Aut(X)$ which preserves $\G$. If every element in the Lie algebra of $H$ is tangent to $\G$ then the leaves of
$\G$ are algebraic and the same
holds true for the leaves of $\F$. Thus we can define $\F$ through a logarithmic $1$-form. If instead there exists
an element in the Lie algebra
of $H$ generically transverse to $\G$ then $\G$ is also defined
by a closed rational $1$-form, cf. \cite[Corollary 2]{MR1957664}.
In this way, in both cases, $\G$ admits a transversely affine structure given by a logarithmic connection $\nabla_{\G}$ with trivial monodromy.
This transverse structure descends to a transverse structure for $\F$ with
finite monodromy and logarithmic poles, see \cite[Example 2.10]{MR3294560}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:sections}
Let $\F$ be a reduced foliation on a projective surface $X$.
Assume that $\F$ is the pull-back under a morphism $\pi : X \to Y$ of a reduced foliation $\G$
on another projective surface $Y$. Then, for $k>0$, any non trivial section $s$ of $\KG^{\otimes k}$ induces a section $\pi^* s$ of $\KF^{\otimes k}$.
Furthermore the zero locus of $\pi^* s$ contains the inverse image of the zero locus of $s$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\G$ is reduced, it follows that $\KF - \pi^* \KG = \Delta$ where $\Delta$ is an effective divisor, see \cite[Proposition 2.1]{MR2818727}.
Therefore $H^0(X , \pi^* \KG^{\otimes k})$ injects into $H^0(X , \KF^{\otimes k})$, for every $k>0$, in such way that a section $s$ is mapped
to a section $\pi^*s$ with zero divisor equal to the sum of the pull-back of $(s)_0$ with $k \Delta$. This is sufficient to prove the lemma.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{THM:A}} Let $\F$ be a transversely affine foliation of degree $d\ge 2$ on $\mathbb P^2$ with transverse
structure given by a meromorphic flat connection $\nabla$ on $\NF$.
Recall that in this case $\NF= \mathcal O_{\mathbb P^2}(d+2)$ and $\KF = \mathcal O_{\mathbb P^2}(d-1)$.
Assume also that $\F$ does not admit a rational first integral.
Let us first treat the case where $\nabla$ is logarithmic with finite monodromy.
Thus all the residues of $\nabla$ are rational numbers. According
to Proposition \ref{P:residues} we have the identity
\[
(d+2) = - \sum_{C \subset \mathbb P^2} \Res_C(\nabla) \deg (C) \, .
\]
If all the residues of $\nabla$ are $\le -1$ then it follows that the support of $(\nabla)_{\infty}$ has degree bounded by $d+2$ which is
certainly smaller than $12(d-1)$ since $d \ge 2$.
Assume that there are residues which are strictly greater than $-1$. Let $\pi: X \to \mathbb P^2$ be a resolution of singularities
of $\F$ and let $\G = \pi^* \F$. Theorem \ref{T:transEuclidean} guarantees the existence of a section $s$ of $\KG^{\otimes k}$ for some
$k \le 12$ which vanishes along all the irreducible components of $(\nabla_{\G})_{\infty}$ with residues strictly greater than $-1$. This
section descends to a section of $\KF^{\otimes k}$ vanishing along the irreducible components of $(\nabla)_{\infty}$ having the same properties.
This suffices to prove the Theorem in the case $\nabla$ is logarithmic with finite monodromy.
If $\F$ admits more than one transverse affine structure
then we can always choose $\nabla$ logarithmic and with trivial monodromy, cf. \cite[Proposition 2.1]{MR3294560}.
It remains to deal with the case where $\F$ admits a unique transverse affine structure defined by a meromorphic flat
connection $\nabla$ which is not logarithmic or has infinite monodromy. The structure theorem for transversely affine foliations tells us
that there exists a ruled surface $S$, a Riccati foliation $\mathcal R$ on $S$, and a rational map $p: \mathbb P^2 \dashrightarrow S$ such that $\F = p^* \mathcal R$.
Since we are assuming that $\nabla$ is not logarithmic
or has infinite monodromy, Proposition \ref{P:kod0} implies that $\mathcal R$ has Kodaira dimension one.
Let $f : \mathbb P^2 \dashrightarrow \mathbb P^1$ be a rational map with irreducible general fiber defining the
pull-back to $\mathbb P^2$ under $p$ of the reference fibration of $\mathcal R$. If
none of the irreducible components of $(\nabla)_{\infty}$ is contained in fibers of $f$ then they all come from horizontal algebraic leaves of
the Riccati folation $\mathcal R$. Since the horizontal leaves of a transversely affine Riccati foliation have integral residues $\le -1$, then
all the irreducible components of $(\nabla)_{\infty}$ have integral residues $\le -1$.
Therefore, as in the case where $\nabla$ is logarithmic with finite monodromy we can conclude that the support of $(\nabla)_{\infty}$
has degree $\le d+2 <12(d-1)$.
Assume from now on that some irreducible component of $(\nabla)_{\infty}$ is contained in a fiber of $f : \mathbb P^2 \dashrightarrow \mathbb P^1$. To conclude the proof of the theorem it suffices to bound the degree of fibers of $f$. For that replace $\mathcal R$ by a reduced foliation
birationally equivalent to it and resolve the rational map $p:\mathbb P^2 \dashrightarrow S$ to obtain the commutative diagram below.
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\matrix (m) [matrix of math nodes,row sep=3em,column sep=4em,minimum width=2em]
{
X & \, \\
\mathbb P^2 & S \\};
\path[-stealth]
(m-1-1) edge node [above] {$\tilde p$} (m-2-2)
(m-1-1) edge node [left] {$q$} (m-2-1);
\path[-stealth]
[dashed] (m-2-1) edge node [below] {$p$} (m-2-2) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
Let $\G = q^* \F$ be the pull-back of $\F$ to $X$ and notice that it coincides with $\tilde p^* \mathcal R$.
We know from Lemma \ref{L:4.8} that there exists two linearly independent sections of $\KR^{\otimes k}$, say $s_1, s_2$, for some $k\le 8$.
The rational map to $g: S \dashrightarrow \mathbb P^1$ defined by the quotient of these two rational sections contracts the fibers of the reference fibration
of $\mathcal R$. In other words, its Stein factorization coincides with the reference fibration of $\mathcal R$. Therefore
$\tilde{p}^*s_1, \tilde{p}^*s_2 \in H^0(X, \tilde p^*\KR^{\otimes k})$, the pull-backs of $s_1, s_2$ to $X$,
define a rational map $X \dashrightarrow \mathbb P^1$
which contracts the fibers of the pull-back of the reference fibration. In particular, there exists a section in $H^0(X, \tilde p^*\KR^{\otimes k})$
which vanishes along any given fiber of the pull-back of the reference fibration.
We can apply Lemma \ref{L:sections} to obtain a section $s \in H^0(X, \KG^{\otimes k})$ ($k\le 8$) with the very same property.
The push-forward of $s$ to $\mathbb P^2$ is a section of $\KF^{\otimes k} \simeq \mathcal O_{\mathbb P^2} (k(d-1))$ which vanishes
on any given fiber of $f$. Thus the fibers of $f$ have degree bounded by $8(d-1)$. This concludes the proof of Theorem \ref{THM:A}. \qed
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{THM:A2}}
Let $\F$ be a foliation of degree $d$ on the projective plane. If $d\le 1$ and $\F$ admits a rational first integral then $\F$ is a pencil of rational curves
and does not satisfy our assumptions. Thus $d\ge 2$. Let $\pi:X \to \mathbb P^2$ be a reduction
of singularities of $\mathcal F$. Denote by $\G = \pi^*\F$ the resulting reduced foliation. Notice that $\G$
is not necessarily relatively minimal, but since we are assuming that the general leaf of $\F$ has genus $>0$,
we have that $\KG$ is pseudo-effective according to Miyaoka's Theorem \cite[Theorem 7.1]{MR3328860}. If we consider the Zariski decomposition $P+N$ of $\KG$ then the support
of $N$ is $\G$-invariant, see \cite[Proposition III.2.1]{MR2435846} or \cite[Theorem 8.1]{MR3328860}.
If $\G$ is a foliation of Kodaira dimension zero then for
any $k>0$ and any non-zero section $s$ of $\KG^{\otimes k}$, the zero locus of $(s)$ is contained in the support of $N$.
Thus it must be $\G$-invariant. According to \cite{MR2177633}, there exists
a non-zero section of $\KG^{\otimes k}$ for some $k \le 12$. Moreover, if we assume that the leaves of $\G$ are algebraic then we
can take $k \le 6$.
Since $\pi_* \KG^{\otimes k}$ injects in $\KF^{\otimes k}$ with cokernel supported in codimension two, and $\KF= \mathcal O_{\mathbb P^2}(d-1)$ it follows
the existence of an invariant algebraic curve for $\F$ of degree at most $6(d-1)$
If $\G$ is a non-isotrivial elliptic fibration then the general member of the linear system $|\KG^{\otimes 12}|$ is supported on a union
of fibers of the fibration. It follows that every leaf of $\F$ has degree bounded by $12(d-1)$.
Assume now that $\G$ is an isotrivial hyperbolic fibration, i.e. the general leaf has genus at least $2$. Thus the Kodaira dimension of $\G$ is one and its Iitaka fibration has
general fiber completely transverse to $\G$. Hence the Iitaka fibration defines a foliation $\H$ such that $\tang(\G,\H)$ is invariant by both foliations, since otherwise this
tangency locus would intersect a general fiber of both fibrations.
Since $h^0(X,\KG^{\otimes k}) \ge 2$ for some $k\le 42$, the direct image of $\H$ on $\mathbb P^2$ is a foliation defined by a pencil of curves of degree bounded by $42(d-1)$. The tangency locus of $\pi_* \H$ and $\F$ is invariant by both foliations. It follows that $\F$ has an invariant algebraic curve of degree at most $42(d-1)$. Theorem \ref{THM:A2} is proved. \qed
\bibliographystyle{amsalpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
In their seminal paper, \cite{GoldreichJulian} first demonstrated that the electromagnetic force dominates gravity and particle inertia in the pulsar magnetosphere. Thus, in the presence of a plasma dense enough to screen the component of the electric field parallel to the magnetic field, the electromagnetic force on the magnetospheric plasma approximately vanishes. However, because the plasma is flowing out relativistically along open magnetospheric field lines, it must be constantly replenished. Otherwise a ``vacuum gap", in which the plasma density is too low to screen the parallel electric field, will develop.
An attractive mechanism for supplying the magnetosphere with plasma is pair production. \cite{Sturrock} proposed that pairs are produced at the polar cap by annihilation of gamma-ray photons on magnetic field lines ($\gamma$--$B$ mechanism). This pair production mechanism has since been extensively studied using both analytical models and simulations \citep{AronsScharlemann,DaughertyHarding,BeskinGR,MuslimovTsygan,HardingMuslimov1998,HibschmanArons,TimokhinArons}. An alternate or potentially complementary mechanism of pair production is annihilation of gamma-ray photons on optical or X-ray photons ($\gamma$--$\gamma$ mechanism), proposed by \citet{ChengHoRuderman}.
The most compelling observational evidence for pair production comes from observations of synchrotron emission in pulsar wind nebulae. For the Crab, the inferred pair multiplicity based on the injection rate of particles into the nebula needed to explain the synchrotron emission is $\kappa \sim 10^6$ \citep{Shklovsky,deJager,Bucciantini_nebula}. Pair multiplicities in the range $\kappa \sim 10^4$--$10^6$ are also inferred for a host of other pulsar wind nebulae \citep{Arons_review}.
Because nebular observations and theoretical models point to high pair multiplicities, it is often useful to adopt the point of view that pair production is efficient and fills the entire magnetosphere with a dense, highly conductive pair plasma. Additionally, the energy density of this plasma is small compared to the energy density of the electromagnetic field, both inside the light cylinder and in the wind region of open field lines beyond it.
Under these conditions, the plasma is governed by the equations of degenerate force-free electrodynamics \citep{TM82,MT82,KomissarovFFE}. The force-free approach has been used in simulations to model the topology of magnetic flux surfaces in the magnetosphere and compute the spindown luminosity of the pulsar \citep{Contopoulos,Gruzinov,Timokhin_forcefree,Komissarov,Spitkovsky,McKinney,CK,LiSpitkovsky,Kalapotharakos,Parfreyetal,PetriFF,Tchekhovskoy,PetriGR}.
Although the force-free assumption is a useful simplification, gamma-ray observations inform us that there are regions of the magnetosphere that are not force-free \citep{MAGICa,Fermi2,AGILE,Fermia}. Sites of gamma-ray emission, which are associated with either magnetospheric vacuum gaps or regions of high current density, involve transfer of energy from the electromagnetic field to particles. This is outside the scope of the force-free paradigm, which has no dissipation.
In order to better connect theory with observations, \citet{LiSpitkovsky,Kalapotharakos} pioneered the dissipative force-free approach. \citet{Kalapotharakos_FIDO} showed that assuming a force-free solution inside the light cylinder and a dissipative solution outside provides a better fit to the {\it Fermi} data than assuming a dissipative solution everywhere.
Global multidimensional, particle in cell (PIC) simulations \citep{PhilippovSpitkovsky,ChenBeloborodov,CeruttiSpitkovsky,Cerutti3D,PhilippovSpitkovsky1,PhilippovGR,BelyaevPIC2,BelyaevPIC} are the natural next step in magnetosphere modeling, because they can self-consistently model plasma instabilities, vacuum gaps, and current sheets. Thus, they provide a handle on the plasma processes leading to dissipation of electromagnetic energy and particle acceleration in the magnetosphere.
\begin{comment}
However, given the computational expense of the PIC method, which arises from a need to resolve microphysical plasma processes and scales, it is currently difficult to use realistic pulsar parameters in multi-dimensional PIC simulations. On the other hand, 1D PIC simulations are able to capture the microphysics, but are not self-contained because the current (as determined by the toroidal twist of magnetic field lines in axisymmetry) is set by the global structure of the magnetosphere and must be put in by hand in a 1D setup.
Typically, the argument advanced in favor of the force-free condition outside the current sheet is that electron-positron pair production fills the magnetosphere everywhere with a dense, high pair multiplicity plasma. However, because the current flows along magnetic field lines (in the poloidal plane) different magnetic field lines are ``decoupled" from each other. Thus, it is not enough just to have a high pair multiplicity in a single location -- it must be high independently on each open field line. Moreover, because particles are flowing along open magnetospheric field lines at close to the speed of light, the charge density along these field lines must be constantly replenished. If the charge density drops too low, regions of unscreened electric field parallel to magnetic field will arise and a gap will develop.
\end{comment}
Using 1D PIC simulations of pair production on magnetic field lines at the polar cap, \cite{TimokhinArons} confirmed the \cite{Beloborodov_cloud} result for the conditions under which a polar cap pair cascade is ignited (discussed further in \S \ref{considerations}). Subsequently, these conditions have been confirmed in 2.5D axisymmetric simulations of the aligned rotator with general relativity \citep{PhilippovGR}.
In this paper, we create an analytical model for the spatial extent of pair-producing field lines over the polar cap using the \cite{Beloborodov_cloud} result. Consistent with \cite{PhilippovGR}, we find that general relativity is a {\it necessary} ingredient for pair production to occur in the aligned rotator over much of the polar cap. The general-relativistic effect enabling polar cap pair production is the dragging of inertial frames \citep{MuslimovTsygan}.
However, even with general relativity included, pair production occurs over only a fraction of the polar cap. Moreover, whereas the PIC simulations of \cite{PhilippovGR} were specific to a dipole magnetic field, we derive analytical results that apply with much weaker assumptions about the magnetic field at the surface of the star. We mention that \cite{Gralla} have recently published analytical results similar to ours.
\begin{comment}
. if the four-current is locally spacelike, but no pair cascade is ignited if the four-current is timelike. Because the presence of pair production is necessary to generate a force-free magnetosphere (in the absence pair production one obtains an electrosphere \citep{KPMichel,MichelLi}), we postulate that the condition of a spacelike current over the polar cap is a {\it prerequisite} for the force-free condition to apply.
A caveat of our approach is that it assumes pair production by gamma-ray curvature photons on magnetic field lines is the only pair production mechanism operating in the magnetosphere, since this was the only mechanism considered by \citet{TimokhinArons}. We comment on how other pair production mechanisms would modify our conclusions, if they are active, in \S \ref{discussion}.
Subsequently, multidimensional PIC simulations by \cite{ChenBeloborodov,Philippov} in flat spacetime showed the difficulty in igniting a polar cap pair cascade when the angle between the pulsar spin and magnetic axes is small $\lesssim 45^\circ$. The fundamental reason for this is that the current is timelike over the entire polar cap in flat spacetime for a pulsar spin axis that is aligned with the magnetic axis. \cite{PhilippovGR} included general relativity in their PIC simulations of the aligned rotator and showed that frame dragging makes the current spacelike over a portion of the polar cap, igniting a pair cascade in that region.
Given the importance of pair production in the standard pulsar theory for filling the magnetosphere with plasma, the question arises as to where on the polar cap the pair cascade is active. In this paper, we present a new analytical approach for determing the self-consistency of the force-free approach in axisymmetry both in flat spacetime and with a slowly rotating Kerr metric.
Previous analytical studies of pair production at the polar cap with general relativity include . However, ours is the first analytical work, which appreciates the importance of a spacelike current at the polar cap for pair production. In this sense our study differs from \citet{BeskinGR,MuslimovTsygan} because we require an understanding of the far-field structure (we assume split monopolar for the far-field region like \citet{Lyutikov}) in order to compute the distribution of current over the polar cap and determine the actively pair-producing field lines.
\end{comment}
The paper is organized as follows. In \S \ref{considerations} we set the framework for our derivation and define conventions. In \S \ref{four_current} we derive a general condition valid for a slowly rotating Kerr metric that allows us to determine the regions of the polar cap over which a pair cascade operates. In \S \ref{jdistribution} we apply our analytical theory to the specific case of a dipole surface magnetic field. In \S \ref{computational} we compare our results with force-free simulations, which show excellent agreement with the analytical theory. In \S\ref{discussion} we discuss the implications of our work for simulations of pulsar magnetospheres and for understanding the physical origin of pulsed gamma-ray emission from pulsars.
\section{General Considerations}
\label{considerations}
We consider an axisymmetric, force-free pulsar magnetosphere around a neutron star, which has a magnetic moment given by $\bfmu = \mu \zhat$ and rotates with angular frequency $\bfOmega = \Omega \zhat$. By the force-free assumption
\ba
\label{ff_current}
\rho \bfE + c^{-1} \bfJ \times \bfB = 0,
\ea
and the Lorentz invariants of the electromagnetic field satisfy $\bfE \cdot \bfB = 0$ and $B^2-E^2 > 0$.
We define the light cylinder radius as $R_{\rm LC} \equiv c/\Omega$. The regions on the pulsar surface containing the footpoints of open magnetospheric field lines are the polar caps, and for typical magnetic field configurations, there are two polar caps. From magnetic flux conservation, the fractional area occupied by both of them combined at the surface of the neutron star is $2 A_{\rm PC}/4 \pi r_*^2 \sim r_*/R_{\rm LC}$, where $A_{\rm PC}$ is the surface area of a single polar cap. For the Crab pulsar, $R_{\rm LC}/r_* \approx 130$, while for millisecond pulsars, $R_{\rm LC}/r_* \sim 10$. In either case, the polar caps occupy a small fraction of the neutron star surface area. For a dipolar field in axisymmetry, the polar caps are both centered on the rotational axis (at opposite poles), in which case the angular extent of a polar cap is $\theta_{\rm PC} \approx \sqrt{A_{\rm PC}/\pi r_*^2} \sim \sqrt{r_*/R_{\rm LC}}$.
If higher order multipole components are dominant at the surface of the star and generate a complicated small scale field structure (on the scale of the polar cap) then it is difficult to make further conclusions. However, if multipolar effects are on a scale that is much larger than the polar cap size, then progress can be made. In this case, one or both of the polar caps can be significantly displaced from the rotational axis \citep{Arons79}. The angular extent of such a displaced polar cap in axisymmetry can be estimated using magnetic flux conservation as $\theta_{\rm PC} \sim A_{\rm PC}/(2\pi r_*^2 \sin \theta_0) \sim r_*/(R_{\rm LC} \sin \theta_0)$, where $\theta_0 \gtrsim \theta_{\rm PC}$ is the displacement of the center of the annulus from the rotational axis. Notice that for $\theta_0 \gg \theta_{\rm PC}$, the angular extent of the off-axis polar cap is smaller than that of the axis-centered one, even though their surface areas are comparable. Additionally, \citet{HardingMuslimov11} considered non-axisymmetric displacements of the polar cap from the magnetic dipole axis. Such perturbations could be important when considering the 3D non-axisymmetric case.
\begin{comment}
Previous analytical studies of pair production at the polar cap with general relativity include . However, ours is the first analytical work, which appreciates the importance of a spacelike current at the polar cap for pair production. In this sense our study differs from \citet{BeskinGR,MuslimovTsygan} because we require an understanding of the far-field structure (we assume split monopolar for the far-field region like \citet{Lyutikov}) in order to compute the distribution of current over the polar cap and determine the actively pair-producing field lines.
Charged particles traveling along curved magnetic field lines near the polar cap emit curvature radiation. If the energies of the emitted curvature photons are high enough, they pair produce on magnetic field lines initiating an electron-positron pair cascade \citep{Erber,Sturrock}. Using 1D PIC simulations,
\end{comment}
\subsection{Pair-Production Criteria}
\citet{Beloborodov_cloud} found a simple set of local criteria that determine whether pair production occurs at the polar cap:
\begin{align}
\label{conditions}
J_B/J_{\rm GJ} < 0 &, \ \ \ \text{pair production} \nn \\
0 < J_B/J_{\rm GJ} < 1 &, \ \ \ \text{no pair production} \\
J_B/J_{\rm GJ} > 1 &, \ \ \ \text{pair production} \nn.
\end{align}
Here $J_B$ is the local steady-state current density along a magnetic field line and $J_{\rm GJ}$ is the Goldreich-Julian current density, which is defined as $J_{\rm GJ} \equiv \rho_{\rm GJ} c$, where $\rho_{\rm GJ}$ is the Goldreich-Julian charge density. The sign of $J_B$ is the same as the sign of $\bfJ \cdot \nhat$, where $\nhat$ is the outward-pointing unit vector normal to the surface of the star. It is important to note that $\rho_{\rm GJ}$ is set locally (modulo small rotationally induced changes in the poloidal magnetic field; see Section~\ref{ChargeCurrentDensities}), whereas $J_B$ is determined by the global structure of the magnetosphere, and thus can differ significantly from $J_{\rm GJ}$. Also important is the fact that $J_B$ is the {\it steady-state} i.e. time-averaged current, since the instantaneous current can exhibit rapid variability due to the time-dependent nature of the pair production process.
There is a physical explanation for the pair-production criteria, equation~(\ref{conditions}). When $ 0 < J_B/J_{\rm GJ} < 1$, the current is carried by the charge density at the surface of the neutron star flowing outward at a velocity less than the speed of light. The resulting flow resembles the steady-state solution predicted by \citet{Mestel_cloud} and \citet{Beloborodov_cloud} and has typical Lorentz factors of order unity (see equation 4 of \citet{Beloborodov_cloud} for maximal Lorentz factor as a function of $J_{\rm GJ}/\rho_{\rm GJ})$. For such low Lorentz factors, pair production on magnetic field lines by either curvature photons or inverse Compton scattered thermal photons from the polar cap is impossible.
Conversely, when $J_B/J_{\rm GJ} < 0$ or $J_B/J_{\rm GJ} > 1$, the current {\it cannot} be carried exclusively by the charge density at the surface of the pulsar flowing outward. In this case, a steady-state flow on short timescales is not achieved. Instead, oscillatory bursts of pair production generate plasma pair densities that exceed the Goldreich-Julian value by up to a factor of $\kappa \sim 10^4$--$10^5$ \citep{Timokhin_max}.
\subsection{General Relativity}
For our calculations that involve general relativity, we use a 3+1 split of slowly rotating Kerr spacetime \citep{MT82,membrane}. We work to first order in the dimensionless Kerr spin parameter, $a \equiv J_*c/G M_*^2$, where $J_*$ and $M_*$ are the angular momentum and mass of the neutron star, respectively. The reason for working to first order in $a$ is that frame dragging first appears at this order. Moreover, the problem is simplified because spacetime non-sphericity first enters into the Kerr metric at second order; in other words, in the slow-rotation approximation the frame-dragging rate is a function of the radial coordinate alone.
The slow-rotation approximation is equivalent to assuming $R_{\rm LC} \gg r_{\rm s}$, where
\ba
r_{\rm s} \equiv \frac{2 GM}{c^2}
\ea
is the Schwarzschild radius. The Kerr metric in this approximation is
\begin{align}
\label{metric}
ds^2 = -\alpha^2 c^2 dt^2 + \alpha^{-2}dr^2 &+ r^2(d\theta^2 + \sin^2 \theta d\phi^2) \\
&- 2\omega_{\rm LT} r^2 \sin^2 \theta d\phi dt \nn,
\end{align}
where the lapse function is defined by $\alpha(r) \equiv \sqrt{1 - r_{\rm s}/r}$.
The frame dragging rate can be expressed as
\ba
\omega_{\rm LT}(r) &\approx& \frac{2 I_* \Omega G}{c^2 r^3},
\ea
where $I_*$ is the neutron star moment of inertia. Using
\ba
I_* \approx 0.21 \frac{M_* r_*^2}{1 - r_{\rm s}/r_*}
\label{MomentInertia}
\ea
to approximate the neutron star moment of inertia \citep{RavenhallPethick}, we can express the frame-dragging rate at the surface of the star as
\ba
\label{LenseThirring}
\omega_{\rm LT}(r_*) \approx 0.21 \left( \frac{r_{\rm s}/r_*}{1 - r_{\rm s}/r_*} \right) \Omega.
\ea
For a $2 M_\odot$ neutron star with $r_* = 12$ km, we have $r_{\rm s}/r_* \approx 0.5$ and $\omega_{\rm LT}(r_*)/\Omega \approx 0.21$; for a $1.2 M_\odot$ neutron star with $r_* = 12$ km, we have $r_{\rm s}/r_* \approx 0.3$ and $\omega_{\rm LT}(r_*)/\Omega \approx 0.09$.
For the the metric in equation (\ref{metric}), Maxwell's equations can be written as
\begin{align}
\label{maxwellkerr}
\bfnabla \cdot \bfE &= 4 \pi \rho \\
\bfnabla \cdot \bfB &= 0 \\
\label{maxwellkerr0}
\bfnabla \times \left(\alpha \bfE + \frac{\bfbeta}{c} \times \bfB \right) &= -\frac{1}{c} \frac{\partial \bfB}{\partial t} \\
\label{maxwellkerr1}
\bfnabla \times \left(\alpha \bfB - \frac{\bfbeta}{c} \times \bfE \right) &= \frac{1}{c} \frac{\partial \bfE}{\partial t} + \frac{4 \pi}{c} \left(\alpha \bfJ - \rho \bfbeta \right).
\end{align}
Physical quantities, such as $\rho$, $\bfJ$, $\bfB$, and $\bfE$ are measured by zero angular momentum observers (ZAMOs) in the frame corotating with absolute space \citep{membrane}. The velocity with which our spherical coordinates rotate relative to this frame is given by the shift vector, $\bfbeta \equiv -\bfomega_{\rm LT} \times \bfr$. The lower-index spatial vector components quoted below are orthonormalized, i.e.\ $A_i \equiv \sqrt{g_{i i}} A^i$, where there is no summation over repeated indices.
\begin{comment}
Following \citep{membrane}, we shall also find it useful to split the magnetic field into poloidal and azimuthal components. For the poloidal component we use the subscript ``$P$" and for the azimuthal component the subscript ``$\phi$". The poloidal component lies in the $r -\theta$ plane and the azimuthal component is in the $\phat$ direction. For instance, the magnetic field, the electric field, and the current split into poloidal and azimuthal components are $\bfB = \bfB_{\rm P} + B_\phi \phat$, $\bfE = \bfE_{\rm P} + E_\phi \phat$, and $\bfJ = \bfJ_{\rm P} + J_\phi \phat$, respectively.
Throughout the paper, we will be concerned with the magnitude of the four-current vector which can be written as
\ba
J^{\mu}J_{\mu} &=& -(\rho c)^2 + J_{\rm P}^2 + J_\phi^2
\ea
and is a Lorentz invariant.
\end{comment}
\section{Polar Cap Pair Production: General Results}
\label{four_current}
In this section, we derive general results about the spatial distribution of field lines that support pair production on the polar cap. Our approach is to trace the distribution of current on open field lines in the wind region beyond the light cylinder back to the polar cap, compute the magnitude of the four-current over the polar cap, and apply the pair-production criteria, equation~(\ref{conditions}).
\subsection{Charge and Current Densities}
\label{ChargeCurrentDensities}
We begin by stating some useful results about charge and current densities for the force-free aligned rotator. The first useful result is that the current flows on magnetic flux surfaces in the magnetosphere. To demonstrate this, consider that in steady state under the assumption of axisymmetry, equation (\ref{maxwellkerr0}) implies that $E_\phi = 0$. As a result, the $\phi$ component of equation (\ref{ff_current}) simplifies to
\ba
\bfJ_{\rm P} \times \bfB_{\rm P} = 0,
\ea
where $\bfB_{\rm P}$ and $\bfJ_{\rm P}$ are the poloidal magnetic field and current, respectively. This means the current flows along magnetic field lines when both are projected into the poloidal plane.
Moreover, by conservation of magnetic flux, $\bfnabla \cdot \bfB = 0$, and conservation of charge, $\bfnabla \cdot (\alpha \bfJ - \rho \bfbeta) = 0$, the poloidal current density is proportional to the poloidal magnetic field up to a factor of the lapse function\footnote{Here $\bfnabla \cdot (\rho \bfbeta) = 0$, as azimuthal gradients are zero by axisymmetry and the shift vector is exclusively in that direction.}: $\alpha \bfJ_{\rm P} \propto \bfB_{\rm P}$. We can express this formally by defining a magnetic flux parameter, $\Psi$, which is measured from the pole. In terms of $\Psi$, the poloidal magnetic field is
\ba
\bfB_{\rm P} = \frac{\bfnabla \Psi \times \phat}{2\pi r \sin \theta},
\ea
and the poloidal current density is
\ba
\label{Jp}
\bfJ_{\rm P} = \frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{d I}{d \Psi} \bfB_{\rm P}.
\ea
Here, $I(\Psi)$ is the poloidal current enclosed between the magnetic flux surface $\Psi$ and the pole, as measured using coordinate time, $t$, which coincides with the proper time of static observers at infinity\footnote{Note that this is in general different from the ZAMO's proper time} \citep{membrane}. Note that $(\bfB \cdot \bfnabla) I = 0$, so the enclosed current is constant on flux surfaces. We shall use this fact to map the current in the wind zone back onto the surface of the neutron star when computing the magnitude of the four-current over the polar cap.
The second useful result is a calculation of the charge density in the magnetosphere. To begin, we define a ``corotational velocity"
\begin{align}
\label{V0eq}
\bfV_0 \equiv \begin{cases}
\bfOmega \times \bfr, & \text{flat}\\
\alpha^{-1} \left(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT} \right) \times \bfr, & \text{Kerr}
\end{cases},
\end{align}
in terms of which the electric field is given by
\ba
\label{corotE}
\bfE = -\bfV_0 \times \bfB/c.
\ea
This expression is Ferraro's isorotation law, which was generalized to a Kerr spacetime by \cite{BlandfordZnajek}. The value of $\Omega$ on a given magnetic flux surface is set at the footpoint of the flux surface on the neutron star. Thus, the angular frequency is in general a function of the magnetic flux parameter [i.e. $\Omega(\Psi)$], but for simplicity we have assumed that the neutron star rotates as a solid body (i.e. $\Omega$ is a constant).
It is worth pointing out that the corotational velocity {\it is not a physical velocity} associated with the magnetospheric plasma, and thus is not required to be less than the speed of light. Rather it is a pattern velocity that can be interpreted as the ``velocity of a magnetic field line", so one can view the magnetic field as corotating with the pulsar. The actual drift velocity of the plasma,
\ba
\label{vdrift}
\bfV_D &=& c \bfE \times \bfB/B^2,
\ea
remains less than the speed of light, since $B^2-E^2 > 0$.
Having defined the electric field in terms of the corotational velocity, the Goldreich-Julian charge density is
\begin{align}
\rho_{\rm GJ} &\equiv - \bfnabla \cdot \left(\bfV_0 \times \bfB \right)/4\pi c \\
&= \frac{-\bfB \cdot \left(\bfnabla \times \bfV_0 \right) + \bfV_0 \cdot \left(\bfnabla \times \bfB \right)}{4\pi c} \\
\label{rhoGJ}
&= - \frac{(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT}) \cdot \bfB}{2 \pi c \alpha} + \frac{\bfV_0 \cdot \left(\bfnabla \times \bfB \right)}{4\pi c}.
\end{align}
This expression for the charge density is the same as in \cite{MuslimovTsygan}.
At the polar cap, the first term on the right hand side of equation (\ref{rhoGJ}) is dominant compared to the second as long as the characteristic length scale over which the poloidal magnetic field varies is larger than the polar cap size. For a dipole field, this condition is easily satisfied, since the radius of curvature at the polar cap is $r_C \sim \sqrt{r_* R_{\rm LC}}$, whereas the size of the polar cap is $d_{\rm PC} \sim r_* \sqrt{r_*/R_{\rm LC}}$, so $r_C/d_{\rm PC} \sim R_{\rm LC}/r_* \gg 1$. From now on, we assume that the characteristic length scale of the poloidal magnetic field at the polar cap is larger than the polar cap size, so we can approximate the Goldreich-Julian density using only the first term in equation (\ref{rhoGJ}).
Having derived an expression for the charge density, the next step is to calculate the current density over the polar cap. Because the poloidal current flows on magnetic flux surfaces we can remap the poloidal current from the wind zone beyond the light cylinder onto the polar cap. In particular, we have at the polar cap
\begin{align}
J^{\mu}J_{\mu} &= -(\rho_{\rm GJ} c)^2 + J_P^2 + J_\phi^2 \\
&\approx -\left(\frac{(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT})\cdot \bfB }{2 \pi \alpha}\right)^2 + J_P^2 + J_\phi^2. \\
\label{Jmueq}
&\approx -\left(\frac{(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT})\cdot \bfB }{2 \pi \alpha}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{1}{\alpha} \frac{dI}{d\Psi} B_{\rm P}\right)^2.
\end{align}
The first approximation involves ignoring the second term for the charge density in equation (\ref{rhoGJ}). The second approximation is to set $J_\phi \approx 0$, which will not strongly affect the four-current magnitude as long as $|J_\phi/\rho_{\rm GJ}| \sim \Omega r_* \sin \theta \ll c$ on the polar cap. The only thing left to do in order to determine the four-current magnitude over the polar cap is to specify $I(\Psi)$. Since $I(\Psi)$ is invariant on flux surfaces, this is most easily done in the wind zone.
The poloidal magnetic field lines in the wind zone of the pulsar magnetosphere open up and become radial. Recently, \citet{Tchekhovskoy_current} have found an analytic fit to the distribution of poloidal field lines from force-free simulations of a dipole magnetosphere. Keeping the two largest terms in their approximation, the poloidal field in the wind zone is given by
\begin{align}
\label{poloidalB}
\bfB_{\rm P} \approx \frac{\mu k}{R_{\rm LC}r^2}(1 + A_1(\cos \theta-1)) \rhat,
\end{align}
where $\mu$ is the dipole moment of the neutron star, $k$ is a constant of order unity, and $A_1 \approx 0.22$. Near the polar axis, the poloidal field is well-described by a split monopole structure \citep{Michelmono}, which has $\partial B_r/\partial \theta = 0$. However, it deviates from a split monopole near the equator due to the presence of a distributed return current. This correction is captured in equation (\ref{poloidalB}) via the $A_1(\cos\theta - 1)$ term.
\begin{comment}
which specifies the current distribution and magnetic field structure\footnote{The formalism can accomodate generic large-scale axisymmetric distributions of currents on magnetic flux surfaces.}. Force-free simulations of an aligned rotator find that the solution in the wind zone is similar to a split monopole, but there is a distributed return current layer. \citet{Tchekhovskoy_current} have used force-free simulations to quantify how the return current is distributed along flux surfaces in the wind zone, including in the distributed return current layer. However, the split monopole, which does not contain the distributed return current layer, is useful for gaining insight into the problem and results in simple easy to understand formulas. Nevertheless, we shall always keep in mind the distributed return current in our discussion, and we compare our split monopole approximation with force-free simulations directly in \S \ref{computational}.
\end{comment}
\subsection{Split-Monopole Wind Zone}
\label{splitmonowind}
We begin by considering a split-monopole distribution of poloidal field lines in the wind zone ($A_1 = 0$ in equation (\ref{poloidalB})). The split monopole provides an accurate description near the polar axis and the resulting equations are substantially simpler and more intuitive. However, it does not contain the distributed return current, and we shall keep this in mind during our discussion. We will consider the general case of $\partial B_r/\partial \theta \ne 0$, which captures the distributed return current, in \S \ref{windzonegen}.
The split monopole in flat spacetime has a simple analytical description for the force-free electromagnetic fields and currents. In the upper half plane ($z > 0$) it is described by the following expressions for the electromagnetic fields and current density:
\begin{align}
\label{monosteady}
B_r &= B_0 \left(\frac{r_0}{r}\right)^2, &E_r &= 0, &J_r &= -\frac{\Omega}{2 \pi} B_r \cos \theta \\
B_\theta &= 0, &E_\theta &=B_\phi, &J_\theta &= 0 \nn \\
B_\phi &= -B_r \frac{r \sin \theta}{R_{\rm LC}} , &E_\phi &= 0, &J_\phi &= 0. \nn
\end{align}
The solution in the lower half plane, $z < 0$, is the same but replacing $B_r \rightarrow -B_r$ so all non-zero values in equation (\ref{monosteady}) change sign. The lower and upper half planes are separated by a current sheet, which carries the return current necessary to prevent charging of the neutron star in steady state. We also mention that \citet{Lyutikov} studied a split-monopole field in a slowly rotating Kerr spacetime. However, the flat spacetime solution will suffice for our calculations, since the light cylinder is at a sufficiently large radius in all observed pulsars that general relativity is not important beyond it.
In the split-monopole region, we can use equations (\ref{monosteady}) together with equation (\ref{Jp}) and $\alpha \approx 1$ to write
\ba
\label{current_split_mono}
\frac{dI}{d\Psi} = -\frac{\Omega}{2\pi} \hat{b}_z \ \ \ \text{(split monopole)},
\ea
where $\hat{b}_z \equiv \bhat_{\rm P} \cdot \zhat$ and $\bhat_{\rm P}$ is the unit vector along the direction of the poloidal magnetic field. Thus, $\hat{b}_z$ measures the orientation of the poloidal magnetic field with respect to the vertical direction; the reason for this use of notation shall become apparent shortly.
\begin{comment}
We are now ready to determine the spatial distribution of pair production over the polar cap. However, we shall use a slightly different form of the pair-production criteria (\ref{conditions}) that is manifestly Lorentz invariant.
When $J_B$ and $J_{\rm GJ}$ have the same sign, which is satisfied by typical field geometries such as a dipole field, the pair-production criteria can be rewritten as
\begin{align}
\label{conditions2}
J^\mu J_\mu > 0 &, \ \ \ \text{pair production} \nn \\
J^\mu J_\mu < 0 &, \ \ \ \text{no pair production},
\end{align}
where the four-current magnitude is
\ba
J^{\mu}J_{\mu} \equiv -(\rho c)^2 + J^2.
\ea
This expression is valid for both a flat spacetime and a Kerr spacetime given that $\rho$ and $\bf J$ are measured by ZAMOs \citep{KomissarovGR}.
According to the set of conditions (\ref{conditions2}), there is pair production only if the four-current is spacelike. Additionally, since gamma-ray photons emitted by accelerated particles at the polar cap are beamed along the magnetic field, and the radius of curvature is assumed to be large compared to the size of the polar cap, the pair-production criteria apply on a {\it field-line-by-field-line basis}. Thus, field lines which have a spacelike four-current at their base in the polar cap support pair production.
In order to apply the pair-production criteria (\ref{conditions2}) on field lines, we need to compute the magnitude of the four-current vector over the polar cap
\begin{align}
&J^{\mu}J_{\mu} = -(\rho_{\rm GJ} c)^2 + J^2 \\
&= -\left(\frac{(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT})\cdot \bfB }{2 \pi \alpha}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{1}{\alpha} \frac{dI}{d\Psi} B_{\rm P}\right)^2 + J_\phi^2. \\
\label{Jmueq}
&\approx -\left(\frac{(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT})\cdot \bfB }{2 \pi \alpha}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{1}{\alpha} \frac{dI}{d\Psi} B_{\rm P}\right)^2.
\end{align}
In the first line, we have used the fact that the charge density is given by the Goldreich-Julian density. In going from the first line to the second line, we have expressed the Goldreich-Julian density using equation (\ref{rhoGJ}) (dropping the second term), and we have expressed the poloidal current using equation (\ref{Jp}). Finally, in going from the second line to the third line, we have dropped the toroidal current, which is subdominant given our assumption that the magnetic field does not vary significantly on the scale of the polar cap.
\end{comment}
Imagine now tracing a field line from the far-field split-monopole region back to the polar cap. Because $dI/d\Psi$ is constant on magnetic flux surfaces, we can use equation (\ref{current_split_mono}) to write the four-current magnitude given by equation (\ref{Jmueq}) as
\begin{align}
\label{kerr_estimate}
&J^{\mu}J_{\mu} = \left(\frac{B_{\rm P} \Omega}{2\pi \alpha}\right)^2 \left[ \left. \left. - \left(1 - \frac{\omega_{\rm LT}}{\Omega}\right)^2 \hat{b}^2_z \right |_{PC} + \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{SM} \right],
\end{align}
where vertical bars with subscripts ``PC" and ``SM" denote evaluation of a quantity {\it on the same magnetic flux surface} at a point PC on the polar cap and at a point SM in the split-monopole wind zone. The prefactor in front of the square brackets is evaluated at the polar cap.
We now use equation (\ref{kerr_estimate}) to make general statements about spacelike versus timelike four-current regions at the inner edge of the polar cap. This is the edge of the polar cap nearest to the polar axis in $\theta$, where the split-monopole solution is valid. We point out that the polar cap itself can still be displaced away from the polar axis.
For the split monopole, $J_{\rm GJ}$ is in the same sense as $\rho_{\rm GJ}$ flowing away from the pulsar. In this case, according to the criteria (\ref{conditions}), whether there is pair production on a field line near the inner edge can be reformulated in terms of the four-current magnitude as
\begin{align}
\label{conditions2}
J^\mu J_\mu > 0 &, \ \ \ \text{pair production} \nn \\
J^\mu J_\mu < 0 &, \ \ \ \text{no pair production}.
\end{align}
This expression is valid for both a flat spacetime and a Kerr spacetime given that $\rho$ and $\bf J$ are measured by ZAMOs \citep{KomissarovGR}.
\begin{comment}
Note that near the last open field line, which lies at the outer edge of the polar cap, i.e. the edge of the polar cap farthest from the polar axis in $\theta$, there is a region of distributed return current where $J_{\rm GJ}$ is in the opposite sense as $\rho_{\rm GJ}$ flowing outward. In this region there will be pair production even if the current is timelike, according to the criteria (\ref{conditions}). Thus, we shall keep the distributed return current in mind, during our discussion, even though it is not explicitly present in the split-monopole model. We consider current distributions that contain the return current explicitly in \S \ref{windzonegen}.
\end{comment}
\subsubsection{Flat Spacetime, Axis-Centered Polar Cap}
We begin by considering the simplest case of a polar cap that is centered on the rotational axis in flat spacetime. In this case, whether the four-current is spacelike or timelike at a point on the polar cap can be determined by comparing the angle the poloidal magnetic field makes with the polar axis at the polar cap and in the split-monopole wind region:
\begin{align}
J^{\mu}J_{\mu} \ \text{is} \ \begin{cases}
\text{timelike}, & \left. \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{PC} > \left. \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{SM}\\
\text{null}, & \left. \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{PC} = \left. \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{SM}\\
\text{spacelike}, & \left. \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{PC} < \left. \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{SM}
\end{cases}.
\label{flat4}
\end{align}
If the angle the poloidal magnetic field makes with the vertical ($\zhat$ direction) is less/greater at the polar cap than in the wind zone on the same magnetic flux surface, then the four-current magnitude at the polar cap will be timelike/spacelike. This gives an intuitive way of determining whether the current will be spacelike or timelike in the split-monopole approximation and is a useful feature of the model.
From these considerations, it immediately follows that the four-current on the polar axis is null. This is because for an axis-centered polar cap, the poloidal magnetic field on the polar axis points in the $\zhat$ direction everywhere. Thus, $\hat{b}_z^2 = 1$ in both the wind zone and on the polar cap. Additionally, the four-current magnitude away from the polar axis on the polar cap is timelike in flat spacetime. This is because flux surfaces generally bend away from the polar axis if the polar cap is centered on it, so that $\hat{b}^2_z|_{PC} > \hat{b}^2_z|_{SM}$. These considerations are {\it valid in general} at the inner edge of the polar cap, since the split-monopole solution provides a good approximation in this region.
\begin{comment}
hold true even forAdditionally, the four-current on the last open field line is timelike, because it runs along the edge of the current sheet in the split-monopole wind zone. The field line adjacent to the current sheet in the split monopole has $\hat{b}_z|_{SM} = 0$ and carries no current.
A different way of stating this result is that the field line just above the current sheet in the split-monopole solution has $J_{\rm P} = 0$. This means the poloidal current is zero along the last open field line all the way back down to the polar cap and the magnitude of the four-current will be timelike if the Goldreich-Julian density is nonzero on the last open field line at the polar cap.
Thus, there is neither pair production on the polar axis, nor on the last open field line, assuming a split-monopole model for the wind zone. However, simulations show there is actually a concentrated distributed return current layer near the last open field line where the four-current is spacelike. We elaborate on this issue in \S \ref{computational} when we compare our analytical results with simulations. However, as long as the field varies slowly over the scale of the polar cap and the distributed return current is confined to the vicinity of the last open field line, a large fraction of the polar cap field lines do not support pair production in flat spacetime.
\end{comment}
\subsubsection{Curved Spacetime, Axis-Centered Polar Cap}
\label{kerr}
\begin{comment}
Many of the equations in the slowly rotating Kerr spacetime carry over without modification from the flat spacetime derivation. Rather than redoing the entire derivation, we focus only on those parts that are different compared to flat spacetime.
For a slowly rotating Kerr spacetime, the ``corotational velocity" in a reference frame that is dragged along with the spacetime (the same one in which the electromagnetic fields are defined) is given by
\ba
\label{v0_Kerr}
\bfV_0 \equiv \left[ \left(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT} \right) \times \bfr \right]/\alpha
\ea
\citep{membrane}. The extra terms account for the frame-dragging effect and the gravitational time dilation and $\Omega(\psi)$ is again constant on magnetic flux surfaces. By Ferraro's isorotation theorem, which still holds in Kerr spacetime, the force-free electric field is still given by equation (\ref{corotE}), but with the form of $\bfV_0$ given in equation (\ref{v0_Kerr}). Starting from equation (\ref{rhoGJ_kerr_start}) and assuming negligible $J_\phi$, as we did previously, the Goldreich-Julian density can be expressed as
\ba
\rho_{\rm GJ} &\approx& -\frac{\bfB_{\rm P} \cdot \left(\bfnabla \times \bfV_0 \right)}{4\pi c} \\
&=& - \frac{1}{4\pi c} \left\{\bfnabla \times \left[ \frac{(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT}) \times \bfr}{\alpha} \right] \right\} \cdot \bfB_{\rm P} \\
&=& - \frac{1}{4\pi c} \left\{\bfnabla \times \left[ \frac{(\Omega - \omega_{\rm LT}) r \sin \theta}{\alpha}\phat \right] \right\} \cdot \bfB_{\rm P} \\
\label{rhoGJ_kerr}
&=& - \frac{(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT}) \cdot \bfB}{2 \pi c \alpha} + \frac{r \sin \theta B_\theta}{4\pi c} \frac{d}{d r} \left( \frac{\omega_{\rm LT}}{\alpha}\right).
\ea
Like the Goldreich-Julian density, equation (\ref{JP_flat}) for the meridional current is also modified in Kerr spacetime, and it becomes
\ba
\label{Jp_kerr}
\bfJ_{\rm P} = \frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{d I(\Psi)}{d \Psi} \bfB_{\rm P}.
\ea
The extra factor of $\alpha^{-1}$ converts from coordinate time, which is used in defining $I$ to the proper time of the dragged frame in which $\bfJ_{\rm P}$ is measured \citep{membrane}.
Dropping the second term in equation (\ref{rhoGJ_kerr}), which we expect to be subdominant, we can derive the analog to equation (\ref{flat_estimate}) at the polar cap
\begin{align}
&J^{\mu}J_{\mu} = -\left(\frac{(\bfOmega - \bfomega_{\rm LT})\cdot \bfB }{2 \pi \alpha}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{1}{\alpha} \frac{dI}{d\Psi} B_{\rm P}\right)^2 + J_\phi^2 \\
\label{kerr_estimate}
&\approx -\left(\frac{B_{\rm P} \Omega}{2\pi \alpha}\right)^2\left[\left. \left. \left(\left(1 - \frac{\omega_{\rm LT}}{\Omega}\right) \hat{b}_z \right)^2 \right |_{PC} - \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{SM} \right].
\end{align}
\end{comment}
The generalization of the criteria (\ref{flat4}) to a slowly rotating Kerr spacetime is given by
\begin{align}
J^{\mu}J_{\mu} \ \text{is} \ \begin{cases}
\text{timelike}, & \left. \left[\left(1 - \frac{\omega_{\rm LT}}{\Omega}\right) \hat{b}_z \right]^2 \right |_{PC} > \left. \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{SM}\\
\text{null}, & \left. \left[\left(1 - \frac{\omega_{\rm LT}}{\Omega}\right) \hat{b}_z \right]^2 \right |_{PC} = \left. \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{SM}\\
\text{spacelike}, & \left. \left[\left(1 - \frac{\omega_{\rm LT}}{\Omega}\right) \hat{b}_z \right]^2 \right |_{PC} < \left. \hat{b}_z^2 \right |_{SM}
\end{cases}.
\label{kerr4}
\end{align}
Comparing equations (\ref{flat4}) and (\ref{kerr4}), we see that the effect of frame dragging is to effectively reduce the magnitude of the charge density at the polar cap as compared to the poloidal current density. This means the four-current near the polar axis is no longer null, but is {\it spacelike}. However, because field lines bend away from the polar axis, it is a local maximum, and the four-current magnitude decreases as we go away from the polar axis.
Additionally, on field lines that have zero poloidal current (for the split-monopole this means $\hat{b}_z|_{SM} = 0$) the four-current magnitude will generally be timelike. In the split-monopole solution the field line of zero poloidal current is the last open field line. However, due to the presence of the distributed return current, the field line of zero poloidal current is shifted inward in the numerical force-free solutions so that it lies between the inner and outer edges of the polar cap. Nevertheless, the fact that the solution contains a field line of zero poloidal current and the fact that the poloidal current varies smoothly across the polar cap means there is a region of timelike four-current at mid-latitudes on the polar cap with $J_{\rm GJ}$ in the same sense as $\rho_{\rm GJ}$ flowing outward. {\it This region does not support pair production}.
\subsubsection{Off-Axis Polar Cap}
If higher order multipoles are important, then the polar cap can be significantly displaced away from the rotational axis \citep{Arons79,Gralla}. Assuming the field varies on a scale that is large compared to the scale of the polar cap, and the dipole component dominates at the light cylinder, we can use the general formalism we have developed.
The direction of the magnetic field in the off-axis case (and hence $\hat{b}_z$ at the polar cap) depends on the relative strengths of the multipole components. However, from equation (\ref{flat4}) it is clear there is generally a region of spacelike four-current at the inner edge of the polar cap (the edge closer to the rotational axis), even in flat spacetime. This is true as long as the polar cap magnetic field is not exactly parallel to the vertical direction, $(\hat{b}_z |_{PC})^2 \ne 1$. This differs from the axis-centered case for which the field on the axis points vertically by axisymmetry, resulting in a null four-current density.
General-relativistic frame dragging reduces the Goldreich-Julian density over the polar cap and enlarges the region of spacelike four-current. However, even in the off-axis case with general relativity, there is generically a region of timelike four-current. The reason, as before, is that both the model and the numerical solution (\S \ref{computational}) contain field lines on which the poloidal current goes to zero. Only in the unlikely special case when the magnetic field is at a right angle to the rotational axis ($\hat{b}_z|_{PC} = 0$), implying $\rho_{\rm GJ} = 0$, will the four-current magnitude over the entire polar cap be spacelike, except on the field line that carries no current, where it will be null.
\begin{comment}
\subsection{General Pair Production Results}
From our results on the four-current magnitude over the polar cap (equations (\ref{flat4},\ref{kerr4})), we can make general statements about pair production. For typical large scale field geometries in axisymmetry, the current density has the same sign as the charge density flowing outward (i.e. $J_B/J_{\rm GJ} > 0$). In this case, the indicator that determines whether the pair cascade is active or not according to the criteria (\ref{conditions}) is the sign of the magnitude of the four-current. If the four-current is spacelike ($J^\mu J_\mu > 0$), then the pair cascade is active, and if it is timelike ($J^\mu J_\mu < 0$) the pair cascade is inactive.
Since the four-current magnitude is everywhere timelike over the polar cap in flat spacetime (except the polar axis where it is null), {\it there is no pair production}. This is consistent with the results of PIC simulations that try to simulate the pair cascade directly in flat spacetime \citep{PhilippovSpitkovsky1,ChenBeloborodov} but find that it is quenched in axisymmetry.
In the more realistic Kerr spacetime, the Lense-Thirring frame dragging effect decreases the charge density at the polar cap below what it would be in flat spacetime. {\it This creates a region of spacelike current near the spherical polar axis, where a pair cascade can exist}. However, the poloidal current on the last open field line equals zero, as demanded by the far-field split-monopole solution. Because the charge density generally does not equal zero at the polar cap on the last open field line, this means {\it there is still a region of the polar cap starting from the last open field line where the current is timelike and pair production is quenched.}
\end{comment}
\subsection{Generalized Wind Zone Solution}
\label{windzonegen}
In this section, we relax the split monopole approximation and derive $dI/d\Psi$ for more general distributions of the poloidal flux. Before we can derive $dI/d\Psi$, however, we must make one additional approximation which is that $E_\theta = B_\phi$ in the wind zone beyond the light cylinder. This means the drift velocity of the plasma is radial ($B_\phi \gg B_r$) and equals the speed of light. With this approximation, it is possible to show that the current in the wind zone is null, $J^\mu J_\mu = 0$, and is given by
\begin{align}
\bfJ_{\rm P} &= \rho_{\rm GJ} c \rhat \\
&= \left(-\frac{\bfOmega \cdot \bfB}{2 \pi} + \frac{\bfV_0 \cdot \left(\bfnabla \times \bfB \right)}{4\pi} \right) \rhat \\
\label{jpgen}
&= -\frac{\Omega B_r}{2 \pi}\left(\hat{b}_z + \frac{\sin \theta}{2 B_r} \frac{\partial B_r}{\partial \theta} \right) \rhat.
\end{align}
In going from the first line to the second, we have used equation (\ref{rhoGJ}), and in going from the second line to the third we have used the fact that poloidal field lines are radial in the wind zone. This implies $\hat{b}_z = \cos \theta$, but we have written the poloidal current in the form above to make a more direct connection to the discussion in \S \ref{splitmonowind}.
Combining equations (\ref{Jp}) and (\ref{jpgen}), and using the fact that $\alpha \approx 1$ in the wind zone, we can write
\ba
\label{ipsigen}
\frac{d I}{d \Psi} = -\frac{\Omega}{2 \pi}\left(\hat{b}_z + \frac{\sin \theta}{2 B_r} \frac{\partial B_r}{\partial \theta} \right).
\ea
Equation (\ref{ipsigen}) is the generalization of equation (\ref{current_split_mono}), which is only valid for the special case of the split monopole ($\partial B_r/\partial \theta = 0$). Substituting the expression for $dI/d\Psi$ from equation (\ref{ipsigen}) into equation (\ref{Jmueq}), the four-current magnitude over the polar cap is given by
\begin{multline}
\label{kerr_gen}
J^\mu J_\mu = \left(\frac{\Omega B_{\rm P}}{2 \pi \alpha}\right)^2\left[ \left. -\left(1 - \frac{\omega_{\rm LT}}{\Omega} \right)^2\hat{b}^2_z \right |_{PC} \right. \\
\left. \left. + \left(\hat{b}_z + \frac{\sin \theta}{2 B_r} \frac{\partial B_r}{\partial \theta} \right)^2 \right |_{WZ} \right].
\end{multline}
Here ``WZ" stands for wind zone analogous to ``SM" for split-monopole in \S \ref{splitmonowind}. As before, vertical bars denote evaluation on the same magnetic flux surface at the polar cap and in the wind zone, respectively, and the prefactor in front of the square brackets is evaluated at the polar cap.
Comparing equation (\ref{kerr_gen}) with equation (\ref{kerr_estimate}), we see that deviations from the split-monopole, such as the distributed return current, are contained entirely within the term proportional to $\partial B_r/\partial \theta$. Additionally, just like in the case of the split monopole, the lapse factor $\alpha$ simply rescales the four-current magnitude, meaning it does not have an effect on the spatial distribution of pair production. This is in contrast to frame dragging, which makes the four-current magnitude more spacelike by reducing the magnitude of the charge density term relative to the current density term.
We can also understand the reason why the split-monopole solution works well near the inner edge of the polar cap. The term proportional to $\partial B_r/\partial \theta$ which is not present in the split-monopole solution has a prefactor of $\sin \theta$ and thus is suppressed near the inner edge of the polar cap. This suppression is further enhanced by the fact that $\partial B_r/\partial \theta \propto \sin \theta$ for the leading correction to the split-monopole solution (equation \ref{poloidalB}).
On the other hand, at the outer edge of the polar cap near the last open field line, $ \hat{b}_z |_{WZ} \sim 0$. Thus, the $\partial B_r/\partial \theta$ term dominates here, and the split-monopole solution is no longer a good approximation.
\section{Pair Production: Dipole Surface Field}
In the previous section, we derived general results that allowed us to identify regions of the polar cap supporting pair production. In this section, we consider a specific magnetic field structure at the polar cap and in the wind zone. This will allow us to check our analytical results against simulations in \S \ref{computational}.
For the poloidal magnetic field in the wind zone, we will concurrently consider the split-monopole model and the more accurate distribution described by equation (\ref{poloidalB}). Although the magnetic field at the polar cap is not known in general, modeling of pulsar radio profiles suggests that it may be well-described by a dipole down to the surface of the neutron star \citep{Rankin}. Thus, we assume a dipole surface magnetic field in this section, in line with most pulsar studies.
\citet{WassermanShapiro} derive the form of a potential magnetic field in the Schwarzschild metric that is dipole for $r \gg r_*$. Defining the dimensionless variable $x \equiv r/r_{\rm s}$, the nonzero magnetic field components are given by
\begin{align}
\label{GR_dipole}
B_r &= \frac{2 \mu \cos \theta }{r^3} f(x), \ \ \ B_\theta = \frac{\mu \sin \theta }{r^3}g(x), \\
f(x) &\equiv -3x^3 \ln(1-x^{-1}) - 3x^2(1+x^{-1}/2), \nn \\
g(x) &\equiv 6x^3 (1-x^{-1})^{1/2} \ln(1-x^{-1}) + \frac{6 x^2 (1-x^{-1}/2)}{(1-x^{-1})^{1/2}} \nn \,.
\end{align}
For $x \gg 1$, the functions $g(x) \rightarrow 1$ and $f(x) \rightarrow 1$, so we recover the field of a dipole with magnetic moment $\mu$.
We can use equation (\ref{kerr_estimate}) to compute the magnitude of the four-current over the polar cap. However, we first need to evaluate the terms in equation (\ref{kerr_gen}) at the polar cap and in the wind zone. For a polar cap field given by equation (\ref{GR_dipole}), $\hat{b}_z$ as a function of $\theta$ is given by
\begin{align}
\label{zhat_bhat}
\left. \hat{b}_z \right|_{PC} = \frac{2 f_* \cos^2 \theta - g_* \sin^2 \theta }{\sqrt{\left(2 f_* \cos \theta \right)^2 + \left(g_* \sin \theta \right)^2}},
\end{align}
where $f_* \equiv f(x_*)$ and $g_* \equiv g(x_*)$. Using equation (\ref{poloidalB}), we have for the wind zone\begin{align}
\label{zhat_bhat2}
\left. \hat{b}_z \right|_{WZ} &= \cos \theta \\
\label{extra_term}
\left. \frac{\sin \theta}{2 B_r} \frac{\partial B_r}{\partial \theta}\right|_{WZ} &=
\frac{A_1 \sin^2\theta}{2(1+A1(\cos\theta -1))}.
\end{align}
For a split-monopole wind zone, the term in equation (\ref{extra_term}) vanishes since $A_1 = 0$ in this case.
The quantities in equations (\ref{zhat_bhat})-(\ref{extra_term}) must be evaluated on the same magnetic flux surface (i.e.\ at the same value of $\Psi$) at the polar cap and in the wind zone. Thus, we need an expression for $\theta(\Psi)$ [or, equivalently, $\Psi(\theta)$] at both the polar cap and in the wind zone. To compute $\Psi(\theta)$ for the split monopole, we first need to determine the normalization of $B_r$ in the wind zone.
The wind zone magnetic field is given by equation (\ref{poloidalB}) up to a constant of order unity, $k$. This constant specifies the total amount of open flux, or equivalently, the spin down luminosity. For a given value of $k$, the amount of open flux and the spindown luminosity will depend (weakly) on the value of $A_1$. It will turn out, however, that our results are insensitive to the exact value of $k$ as long as it is of order unity. Thus, we leave it as a free parameter in the model that we can vary.
To gain some intuition for why $k$ is of order unity it is useful to consider a split-monopole magnetic field ($A_1 = 0$), and we shall refer to $k$ as $k_{\rm SM}$ when explicitly referencing the split-monopole distribution of field lines. Setting $k_{\rm SM} = 1$ makes the total magnetic flux in the split monopole wind-zone region equal to the total magnetic flux beyond the light cylinder for a surface dipole field in flat spacetime. However, a value of $k_{\rm SM} \approx 1.5^{1/2}$ is necessary for the spindown luminosity to agree with force-free simulations using a surface dipole field in flat spacetime. We measure from simulations values of $k_{\rm SM}$ for various light cylinder radii in flat and curved spacetimes in \S \ref{computational} and find them always to be near unity ($1 < k_{\rm SM} < 2$).
We can express $\Psi(\theta)$ in the wind zone and at the polar cap as
\begin{align}
\label{psi_theta}
\left. \Psi(\theta) \right|_{WZ} &= \frac{2 \pi \mu k}{R_{\rm LC}}\left[1-\cos \theta -\frac{A_1}{2}(1 - \cos\theta)^2 \right]\\
\left. \Psi(\theta) \right|_{PC} &= \frac{2 \pi \mu f_*}{r_*} \sin^2 \theta.
\end{align}
Defining the dimensionless variables
\begin{align}
\psi \equiv \frac{R_{\rm LC}}{ 2\pi \mu k} \Psi, \ \ \ \overline{\psi} \equiv \frac{r_*}{2 \pi \mu f_*} \Psi,
\end{align}
we can solve for $\cos \theta$ in the wind zone and $\sin^2 \theta$ at the polar cap in terms of $\psi$ and $\overline{\psi}$, respectively:
\begin{align}
\label{wz_theta}
\cos \theta &= 1-\frac{1-\sqrt{1-2A_1\psi}}{A_1} & (\text{wind zone})\\
\label{pc_theta}
\sin^2\theta &= \overline{\psi} & (\text{polar cap}).
\end{align}
Note that the polar cap on the surface of the neutron star is defined by values of $\psi$ in the range $0 \le \psi < 1$. Also, for a split-monopole wind zone we can take $A_1 \rightarrow 0$ to derive the simpler expression $\cos \theta = 1 - \psi$.
From here, the procedure to determine the four-current magnitude over the polar cap is straightforward, albeit mechanically involved, so we simply outline it. By substituting expression (\ref{wz_theta}) into equations (\ref{zhat_bhat2}) and (\ref{extra_term}) and expression (\ref{pc_theta}) into equation (\ref{zhat_bhat}), one can derive a formula for the four-current magnitude as a function of $\Psi$. By construction, the evaluation of the terms in equation (\ref{kerr_gen}) can then be performed on the same magnetic flux surface, which allows one to derive the four-current magnitude as a function of $\Psi$. One can then use equation (\ref{pc_theta}) to express the four-current magnitude as a function of $\theta$ over the polar cap.
\begin{comment}
Inverting equations (\ref{psi_theta2}) for $\theta$ and substituting the results into equations (\ref{zhat_bhat}), we can write $\hat{b}_z$ as a function of the magnetic flux:
\begin{align}
\label{zhat_bhat_flux}
\hat{b}_z &= \ \begin{cases}
1 - \psi, & \text{split monopole}\\
\frac{2 (1- \overline{\psi}) f_*- \overline{\psi} g_*}{\sqrt{4 (1 - \overline{\psi}) f_*^2 + \overline{\psi} g_*^2}}, & \text{dipole}
\end{cases}.
\end{align}
Substituting these expressions for $\hat{b}_z$ into equation (\ref{kerr_estimate}), we can determine the magnitude of the four-current over the polar cap in our dipole model.
\end{comment}
Fig.~\ref{flat_fig} shows $J^{\mu}J_{\mu}/(\rho c)^2$ as a function of $\theta/\theta_{\rm PC}$, where $\theta_{\rm PC}$ is the angular extent of the polar cap. In flat spacetime, the four-current is timelike over the entire polar cap, except on the polar axis where it is null. On the other hand, in a slowly rotating Kerr spacetime there is a spacelike four-current region that includes the polar axis, as evidenced by the blue and green curves. For each of the blue and green curves, we have denoted the pair production boundaries using vertical dotted green and blue lines, respectively. Note that the rightmost blue and green dotted lines are on top of each other, so they appear as a single line.
We can split the polar cap into different regions, which have the dotted lines as their boundaries. In region 1, which extends to the right from the polar axis to the first dotted line, there is pair production, because the four-current is spacelike. In region 2, between the two dotted lines, there is no pair production because the four-current is timelike and $0 < J_B/\rho_{\rm GJ}c < 1$. Region 3, which extends to the right from the second dotted line to the last open field line, is the region of distributed return current. Although the four-current is timelike in this region, we have $J_B/\rho_{\rm GJ}c < 0$, so there is pair production.
Note also that the compactness of the neutron star has a drastic effect on the location of the boundary between regions 1 and 2. In particular as $r_{\rm s}/r_* \rightarrow 0$, the size of region 1 shrinks and region 1 disappears entirely in flat spacetime. This is because the region of pair production near the polar axis is due entirely to the frame-dragging effect, which is absent in flat spacetime. On the other hand, we see that varying the compactness has virtually no effect on the location of the boundary between regions 2 and 3. Thus, the size of the distributed return current region scaled to the polar cap size is not affected by general relativity.
We also see from Fig. \ref{flat_fig} that varying the dimensionless parameters $k_{\rm SM}$ and $R_{\rm LC}/r_*$ has very little effect on the distribution of the four-current magnitude over the polar cap. However, it does affect the size of the polar cap, since the polar cap becomes smaller as the compactness of the neutron star increases \citep{Gralla} or as the light cylinder moves further out. However, by normalizing $\theta$ by $\theta_{\rm PC}$, we have removed the size-variation of the polar cap so we can compare the distribution of four-current magnitude across the polar cap for different parameter regimes directly.
\begin{comment}
Also, the polar cap magnetic field is nearly aligned with the $z$-axis as long as $R_{\rm LC}/r_* \gg 1$, or equivalently $\theta_{\rm PC} \ll 1$. As a result, for $R_{\rm LC}/r_* \gtrsim 10$, the variation of current over the polar cap is determined almost exclusively by the distribution of current along magnetic flux surfaces in the wind zone. It is fairly insensitive to the precise structure of the surface magnetic field, as long as the latter varies on a scale that is large compared to the polar cap size.
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
At the edge of the polar cap, in our dipole model, lies a current sheet that carries the return current. force-free simulations indicate that this current sheet may in fact be a distributed current over the outer $\sim 10-20 \%$ of the polar cap in $\theta$, which would generate a region of spacelike current at the outer edge of the polar cap. We discuss this scenario further in \S \ref{computational}, where we present computational results.
\end{comment}
\label{jdistribution}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.49\textwidth]{polarcap_currents_DRC.pdf}
\caption{Analytically computed four-current magnitude normalized by $(\rho c)^2$ as a function of angle measured from the polar axis for a dipole surface field. The red set of curves is for a flat spacetime and the green and blue sets of curves are for slowly rotating Kerr spacetimes with $r_{\rm s}/r_* = 0.3$ and $r_{\rm s}/r_* = 0.5$, respectively. All of the color curves use equation (\ref{poloidalB}) to approximate the poloidal magnetic field in the wind zone; the upper/lower sets of gray curves are analogous to the blue/red curves, but assuming a split-monopole distribution for the poloidal magnetic field in the wind zone. The split-monopole is a good approximation near the pole, but is inaccurate near the last open field line. Within each bundle of curves, the dotted line is for the parameters $(R_{\rm LC}/r_* = 100,k_{\rm SM} = 1)$, the solid line is for the parameters $(R_{\rm LC}/r_* = 10,k_{\rm SM} = 1)$, and the dashed line is for the parameters $(R_{\rm LC}/r_* = 10,k_{\rm SM} = 2)$.}
\label{flat_fig}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\section{Computational Results}
\label{computational}
The analytical models have been formulated in the slow-rotation approximation to the Kerr metric, equation~(\ref{metric}). We have performed a set of time-dependent axisymmetric simulations of the pulsar magnetosphere in the complete Kerr spacetime in order to verify the models at low spins, and investigate their applicability to rapidly rotating pulsars. While the Kerr solution does not describe precisely the spacetime outside an extended rotating body, we expect it to be sufficiently realistic for our present purposes.
In the simulations, the equations of general-relativistic force-free electrodynamics are solved by the \textsc{phaedra} code \citep{Parfreyetal, ParfreyPhDT}, using the Kerr-Schild spacetime foliation and spherical coordinates. The compactness parameter is set to $r_{\rm s}/r_* = 0.5$ for all runs. The computational domain consists of the space $r_* \leq r \leq 2,\!000 r_*$ and $0 < \theta < \pi$. The grid has $N_r \times N_\theta = 1024 \times 512$ nodes, which are concentrated near the star by a smooth coordinate mapping.
For each simulation, we set the light cylinder radius $R_{\rm LC}$. The corresponding dimensionless spin parameter is given by $a = J_*c/G M_*^2$, where the star's angular momentum is $J_* = I_* \Omega_*$; equations~(\ref{LenseThirring}) and (\ref{MomentInertia}) give
\ba
a = 0.21 \frac{r_*^2}{1 - r_{\rm s}/r_*} \frac{1}{R_{\rm LC} \, r_{\rm g}},
\ea
where $r_{\rm g}$ is the star's gravitational radius, $r_{\rm g} = G M_*/c^2 = r_{\rm s} / 2$.
We performed five simulations: two in the Kerr metric with $R_{\rm LC}/r_* = 5$ and 10, giving $a = 0.336$ and 0.168 respectively; two in flat spacetime with the same $R_{\rm LC}/r_*$, and one in the Schwarzschild metric ($a = 0$) with $R_{\rm LC}/r_* = 5$. The Wasserman-Shapiro dipole, equation~(\ref{GR_dipole}), was used as the initial field configuration for the Schwarzschild simulation; in the Kerr metric this field must be adjusted to respect solenoidality [see e.g.\ \citet{ParfreyPhDT}].
The normalized four-current magnitude, $J_\mu J^\mu/\rho c^2$, over the polar cap is shown in Fig.~\ref{sim_fig}; note that, as above, the charge density $\rho$ is defined in the rest frame of the observer with zero radial velocity and corotating with spacetime at the Lense-Thirring angular velocity. In this figure, results from the simulations are shown in blue and red, and the model curves are drawn in gray; the model corresponds to the two-term poloidal flux distribution of equation~(\ref{poloidalB}).
For the simulation curves, the normalizing polar cap extent $\theta_{\rm PC}$ is determined by equating the magnetic flux through the polar cap to the open flux in the wind zone $\Psi_{\rm open}$, which is in turn defined as the total flux through the hemisphere $0 < \theta < \pi/2$ at $r = 2 R_{\rm LC}$. The open flux can be directly found from the simulation once the magnetosphere has reached a steady state.
The analytic models require a value of $k$, which sets the open flux through the polar cap. We fix this value for each model such that the open flux in the model and the corresponding simulation are the same. Specifically, we use the open flux $\Psi_{\rm open}$ from the corresponding simulation and equation~(\ref{psi_theta}) with $A_1 = 0.22$: $k = \Psi_{\rm open} R_{\rm LC} / \left[2 \pi \mu \left(1 - A_1/2 \right)\right]$. For comparison, we also report results for the simpler split-monopole model, for which $k_{\rm SM}$ is found using the same expression and $A_1 = 0$. The values of $k$, $k_{\rm SM}$, and $\theta_{\rm PC}$ for each simulation are collected in Table~1.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.4in]{fig2.pdf}
\caption{Simulation results: normalized four-current magnitude across the polar cap, in the Kerr (solid blue, $r_{\rm s}/r_* = 0.5$), Minkowski (solid red), and Schwarzschild (dashed red, $r_{\rm s}/r_* = 0.5$) spacetimes. The gray curves show the analytical model corresponding to each simulation, using a two-term approximation for the distribution of the poloidal magnetic field in the wind zone. Thick (thin) lines are drawn for $R_{\rm LC}/r_* = 10$ ($R_{\rm LC}/r_* = 5$). }
\label{sim_fig}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ l c c c c c}
Metric & $R_{\rm LC}/r_*$ & $a$ & $k_{\rm SM}$ & $k$ & $\theta_{\rm PC}$ (rads) \\
\hline
Kerr & 5 & 0.336 & 1.37 & 1.54 & 0.42 \\
Kerr & 10 & 0.168 & 1.34 & 1.50 & 0.29 \\
Schwarzschild & 5 & 0 & 1.36 & 1.53 & 0.42 \\
Minkowski & 5 & --- & 1.20 & 1.35 & 0.51 \\
Minkowski & 10 & --- & 1.24 & 1.39 & 0.36 \\
\end{tabular}
\label{sim_table}
\caption{ Simulation parameters and basic properties of solutions }
\end{table}
As can be seen in Fig.~\ref{sim_fig}, the model accurately predicts the current structure near the polar axis, including the normalization of $J_\mu J^\mu/\rho c^2$ at the axis in Kerr spacetime.
The angle $\theta_{\rm null}$, at which $J_\mu J^\mu = 0$, is recovered by the models with an error of $\delta\theta_{\rm null}/\theta_{\rm PC} =$ -0.037 (-0.028) for $R_{\rm LC}/r_* =$ 10 (5), where $\delta\theta_{\rm null} = \theta_{\rm null, model} - \theta_{\rm null, sim}$. The split-monopole model is more accurate in this regard, with errors of $\delta\theta_{\rm null}/\theta_{\rm PC} =$ 0.013 (0.027) for $R_{\rm LC}/r_* =$ 10 (5); here the slow-rotation model becomes more accurate as the stellar rotation rate is decreased. One the other hand, closer to the polar cap boundary $\theta_{\rm PC}$ the split-monopole model diverges somewhat from the simulations, as explained by the discussion in \S \ref{windzonegen}.
It is striking how closely both models follow the simulations even at these high spins---the two values investigated here correspond to spin frequencies of 477~Hz and 954~Hz, taking $r_* = 10$~km; the latter value corresponds to a pulsar faster than any yet discovered.
\begin{comment} The model assumes that all of the return current flows in a singular current layer, as indicated by the vertical gray line in Fig.~\ref{sim_fig}; in other words, the radial component of the current density maintains the same sign across the polar cap.
\end{comment}
In the simulations, the return current has two components: a narrow, nearly singular current layer at the polar cap boundary, and a distributed return current which occupies a non-negligible volume. In Fig.~\ref{sim_fig} the distributed return current lies to the right of the curves' minima, which coincide with the colatitudes at which the contravariant vector component $J^r = 0$. In all simulations the width of the return-current region is approximately 11\% of the polar cap width, although this would increase if the field were non-dipolar and the polar cap were displaced from the polar axis. This is because the magnetic flux is typically more concentrated towards the outer edge of the polar cap for an on-axis polar cap as compared to an off-axis one in axisymmetry. The return-current region is slightly larger in the analytical models using the two-term poloidal flux approximation, extending over roughly 12\% of the polar cap width for the parameters shown.
The four-current structure in the Schwarzschild simulation is nearly indistinguishable from the flat spacetime results---clearly the frame dragging is the critical ingredient. One can understand this in the context of the model by noting that both $J_\mu J^\mu$ and $\rho^2$ are proportional to $1/\alpha^2$ [see equations~ (\ref{kerr_estimate}) and (\ref{kerr_gen})], and therefore the normalized four-current magnitude is independent of the lapse function.
\section{Discussion}
\label{discussion}
Assuming a force-free magnetic field structure, we have shown that there generically exist regions of timelike four-current with $0 < J_B/J_{\rm GJ} < 1$ on the polar cap for an axisymmetric pulsar in both flat and Kerr spacetimes. Both theory \citep{Beloborodov_cloud} and one dimensional PIC simulations \citep{TimokhinArons} predict that pair production is not expected in these regions.
Our analytical approach is valid for general magnetic field geometries, assuming the magnetic field varies on a scale larger than the scale of the polar cap. We show that in flat spacetime for a polar cap centered on the rotational axis, the four-current over the polar cap is timelike, except on the polar axis, where it is null. In Kerr spacetime, frame dragging reduces the Goldreich-Julian density over the polar cap and creates a spacelike four-current region near the polar axis. Additionally, if the polar cap is displaced from the rotational axis due to the presence of higher-order multipoles, there will generically be a region of spacelike four-current at its inner edge even in flat spacetime, unless the magnetic field is exactly vertical.
We find it useful to consider the split-monopole model for the fields in the wind zone, since it allows one to derive simple and intuitive results. The split-monopole model is most accurate near the inner edge of the polar cap (the one closest to the polar axis). It predicts the highest latitude at which the four-current becomes null with a fractional error of $\lesssim 1\%$ for $R_{\rm LC} \gtrsim 10\, r_*$.
However, force-free simulations show that there is a distributed return current region. For a surface dipole field, the distributed return current occupies $\sim 11 \%$ of the polar cap in latitude starting from the last open field line. Pair production occurs in this region, since the four current is timelike but is in the opposite sense as the Goldreich-Julian density flowing outward.
Because the split-monopole model does not contain the distributed return current, we have considered a form of the poloidal field lines in the wind zone given by equation (\ref{poloidalB}). This form is obtained from a fit to force-free simulations by \citet{Tchekhovskoy_current}.
Using their fitting formula, we find excellent agreement in the width of the return-current region between our analytical theory and force-free simulations.
An interesting application of our results is to the hollow cone model of \citet{RadhakrishnanCooke}. In Kerr spacetime, pair-producing regions at the pole and in the distributed return current layer are separated by a timelike four-current region devoid of pair production. Thus, the spatial distribution of pair-producing regions resembles a hollow cone. If one associates radio emission with pair production, then our work provides a physical explanation for the hollow cone model, in those pulsars having nearly-aligned spin and magnetic axes.
In the case of significantly misaligned spin and magnetic axes, the axisymmetric approximation is severely violated. However, we point out that even in this case, it is still possible to trace the far-field distribution of current from the wind zone along magnetic field lines back to the polar cap. In particular, \citep{Gruzinov06} has shown that if the structure of magnetic field lines corotates with the star\footnote{The velocity of the field lines, which corotate rigidly, does not generally equal the drift velocity of the plasma.}, then under the force-free assumption in flat spacetime
\ba
\label{Gruzinoveq}
\bfnabla \times \left[\bfB + \frac{\bfV_0}{c} \times \left(\frac{\bfV_0}{c} \times \bfB\right)\right] = \lambda \bfB.
\ea
Here $\bfV_0$ is given by the flat spacetime expression in equation (\ref{V0eq}) and $\lambda$ is constant on magnetic field lines ($\bfB \cdot \bfnabla \lambda = 0$), which can be seen by taking the divergence of both sides of the equation. This means it is possible to generalize our methodology and trace back the current from the wind zone to determine the distribution of current over the polar cap in 3D.
Our results also have important implications for first-principles modeling of the pair cascade. They are broadly in agreement with the axisymmetric PIC simulations of \citet{PhilippovGR}. These authors find that in flat spacetime, pair production is shut off over the entire polar cap, whereas with general relativity there is still a large fraction of the polar cap at mid-latitudes that does not support pair production. Our results show that the features observed in these simulations are universal regardless of the magnetic field configuration or the ratio of the light cylinder radius to the neutron star radius. In fact, the only major assumption we require for our results to hold is that the magnetic field at the surface of the neutron star varies on scales larger than the size of the polar cap.
Our results also suggest the presence of a ``gap" (a region where the density is below the Goldreich-Julian density) in the outer magnetosphere, due to the absence of surface pair production over a sizable fraction of the polar cap. However, we have only considered the $\gamma$--$B$ mechanism of pair production. A second channel for pair production that our analytical treatment does not consider is the photon-photon mechanism proposed by \citet{ChengHoRuderman}. The $\gamma$--$\gamma$ mechanism was simulated using PIC by \citet{ChenBeloborodov} and could potentially fill an outer gap with plasma.
Nevertheless, even in the presence of $\gamma$--$\gamma$ pair production, one may still expect a thin gap above the return-current layer near the last open field line. This is due to the concave shape of the field lines in the closed zone of the magnetosphere, which makes it difficult for photons emitted in the region of open field lines or from the return current layer to fill the volume directly above the last open field line [see e.g.\ Fig. 3 of \cite{ChengHoRuderman}].
Gaps have been proposed as sites of pulsed high-energy emission \citep{Wattersetal,RomaniWatters,DyksRudak,MuslimovHarding}. However, alternatives that place the emission in the return current layer or current sheet also exist \citep{BaiSpitkovsky,Cerutti3D}. Thus, further computational work is needed to pin down theoretically the sites of pulsed high-energy emission.
\begin{comment}
Another application of our results to the modeling of pulsed high-energy emission concerns the nature of the accelerating electric field which is required to transfer energy from the electromagnetic field to particles. According to Poynting's theorem (in flat spacetime)
\ba
\frac{\partial u_{EM}}{\partial t} + \frac{c}{4 \pi} \bfE \times \bfB = - \bfE \cdot \bfJ,
\ea
where $u_{EM} = (E^2 + B^2)/8\pi$ is the energy density in the electromagnetic field. This implies that conversion of Poynting flux to particle energy (ultimately radiated as gamma rays) occurs via the dissipative $\bfE \cdot \bfJ$ term. Currently, there is no accepted theory for the origin of this term in the pulsar magnetosphere. Our results may help elucidate the physical basis of the $\bfE \cdot \bfJ$ term.
Because the return current layer is spacelike inside the light cylinder, there is {\it counterstreaming} of positive and negative charge carriers within the layer. A natural way for such counterstreaming to occur is if a parallel electric field exists in the current layer, which ``filters" charge carriers and sends them in opposite directions. The filter electric field idea is attractive from the point of view of observations, since simulations of the pulsar magnetosphere with a force free electromagnetic field identify the current sheet and return current layer as attractive site for generating the gamma-ray emission \citep{Cerutti3D}. Additionally, the axisymmetric simulations of \cite{BelyaevPIC} show that the magnitude of $\bfE \cdot \bfJ$ is largest in the return current layer in the vicinity of the Y-point.
The action of the filter in the return current layer, however, depends on whether there is a vacuum gap above the return current layer (as our results suggest). If such a gap exists then the filtered charges must come from the surface of the neutron star and are filtered as they move outwards. Alternatively, if the magnetosphere is filled with a copious supply of plasma, then one could potentially generate a flow of charges into the return current layer from the open field lines. Such a ``reconnection flow" through the Y-point has been suggested by \cite{Arons_review}, and there is some evidence for a flow of particles from the open field lines into the return current layer in the simulations of \cite{CeruttiSpitkovsky}, which have copious pairs throughout the magnetosphere.
\end{comment}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to thank Jon Arons, Eliot Quataert, Anatoly Spitkovsky, Sasha Philippov, and Sam Gralla for stimulating discussions that helped to improve the paper. MB was supported by NASA Astrophysics Theory grant NNX14AH49G to the University of California, Berkeley and the Theoretical Astrophysics Center at UC Berkeley. KP was supported by NASA through Einstein Postdoctoral Fellowship grant number PF5-160142 awarded by the Chandra X-ray Center, which is operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory for NASA under contract NAS8-03060. This research used the SAVIO computational cluster resource provided by the Berkeley Research Computing program at the University of California, Berkeley (supported by the UC Berkeley Chancellor, Vice Chancellor of Research, and Office of the CIO).
\begin{comment}
Because timelike current regions in 1D particle in cell simulations are associated with a failed pair cascade, our results show that an axisymmetric magnetosphere contains regions of low pair multiplicity where the force-free condition is violated. In these regions, the component of the electric field parallel to the magnetic field must be shorted out by a mechanism other than pair production of curvature photons on magnetic field lines near the surface. Otherwise, there will be a gap in the magnetospheric structure of unscreened electric field parallel to magnetic field lines.
Our derivation also enables us to calculate the current structure over the polar cap for an assumed polar cap magnetic field. For a dipole magnetic field, we find that the hypothesized gap in the magnetosphere starts from the return current layer at the edge of the polar cap and extends in latitude towards the pole up to the last pair-producing field line. Our analytical results for a dipole field at the polar cap are consistent with the computational results of \citet{PhilippovGR}.
\end{comment}
|
\section{Introduction}
While traditional wireless communication systems employ \emph{energy carriers} (such as electromagnetic or acoustic waves) for communication, Molecular Communication (MC) utilizes \emph{physical molecules} as its carriers of information. In {diffusion-based} MC, released molecules from the transmitter diffuse in the environment to reach the receiver. Electromagnetic waves and molecular diffusion share similarities and differences. Both the electromagnetic wave equation and the Fick's second law of macro-scale diffusion are second-order linear partial differential equations. As a result, both lead to linear system models that satisfy the superposition property. The superposition property is used in the design of multi--carrier wireless systems. However, there are also differences between electromagnetic waves and molecular diffusion. Notably in MC, we can have multiple molecule types in the medium that may undergo chemical reactions as they diffuse in the environment. The reaction amongst the molecules is governed by the non-linear reaction--diffusion differential equations. Furthermore, while the measurement noise of a wireless receiver may be modeled by an additive Gaussian noise (the AWGN channel), some of the most promising molecular receptors have a signal-dependent measurement noise (\emph{i.e.,} their noise variance is higher when they are measuring a larger signal); see for instance \cite{gohari2016information} for a detailed discussion.
In a diffusion-based communication system, the transmitter and the receiver are biological or engineered cells that release or receive molecules, while the channel is assumed to be a gas or aqueous medium in which molecules can move. We might also have relay nodes to facilitate the communication between the transmitter and the receiver.
Chemical reaction is a key operation mechanism of biological molecular systems. As a result, chemical reactions are likely to be a fixture of future engineered molecular transmitters or receivers. For instance, \cite{chou2015markovian, chou2015impact} consider the role of chemical reaction in transmitter and receiver design. However, the emphasis of this paper is on the challenges and opportunities of utilizing chemical reactions \emph{inside the communication medium (channel)} rather than inside the transmitter or receiver nodes. We may view the diffusion-reaction process as a form of \emph{physical-layer computation} that is performed over the medium (distinct from the operation of transceiver cells). While the superposition property has been utilized for ``computation over the air" in the wireless literature \cite{Nazer, Goldenbaum, Limmer, Abari, liew2013physical}, chemical reactions provide the possibility of more complicated interactions than a simple superposition. Although few existing works provide a number of ideas for exploiting chemical reactions in the medium for communication purposes, we still lack a full understanding. In this paper, we review the state of the art and give a number of new ideas. In particular, our emphasis is on the utility of chemical reactions by the relay nodes.
\textbf{Challenges and known techniques:}
While linear chemical reactions can be readily utilized for signal shaping, the more interesting chemical reactions are non-linear and demonstrate complicated patterns \cite{samoilov2002signal}.
The main challenge of utilizing chemical reactions is the non-linearity of the reaction-diffusion equations and lack of explicit analytical solutions.
For instance, consider the following chemical reaction:
\begin{align}\label{eqn:chemical-reaction}
\mathsf{A}+\mathsf{B} \xrightarrow{\gamma } \mathsf{C}
\end{align}
in which $\gamma $ is the rate of the reaction. Let $c_\mathsf{A}$ and $c_\mathsf{B}$ be the concentrations of $\mathsf{A}$ and $\mathsf{B}$. The reaction-diffusion law can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eqav}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial c_\mathsf{A}}{\partial t} = D_\mathsf{A} \nabla ^2 c_\mathsf{A}
-\gamma c_\mathsf{A} c_\mathsf{B}, \quad
\frac{\partial c_\mathsf{B}}{\partial t} = D_\mathsf{B} \nabla ^2 c_\mathsf{B}
-\gamma c_\mathsf{A} c_\mathsf{B},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $D_\mathsf{A}$ and $D_\mathsf{B}$ are the diffusion coefficients of $\mathsf{A}$ and $\mathsf{B}$, respectively.
The term $\gamma c_\mathsf{A} c_\mathsf{B}$ is the challenging non-linear term. Thus far, this challenge is mostly dealt with in the MC literature by noting that despite lack of analytical solutions, it may be still possible to intuitively predict the \emph{qualitative behavior} of the solutions,
in particular when the reaction is limited to a small neighbourhood \cite{Gold} or is instantaneous (high reaction rate). The general approach is to use the high-level intuition to design signaling schemes, which may be backed up with numerical simulations or partial supporting analysis.
We may categorize the known ideas of utilizing chemical reactions in the medium as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Memory degradation:} In \cite{enzym1}, it is suggested to release enzymes throughout the environment.\footnote{While \cite{enzym1} assumes enzymes are released throughout the medium, \cite{cho2017effective} study its release in a limited area of the medimum.} A chemical reaction between enzymes and information carrying molecules cancels out the involved molecules, and has the effect of shortening the lifetime distribution of all molecules in the environment. This reaction can put down inter-symbol interference (ISI) by reducing the remaining molecular concentration from previous transmissions, at the cost of weakening the desired signal
\item \emph{Pattern formation:} In the above item, we gave a chemical reaction that simply reduces the concentration of the reactant molecules. However, more complicated dynamics and patterns (such as oscillating reactions or travelling waves) can arise from chemical reactions. Assuming that molecules of type $\mathsf{A}$ are used for communication, it has been suggested in \cite{PatternFormation} to fill the environment with molecules of type $\mathsf{B}$ whose reaction with molecules of type $\mathsf{A}$ produces such oscillating and propagating patterns. This may be utilized to increase the propagation range of the molecules (before they dissolve in the environment). The more complicated spatial-temporal patterns could increase the decoder's ability to distinguish amongst them; this can effectively increase the information capacity of the system.
\item \emph{Simulating negative signals and ISI reduction:} Unlike electrical current and voltage that can take negative values, the density of molecules in an environment cannot go negative.
Chemical reactions are proposed for simulating transmission of a negative signal by a molecular transmitter \cite{newadd1, Gold, IWCIT2016type}. For instance, authors of \cite{Gold} suggest using $\text{H}^{+}$ and $\text{OH}^{-}$ ions. Release of any of these ions reduces the concentration of the other one in the medium, and one can interpret release of $\text{H}^{+}$ ions as sending a positive, and release of $\text{OH}^{-}$ ions as sending a negative signal. Simulation of negative signals allows for design of precoders at the transmitter to combat the ISI (e.g. see \cite{IWCIT2016type}).
\item \emph{Relay Signal Amplification:} The degradation and attenuation of molecules limit the transmission distance between the transmitter and the receiver \cite{fekrirelay1}. Relaying is an approach to increase the range of communication; it is also observed in intracellular communication in nature. Authors in \cite{nakano2011repeater} describe a chemical reaction that amplifies the incoming signals. However, we point out that signal amplification may be also performed blindly in the medium; assume that the information molecule is of type $\mathsf{A}$ and the relay releases a limited amount of molecules of type $\mathsf{B}$ such that
\begin{align}\label{eqn:chemical-reaction23}
\mathsf{A}+\mathsf{B} \xrightarrow{\gamma } 2\mathsf{C}+\mathsf{D}.
\end{align}
This reaction produces molecules of type $\mathsf{C}$ whose concentration is twice the concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{A}$ in the environment. Thus, the relay simply releases molecules of type $\mathsf{B}$ without having to sense the incoming density of molecules of type $\mathsf{A}$.
\item\emph{Molecular media-based modulation}: authors in \cite{gohari2016information} argue that information can be transmitted by changing the general physical properties of the communication medium (rather than directly changing the density of the released molecules). For instance, assume that we have two transmitters, called the $\mathsf{A}$-transmitter and the $\mathsf{B}$-transmitter, who release molecules of types $\mathsf{A}$ and $\mathsf{B}$ in the medium, respectively. There is a receiver who can \emph{only} sense the density of molecules of type $\mathsf{A}$. If $\mathsf{A}$ and $\mathsf{B}$ react in the environment, the $\mathsf{B}$-transmitter can communicate indirectly to the receiver (despite the receiver only has sensors that detect $\mathsf{A}$ molecules): the reason is that the actions of the $\mathsf{B}$-transmitter influences the communication medium between the $\mathsf{A}$-transmitter and the receiver.
\end{itemize}
Besides the above explicit ideas for medium chemical reactions, authors in \cite{karig2011model} utilize an interesting feature of non-linear systems, namely harnessing noise for signal propagation in a cell-to-cell MC system. Unlike linear systems where noise plays a disruptive role, noise can increase information capacity of non-linear systems (this effect is known as the \emph{stochastic resonance}).
\textbf{Our contribution:}
Our main contribution in this work is to propose new ideas for utility of chemical reactions in a communication medium. These ideas are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Receiver noise reduction:} as mentioned earlier, many molecular receivers have signal dependent noise. In particular, they face a smaller noise if they are sensing a smaller signal. Now, suppose the density of molecules around the receiver is $y$ and the receiver wants to measure it. If a receiver can predict that $y$ is at least $\lambda$, it can locally release a different species of molecules that would react with the signal molecules around the receiver, and reduce the signal molecule density by $\lambda$ in the vicinity of the receiver. Thus, instead of measuring $y$, it measures $y-\lambda$. This will incur a smaller signal dependent noise.\\
The receiver can predict a minimum for its upcoming measurement $y$ by utilizing its previous observations. For instance, if the receiver has measured a high density of molecules in the previous time slot, it expects the current density of molecules to be high in the current time slot as well. The reason is that diffusion is a slow process and it takes time for the effect of previous transmissions to disappear from the medium. As a result, the receiver may have an estimate that the molecule density is at least $\lambda$, where $\lambda$ is found adaptively from its previous observations. One should also consider the possibility that the estimate $\lambda$ is incorrect, \emph{i.e.,} $y$ is less than $\lambda$. In this case, the receiver observes $\min(0, y-\lambda)=0$, and the information about $y$ will be lost. Receiver's error in finding a suitable lower bound $\lambda$ for $y$ can result in an error, but the probability of this error can be small and compensate for the decrease in the signal-dependent measurement noise.\footnote{We have already used a simpler form of this idea in \cite{IWCIT2016type}, but in that work the amount of release of molecules was not chosen adaptively by the receiver.}
\item \emph{The dual purpose of transmission:} Thus far the literature assumes that a transmitter releases molecules to convey its own message. Consider a scenario where we have two nodes that are using molecules of types $\mathsf{A}$ and $\mathsf{B}$ for transmission, respectively. These transmitters also have receptors on their surface that allows them to obtain information about the other node's transmissions.
Assume that these molecules of types $\mathsf{A}$ and $\mathsf{B}$ can react and cancel out each other. Then, the first node can release molecules of type $\mathsf{A}$ for (i) encoding of its information bits, or (ii) for reducing the density of the other's nodes molecule to reduce its measurement noise level.
\item \emph{Molecular physical-layer network coding (Molecular PNC):} Network coding in MC has been studied in \cite{akan2013, aghvami2014}, where the relay uses an XOR logic gate \cite{credi}, at the molecular level, to XOR the messages of the two transceivers. As we show later, one can improve upon the previously proposed schemes by realizing the XOR operation inside the medium via chemical reactions. This allows for removal of the XOR gate inside the relay node. The idea is as follows: suppose we have molecules of type $\mathsf{A}$ and $\mathsf{B}$ that react and cancel out each other. Then, if only one molecule type exists in the medium, it survives. However, the presence of both molecules results in the destruction of both.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.23]{network-coding3.eps}
\caption{A molecular two-way relay network}
\label{NCmodel}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Example of a two-way relay network model:} To make the above ideas formal at once, we propose a specific setup with a certain signal-dependent receiver noise. We give an explicit modulation scheme that utilizes all the above-mentioned ideas in its design. More specifically, we consider a two-way molecular relay network, depicted in Fig. \ref{NCmodel}, where two nano-transceivers, $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$, exchange their information through a nano-relay, $\mathsf{R}$, in two phases. In phase 1, $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ send their messages to the relay $\mathsf{R}$ using molecule types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$, respectively, and in phase 2, the relay sends a message back to both transceivers using a different molecule type $\mathsf{M}_3$ (to avoid self-interference \cite{schober1}).
Multiple transmission options are possible in this network \cite{liew2013physical}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{(No network coding).}
The transceivers send their messages to the relay node simultaneously in one time slot using different molecule types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$ (or in two time slots using the same molecule type). Then, the relay takes two time slots to forward the message of one transceiver to the other and vice versa. This will take three (or four) time slots.
\item \emph{(Straightforward network coding (SNC)).} Here, the relay computes the XOR of the incoming messages and sends it back to the two transceivers in a single time slot. Each transceiver, having access to its own transmitted bits, uses the XOR to decode the other transceiver's message. This will take two (or three) time slots.
\item \emph{(Physical-layer network coding (PNC)).} The transceivers send their messages in the same time slot using different molecule types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$, and thus by canceling out/adding to each other in the communication medium, a physical-layer XOR is performed. This will take two time slots.
\end{enumerate}
In this paper, we propose a new network coding scheme in MC parallel to the PNC in traditional wireless networks. The traditional PNC is based on the fact that the signals can be negative and thus they may cancel out each other physically when adding in the environment. Since in MC the transmitted signals cannot be negative, we suggest the use of molecular reaction to cancel out the signals. This covers our two new ideas (namely receiver noise reduction and molecular PNC) that we mentioned above. By making physical-layer XOR using reaction, the signal density reduces when both molecules arrive at the relay and hence the signal dependent noise at the relay is reduced. We show that our proposed PNC scheme outperforms previously proposed SNC schemes for MC.
A complication arises if the above molecular channels have ISI, and this is where we make use of our two new ideas (namely receiver noise reduction and the dual purpose of transmission). For point-to-point channels, ISI mitigating techniques have been introduced in \cite{mosayebi2014},\cite{movahednasab2015}. However, to the best knowledge, there is no study on the ISI-mitigating schemes in two-way relay channels. One natural way to tackle this problem is to apply the point-to-point ISI mitigating techniques to each hop of the relay channel. For the SNC scheme, we extend the existing ISI mitigating techniques of point-to-point channels proposed in \cite{mosayebi2014},\cite{movahednasab2015} to each hop. However, for the PNC scheme we propose a novel ISI-mitigating scheme, which is based on two observations: i) in two-way channels each transceiver has access to the previous messages of the other transceiver, and thus knows an estimation of the other user's ISI. ii) The molecular reaction can be used to cancel out the ISI (or reduce the estimated ISI) by utilizing the ``receiver noise reduction" idea. It is important to point out that in a channel with ISI, a transmitter may release molecules even when its bit is zero; this is to cancel out the ISI of the other receiver (dual purpose of transmission).
We make the following conclusions from our analysis of the proposed molecular PNC scheme. In the no ISI case, our results (based on the derived closed form equations) show that the PNC outperforms the SNC in terms of error probability thanks to the reaction among the molecules in the PNC scheme. In fact, when the messages of both transceivers are 1, the number of the molecules bound to the receptors is reduced compared to SNC scheme. This results in less error caused by the ligand-receptor binding process. These results are confirmed by simulations. In presence of ISI, the error probability of both ISI-mitigated PNC and SNC schemes are derived analytically (and confirmed by simulation); it is shown that the PNC performs significantly better than the SNC. The main reason is that in the SNC, using adaptive transmission rate at each transceiver mitigates its own ISI only when its message is 1. However, in the PNC, using adaptive rates\footnote{From now on by "adaptive rate", we mean "adaptive transmission rate"} at the transceivers mitigates the ISI for all sent messages.
This paper is organized as follows: in Section \ref{sec:model}, we present the physical model for the two-way relay example. In Section \ref{sec:pncscheme}, we describe the use of chemical reaction for molecular PNC and receiver noise reduction, and in Section \ref{sec:ISImitigate}, we explain the idea of chemical reaction for dual purpose of transmission and receiver noise reduction. In Section \ref{error} and \ref{errorISI}, the error performance of the two schemes in no ISI and ISI cases are respectively investigated.
In Section \ref{Simulation}, we present the numerical results, and finally, we include concluding remarks in Section \ref{conclusion}.
\textbf{Notation:} We use the superscript $ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}$ for the parameters of the channel from the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ to the relay, $\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i$ for the parameters of the channel from the relay to the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$. The event $E^c$ shows the complement of the event $E$ and $\bar{i}$ denotes the complement of $i$ in its defined set. The superscript ``I'' indicates the parameters for the case with ISI. The random variables, error events, cumulative distribution functions and diffusion coefficients are shown by upper cases while the realizations of random variables are indicated by lower cases. The decoded value of the information bit $B$ is denoted by $\hat{B}$.
\section{Physical Model }\label{sec:model}
We consider a diffusion-based nano-network consisting of two nano-transceivers and a nano-relay with the ability of both transmitting and receiving information in different time slots (see Fig. \ref{NCmodel}). A two-way communication between two nano-transceivers is established by a nano-relay. The distance of the relay from the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ is denoted as $d_i$. The transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ for $i=1,2$ has a sequence of information bits $(B_{i,1}, B_{i,2}, \cdots)$ that wants to transmit to the other transceiver.
We assume that the time is slotted with duration $t_s$, and during any communcation protocol, molecules are released by either the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ or relay $\mathsf{R}$ at the beginning of the time slots. For instance, a protocol might utilize the on-off keying (OOK) modulation for transmission in which each transmitter releases a burst of molecules to send the information bit $1$ at the beginning of each time slot, or stays silent to send the information bit $0$. We assume that $ \mathsf{T}_1$ releases molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_1$, $ \mathsf{T}_2$ releases molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_2$, and the relay releases molecule type $\mathsf{M}_3$ (to avoid self-interference). While molecules are released at the beginning of time slots of duration $t_s$, molecule density is measured by receptors on the surface of $ \mathsf{T}_1$, $ \mathsf{T}_2$ or $\mathsf{R}$ at time instances $t_0, t_0+t_s, t_0+2t_s, \dots$ for some $t_0 \leq t_s$.
\textbf{Channel model:} For the diffusion of molecules, we use the deterministic model based on Fick's second law of diffusion. According to this model, the impulse response of the channel for molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ with diffusion coefficient $D_i$, which is denoted by $h_{\mathsf{M}_i}(r,t)$, for 3-D diffusion can be obtained as \cite{Pierobon1}
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
h_{\mathsf{M}_i}(r,t)=\frac{1[t>0]}{(4 \pi D_i t)^{{3}/{2}}}e^{-\frac{r^2}{4 D_i t}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
This means that when a nano-transmitter releases $\zeta$ molecules at time $t=0$, the concentration of molecules at distance $r$ from the transmitter will be $c(r,t)=\zeta h_{\mathsf{M}_i}(r,t)$.
\textbf{Reception model:} Molecules released by $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ need to be measured by the relay $\mathsf{R}$, and molecules released by the relay $\mathsf{R}$ need to be measured by $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$. The reception process is assumed to be the ligand-receptor binding process. More specifically, to measure the density of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$, we consider receptors of type $\Omega_i$ that react with molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ via the following reversible reaction:
\begin{align}\label{reactions}
\mathsf{M}_i+\Omega_i \underset{\eta_{i}}{\overset {\gamma_{i}}{\rightleftharpoons}} \mathsf{M}_i\Omega_i,
\end{align}
where $\gamma_i$ and $\eta_i$ are the association and dissociation rates of the molecule type $\mathsf{M}_i$ to the receptors of its type, respectively. Since $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ use molecule types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$, respectively, the relay has two receptor groups for measuring density of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$. Conversely, relay uses molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$ and hence $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ each have a receptor group for measuring the density of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$. The number of receptors of type $\Omega_i$ on the surface of the relay is denoted by $n_{i}^{\mathsf{R}}$ for $i=1,2$. The number of receptors of type $ \mathsf{T}_3$ on the surface of $ \mathsf{T}_i$ is denoted by $n_{3}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$.\\
Equation \eqref{reactions} gives the reaction equation with $\mathsf{M}_i$ and $\Omega_i$ only. Molecules of a different type $\mathsf{M}_j$ might also react and block the receptors of type $\Omega_i$. The blocking effect caused by the molecules of the other types around the receptors of one type can be characterized by ${\gamma_i}^{\textrm{Block},j}$ and ${\eta_i}^{\textrm{Block},j}$, the blocking and unblocking rates, respectively, of the receptor type $\Omega_i$ by the molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_j$ \cite{aminian1}. In this case, if the concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ around a receptor type $\Omega_i$ at a certain time is $c_i$, the receptor binds with a molecule of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ with probability
\begin{equation}\label{pbinding}
\begin{aligned}
p_{\textrm{b},i}=\frac{c_{i}}{c_{i}+\sum_{j \neq i}\frac{\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}c_{j}}{\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}^{\textrm{Block},j}}+\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}=\frac{\eta_i}{\gamma_i}$ and $\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}^{\textrm{Block},j}=\frac{{\eta_i}^{\textrm{Block},j}}{{\gamma_i}^{\textrm{Block},j}}$ are the dissociation constants. As an example, consider the surface of the relay with $n_{i}^{\mathsf{R}}$ receptors of type $\Omega_i$. Each receptor will be bound with probability $p_{\textrm{b},i}$ and the total number of bound receptors will follow a binomial distribution with parameters $(n_{i}^{\mathsf{R}}, p_{\textrm{b},i})$. The relay can read the number of receptors of type $\Omega_i$ that are bound with molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ as its output. The reception process at the transceivers $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ is similar.
\section{Chemical Reaction: Molecular PNC and Receiver Noise Reduction} \label{sec:pncscheme}
Here, we demonstrate the benefit of chemical reaction for molecular PNC and receiver noise reduction (as discussed in the introduction) in the context of the above two-way communication channel. Previously, SNC was used for communication over this channel, \cite{akan2013, aghvami2014}, in which the relay, after decoding the messages of both transceivers, forwards the XOR of the decoded messages to the transceivers. Now, we propose a new PNC scheme based on chemical reactions in the medium, which makes the physical-layer XORing possible by exploiting the reaction among different molecule types and thus it does not need a logic XOR gate at the relay. In this section, we consider a channel with no ISI. The case with ISI is considered in Section~\ref{sec:ISImitigate} to illustrate the idea of the dual purpose of transmission.
\subsection{The Previously Known SNC Scheme}
For the transmission model, we restrict to protocols in which the transcievers and the relay alternate in becoming active. In other words, in each run of the protocol, the transceivers $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ first become active and transmit molecules. Then, $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ become silent and the relay $\mathsf{R}$ starts transmitting. During the $k$-th run of this protocol,
$ \mathsf{T}_i$ aims to communicate the bit $B_{i,k}$ to the other transceiver for $i=1,2$. This protocol is run repeatedly so that
$ \mathsf{T}_1$ reconstructs $(\hat B_{2,1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1}, \hat B_{2,2}^{ \mathsf{T}_1}, \cdots)$ while
$ \mathsf{T}_2$ reconstructs $(\hat B_{1,1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}, \hat B_{1,2}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}, \cdots)$. The ransmission protocol in the SNC scheme has two communication phases described as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Phase 1:} In the first phase, the transceivers, $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$, send their information bits to the relay using OOK modulation. Due to using different molecule types by the transceivers, this phase consumes only one time slot. Employing the OOK modulation, the transceivers $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ release $\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_1}$ and $\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_2}$ molecules of types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$, respectively, to send the information bit $1$ and release nothing to send the information bit $0$.
\item\textbf{Phase 2:} In the second phase, the relay decodes the messages of $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ and transmits the XOR of the decoded bits to both transceivers using OOK modulation, i.e., the relay releases $\zeta^{\mathsf{R}}$ molecules of types $\mathsf{M}_3$ to send the information bit $1$ and stay silent to send the information bit $0$. The relay consumes one time slot to forward its message to each transceiver. Each transceiver decodes the message of the relay and by XORing the decoded message and its own transmitted message finds the message sent by the other transceiver.
\end{itemize}
This network coding scheme needs two time slots in total. We consider a super time slot which contains two time slots of equal duration of $t_s$. Throughout the paper, $k$ shows the index of the super time slot. $T_1$ and $T_2$ send their messages, $B_{1,k}$ and $B_{2,k}$, at the beginning of the $k$-th super time slot to the relay by releasing $X_{i,k}=B_{i,k} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$ molecules (phase 1) and then the relay decodes the message of each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ as $\hat{B}_{i,k}^\mathsf{R}$ and sends the message $B_{\mathsf{R},k}=\hat{B}_{1,k}^\mathsf{R} \oplus \hat{B}_{2,k}^\mathsf{R}$, by releasing $X_{3,k}=B_{\mathsf{R},k} \zeta^{\mathsf{R}}$ molecules, in the phase 2 of the $k$-th super time slot to the transceivers. The number of bound molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ at the relay in the $k$-th super time slot is noted by $Y_{i,k}^R$ and the number of bound molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$ at $ \mathsf{T}_i$ is noted by $Y_{3,k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$. The block diagram of the system is shown in Fig. \ref{blockdiag}. In the following, we explain the physical model of the SNC scheme in detail.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{blockdiagram_SNC2.eps}
\caption{Block diagram of the system in the SNC scheme}
\label{blockdiag}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
According to the channel model in the previous section, the channel impulse response from the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ to the relay $\mathsf{R}$ is obtained as $h_{\mathsf{M}_i}(d_i,t)=\frac{1[t>0]}{(4 \pi D_i t)^{{3}/{2}}}e^{-\frac{d_i^2}{4 D_i t}}$. The channel gains from $ \mathsf{T}_i$ to $\mathsf{R}$ are obtained by sampling $h_{\mathsf{M}_i}(d_i,t)$ at time instances $t_0, t_0+t_s, t_0+2t_s,...$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{impresp}
\begin{aligned}
\pi_{l}^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}=h_{\mathsf{M}_i}(d_i,t_0+(l-1)t_s), \qquad i \in \{1,2\},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The channel gains from the relay $\mathsf{R}$ to the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$, $\pi_{l}^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}$, can be obtained similarly.
We remark that the index $l$ refers to each time slot. When we have no ISI in the channels, the remaining molecules of the previous super time time slot are died away before new molecules are released and hence the concentration of the molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ measured by the relay in the $k$-th super time slot is
\begin{equation}\label{eqCiknoISI}
\begin{aligned}
C_{i,k}=X_{i,k} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}=B_{i,k}\zeta^{T_i}\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}, \qquad i \in \{1,2\}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$ measured by each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ can be obtained similarly.
\subsection{The Proposed PNC Scheme} Here, we propose to implement the physical-layer XOR using the molecular reaction, which reduces the receiver noise. Thus, we first choose two molecule types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$, to be sent by the transceivers ($ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$, respectively), such that they can react with each other by an irreversible reaction as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{ABreaction}
\mathsf{M}_1+\mathsf{M}_2 \overset{\gamma_{12}}{\rightarrow} \mathsf{M}_{12},
\end{equation}
where $\gamma_{12}\geq 0$ is the reaction rate of the molecules $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$. The molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_{12}$ does not bind to the receptors of the relay, while the molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ react with the receptors of the $i$-th type ($\Omega_i$) at the relay, by reversible reactions as given in \eqref{reactions}. The two communication phases in this scheme are similar to the SNC scheme with the difference that the XOR is performed in the medium instead of the relay and the relay implicitly decodes the physically made XOR of the messages and sends it to the transeivers in the second phase.
$\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$ are chosen such that $\gamma_{12}\gg \gamma_{1}, \gamma_{2}$.
Hence, if both messages of the transmitters are $1$, both molecules $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$ arrive at the relay and react with each other as in \eqref{ABreaction} (much faster than binding to their receptors). As a result, the concentrations of both molecules decrease in the environment and almost no molecule binds to the receptors of the relay. When only $\mathsf{M}_1$ or $\mathsf{M}_2$ arrives at the relay, it binds to its corresponding receptors at the relay. The stimulated receptor group would release $\zeta^\mathsf{R}$ molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$ in the next time slot. Thus, to make a physical-layer XOR, it is enough to choose the number of released molecules appropriately.
The physical model of the PNC scheme is similar to the SNC scheme, with the difference that in the PNC, \eqref{eqCiknoISI} is the concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ around the relay \emph{before reaction}, i.e., the concentrations of molecules of types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$ around the relay before reaction are $B_{1,k} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_1} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_1\mathsf{R}}$ and $B_{2,k} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_2} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_2\mathsf{R}}$, respectively. Assuming perfect reaction, molecule type with lower concentration is completely canceled out, and a residual part of the one with higher concentration remains. In particular, the concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$ measured by the receptors of their type at the relay are $C_{1,k}=\max\{B_{1,k} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_1} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_1\mathsf{R}}-B_{2,k} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_2} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_2\mathsf{R}},0\}$ and $C_{2,k}=\max\{B_{2,k} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_2} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_2\mathsf{R}}- B_{1,k} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_1} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_1\mathsf{R}},0\}$, respectively. Each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$, knowing its own channel coefficient $\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}$, chooses $\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$ such that an almost equal concentration of molecules of both types arrives at the relay (when both transceivers send the information bit $1$). This makes almost all molecules react with each other and thus realizes a physical-layer XOR. In this paper, we assume perfect reaction among molecules of types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$.
The error performances of the two schemes without ISI are investigated in Section \ref{error}. It is shown analytically and later by simulation that the proposed PNC scheme outperforms the SNC scheme.
\textbf{Remark on notation:} While we have attempted to simplify the notation (both in the case with and without ISI) as much as possible, for the two phases of the communication, we needed to define messages sent and decoded in each phase by the transceivers and the relay; we needed to define error events for each phases. Furthermore, since we have two receptor groups at the relay we needed to define decoded messages of each receptor group and their corresponding error events. Table \ref{table_notation} summarizes our mostly used notations in this paper.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Used Notations}
\begin{tabular}{p{2.7cm}|p{13cm}}
\hline
$B_{i,k}$ & The message of the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ in the $k$-th super time slot
\\
$B_{\mathsf{R},k}$ &The sent message of the relay in the $k$-th super time slot
\\
$B_{\mathsf{R}_i,k}$ $ =B_{i,k} (B_{1,k} \oplus B_{2,k})$ & A part of the message $B_{\mathsf{R},k}$, to be decoded by the $i$-th receptor group at the relay in the PNC in the $k$-th super time slot
\\
$\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_i,k}$ & The decoded message by the $i$-th receptor group at the relay in the PNC in the $k$-th super time slot
\\
$\hat{B}_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}$ & The decoded message by the $i$-th receptor group at the relay in the SNC
in the $k$-th super time slot
\\
$\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$ & The message of the relay, decoded at the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$
in the $k$-th super time slot
\\
$\hat{B}_{i,k}^{ \mathsf{T}_j}$ & The message of the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$, decoded by the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ in the $k$-th super time slot\\
$X_{i,k}$ & The number of released molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ in the $k$-th super time slot\\
$C_{i,k}$ & The concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ around its receptors in the $k$-th super time slot\\
$I_{i,k}$ & The concentration of remained molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ from the previous super time slots around its receptors in the $k$-th super time slot\\
$E_{i,k}$ & The error event at transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ in the $k$-th super time slot ($\hat{B}_{\bar{i},k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \neq B_{\bar{i},k}$)\\
$E_{\mathsf{R},k}$ & The error event of the first communication phase in the $k$-th super time slot ($B_{\mathsf{R},k} \neq B_{1,k} \oplus B_{2,k}$)\\
$E_{\mathsf{R}_i,k}$ & The error event of the $i$-th receptor group at the relay in the $k$-th super time slot (in PNC: $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_i,k} \neq B_{\mathsf{R}_i,k}$, in SNC: $\hat{B}_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}} \neq B_{i,k}$)\\
$E^{ \mathsf{T}_i,k}$ & The error event of the second communication phase in the $k$-th super time slot ($\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \neq B_{\mathsf{R},k}$)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table_notation}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{table}
\section{Chemical Reaction: Dual Purpose of Transmission and Receiver Noise Reduction}\label{sec:ISImitigate}
In this section, to illustrate the idea of the dual purpose of transmission and recevier noise reduction (as mentioned in the introduction), we consider the ISI case and using the reaction characteristic of the PNC scheme, we propose an ISI mitigating technique for the first communication phase of the PNC scheme. To have a fair comparison between the two schemes, we apply the existing ISI mitigating techniques to the SNC scheme. In our schemes, we assume that the transceivers know the channel coefficients of both transceivers to the relay, i.e., the distances and diffusion coefficients.
In the PNC scheme, the XOR is realized in the medium using the molecular reaction in the first communication phase. In the presence of ISI, there are remaining molecules from the previous transmissions. Using the idea of the dual purpose of transmission and receiver noise reduction, we use reaction to mitigate ISI in the first communication phase by releasing extra molecules from each transceiver to react with the remaining molecules of the other transceiver from the previous transmissions. Since each transceiver has access to the decoded version of the transmitted bits of the other transceiver in the previous super time slots, knowing its own channel coefficient and the channel coefficient of the other transceiver, it can estimate the concentration of the remaining molecules of the other transceiver from the previous transmissions and choose its transmission rate such that along with transmitting its own message, the concentration of the remaining molecules of the other transceiver is also canceled out. As an example, assume a two-way communication channel with one super time slot memory for the transceiver-relay channel. Also assume the messages of the transceivers $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$ are $1$ and $0$, respectively, in the current super time slot. Because of the one super time slot memory in the channel, there may be concentrations of the remaining molecules of types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$ around the relay from the previous super time slot. The transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_1$ releases a constant number of molecules to send its information bit $1$ and some extra molecules to cancel out the remaining molecules of the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_2$ from the previous super time slot. Since the message of $ \mathsf{T}_2$ is $0$, it does not release any molecules to send its message, but releases some molecules to cancel out the remaining molecules of $ \mathsf{T}_1$ around the relay from the previous super time slot. Hence, in this scheme, the transceivers may release some molecules even if their message is $0$.
The transceivers do not know the very exact number of the released molecules of the other transceiver in the previous super time slots, but can estimate it. We show in Section \ref{sec:PNC_ISI} that, for a unit super time slot memory, each transceiver can use the decoded message of the other transceiver in the $(k-1)$-th super time slot and the number of its own released molecules in the $(k-2)$-th super time slot to estimate the number of the released molecules of the other transceiver in the previous super time slot.
In the SNC scheme, we use the existing ISI mitigating techniques (as mentioned before, SNC in the presence of ISI has not been studied before). To mitigate ISI in a communication link, two approaches are possible: adapting transmission rate at the transmitter \cite{movahednasab2015}, and adapting threshold at the receiver \cite{mosayebi2014}. Our proposed scheme for the first communication phase of the PNC scheme is based on using an adaptive rate at the transceivers along with a fixed threshold at the relay. Hence, we extend the method in\cite{movahednasab2015} to the SNC scheme, i.e., each transceiver adapts its transmission rate to mitigate its own ISI. In this scheme, when the message of the transceiver is $0$, it stays silent; otherwise, according to its transmission in the previous super time slot, it adapts its rate such that the concentration of molecules around the relay is a constant value.
There is also ISI in the second communication phase of each scheme. To reduce the complexity of the relay in both schemes, we put all complexity at the transceivers and take the second approach in phase 2 \cite{mosayebi2014}. The adaptive thresholds in the second phase are derived in Section \ref{errorISI}.
\subsection{The SNC Scheme}\label{sec:SNC_ISI}
In this scheme, in the $k$-th super time slot, if $B_{i,k}=0$, the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ stays silent and if $B_{i,k}=1$, the transceiver transmits an adaptive number of molecules such that a constant concentration of molecules, $c^\textrm{SNC}$, arrives at the relay at each super time slot. We first need to explain the physical model for the ISI. We model the ISI in the channel of the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ to the relay $\mathsf{R}$ by a $q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}$-slot memor\cite{Arjmandi2014}, i.e., $\pi_{l}^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}=0$, for $l>q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}+1$, where $\pi_l^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}$ is defined in \eqref{impresp},
and similarly, we model the channel of the relay $\mathsf{R}$ to the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ by a $q^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}$-slot memory.
In addition, since in our transmission protocol, the molecules of types $\mathsf{M}_1$ and $\mathsf{M}_2$ are released in odd time slots and the molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$ are released in even time slots,
the performance of the system is the same for $q=2k^\prime$ and $q=2k^\prime+1$, $k^\prime \in\{0,1,2,...\}$, which means that the concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ around the relay in the $k$-th super time slot is given as
\begin{equation}\label{eqCik}
\begin{aligned}
C_{i,k}=\sum_{l=0}^{\lfloor \frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor} \pi_{2 l+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}\cdot X_{i,k-l}=X_{i,k} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}+I_{i,k},\qquad i \in \{1,2\},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $I_{i,k}$ denotes the ISI term, which is the concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ around the relay remained from the previous super time slots. The concentration of molecules around the transceviers can be obtained similarly.
Each $ \mathsf{T}_i$ to send its message $B_{i,k} \in \{0,1\}$ in the $k$-th super time slot transmits
\begin{equation}\label{eqXikSNCadap}
\begin{aligned}
X_{i,k}=B_{i,k}(\frac{c^\textrm{SNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}-L_{i,k}^{\textrm{SNC}}),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
molecules such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq_LTikSNC}
\begin{aligned}
L_{i,k}^{\textrm{SNC}}=\frac{I_{i,k}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We first assume one super time slot memory for the transceiver-relay channel (i.e., $\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor=1, i =1,2$). Then, we extend it to higher channel memories. We define the normalized channel gains as follows:
\begin{align}\label{eqnui}
\nu_l^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}=\frac{\pi_l^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}},\qquad i \in \{1,2\}, \quad l>1.
\end{align}
Using $I_{i,k}=\pi_3^{T_{i}R}X_{i,k-1}$ and substituting \eqref{eq_LTikSNC} in \eqref{eqXikSNCadap}, we obtain:
\begin{align}\label{XikSNCbargashti}
X_{i,k}=B_{i,k}(\frac{c^\textrm{SNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}-\frac{\pi_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}X_{i,k-1}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}})=\frac{c^\textrm{SNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}} B_{i,k}-\nu_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}} B_{i,k}X_{i,k-1},\qquad i \in \{1,2\}.
\end{align}
\begin{remark}
According to \eqref{XikSNCbargashti}, each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ needs to save the number of its released molecules in the $(k-1)$-th super time slot, i.e., $X_{i,k-1}$ to determine $X_{i,k}$. Note that the number of released molecules from $ \mathsf{T}_i$ in each super time slot has a maximum value which can be obtained from \eqref{XikSNCbargashti} when $X_{i,k-1}=0$ and $B_{i,k}=1$ as $X_{i,\textrm{max}}^\textrm{SNC}=\frac{c^\textrm{SNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}$. Hence, a finite memory is needed to save $X_{i,k-1}$.
\end{remark}
\textbf{Extension to higher channel memories:} The results can be extended to a channel with arbitrary memory using \eqref{eqXikSNCadap} and \eqref{eq_LTikSNC}:
\begin{align}\label{XikSNCbargashti_ext}
X_{i,k}=\frac{c^\textrm{PNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}B_{i,k}-\sum_{l=1}^{\lfloor \frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2} \rfloor}\nu_{2l+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}} B_{i,k} X_{i,k-l},\qquad i \in\{1,2\},
\end{align}
which shows that each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ has to save the number of its released molecules in previous $\lfloor \frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2} \rfloor$ super time slots. Similar to the channel with one super time slot memory, we have $X_{i,\textrm{max}}^\textrm{SNC}=\frac{c^\textrm{SNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}$.
\subsection{The Proposed PNC Scheme}\label{sec:PNC_ISI}
In this scheme, each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ releases extra molecules, denoted by $L_{i,k}$, in each super time slot to react with and cancel out the remained molecules of the other transceiver from the previous super time slots (dual purpose of transmission), i.e., for $i\in \{1,2\}$,
\begin{align}\label{eqXikPNCadap}
X_{i,k}= B_{i,k}\frac{c^\textrm{PNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}+L_{i,k}^{\textrm{PNC}},
\end{align}
in which
\begin{align}\label{eq_LTikPNC}
L_{i,k}^{\textrm{PNC}}=\frac{\tilde{I}_{\bar{i},k}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}},
\end{align}
where $\tilde{I}_{\bar{i},k}$ is the estimated value of the remained molecules of the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}$ around the relay in the $k$-th super time slot, which is calculated by the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ using its previously decoded messages. $c^\textrm{PNC}$ shows the fixed concentration of molecules that we wish to maintain around the relay. Note that the ISI model in this scheme is similar to the SNC scheme, with the difference that in the PNC, \eqref{eqCik} is the concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ around the relay before reaction.
Similar to the SNC scheme, we first assume $\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor=1, i =1,2$ and then extend it to higher channel memories. By substituting \eqref{eq_LTikPNC} in \eqref{eqXikPNCadap} and using $\tilde{I}_{\bar{i},k}=\pi_3^{T_{\bar{i}}R}\tilde{X}_{\bar{i}}^{k-1}$ ($\tilde{X}_{\bar{i}}^{k-1}$ is the approximated value of the number of released molecules from $T_{\bar{i}}$ in the $(k-1)$-th super time slot, calculated by $ \mathsf{T}_i$), we have:
\begin{align}\label{XikPNCbargashti_1}
X_{i,k}= B_{i,k}\frac{c^\textrm{PNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}+\frac{\pi_3^{T_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}\tilde{X}_{\bar{i},k-1}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}},
\end{align}
for $ i \in \{1,2\}$. We can write a similar equation for $\tilde{X}_{\bar{i},k-1}$ as follows
\begin{align}\label{XikPNCbargashti_2}
\tilde{X}_{\bar{i},k-1}=\hat{B}_{\bar{i},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}\frac{c^\textrm{PNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}+\frac{\pi_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}X_{i,k-2}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}.
\end{align}
Now, by substituting \eqref{XikPNCbargashti_2} in \eqref{XikPNCbargashti_1}, we obtain:
\begin{align}\label{XikPNCbargashti}
X_{i,k}=\frac{c^\textrm{PNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}(B_{i,k}+\nu_3^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}} \hat{B}_{\bar{i},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})+\nu_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}} \nu_3^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}} X_{i,k-2},\qquad i \in \{1,2\}.
\end{align}
\begin{remark}
According to \eqref{XikPNCbargashti}, each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ needs to save the received message from the other transceiver in the $(k-1)$-th super time slot (i.e., $\hat{B}_{\bar{i},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$) along with the number of its released molecules in the two previous super time slots (i.e., $\{X_{i,k-1},X_{i,k-2}\}$). Note that, we assume $\nu_l^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}<1$, for $l>1$,\footnote{In diffusion-based systems with channel memory, the sampling time $t_0$ is chosen such that $h(d,t)$ takes its maximum at $t=t_0$, and thus $\pi_{l}<\pi_1$, for $l>1$. Hence, for a single transmitter-receiver channel, $t_s=\frac{d^2}{6D}$ \cite{Llatser2013}. Applying this strategy in our model, we set the maximum of $h_{\mathsf{M}_i}(d_i,t)$ at $t=\frac{d_i^2}{6D_i}$ for the $ \mathsf{T}_i$-$\mathsf{R}$ channels and the maximum of $h_{\mathsf{M}_3}(d_i,t)$ at $t=\frac{d_i^2}{6D_3}$ for the $\mathsf{R}$-$ \mathsf{T}_i$ channels. To make all channel coefficients to be reducing, we choose $t_0=\textrm{max}\{\frac{d_1^2}{6D_1},\frac{d_2^2}{6D_2},\frac{d_1^2}{6D_3},\frac{d_2^2}{6D_3}\}$.} and hence, the number of released molecules from $ \mathsf{T}_i$ in each super time slot has a maximum value.
This means that the system is stable and a finite memory is needed to save $X_{i,k-1},X_{i,k-2}$. The maximum number of released molecules from $ \mathsf{T}_i$ in each super time slot, $X_{i,\textrm{max}}^{\textrm{PNC}}$, can be obtained from \eqref{XikPNCbargashti} by substituting $X_{i,k}=X_{i,k-2}=X_{i,\textrm{max}}^\textrm{PNC}$ and $B_{i,k}=\hat{B}_{\bar{i},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=1$:
\begin{align}\label{Xipncmax}
&X_{i,\textrm{max}}^{\textrm{PNC}}=\frac{c^\textrm{PNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}} \cdot \frac{1+\nu_3^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{1-\nu_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}} \nu_3^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}},\qquad i \in \{1,2\}
\end{align}
\end{remark}
\textbf{Extension to higher channel memories:} The number of released molecules to mitigate ISI for higher channel memories can be obtained similar to the unit memory case from \eqref{eqXikPNCadap} and \eqref{eq_LTikPNC} as follows:
\begin{align}\label{XikPNCbargashti_ext}
X_{i,k}=\frac{c^\textrm{PNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}(B_{i,k}+\sum_{l=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\nu_{2l+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}} \hat{B}_{\bar{i},k-l}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})+\sum_{l_1=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\sum_{l_2=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\nu_{2l_1+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}} \nu_{2l_2+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}} X_{i,k-l_1-l_2},\qquad i \in \{1,2\},
\end{align}
which shows that each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ has to save its decoded messages in previous $\lfloor \frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{2} \rfloor$ super time slots
and the number of its released molecules in previous
$\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_1\mathsf{R}}}{2} \rfloor+ \lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_2\mathsf{R}}}{2} \rfloor$ super time slots. If the channel coefficients are such that $\sum_{l_1=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\sum_{l_2=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\nu_{2l_1+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}} \nu_{2l_2+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}} < 1$,\footnote{This condition can be assured by decreasing $\nu_l^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}$s which needs increasing the $t_s$ and decreasing the sampling rate accordingly.} the number of released molecules from $ \mathsf{T}_i$ in each super time slot has a maximum value, which can be obtained similar to \eqref{Xipncmax} as follows:
\begin{align}
&X_{i,\textrm{max}}^{\textrm{PNC}}=\frac{c^\textrm{PNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}} \cdot \frac{1+\sum_{l=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\nu_{2l+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{1-\sum_{l_1=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\sum_{l_2=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\nu_{2l_1+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}} \nu_{2l_2+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}, \qquad i \in \{1,2\}.
\end{align}
This guarantees the stability of the scheme.
\begin{remark} In Section \ref{Simulation}, For a fair comparison of the SNC and PNC schemes, we choose $c^\textrm{SNC}$ and $c^\textrm{PNC}$ such that
$\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i =1}^{2}X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^{\textrm{SNC}}=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{2} X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^{\textrm{PNC}},$
where $X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^{\textrm{PNC}}$ and $X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^{\textrm{SNC}}$ are the average number of the released molecules from the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ in the PNC and SNC schemes, respectively. The average values can be obtained from \eqref{XikSNCbargashti_ext} and \eqref{XikPNCbargashti_ext} by substituting $X_{i,k}$ and $X_{i,k-1}$ with their average values ($X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^\textrm{PNC}$ or $X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^\textrm{SNC}$), and $B_{i,k}$ and $B_{\bar{i}}^{k-1}$ with their average values, $\frac{1}{2}$, as follows:
\begin{align}
&X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^\textrm{SNC}=\frac{c^\textrm{SNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}} \cdot \frac{1}{2+\sum_{l=1}^{\lfloor \frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2} \rfloor}\nu_{2l+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}, \quad X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^\textrm{PNC}=\frac{c^\textrm{PNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}} \cdot \frac{1+\sum_{l=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\nu_{2l+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{2(1-\sum_{l_1=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\sum_{l_2=1}^{\lfloor\frac{q^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}}{2}\rfloor}\nu_{2l_1+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}} \nu_{2l_2+1}^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}})},
\end{align}
\end{remark}
\section{Error Performance Analysis with No ISI}\label{error}
In this section, we derive the probabilities of error at the transceivers $ \mathsf{T}_1$ and $ \mathsf{T}_2$, noted by $p_{\textrm{e},1}$ and $p_{\textrm{e},2}$, respectively. Throughout this paper, we consider the average bit error probability (Avg-BEP) as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{AvgBEP}
\textrm{Avg-BEP}=\frac{1}{2}(p_{\textrm{e},1}+p_{\textrm{e},2}).
\end{equation}
First, we investigate the error probabilities of the proposed PNC scheme. Then, using a similar approach, we derive the error probabilities of the SNC scheme. Since the error probability without ISI in the current super time slot does not depend on the error probabilities of the previous super time slots and is the same for all super time slots, we drop the index $k$ of the bits and error events in this section.
\subsection{The proposed PNC scheme}\label{error:PNC}
Each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ sends its message $B_i \in \{0,1\}$ to the relay through releasing $X_i=\zeta^\mathsf{R} B_i$ molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$. When both transceivers send the information bit $1$, almost all molecules react with each other and we have a physical-layer XOR. That is, the relay implicitly decodes the physically made XOR of the messages, $B_1 \oplus B_2$, and sends it to the transceivers through releasing $X_3$ molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$.
We define an auxiliary variable $B_{\mathsf{R}_i}$ as the part of the message $B_1 \oplus B_2$ which corresponds to $B_i$.
Each receptor group $i$ at the relay decodes the message $B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=B_i (B_1 \oplus B_2)$, the part of the message $B_1 \oplus B_2$ which corresponds to $B_i$, as $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_i}$. For $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_1}=\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_2}=0$, the relay stays silent; otherwise (when $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_1}=1$ or $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_2}=1$), it releases $\zeta^\mathsf{R}$ molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$ and hence, $X_3=(\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_1}+\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_2})\zeta^\mathsf{R}=B_{\mathsf{R}}\zeta^\mathsf{R}$
Due to the perfect reaction assumption, $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_1}$ and $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_2}$ cannot be $1$ at the same time and thus, $X_3 \in \{0,\zeta^\mathsf{R}\}$. We remark that these notations are used for the ease of error analysis.
In fact, the message sent by the relay ($B_{\mathsf{R}}$) implicitly shows the $\widehat{B_1 \oplus B_2}$ and it is realized through $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_1}$ and $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_2}$ in our scheme. Furthermore, the system naturally adds up $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_1}$ and $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_2}$, because the encoder would release molecules when it is stimulated by the active receptor group (at most one active receptor group exists in each time slot).
Finally, each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ decodes the message of the relay as $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$ and, by XORing it with its own sent message, finds the message sent by the other transceiver, i.e., $\hat{B}_{\bar{i}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=B_i \oplus \hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}, i \in\{1,2\}$.
Define $E_i$ as the error event at the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$, i.e., {$\hat{B}_{\bar{i}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \neq B_{\bar{i}}$}. The probability of the event $E_i$ is shown by $\mathbb{P}(E_i)=p_{\textrm{e},i}$. $E_i$ consist of two error events corresponding to two communication phases:
i. $E_{\mathsf{R}}$: $B_{1} \oplus B_{2}$ is decoded with error at the relay ($B_{\mathsf{R}} \neq B_{1} \oplus B_{2} $).
ii. $E^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$: The $i$-th transceiver decodes the message of the relay with error ($\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \neq B_{\mathsf{R}}$).\\
The probabilities of the first and second events are shown by $\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}})$ and $\mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i})$, respectively. We show the conditioned event $\{B=b\}$ with $\{b\}$ for brevity, when it is clear from the context. Hence,
\begin{align}\label{eq_Peim1m2}
\nonumber
\mathbb{P}(E_i|&B_1=b_1,B_2=b_2)=\mathbb{P}(\hat{B}_{\bar{i}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}\neq B_{\bar{i}}|b_1,b_2)\\\nonumber
=&\mathbb{P}(\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=B_{\mathsf{R}}, B_{\mathsf{R}} \neq b_1 \oplus b_2|b_1,b_2)+\mathbb{P}(\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \neq B_{\mathsf{R}}, B_{\mathsf{R}}=b_1 \oplus b_2|b_1,b_2)\\
=&\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|b_1,b_2)\big(1-\mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R}}=\overline{b_1 \oplus b_2})\big)+\big(1-\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|b_1,b_2)\big)\mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R}}=b_1 \oplus b_2),
\end{align}
for $i \in \{1,2\}$. By taking average over $B_1$ and $B_2$, the total probability of error at the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ can be easily obtained for $i \in \{1,2\}$ as
\begin{align}\label{eq_Pei}
p_{\textrm{e},i}&=\mathbb{P}(E_i)=\frac{1}{4}\sum_{b_1,b_2 \in \{0,1\}} \mathbb{P}(E_i|B_1=b_1,B_2=b_2)\\
&=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{b_R \in \{0,1\}}\mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R}}=b_\mathsf{R})+\frac{1}{4}\big[1-\sum_{b_R \in \{0,1\}}\mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R}}=b_\mathsf{R})\big]\sum_{b_1,b_2 \in \{0,1\}} \mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|b_1,b_2) .\nonumber
\end{align}
In the following, we compute the error probabilities of the two communication phases, i.e., $\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=b_1,B_2=b_2)$ and $\mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_\mathsf{R}=b_\mathsf{R})$.
\textbf{Phase 1:}
When both transceivers send the same information bit $1$ or $0$, the concentrations of molecules of types $1$ and $2$ around the relay are $C_1=C_2=0$ (thanks to perfect reaction) and when the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i, i \in \{1,2\}$, sends the information bit $1$ and the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}$ sends the information bit $0$, the concentrations are $C_i=\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_i}\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}$ and $C_{\bar{i}}=0$. Hence, when $B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=b_{\mathsf{R}_i}$, the concentration of the molecule type $\mathsf{M}_i$ around the relay is $C_i=b_{\mathsf{R}_i} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_i}\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}$ and the probability of binding for the receptor type $\Omega_i$ at the relay can be obtained from \eqref{pbinding} as
\begin{equation}\label{pbiRPNC}
p_{\textrm{b},i}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(b_{\mathsf{R}_i})=\frac{b_{\mathsf{R}_i} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{b_{\mathsf{R}_i} \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}+\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}}, \qquad i \in \{1,2\}.
\end{equation}
According to the physical model, the conditional distribution of the number of bound molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ at the relay, $Y_i^R$, given $B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=b_{\mathsf{R}_i}$, is $\textrm{Binomial}\big(n_i^{\mathsf{R}},p_{\textrm{b},i}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(b_{\mathsf{R}_i})\big)$. Since $p_{\textrm{b},i}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(0)=0$, we have
\begin{align}\label{delta}
\mathbb{P}{\{Y_i^R=y|B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0\}}=\delta{\left[y\right]},\qquad i \in \{1,2\}.
\end{align}
Each receptor group $i$ uses a threshold, $\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}$, to decode $B_{\mathsf{R}_i}$: if $Y_i^\mathsf{R}$ is lower than $\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}$, then $B_{\mathsf{R}_i}$ is decoded as $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0$; otherwise, $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_i}=1$. The maximum-a-posteriori (MAP) decision rule is used as follows:
\begin{align}\label{threshold1}
\mathbb{P}\{B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=1\}\mathbb{P}{(y_i^R|B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=1)}&\overset{\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_i}=1}{\underset{\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0}\gtrless}\mathbb{P}{\{B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0\}}\mathbb{P}{(y_i^R|B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0)}
=\mathbb{P}\{B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0\}\delta{\left[y_i^R\right]},
\end{align}
which results in $\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}=0, i \in \{1,2\}$.\footnote{Note that here we have, $\mathbb{P}\{B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=1\}=\mathbb{P}\{B_i=1,B_{\bar{i}}=0\}=\frac{1}{4}$, $\mathbb{P}\{B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0\}=\mathbb{P}\{B_i=0,B_{\bar{i}}=0\}+\mathbb{P}\{B_i=0,B_{\bar{i}}=1\}+\mathbb{P}\{B_i=1,B_{\bar{i}}=1\}=\frac{3}{4}$, and thus, $\mathbb{P}\{B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=1\}<\mathbb{P}\{B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0\}$ and \eqref{threshold1} result in $\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}=0$. However, if $\mathbb{P}\{B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=1\}\geq \mathbb{P}\{B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0\}$, since the threshold is non-negative, we would still obtain $\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}=0$.} We define $E_{\mathsf{R}_i}$ as the event $\{\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_i} \neq B_{\mathsf{R}_i}\}$. Hence, $\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}_i})$ is the probability of error when $B_{\mathsf{R}_i}$ is decoded with error at the $i$-th receptor group of the relay. Note that $B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0$ is decoded without error at the relay, due to the noiseless assumption. Hence, for $i \in \{1,2\}$,
\begin{align}\label{eq_PeRi}
\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0)&=\mathbb{P}{\{Y_i>\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}|B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=0\}}=0,\\\nonumber
\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=1)&=\mathbb{P}{\{Y_i\leq\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}|B_{\mathsf{R}_i}=1\}}=(1-p_{\textrm{b},i}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(1))^{n_i^{\mathsf{R}}}.
\end{align}
Recall that the number of released molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$ equals to $X_3=0$ when the transceivers send the same messages and $X_3=\zeta^\mathsf{R}$ when one of the transceivers send the information bit $1$ and the corresponding receptor group at the relay decodes it correctly (see Table \ref{table1}).
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Messages and number of molecules sent by the relay in the proposed PNC scheme}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|K{1.2cm}|K{3cm}|K{3cm}|c}
\hline
$B_1$ & $B_2$ & $B_1 \oplus B_2 $ & $B_{\mathsf{R}_1}=B_1 (B_1 \oplus B_2)$ & $B_{\mathsf{R}_2}=B_2 (B_1 \oplus B_2)$ & $X_3$\\\hline
$0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$\\
$1$ & $0$ & $1$ & $1$ & $0$ & $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_1} \zeta^\mathsf{R}$\\
$0$ & $1$ & $1$ & $0$ & $1$ & $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}_2} \zeta^\mathsf{R}$\\
$1$ & $1$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table1}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{table}
Thus, when $(B_1,B_2)\in\lbrace(0,0),(1,1)\rbrace$, $B_{\mathsf{R}_1}$ and $B_{\mathsf{R}_2}$ equal to zero and are decoded without error at the relay. When $(B_1,B_2)=(1,0)$, we have $B_{\mathsf{R}_1}=1$ and $B_{\mathsf{R}_2}=0$. Hence, $B_{\mathsf{R}_2}$ is decoded without error at the relay and we get $\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=1,B_2=0)=\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}_1}|B_1=1,B_2=0)$. Similarly, we get $\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=1,B_2=0)=\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}_2}|B_1=0,B_2=1)$. Therefore,
\begin{align}\label{eq_PeRreaction}
\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=0,B_2=0)&=\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=1,B_2=1)=0,\\\nonumber
\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=1,B_2=0)&=(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(1))^{n_1^\mathsf{R}},\quad \mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=0,B_2=1)=(1-p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(1))^{n_2^\mathsf{R}}.
\end{align}
\textbf{Phase 2:} The binding probability for the receptors at each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ when $B_{\mathsf{R}}=b_\mathsf{R}$ is:
\begin{align}
p_\textrm{b}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}(b_\mathsf{R})=\frac{b_\mathsf{R}\zeta^\mathsf{R} \pi_1^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}}{b_\mathsf{R}\zeta^\mathsf{R} \pi_1^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}+\kappa_{\textrm{D}_3}}, \qquad i \in \{1,2\}.
\end{align}
The conditional distribution of the number of bound molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$ at the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$, $Y_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$, given $B_{\mathsf{R}}=b_\mathsf{R}$, is Binomial$\big(n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}, p_\textrm{b}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}(b_\mathsf{R})\big)$. We have $\mathbb{P}{\{Y_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=y|B_{\mathsf{R}}=0\}}=\delta{\left[y\right]}$ since $p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}(0)=0$,. \\
To decode $B_{\mathsf{R}}$, each transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ uses a threshold, $\tau^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$. Using MAP decision rule, the optimum value of $\tau^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$ can be obtained similar to \eqref{threshold1} as $\tau^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=0$. Hence,
\begin{align}\label{eq_PeRihat}
\mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}}=0)&=0
\quad \mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}}=1
=(1-p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}(1))^{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}}.
\end{align}
Now, by substituting the error probabilities of the two phases from \eqref{eq_PeRreaction} and \eqref{eq_PeRihat} in \eqref{eq_Pei}, we obtain
\begin{align}\label{Peireaction1}
p_{\textrm{e},i}=&\frac{1}{2}{(1-p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}(1))}^{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}}+\frac{1}{4}\left[1-(1-p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}(1))^{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}}\right]
\left[(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(1))^{n_1^\mathsf{R}}+(1-p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(1))^{n_2^\mathsf{R}}\right],
\end{align}
for $i \in \{1,2\}$, and thus the Avg-BEP can be obtained from \eqref{AvgBEP}.
\subsection{The SNC scheme}
In the SNC scheme, the $i$-th receptor group at the relay decodes $B_i$ (the message of the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$) as $\hat{B}_i^{\mathsf{R}}$. The relay XORs the decoded messages and sends the message $B_{\mathsf{R}}=\hat{B}_1^{\mathsf{R}} \oplus \hat{B}_2^{\mathsf{R}}$ to the transceivers using $X_3^\mathsf{R}=B_{\mathsf{R}}\zeta^\mathsf{R}$ molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$. The error probability of the second communication phase can be obtained from \eqref{eq_PeRihat}. In the following, we derive the error probability of the first phase. Here, we define $E_{\mathsf{R}}=\{B_{\mathsf{R}} \neq B_1 \oplus B_2\}$ to show the error event at the relay. The total error probability at the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ can be obtained from \eqref{eq_Pei}. Now, we compute $\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=b_1,B_2=b_2)$. When $B_1=b_1$ and $B_2=b_2$, the probability of binding for the receptor type $\Omega_i$ at the relay can be obtained from \eqref{pbinding} as
\begin{align}\label{pbiRSNC}
&p_{\textrm{b},i}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(b_1,b_2)=\frac{b_i \zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_i}\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}{b_i\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_i}\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}+\frac{\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}}{\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}^{\textrm{Block},\bar{i}}}b_{\bar{i}}\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}}\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}\mathsf{R}}+\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}}, \qquad i \in \{1,2\}.
\end{align}
The conditional distribution of $Y_i^R$ (given $B_1=b_1$ and $B_2=b_2$) is Binomial$\big(n_i^{\mathsf{R}},p_{\textrm{b},i}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(b_1,b_2)\big)$. Since $p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(0,b_2)=p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(b_1,0)=0$, we have $\mathbb{P}\{Y_i^{R}=y|B_i=0\}=\delta{\left[y\right]},~i \in \{1,2\}$. \\
The relay uses a threshold $\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}$ to decode $B_i$.
Similar to the PNC scheme, we obtain the optimum thresholds using MAP decision rule as $\tau_1^{\mathsf{R}}=\tau_2^{\mathsf{R}}=0$. We also define $E_i^{\mathsf{R}}=\{\hat{B}_i^{\mathsf{R}} \neq B_i\}$ to denote the event where $B_i$ is decoded with error at the relay.
Hence,
\begin{align}\label{eq_PeT1type}
\mathbb{P}(E_1^{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=0,B_2=b_2)&=\mathbb{P}\{Y_1>\tau_1^{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=0,B_2=b_2\}=0,\\\nonumber
\mathbb{P}(E_1^{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=1,B_2=b_2)&=\mathbb{P}\{Y_1\leq\tau_1^{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=1,B_2=b_2\}=(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,b_2))^{n_1^\mathsf{R}}.
\end{align}
$\mathbb{P}(E_2^{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=b_1,B_2=b_2)$ can be obtained similarly. Due to XORing at the relay, the event $E_{\mathsf{R}}$ is equivalent to the event that one of the messages $B_1$ or $B_2$ is decoded with error at the relay. Hence,
\begin{align}\label{eq_PeR}
\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=b_1,B_2=b_2)=\mathbb{P}(E_i^{\mathsf{R}}|b_1,b_2)(1-\mathbb{P}(E_2^{\mathsf{R}}|b_1,b_2))+(1-\mathbb{P}(E_i^{\mathsf{R}}|b_1,b_2)\mathbb{P}(E_2^{\mathsf{R}}|b_1,b_2).
\end{align}
By substituting $\mathbb{P}(E_1^{\mathsf{R}}|b_1,b_2)$ and $\mathbb{P}(E_2^{\mathsf{R}}|b_1,b_2)$ from \eqref{eq_PeT1type} in \eqref{eq_PeR} we obtain:
\begin{align}\label{eq_PeRtype}
&\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=1,B_2=0)=(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,0))^{n_1^\mathsf{R}},\qua
\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=0,B_2=1)=(1-p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(0,1))^{n_2^\mathsf{R}},\\\nonumber
&\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=0,B_2=0)=0,\quad \mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=1,B_2=1)=(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,1))^{n_1^\mathsf{R}}+(1-p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,1))^{n_2^\mathsf{R}}\\\nonumber
&\qquad \qquad \qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \quad-2(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,1))^{n_1^\mathsf{R}}(1-p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,1))^{n_2^\mathsf{R}}.
\end{align}
Finally, by substituting the error probabilities of the two communication phases (from $\eqref{eq_PeRtype}$ and \eqref{eq_PeRihat}) in \eqref{eq_Pei}, we obtain $p_{\textrm{e},i}$, $i \in \{1,2\}$, as
\begin{align}\label{Peitype1}
p_{\textrm{e},i}&=\frac{1}{2}{(1-p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}(1))}^{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}}+\frac{1}{4}\left[1-(1-p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}(1))^{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}}\right
\left[(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,0))^{n_1^\mathsf{R}}+(1-p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(0,1))^{n_2^\mathsf{R}}\right.\\\nonumber
& \left.\quad +(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,1))^{n_1^\mathsf{R}}+(1-p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,1))^{n_2^\mathsf{R}
-2(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,1))^{n_1^\mathsf{R}}(1-p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,1))^{n_2^\mathsf{R}}\right].
\end{align}
\begin{remark} Comparing \eqref{Peireaction1} and \eqref{Peitype1}, it can be seen that the error probability at each transceiver and thus the Avg-BEP of the PNC scheme is lower than or equal to that of the SNC: since $p_{\textrm{b},i}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$ is the same for both schemes, the first two terms of \eqref{Peireaction1} and \eqref{Peitype1} are equal; the second two terms of \eqref{Peitype1} are lower than those in \eqref{Peireaction1} according to the fact that $p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(1)\geq p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(1,0)$, $p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(1)\geq p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{SNC}}(0,1)$ due to the blocking effect in the SNC scheme; the sum of the other terms in \eqref{Peitype1} is $\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}}|B_1=1,B_2=1)\geq0$.
\end{remark}
\vspace{-1em}
\section{Error Performance Analysis in the Presence of ISI}\label{errorISI}
We assume the transceiver-relay and the relay-transceiver channels to have unit super time slot memory.
In Section \ref{Simulation}, we simulate the system for higher channels memories.
\subsection{The PNC scheme}\label{errorISI:PNC}
Similar to the no ISI case, from \eqref{eq_Peim1m2}, we define two error events in each super time slot corresponding to each communication phase: (i) $E_{\mathsf{R},k}=\{\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k} \neq B_{\mathsf{R},k}\}$, and (ii) $E_k^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=\{\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \neq \hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k}\}$. In the following, we obtain recursive equations for the error probabilities of both communication phases.
\textbf{Phase 1:} According to \eqref{XikPNCbargashti}, the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ uses the decoded message of the other transceiver in the $(k-1)$-th super time slot ($\hat{B}_{\bar{i},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$) and the number of its own released molecules in the $(k-2)$-th super time slot ($X_{i,k-2}$) to determine the number of released molecules in the $k$-th super time slot.
$X_{1,k-2}$ and $X_{2,k-2}$, themselves, depend on the previous decoded messages and hence, they may contain error. We consider the error effect in $(k-1)$-th super time slot and neglect the error effect in $X_{1,k-2}$ and $X_{2,k-2}$ to obtain an approximate value for the error probability of the first communication phase (however, in Section \ref{Simulation}, we simulate this system and obtain the error probability considering the effect of error in $X_i^{k-2}$). With this assumption, the error probability of phase 1 in the $k$-th super time slot is obtained as
\begin{align}\label{eq_peRPNCISI}
&\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k}|B_{1,k}=b_{1,k},B_{2,k}=b_{2,k})\\\nonumber
&=\frac{1}{4}\sum_{\substack{\hat{b}_1, \hat{b}_2\in \{0,1\}\\,b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1} \in \{0,1\}}} \left[\mathbb{P}(\hat{B}_{1,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}=\hat{b}_1,\hat{B}_{2,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1}=\hat{b}_2|b_{1,k},b_{2,k},b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1}) \right.\\\nonumber
&\qquad \left. \times \mathbb{P}\big(E_{\mathsf{R},k}|(B_{1,k},B_{2,k}, B_{1,k-1}, B_{2,k-1},\hat{B}_{1,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}, \hat{B}_{2,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1})=(b_{1,k},b_{2,k}, b_{1,k-1}, b_{2,k-1},\hat{b}_1,\hat{b}_2)\big)\right].
\end{align}
The first term in the summation of \eqref{eq_peRPNCISI} is the joint decoding probability at the transceivers, which is independent of the current messages ($b_{1,k},b_{2,k}$) and can be derived as a function of the error probabilities in the $(k-1)$-th super time slot as
\begin{align}\label{eq_state}
\mathbb{P}(\hat{B}_{1,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}=\hat{b}_1,&\hat{B}_{2,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1}=\hat{b}_2|b_{1,k},b_{2,k},b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1})=\\\nonumber
&\big(1-\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}|b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1})\big)\mathbb{P}\{\hat{B}_{1,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}=\hat{b}_1,\hat{B}_{2,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1}=\hat{b}_2|b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1},E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{c}\}\\\nonumber
&+\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}|b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1}) \mathbb{P}\{\hat{B}_{1,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}=\hat{b}_1,\hat{B}_{2,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1}=\hat{b}_2|b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1},E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}\}.
\end{align}
Now, considering the independent decoding at the transceivers, as well as the independent channels from the relay to the transceivers, we obtain
\begin{align}\label{eq_state2}
\mathbb{P}\{\hat{B}_{1,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}=\hat{b}_1&,\hat{B}_{2,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1}=\hat{b}_2|b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1},E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{c}\}\\\nonumber
&=\mathbb{P}\{\hat{B}_{1,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}=\hat{b}_1|b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1},E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{c}\} \mathbb{P}\{\hat{B}_{2,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1}=\hat{b}_2|b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1},E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{c}\},
\end{align}
where the above probabilities would be the error probability when $\hat{b}_i \neq b_{i,k-1}$, for $i \in \{1,2\}$, and thus:
\begin{equation}\label{eq_state3}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbb{P}\{\hat{B}_{i,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_{\bar{i}}}&=\hat{b}_i|b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1},E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{c}\}=\begin{cases}
\mathbb{P}(E_{k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R},k-1}=b_{1,k-1}\oplus b_{2,k-1}), &\textrm{if }\hat{b}_i \neq b_{i,k-1}\\
1-\mathbb{P}(E_{k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R},k-1}=b_{1,k-1}\oplus b_{2,k-1}), &\textrm{if } \hat{b}_i= b_{i,k-1}
\end{cases}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Similar equations can be derived for $\mathbb{P}\{\hat{B}_{1,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2}=\hat{b}_1,\hat{B}_{2,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1}=\hat{b}_2|b_{1,k-1},b_{2,k-1},E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}\}$.
Combining \eqref{eq_state}-\eqref{eq_state3} gives the first term in the summation of \eqref{eq_peRPNCISI}.
To obtain the second term in the summation of \eqref{eq_peRPNCISI}, i.e., $\mathbb{P}\big(E_{\mathsf{R},k}|(B_{1,k},B_{2,k}, B_{1,k-1}, B_{2,k-1},\hat{B}_{1,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_2},$ $ \hat{B}_{2,k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_1})=(b_{1,k},b_{2,k}, b_{1,k-1}, b_{2,k-1},\hat{b}_1,\hat{b}_2)\big)$, one must obtain the concentration of each molecule type around the relay after reaction for all $2^6$ realizations of $b_{1,k},b_{2,k}, b_{1,k-1}, b_{2,k-1}, \hat{b}_1, \hat{b}_2$. Then, the error probability at the relay for each case can be derived based on the corresponding binding probabilities. The details are given in Appendix~\ref{apendixa}, where the second term in the summation of \eqref{eq_peRPNCISI} is derived. Combing all these equations, a set of recursive equations is obtained for the error probability of the relay in Appendix~\ref{apendixa}.
\textbf{Phase 2:} Here, using fixed transmission rate, the probability of binding for molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_3$ at the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ (when $B_{\mathsf{R},k}=b_{\mathsf{R},k}$ and $B_{\mathsf{R},k-1}=b_{\mathsf{R},k-1}$) is given as
\begin{align}\label{eq_pbTiISI}
p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(b_{\mathsf{R},k},b_{\mathsf{R},k-1})=\frac{b_{\mathsf{R},k} \zeta^\mathsf{R} \pi_1^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}+b_{\mathsf{R},k-1} \zeta^\mathsf{R} \pi_3^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}}{b_{\mathsf{R},k} \zeta^\mathsf{R} \pi_1^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}+b_{\mathsf{R},k-1} \zeta^\mathsf{R} \pi_3^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}+\kappa_{\textrm{D},i}},\qquad i \in \{1,2\}.
\end{align}
To mitigate ISI in this phase, the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ uses the decoded message of the relay in the $(k-1)$-th super time slot, i.e., $\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}$ and obtains the adaptive threshold in the $k$-th super time slot using Maximum Likelihood (ML) decision rule as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}(y_{3,k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R},k}=1, B_{\mathsf{R},k-1}=\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})\overset{\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=1}{\underset{\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=0}\gtrless}\mathbb{P}(y_{3,k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R},k}=0,B_{\mathsf{R},k-1}=\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}),
\end{align}
Hence,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
y_{3,k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}\overset{\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=1}{\underset{\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=0}\gtrless}\frac{N^{ \mathsf{T}_i}\log{\left(\frac{1-p_\textrm{b}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(0,\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})}{1-p_\textrm{b}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(1,\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})}\right)}
}{\log{\left(\frac{p_\textrm{b}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(1,\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})\big(1-p_\textrm{b}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(0,\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})\big)}{p_\textrm{b}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(0,\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})\big(1-p_\textrm{b}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(1,\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})\big)}\right)}}=\tau^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
which gives the adaptive threshold used at $ \mathsf{T}_i$ (that is $\tau^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})$). It can be easily seen that when previous decoded message is zero, our ISI mitigating technique gives the zero threshold (i.e., $\tau^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(0)=0$). For the above decision rule, the error probability at $ \mathsf{T}_i$ for $b_{\mathsf{R},k}\in\{0,1\}$ is obtained as
\begin{align}\label{eq_PeRihatISI}
\nonumber
\mathbb{P}(E_k^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R},k}=b_{\mathsf{R},k})=\sum_{b_{\mathsf{R},k-1},\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \in \{0,1\}} &\left[ \mathbb{P}(B_{\mathsf{R},k-1}=b_{\mathsf{R},k-1}) \mathbb{P}(\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,k-1}=\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|b_{\mathsf{R},k-1})\right.\\
&\left.\quad \times \mathbb{P}\big(Y_{3,k}^{ \mathsf{T}_i} > \tau^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i})|b_{\mathsf{R},k}, b_{\mathsf{R},k-1},\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}\big)\right]
\end{align}
for $ i \in \{1,2\}$, where $\mathbb{P}(B_{\mathsf{R},k-1}=0)=\frac{1}{4}\big[2-\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}|B_{1,k-1}=0,B_{2,k-1}=0)-\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}|B_{1,k-1}=1,B_{2,k-1}=1)+\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}|B_{1,k-1}=0,B_{2,k-1}=1)+\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k-1}|B_{1,k-1}=1,B_{2,k-1}=0)\big]$ and
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbb{P}(\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}=\hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|b_{\mathsf{R},k-1})=\begin{cases}
\mathbb{P}(E_k^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|b_{\mathsf{R},k-1}), \quad &\textrm{if } \hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \neq b_{\mathsf{R},k-1},\\
1-\mathbb{P}(E_k^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|b_{\mathsf{R},k-1}), & \textrm{if } \hat{b}_{\mathsf{R},k-1}^{ \mathsf{T}_i}= b_{\mathsf{R},k-1}.\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Hence, $\mathbb{P}(E_k^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R},k}=b_{\mathsf{R},k})$ can be obtained recursively from \eqref{eq_PeRihatISI}. Since we have two linear equations in \eqref{eq_PeRihatISI} with two unknowns, a closed form equation can be easily obtained for $\mathbb{P}(E_k^{ \mathsf{T}_i}|B_{\mathsf{R},k}=b_{\mathsf{R},k})$.
\begin{remark}To further simplify the error performance results, we consider the case where there is no error in the decoded messages of the previous super time slots (i.e., we ignore the error propagation). Then, the error probability of phase 1 will be equal to the no ISI case. For the error probability of phase 2, we take the average of \eqref{eq_PeRihatISI} over $\hat{B}_{\mathsf{R}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,k-1}=B_{\mathsf{R},k-1}$ and use \eqref{eq_Pei} to obtain the error probability at the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ as follows:
\begin{align}
\label{eq_PeiNoEPNC}
p_{\textrm{e},i}^\textrm{NoE}=&\frac{1}{16}(4-u^2) w_{i,1}+\frac{1}{16}(2-u)^2 w_{i,2}+\frac{1}{4}u,
\end{align}
for $i \in \{1,2\}$, where
{\small\begin{align}\label{eq_E}
&w_{i,1}=\big(1-p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(1,0)\big)^{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}}+\sum_{l=\tau^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(1)+1}^{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}}{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \choose l}\big(p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(0,1)\big)^{l}\big(1-p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(0,1)\big)^{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}-{l}},\\\nonumber
&w_{i,2}=\sum_{l=0}^{\tau^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(1)}{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i} \choose l}\big(p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(1,1)\big)^{l}\big(1-p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}(1,1)\big)^{n_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i}-{l}}, \quad u=\big(1-p_{\textrm{b},1}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(1)\big)^{n_1^\mathsf{R}}+\big(1-p_{\textrm{b},2}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}(1)\big)^{n_2^\mathsf{R}},
\end{align}}
$p_{\textrm{b},i}^{\mathsf{R},\textrm{PNC}}$ and $p_{\textrm{b}}^{ \mathsf{T}_i,\textrm{I}}$ are defined in \eqref{pbiRPNC} and \eqref{eq_pbTiISI}, respectively. Note that, ignoring the error propagation gives lower bounds on the error probabilities of each hop, while the overall error probability cannot be proved to necessarily be a lower bound. However, in our simulation results, it is always a lower bound.
\end{remark}
\subsection{The SNC scheme}
Here, the error probability of the second phase is the same as that of the PNC given in \eqref{eq_PeRihatISI}, with the difference that $\mathbb{P}(B_{\mathsf{R},k-1}=0)$ must be computed separately, since the error probabilities of the first phase are not equal for two schemes. Thus, we only analyze the error probability of the first phase. According to \eqref{XikSNCbargashti}, the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ uses the number of released molecules in the $(k-1)$-th super time slot to determine the number of released molecules in the $k$-th super time slot: if its message is 1, the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i$ releases some molecules such that the concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ at the relay will be equal to $c^\textrm{SNC}$ and if its message is 0, it stays silent (concentration of the molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ at the relay will be equal to the concentration of the remained molecules from the previous super time slot, i.e., $X_{i,k-1} \pi_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}$). Hence, the concentration of molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ around the relay is
$C_{i,k}=B_{i,k} c^\textrm{SNC}+(1-B_{i,k})X_{i,k-1}\pi_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}$ and the binding probability for molecules of type $\mathsf{M}_i$ at the relay can be obtained from \eqref{pbinding}. It is just straightforward to show from \eqref{XikSNCbargashti} that the probability distribution function (PDF) of $X_{i,k}$ for $i \in \{1,2\}$ is as follows:
\begin{align}\label{DistXi}
p_{X_{i,k}}(x)=\frac{1}{2^{m}} \delta(x-x_{i,m}), \qquad x_{i,m}=\frac{c^\textrm{SNC}}{\pi_1^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}}\sum_{l=0}^{m-2}(-\nu_3^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}})^l, \qquad m\in \mathbb{N}.
\end{align}
The relay uses MAP decision rule to decode the message of the transceiver $ \mathsf{T}_i,\; i \in \{1,2\}$ as
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{2}\mathbb{P}(y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|B_{i,k}=1) \overset{\hat{B}_{1}^{R,k}=1}{\underset{\hat{B}_{1}^{R,k}=0}\gtrless} \frac{1}{2}\mathbb{P}(y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|B_{i,k}=0).
\end{align}
Hence,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\!\!\!\!\sum_{\substack{b_{\bar{i},k} \in \{0,1\}}}\int\limits_{x_{1},x_{2}} \mathbb{P}{\{X_{1,k-1}=x_{1}\}}\mathbb{P}{\{X_{2,k-1}=x_2\}} \big[p_{Y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|1,b_{\bar{i},k}, x_{1},x_{2}}(y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}})-p_{Y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|0,b_{\bar{i},k}, x_{1},x_{2}}(y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}})\big] dx_{1} dx_{2} \overset{\hat{B}_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}=1}{\underset{\hat{B}_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}=0}\gtrless}0,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $p_{Y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|b_{i,k},b_{\bar{i},k}, x_{1},x_{2}}(y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}})=\mathbb{P}(y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|B_{i,k}=b_{i,k},B_{\bar{i},k}=b_{\bar{i},k},X_{1,k-1}=x_{1},X_{2,k-1}=x_{2})$. By substituting $\mathbb{P}\{X_{i,k-1}=x_i\}$ from \eqref{DistXi}, we obtain the MAP decision rule in the $i$-th receptor group as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:decSNC}
\sum_{b_{\bar{i},k} \in \{0,1\}}\sum_{m_1,m_2=0}^{\infty} (\frac{1}{2})^{m_1+m_2} \big[p_{Y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|1, b_{\bar{i},k}, x_{1,m_1},x_{2,m_2}}(y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}})-p_{Y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|0, b_{\bar{i},k}, x_{1,m_1},x_{2,m_2}}(y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}})\big] \overset{\hat{B}_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}=1}{\underset{\hat{B}_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}=0}\gtrless}0,
\end{equation}
which its solution gives the optimum threshold at the relay (shown by $\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}$) and can be found numerically.
Then, the error probability at the $i$-th receptor group ($i \in \{1,2\}$) of the relay is obtained as
\begin{align}\label{eq_PeRISI}
\mathbb{P}(E_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|B_{i,k}=0,B_{\bar{i},k}=b_{\bar{i},k})&=1-\sum_{m_1,m_2=0}^{\infty}(\frac{1}{2})^{m_1+m_2}F_{Y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|0,b_{\bar{i},k}, x_{1,m_1},x_{2,m_2}}(\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}),\\\nonumber
\mathbb{P}(E_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|B_{i,k}=1,B_{\bar{i},k}=b_{\bar{i},k})&=\sum_{m_1,m_2=0}^{\infty}(\frac{1}{2})^{m_1+m_2}F_{Y_{i,k}^{\mathsf{R}}|1,b_{\bar{i},k}, x_{1,m_1},x_{2,m_2}}(\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}),
\end{align}
where $F_{Y_{i,k}^\mathsf{R}|b_{i,k},b_{\bar{i},k},x_{1,m_1},x_{2,m_2}}(\tau_i^{\mathsf{R}})=\mathbb{P}\{Y_{i,k}^\mathsf{R}\leq \tau_i^{\mathsf{R}}|B_{i,k}=b_{i,k},B_{\bar{i},k}=b_{\bar{i},k}, X_{1,k-1}=x_{1,m_1}, X_{2,k-1}=x_{2,m_2}\}$. Now, $\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k}|B_{1,k}=b_{1,k},B_{2,k}=b_{2,k})$ can be obtained by substituting \eqref{eq_PeRISI} in \eqref{eq_PeR}.
\begin{remark} The error probability can be further simplified assuming that the message of the relay is decoded without error at the transceivers in the previous super time slot:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eq_PeiNoESNC}
p_{\textrm{e},i}^\textrm{NoE}=\frac{1}{16}\big((2-u_1)^2-u_2^2\big) w_{i,1}+\frac{1}{16}\big((2-u_2)^2-u_1^2\big) w_{i,2}+\frac{1}{4}(u_1+u_2),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
for $ i \in \{1,2\}$, where $u_1=\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k}|B_{1,k}=0,B_{2,k}=0)+\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k}|B_{1,k}=1,B_{2,k}=1)$, $u_2=\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k}|B_{1,k}=0,B_{2,k}=1)+\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R},k}|B_{1,k}=1,B_{2,k}=0)$ can be computed from \eqref{eq_PeRISI} and \eqref{eq_PeR}, and $w_{i,1}$, $w_{i,2}$ are defined in \eqref{eq_E}. This provides a lower bound on the error probability of the SNC scheme. Because, we have $p_{\textrm{e},i}=\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}})+\big(1-2\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}})\big)\mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i})$ from \eqref{eq_Pei}. By ignoring the error propagation we obtain a lower bound on $\mathbb{P}(E^{ \mathsf{T}_i})$. Since $\mathbb{P}(E_{\mathsf{R}})<0.5$, this is a lower bound on $p_{\textrm{e},i}$.
\end{remark}
\section{Simulation and Numerical Results}\label{Simulation}
In this section, we evaluate the performance of the PNC and SNC schemes in terms of the probability of error. We consider the parameters in Table \ref{parameters} (consistent with prior works \cite{aminian1, fekri1}). For the SNC scheme, we consider no, low, and high blocking cases, specified in Table \ref{parameters}, as in \cite{aminian1}. In the no ISI case, we choose $t_s=t_0=1.67~\textrm{s}$ which is the time that the impulse responses of the channels take their maximum. In the ISI case, we assume $t_0=1.67s$ and $t_s$ is chosen such that $\nu_{q+2}=0.05$.
Fig. \ref{fignoISI} shows the Avg-BEP versus $\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_1}=\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_2}=\zeta^\mathsf{R}=\zeta$ for the two schemes without ISI using \eqref{AvgBEP}, \eqref{Peireaction1}, and \eqref{Peitype1} along with the Avg-BEP using simulation. It can be seen that the proposed PNC scheme outperforms the SNC scheme in all blocking cases. This is due to the reduction in the number of the molecules bound to the receptors (thanks to reaction). Also, the simulations confirm the analytical results.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{.43\textwidth}
\centering
\vspace{0pt}
\includegraphics[trim={1cm 0 0 0cm}, scale=0.5]{BEPperNm-noISI-final.eps}
\caption{Average bit error probability with respect to $\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_1}=\zeta^{ \mathsf{T}_2}=\zeta^\mathsf{R}=\zeta$ without ISI.}
\label{fignoISI}
\end{minipage}\quad
\begin{minipage}[t]{.53\textwidth}
\centering
\vspace{0pt}
\captionof{table}{Simulation Parameters}
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{tabular}{p{4.4cm}|l}
\hline
$D_1, D_2, D_3$ & $10^{-9}~\textrm{m}^2/\textrm{s}$\\
$d_1, d_2$ & $100 ~\mu \textrm{m}$\\
$n^{ \mathsf{T}_1}, n^{ \mathsf{T}_2}$ & $500$\\
$n_1^\mathsf{R}, n_2^\mathsf{R}$ & $250$\\
$\gamma_1, \gamma_2,\gamma_3$ & $4 \times 10^5~(\textrm{mol}/\textrm{litre})^{-1}{\textrm{min}}^{-1}$\\
$\eta_1,\eta_2,\eta_3$ & $0.1~{\textrm{min}}^{-1}$\\
${\gamma_1}^{\textrm{Block},2},{\gamma_2}^{\textrm{Block},1}$ (Low Blocking) & $3 \times 10^5~(\textrm{mol}/\textrm{litre})^{-1}{\textrm{min}}^{-1}$\\
${\eta_1}^{\textrm{Block},2}, {\eta_2}^{\textrm{Block},1}$ (Low Blocking)& $0.1~{\textrm{min}}^{-1}$\\
${\gamma_1}^{\textrm{Block},2},{\gamma_2}^{\textrm{Block},1}$ (High Blocking) & $5 \times 10^5~(\textrm{mol}/\textrm{litre})^{-1}{\textrm{min}}^{-1}$\\
${\eta_1}^{\textrm{Block},2}, {\eta_2}^{\textrm{Block},1}$ (High Blocking)& $0.01~{\textrm{min}}^{-1}$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{footnotesize}
\label{parameters}
\end{minipage}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{figISI} shows the Avg-BEP versus the average number of transmitted molecules (i.e., $\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{2}X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^{\textrm{PNC}}=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{2} X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^{\textrm{SNC}}=X_\textrm{avg}$) in the presence of ISI using analysis and simulation along with the Avg-BEP using NoE approximations given in \eqref{eq_PeiNoEPNC} and \eqref{eq_PeiNoESNC} for the channels with memory of $3$. It can be seen that the error performance of the SNC scheme, for which we adopt the existing ISI mitigating techniques, is considerably worse than the error performance of the PNC scheme, for which we propose a reaction-based ISI mitigating technique.
The reason is that in the SNC scheme, using adaptive rate at each transceiver mitigates the ISI only when the message of the transceiver is $1$. But, in the PNC scheme, using adaptive rates at the transceivers mitigates the ISI in all cases of the sent messages. It is also seen that the NoE approximation of error probablity of the PNC scheme is a lower bound.
Fig. \ref{figISIvsq} shows the Avg-BEP versus the channel memory ($q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}=q^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}=q, i=1,2$), in the presence of ISI. Here, we assume $\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{2}X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^{\textrm{PNC}}=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{2} X_{i,\textrm{avg}}^{\textrm{SNC}}=1 \times 10^{-22}~\textrm{mol}$. It can be observed that the error probability increases by channel memory. However, the PNC scheme using the proposed ISI mitigating technique performs much better than the SNC scheme using the existing ISI mitigating techniques.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.47\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={1cm 0 0 0}, scale=0.5]{BEPperNm-q1-adaptiverate-finalG20-final.eps}
\caption{Avg-BEP with respect to the average number of transmitted molecules in the presence of ISI ($q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}=q^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}=3, i=1,2$).}
\label{figISI}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{minipage}\qquad%
\begin{minipage}{0.47\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={1cm 0cm 0cm 0cm}, scale=0.5]{BEPperq-adaptiverate-finalG20.eps}
\caption{Avg-BEP with respect to channel memory ($q^{ \mathsf{T}_i\mathsf{R}}=q^{\mathsf{R} \mathsf{T}_i}=q, i=1,2$), in the presence of ISI ($X_{\textrm{avg}}=1 \times 10^{-22}~\textrm{mol}$).}
\label{figISIvsq}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\section{Concluding Remarks}\label{conclusion}
In this paper, we proposed the physical-layer network coding (PNC) for molecular communication (MC) called the reaction-based PNC scheme, where we used different molecule types, reacting with each other by a fast irreversible reaction. Hence, we constructed a physical-layer XOR in this scheme without requiring an XOR gate at the relay. This results in a simple implementation for the proposed scheme. To mitigate the ISI, we also used the reaction characteristics of the PNC scheme and proposed a reaction-based ISI mitigating technique for this scheme, where each transceiver using its previously decoded messages, cancels out the ISI of the other transceiver using the reaction of molecules. Considering the ligand-receptor binding process at the receivers, we investigated the error probabilities of the straightforward and the proposed network coding schemes. As expected and confirmed by simulations, the reaction-based scheme decreases the overall error probability in two-way relay MC, while having less complexity. Further, the proposed ISI mitigating technique for the PNC scheme has significantly better performance compared to the existing techniques applied to each hop of the system. Our scheme also handled the receptors blocking problem.
\emph{Channel state information (CSI)}:
We assumed that the transceivers know the channel coefficients of both transceivers to the relay channels. This is justified if the nodes have fixed distance, where the channel coefficients can be computed from the diffusion equation. Studying the network coding schemes with limited (or no) CSI is an interesting future work.
\emph{Deterministic model}: We considered the deterministic model for our analysis which ignores the channel noise. In the presence of noise, the derivations would be much more complex but the methods do not change.
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $G$ be a countable group. The Baum-Connes conjecture with coefficients for $G$ (denoted by $BC_{coef}$), proposes that, for every
$C^*$-algebra $A$ on which $G$ acts by automorphisms, the analytical assembly map
$$
\mu_{G,A} : KK_i^G(\underbar {EG}, A) \rightarrow K_i(A\rtimes_ r G) \,\,\,\,\,\, i = 0, 1
$$
is an isomorphism; where $KK_i^G(\underbar{EG}, A)$ denotes the $G$-equivariant K-homology with $G$-compact supports and coefficients in $A$, of the classifying space $\underbar {EG}$ for $G$-proper actions; and
$K_i(A \rtimes_{r} G)$ denotes the analytical K-theory of the reduced crossed product $A \rtimes_{r} G$.
Although $BC_{coef}$ failed to be true in general, it has been proved for several classes of groups. Among them are one-relator groups, see \cite{Oyono}, \cite{Tu}, \cite{BBV}. Furthermore Higson-Kasparov \cite{HK} established $BC_{coef}$ for the class of amenable groups. For $A = \mathbb C$, we come up with the original Baum-Connes conjecture \cite{BC} that was extended by Baum, Connes and Higson \cite{BCH} to the above stronger formulation.
The solvable Baumslag-solitar groups $BS(1, n) = \langle a, b | a b a^{-1} = b^{n}\rangle$ for $n \in\mathbb{Z}\backslash\{0\}$,
are both one-relator and amenable, so are located in the \mbox{intersection} of the two above-mentioned classes. Although $BC_{coef}$ is known for them, it seems interesting to provide in this case an explicit description, with explicit generators, of both sides of the conjecture without coefficients.
So in this paper we give, for the solvable Baumslag-Solitar groups, a direct proof that $\mu_{G,\mathbb{C}}$ is an isomorphism, by identifying the generators of both sides. In Theorem \ref{main} we show that
$$K_0(C^*(BS(1,n)))=\mathbb{Z}.[1]$$ and
$$K_1(C^*(BS(1,n)))=\mathbb{Z}\oplus \mathbb{Z}/|n-1|.\mathbb{Z}, \,\,\, n\neq 1$$
with generators $[a]$ (of infinite order) and $[b]$ (of order $|n-1|$).
To prove this result we view $BS(1,n)$ as a semi-direct by $\mathbb{Z}$, hence $C^*(BS(1,n))$ as a crossed product by $\mathbb{Z}$, and we compute the analytical \mbox{K-groups} of $BS(1, n)$ thanks to the Pimsner-Voiculescu 6-terms exact \mbox{sequence} \cite{PV} \footnote{For $n=-1$, i.e. the Klein bottle group, a computation based on the Pimsner-Voiculescu sequence appears in Proposition 2.1 of \cite{Sudo}, apparently not aware of previous results on the subject.}.
Finally to reach the Baum-Connes conjecture with trivial coefficients for $BS(1,n)$ we appeal to two useful facts: on the one hand for $G$ a torsion-free group we have $K_i^G(\underbar{EG})=K_i(BG)$, the K-homology with compact supports of a classifying space $BG$ for $G$; on the other hand for $G$ one-relator torsion-free, there is a simple 2-dimensional model for $BG$, namely the presentation complex of $G$, see \cite{Lyn}.
\section{The $C^*$-algebra of $BS(1,n)$}
For $n\neq 1$, there is a faithful homomorphism from $BS(1,n)$ to the affine group of the real line, given by:
$$BS(1,n)\rightarrow Aff_1(\mathbb{R}):\left\{\begin{array}{ccll}a & \mapsto & (x\mapsto nx) & \mbox{(dilation by $n$)} \\b & \mapsto & (x\mapsto x+1) & \mbox{(translation by $+1$)}\end{array}\right. .$$
It realizes an isomorphism
$$BS(1,n)\simeq \mathbb{Z}[1/n]\rtimes_\alpha\mathbb{Z},$$
where $\mathbb{Z}[1/n]=\{\frac{m}{n^\ell}\in\mathbb{Q}:m, n\in\mathbb{Z},\ell\in\mathbb{N}\}$, viewed as an additive group; and $\alpha$ is multiplication by $n$.
It is well-known that, if a discrete group $G$ decomposes as a semi-direct product $G=H\rtimes_\alpha\mathbb{Z}$, with $H$ a normal abelian subgroup, then
$$C^*(G)=C^*(H)\rtimes_\alpha\mathbb{Z}=C(\hat{H})\rtimes_{\hat{\alpha}}\mathbb{Z},$$
where $\hat{H}$ denotes the Pontryagin dual of $H$ (so $\hat{H}$ is a compact abelian group), and $\hat{\alpha}$ is the dual automorphism.
In the case of $BS(1,n)$, we have $H=\mathbb{Z}[1/n]$, viewed as the inductive limit of
$$\mathbb{Z}\stackrel{i_0}{\longrightarrow}\mathbb{Z}\stackrel{i_1}{\longrightarrow}\mathbb{Z}\stackrel{i_2}{\longrightarrow}...,$$
where $i_k:\mathbb{Z}\rightarrow\mathbb{Z}$ (for $k\geq 0$) is multiplication by $n$. So $\widehat{i_k}:\mathbb{T}\rightarrow\mathbb{T}$ is raising to the power $n$, and $\hat{H}$ is the projective limit of
$$...\stackrel{\widehat{i_2}}{\longrightarrow}\mathbb{T}\stackrel{\widehat{i_1}}{\longrightarrow}\mathbb{T}\stackrel{\widehat{i_0}}{\longrightarrow}\mathbb{T},$$
which we identify with the solenoid\footnote{Strictly speaking, it is a solenoid only for $|n|>1$, while it is $\mathbb{T}$ for $|n|=1$.}
$$X_n=\{z=(z_k)_{k\geq 0}\in\mathbb{T}^\mathbb{N}: z_{k+1}^n=z_{k},\forall k\geq 0\}.$$
The duality between $X_n$ and $\mathbb{Z}[1/n]$ is given by $(z,m)=z_\ell^m$, where $m$ belongs to the $\ell$-th copy of $\mathbb{Z}$; this is well defined as $(z,i_\ell(m))=z_{\ell+1}^{n.m}=z_\ell^m=(z,m)$. For $\frac{m}{n^\ell}\in\mathbb{Z}[1/n]$, this corresponds to $(z,\frac{m}{n^\ell})=z_\ell^m$ for $z=(z_k)_{k\geq 0}\in X_n$.
The automorphism $\alpha$ is given by $\alpha(m)=i_\ell(m)$, where $m$ lies in the $\ell$-th copy of $\mathbb{Z}$. So $\hat{\alpha}$ is the automorphism of $X_n$ given by the backwards shift: $(\hat{\alpha}(z))_k=z_{k+1}$ for $k\geq 0$.
So $C^*(BS(1, n)) = C(X_n) \rtimes_{\hat \alpha} \mathbb Z $. This crossed product can be viewed as the universal $C^*$-algebra generated by two unitaries $u$ and $v$ satisfying the relation $u v u^{-1} = v^n$, where $u$ is the unitary of $C^*(\mathbb Z)$ corresponding to the generator $+1$ of $\mathbb Z$ acting on $C(X_n)$, while $v\in C(X_n)$ is given by the function $z\mapsto z_0$ on $X_n$. This crossed product description of $C^*(BS(1,n))$ appears already in \cite{BJ,IMSS}.
\begin{Lem}\label{K*(Xn)} $K_0(C(X_n))=\mathbb{Z}.[1]$ (the infinite cyclic group generated by the class of $1\in C(X_n)$) and $K_1(C(X_n))\simeq\mathbb{Z}[1/n]$.
\end{Lem}
{\bf Proof:} We have $C(X_n)=C^*(\mathbb{Z}[1/n])=\varinjlim (C^*(\mathbb{Z}),i_k)$ (where we also denote by $i_k$ the $*$-homomorphism $C^*(\mathbb{Z})\rightarrow C^*(\mathbb{Z})$ associated with the group homomorphism $i_k$). Since K-theory commutes with inductive limits, we get $K_i(C(X_n))=\varinjlim (K_i(C^*(\mathbb{Z})),(i_k)_*)$ ($i=0,1$). Since $K_0(C^*(\mathbb{Z}))=\mathbb{Z}.[1]$ and $i_k$ is a unital $*$-homomorphism, we have \mbox{$K_0(C(X_n))=\varinjlim (\mathbb{Z}.[1],Id)=\mathbb{Z}.[1]$}. On the other hand, let $v$ be the unitary of $C^*(\mathbb{Z})$ corresponding to the generator $+1$ of $\mathbb{Z}$ (so that $K_1(C^*(\mathbb{Z}))=\mathbb{Z}.[v]$). Then $i_k(v)=v^n$, i.e. $(i_k)_*[v]=n[v]$, and the inductive system $(K_1(C^*(\mathbb{Z})),(i_k)_*)$ is isomorphic to the original system $(\mathbb{Z},i_k)$, so they have the same limit $\mathbb{Z}[1/n]$.
\hfill$\square$
\section{K-theory for $C^*(BS(1,n))$}
Let $A$ be a unital $C^*$-algebra and $\alpha \in Aut (A)$. We can define the crossed product $A\rtimes_{\alpha} \mathbb{Z}$ associated with the action $\alpha$ of $\mathbb Z$ on $A$. Let $u \in A\rtimes_{\alpha} {\mathbb Z}$ be the unitary which implements this action in the construction of crossed product. Abstractly the
crossed product $A\rtimes_{\alpha} \mathbb{Z}$ is generated by \mbox{$\{A, u : u a u^* = \alpha(a), a \in A\}$}. The Pimsner-Voiculescu 6-term exact sequence \cite{PV} gives us a tool to calculate the $K$-theory of $A\rtimes_{\alpha} \mathbb{Z}$ via the following cyclic diagram with 6-terms:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ccccc}
K_0(A) & \stackrel{Id-\alpha_*}{\longrightarrow} & K_0(A) & \stackrel{\iota_*}{\longrightarrow} & K_0(A\rtimes_{\alpha} {\mathbb Z}) \\ \partial_1\uparrow & & & & \downarrow \partial_0\\
K_1(A\rtimes_{\alpha} {\mathbb Z}) & \stackrel{\iota_*}{\longleftarrow} & K_1(A) & \stackrel{Id-\alpha_*}{\longleftarrow} & K_1(A)
\end{array}
\end{equation*}
Here $\iota: A\rightarrow A\rtimes_{\alpha}\mathbb{Z}$ denotes inclusion. We will need some \mbox{understanding} of the connecting map $\partial_1$; namely, we observe in the next lemma that $\partial _1 ([u]) = -[1]$. This will help us in later computations.
\begin{Lem}\label{K_1 generator}
The connecting map $\partial_1 \colon K_1(A\rtimes_{\alpha} \mathbb Z) \rightarrow K_0(A)$ maps $[u]$ to $-[1]$.
\end{Lem}
{\bf Proof:} Let $C^*(S)$ be the $C^*$-algebra generated by a non-unitary isometry $S$ and let $P = I - S^*S$. Now $\mathcal T_{\mathrm{A}, {\alpha}}$, the Toeplitz algebra for $A$ and $\alpha$, is the $C^*$-subalgebra of $(A\rtimes_{\alpha} \mathbb Z)\otimes C^*(S)$ generated by $u \otimes S$ and $A\otimes I$. Let $\mathcal K$ be the $C^*$-algebra of compact operators on a separable Hilbert space, with the corresponding system of matrix units $( e_{ij})_{i,j \geq 0}$. Consider the Toeplitz extension associated with $A\rtimes_{\alpha} \mathbb Z $ as in \cite{PV}:
\begin{equation*}
0
\rightarrow
A \otimes \ \mathcal{K}
\stackrel{\varphi}{\rightarrow}
\mathcal T_{\mathrm{A}, {\alpha}} \stackrel{\psi}{\rightarrow}
\mathrm A \rtimes \mathbb Z
\rightarrow
0,
\end{equation*}
with
$\varphi (a \otimes e_{ij}) = u^i a u^{*^{j}} \otimes S^i P S^{* ^j}$ and $$\psi (u \otimes S) = u, \hspace{15pt} \psi (a \otimes I) = a$$ for any $a \in A $ and $i, j \in \mathbb N$.
The map $\partial_1 \colon K_1(A\rtimes_{\alpha} \mathbb Z) \rightarrow K_0(A\otimes\mathcal{K})$ is then the boundary map \mbox{associated} with the Toeplitz extension, we compute $\partial_1([u])$ following the description given in \cite{Black}, 8.3.1. Consider first
$
\left (
\begin{array}{cc}
u & 0 \\
0 & u^*
\end{array}
\right )
$.
This matrix can be lifted via $\psi$ to a matrix
$
M =
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
u\otimes S & 1\otimes P \\
0 & u^*\otimes S^*
\end{array}
\right)
$,
where $M\in \mathrm U_{2}(\mathcal{T}_{A, \alpha}) $.
For $p_1 := (1\otimes I) \oplus 0 \in \mathrm M_2(\mathcal T_{A, \alpha})$ we have
\begin{equation*}
Mp_1M^* - p_1
=
(1 \otimes SS^* - 1 \otimes I) \oplus 0
=
(-1 \otimes P ) \oplus 0
.
\end{equation*}
The pullback of this element via $\varphi$ is
$z := (-1 \otimes e_{00}) \oplus 0 \in \mathrm M_2(A \otimes \mathcal K).$ So $\partial_1([u])=-[-z]$.
Via the isomorphism
$K_0(A \otimes \mathcal K) \cong K_0 (A)$
, the element
$[-z] = [1 \otimes e_{00}]$
corresponds to $[1]$.
Hence
$\partial_1 ([u]) = -[1].$
\hfill$\square$
\begin{Thm}\label{main} $K_0(C^*(BS(1,n)))=\mathbb{Z}.[1]$. For $n\neq 1$:
$$K_1(C^*(BS(1,n)))=\mathbb{Z}\oplus \mathbb{Z}/|n-1|.\mathbb{Z},$$
with generators $[a]$ (of infinite order) and $[b]$ (of order $|n-1|$).
\end{Thm}
{\bf Proof:} We view $C^*(BS(1,n))$ as the crossed product $C^*(BS(1,n))=C^*(\mathbb{Z}[1/n])\rtimes_\alpha\mathbb{Z}$, and apply the Pimsner-Voiculescu 6-terms exact sequence to it. Denoting by the $\iota:C^*(\mathbb{Z}[1/n])\rightarrow C^*(BS(1,n))$ the inclusion, and appealing to lemma \ref{K*(Xn)}, we get:
$$ \begin{array}{ccccc}\mathbb{Z}.[1] & \stackrel{Id-\alpha_*}{\longrightarrow} & \mathbb{Z}.[1] & \stackrel{\iota_*}{\longrightarrow} & K_0(C^*(BS(1,n))) \\ \partial_1\uparrow & & & & \downarrow \\K_1(C^*(BS(1,n))) & \stackrel{\iota_*}{\longleftarrow} & \mathbb{Z}[1/n] & \stackrel{Id-\alpha_*}{\longleftarrow} & \mathbb{Z}[1/n]\end{array}$$
Since $\alpha(1)=1$, the upper-left arrow is the zero map. The bottom-right arrow is given by multiplication by $1-n$ on $\mathbb{Z}[1/n]$, so it is injective, hence the right vertical arrow is zero. This shows that $\iota_*:\mathbb{Z}.[1]\rightarrow K_0(C^*(BS(1,n)))$ is an isomorphism.
Turning to $K_1$, we observe that the relation $[b]=[aba^{-1}]=[b^n]$ implies $(n-1).[b]=0$, i.e. the order of $[b]$ divides $|n-1|$. To prove that this is exactly $|n-1|$, we look at the bottom line of the Pimsner-Voiculescu sequence. Since $\mathbb{Z}[1/n]/Im(Id-\alpha_*)=\mathbb{Z}/|n-1|.\mathbb{Z}$, we get a short exact sequence:
$$0\rightarrow\mathbb{Z}/|n-1|.\mathbb{Z}\rightarrow K_1(C^*(BS(1,n)))\stackrel{\partial_1}{\rightarrow} \mathbb{Z}.[1]\rightarrow 0.$$
which splits to give $K_1(C^*(BS(1,n)))=\mathbb{Z}\oplus \mathbb{Z}/|n-1|.\mathbb{Z}$, with $[b]$ a generator of order $|n-1|$. Since $\partial_1 ([a])=-[1]$ by lemma \ref{K_1 generator}, we see that $[a]$ is a generator of infinite order.
\hfill$\square$
\begin{Cor}\label{BC} Set $G_n=:BS(1,n)$. For $n\neq 1$, the Baum-Connes conjecture without coefficients holds for $G_n$, i.e. the Baum-Connes assembly map \mbox{$\mu_{G_n,\mathbb{C}}:K_i(BG_n)\rightarrow K_i(C^*(G_n))\;(i=0,1)$} is an isomorphism.
\end{Cor}
{\bf Proof:} We appeal to a result of Lyndon \cite{Lyn}: for a torsion-free one-relator group $G=<S|r>$ on $m$ generators, the presentation complex (consisting of one vertex, $m$ edges and one 2-cell) is a 2-dimensional model for the classifying space $BG$. By lemma 4 in \cite{BBV}:
$$K_0(BG)=H_0(BG,\mathbb{Z})\oplus H_2(BG,\mathbb{Z})\;and\;K_1(BG)=H_1(BG,\mathbb{Z}).$$
Moreover $H_2(BG,\mathbb{Z})=0$ when $r$ is not in the commutator subgroup of the free group on $S$. This applies to $G_n$, as we assume $n\neq 1$.
Then $K_0(BG_n)=H_0(BG_n,\mathbb{Z})=\mathbb{Z}$, generated by the inclusion of a base point. By Example 2.11 on p.97 of \cite{MV}, the image of this element under $\mu_{G_n,\mathbb{C}}$ is $[1]$, the class of $1$ in $K_0(C^*(G_n))$. The result for $K_0$ then follows from Theorem \ref{main}.
Now, for any group $G$, identify $H_1(BG,\mathbb{Z})$ with the abelianized group $G^{ab}$. There is a map $\kappa_{G}:G^{ab}\rightarrow K_1(C_r^*(G))$ obtained by mapping a group element $g\in G$ first to the corresponding unitary in $C_r^*(G)$, then to the class $[g]$ of this unitary in $K_1(C_r^*(G))$. We get this way a homomorphism $G\rightarrow K_1(C^*_r(G))$, which descends to $\kappa_G:G^{ab}\rightarrow K_1(C^*_r(G))$ as the latter group is abelian. By Theorem 1.4 on p.86 of \cite{MV}, for $G$ torsion-free, the map $\kappa_G$ coincides with $\mu_{G,\mathbb{C}}$ on the lowest-dimensional part of $K_1(BG)$. Here, $\mu_{G_n,\mathbb{C}}:K_1(BG_n)\rightarrow K_1(C^*(G_n))$ coincides with $\kappa_{G_n}:G_n^{ab}=\mathbb{Z}\oplus\mathbb{Z}/|n-1|.\mathbb{Z}\rightarrow K_1(C^*(G_n))$, which is an isomorphism by Theorem \ref{main}.
\hfill$\square$
\begin{Rem}
Let $\tau : C^*(BS(1, n)) \rightarrow \mathbb C$ be the canonical trace on
$ C^*(BS(1, n))$. This induces the homomorphism
$\tau _* : K_0( C^*(BS(1, n))) \rightarrow \mathbb R$
at the K-theory level. Since $\tau$ is unital, by Theorem \ref{main} we have $\tau_*(K_0( C^*(BS(1, n)))) = \mathbb Z$.
\end{Rem}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Over the past thirty years, a number of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) have been developed.
In reactive protocols such as AODV~\cite{aodv} and DSR~\cite{dsr}, routes are set up on demand via route request packets. Proactive protocols, such as OLSR~\cite{olsr}, maintain routes to destinations by periodically disseminating routing information throughout the network. Reactive protocols generally perform better in mobile scenarios, but can have high latencies and introduce high traffic overhead during route setup. Hybrid protocols, such as ZRP~\cite{zrp}, attempt to combine the features of the reactive and proactive approaches. The aforementioned protocols do not scale to networks with large numbers of nodes, e.g., in the thousands or several thousands.
Recently, MANET routing protocols based on routing schemes for distributed hash tables (DHTs) have been proposed. DHT-based MANET routing protocols are interesting for several reasons. First is their scalability properties achieved by creating a special network structure and reducing the routing table size. Second is their robustness relative to clustering-based approaches. In clustering-based protocols, nodes are divided into groups, which are subsequently split into smaller groups~\cite{Hong}. Although, such an approach can be scalable to larger networks, critical nodes for controlling clusters~\cite{Hong} and dynamic addresses \cite{Hong,dart,ntk} are used, which may compromise the stability of the network.
DHT-based routing, however, often suffers from the mismatch problem resulting in a high path stretch\footnote{The path stretch is defined as $ \frac{{\rm len}(a,b)}{{\rm dist}(a,b)} $, where ${\rm len}(a,b)$ is the route length between nodes $a$ and $b$ found by the routing protocol and ${\rm dist}(a,b)$ is the length of the shortest path between $a$ and $b$. The length of a path can be measured as either the latency or the number of hops}. In such networks, every node has its own logical identifier (LID) and also stores information about a portion of other nodes with certain LIDs, such that any node should be able to send information to any other node. Because in such networks routing is done on top of the logical structure and the logical addresses do not necessarily correspond to the physical locations, the number of physical hops through which data traverses is often far from optimal \cite{Abid}.
A number of interesting solutions have been proposed for minimizing the path stretch. For example, the Virtual Ring Routing protocol builds a virtual ring where nodes are ordered according to their LIDs~\cite{VRR}. Each node maintains a record of a constant number of nodes with closest addresses and paths to them. When routing data, the next hop with the closest address to the destination's identifier is chosen. The guarantee of constant path stretch relies on the fact that each node knows a total of $O(\sqrt{N})$ nodes (where $N$ is the total number of nodes in the network). Hence, the probability that a node will know a route to the destination is $O(\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}})$, and the expected number of traversed nodes is $O(\sqrt{N})$~\cite{VRR}. Given that the average distance in a wireless ad hoc network is also $O(\sqrt{N})$~\cite{Kleinrock}, the path stretch is constant. Another approach is taken by the 3D~routing protocol, which ensures good path stretch properties by embedding the node LIDs into a 3-dimensional space~\cite{3drp}. Thus, forwarding data is as simple as sending it in the ``right direction.'' Both approaches, however, fail to deal with the network mobility and merging/splitting operations.
The Binary Multi-Level Routing Protocol (BMLRP) proposed in this paper is closest in approach to the recent KDSR~\cite{kdsr} and URBAN\_XOR~\cite{Pasquini} protocols, which employ a Kademlia DHT~\cite{kademlia} inspired approach for building the network structure. Each node maintains $n$ buckets for storing information about other nodes with address prefixes equal to the node's address prefix. When routing information to any node, the next hop with the longest matching prefix is chosen from among the $n$~buckets. Path efficiency in URBAN\_XOR~is achieved by employing the concept of local visibility, which prioritizes physically close nodes in the routing table. Maintaining such network structure ensures small path stretch, limits protocol overhead and supports mobility better than other routing approaches do~\cite{urbanxor}.
The URBAN\_XOR\ protocol, however, has several drawbacks. The most prominent one is the absence of a guarantee that if two nodes are indirectly connected they are able to communicate \cite{Pasquini}. Another objection is the slow method of acquiring paths to other nodes, which still tends to generate much overhead traffic in mobile scenarios. The proposed BMLRP protocol is a proactive routing protocol that aims to solve both problems altogether.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section~\ref{sec:urbanxor} describes the URBAN\_XOR\ routing protocol in more detail. Section~\ref{sec:bmlrp} introduces BMLRP, which overcomes the major drawbacks of URBAN\_XOR.
Section~\ref{sec:analysis} discusses routing properties of the new approach.
Section~\ref{sec:conclusion} concludes the paper.
\section{URBAN\_XOR}
\label{sec:urbanxor}
In the URBAN\_XOR\ protocol each node has a unique permanent $n$-bit identifier that is randomly generated before connecting to the network. The routing table of every node is organized into $n$ buckets, each of size $K$. We will denote $l(a,b)$ as a function of two addresses. The value of $l(a,b)$ is the length of the longest common prefix of $a$ and $b$. For instance, $l(01100, 01000) = 2$ because the biggest common prefix is $01$. When a node $a$ discovers a new neighbor $b$, identifier $b$ is added to the bucket number $l(a,b)$ of node $a$.
After the node connects to its direct (both physical and virtual) neighbors, it starts filling the $n$ buckets by asking for missing nodes. When a new node is discovered, an abstract virtual link is built to it. Thus, multi-hop routes in the physical space are stored in a reduced form. At the same time nodes passively overhear the traffic to find new routes without loading the network. The local visibility concept ensures that the impact of any update in the network is limited by close nodes.
Similarly to Kademlia DHT \cite{kademlia}, when node $a$ is routing data to $b$, the first node selects an address $c$ from its routing table such that $l(c,b) > l(a,b)$. Because each next node that forwards the data has longer common prefix with the destination, the data eventually arrives. For this to be always true, each node in the network must have at least one entry in each bucket if an appropriate identifier exists. The URBAN\_XOR\ protocol, however, might maintain empty buckets and thus fail to satisfy this property~\cite{Pasquini}.
\section{The Proposed Protocol: BMLRP}
\label{sec:bmlrp}
Consider a node with a unique permanent $n$-bit address $a$, similarly to URBAN\_XOR. We say that all nodes $b$ in the network form a level-$i$ network with respect to $a$ if $l(a,b) \ge i$. We also refer to level-$i$ nodes as the nodes from the level-$i$ network with respect to $a$. The level-$i$ routing table of $a$ denotes a graph containing all visible level-$i$ nodes of $a$. For instance, the level-0 network will contain all nodes, which is also defined as the \emph{physical network}. The level-3 network will contain all nodes that have the first 3 bits equal to the first 3 bits of $a$. Because we assume all identifiers are distributed evenly, the number of level-3 nodes will be approximately 8 times smaller than the physical network size. As a general rule, the level-$i$ network contains approximately $\frac{N}{2^i}$ nodes, where $N$ is the size of the physical network.
After a node joins the physical network, it starts creating virtual links to the nearby level-1 nodes. In a sense, it connects to them the same way it connects to its physical neighbors. We now abstractly consider a level-1 network similarly to a level-0 network according
to all of its properties. The idea is to ascend levels up to the point where the number of visible level-$m$ nodes is equal to the total number of all level-$m$ nodes.
\input{fig-bmlrp-routes.tex}
When node $a$ is routing data to node $d$, it will choose the closest next hop $b$ such that $l(b,d) > l(a,d)$. In other words, the first bit that is not equal between $a$ and $d$ must be equal between $b$ and $d$. Similarly to Kademlia DHT and URBAN\_XOR, each new node routing traffic has a longer common prefix with $d$, thus avoiding loops. To communicate with same-level nodes, source routing is used. Assuming $a$ sees $b$ in its level-$i$ routing table, it prepends path $c_1$--$c_2$--...--$c_k$--$b$ ($c_j$ are level-$i$ nodes) to the packet and sends the data to $c_1$ which in turn will forward it according to the given path. Sending the packet to $c_1$ involves routing on an underlying level-$j$ network ($j < i$). Similarly, a new path of level-$j$ nodes is prepended, as well as, paths for all underlying networks. Given that nodes' addresses are distributed uniformly, the number of levels and the length of the source routing prefix is bounded by the logarithm of the total number of nodes. A real implementation will not include full $n$-bit addresses in the source routing prefix, but the details are omitted here.
For simplicity, from now on we will label a level-$i$ node white if the $(i+1)$-th bit of its address is 0; otherwise the node is black. Figure~\ref{fig:bmlrp-routing} shows a simplified example of routing data from 11100 to 01000, with subfigures demonstrating different levels of the network with respect to the destination. The blue nodes denote the routing nodes; the red node on each level indicates the destination. Bold entries indicate nodes and links known by the routing node. The journey starts on the physical level depicted by Figure~\ref{fig:bmlrp-routing-l0}. The source and destination nodes differ in the first bit, therefore 11100 transmits the data to a close physical white node -- 01100. Figure~\ref{fig:bmlrp-routing-l1} shows the level-1 network with respect to the destination, where the routing node is now 01100. Node 01100 chooses the next hop $b$ such that $l(b, 01000) > l(01100, 01000) = 2$; $b$ equals 01010. When node 01010 receives the message, it will find the destination address in its level-3 routing table
and will route the data through an intermediate level-3 node.
\begin{defn}
We say that nodes $a$ and $b$ are connected in level-$i$ network if $a$ and $b$ send information about close level-$i$ nodes and edges to each other, including those returned by Algorithm~\ref{alg:routes}.
\label{defn:connected}
\end{defn}
For each edge sent by node $a$ to its connected level-$i$ neighbor $b$, a sequence of level-$i$ nodes $c_1$--$c_2$--$c_3$--...--$c_k$ must be included, where $c_1$ and $c_2$ (or $c_1$ and $a$ if there is no $c_2$) are the nodes incident to the edge and $c_2$--$c_3$--...-$c_k$--$a$--$b$ is the path through which the edge was transmitted from $c_2$ to $b$. Node $a$ must choose the shortest such path $c_1$--$c_2$--...--$c_k$ and ensure that no $c_j$ equals $b$. Records of the paths contain shortcuts from a previously defined dictionary instead of full $n$-bit identifiers.
When node $b$ has just connected to $a$ in level-$i$ network, $a$ will send a subset of close level-$i$ nodes and edges to $b$. For any update in $a$'s level-$i$ routing table, $a$ will calculate a new subset of close nodes and edges and send an update to $b$ -- the difference between the new subset and the old subset. This way, the overhead is kept low and, unlike in URBAN\_XOR, all necessary information is propagated reactively, making convergence fast. Each node combines graphs received from its level-$i$ neighbors and forms a new graph $G$, also called the level-$i$ routing table.
We will now examine which nodes and edges must be propagated by each node in order to satisfy the connectivity requirement. Assume all nodes in Algorithm~\ref{alg:routes} are level-$i$ nodes.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Include necessary routes}
\label{alg:routes}
\begin{itemize}
\item For each connected neighbor $b$, node $a$ constructs a graph $G_b$ by merging the graphs received from all of its neighbors except $b$ and adding all direct edges to these neighbors, and adding the edge $a$--$b$. Node $a$ then calculates a subset $G_{outb}$ of $G_b$ defined as follows.
\item Consider every path $b$--$a$--$c_1$--$c_2$--...--$c_k$--$d$ in $G_b$; call this path ${\mathcal{P}}$ (all nodes in ${\mathcal{P}}$ are different). Without loss of generality, let $a$ be white. All nodes and edges of ${\mathcal{P}}$ will be included in $G_{outb}$ if all of the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $d$ is black ,
\item $c_j$ are white ($1 \le j \le k$) ,
\item for any $c_j$ there is no black node $f$ in $G_b$, such that the distance
from $f$ to $c_j$ is smaller than the distance
from $c_j$ to $d$ in ${\mathcal{P}}$ and the distance from $c_j$ to $b$ in ${\mathcal{P}}$.
\end{enumerate}
\item Exclude node $b$ from $G_{outb}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{algorithm}
Figure~\ref{fig:bmlrp-routes} shows an example in which nodes only propagate edges returned by Algorithm~\ref{alg:routes}. Node~0 connects to nodes~1 and 4. By Algorithm~\ref{alg:routes}, node 1's graph $G_0$ is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:bmlrp-routes-nb1}. Paths that will be included in $G_{out0}$ are 0--1--5--4, 0--1--5--6, 0--1--2--6. Path 0--1--2--3--7 will not be included because the distance from 6 to 2 is shorter than both paths 0--1--2 and 2--3--7. Figure~\ref{fig:bmlrp-routes-nb2} shows a similar graph of node 4. Here, the only 2 paths satisfying the requirement are 0--4--5 and 0--4--8. Node~0 combines the information received from nodes 1 and 4, and forms a routing table $G$ depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:bmlrp-routes-visible}.
To ensure connectivity between any two nodes in the network, it is sufficient to make every same-color node in level-$i$ graph $G$ a neighbor on level~$(i+1)$. It can be foreseen, however, that this will lead to big routing tables on higher levels. Therefore, a more restrictive approach is needed. Algorithm~\ref{alg:connect} characterizes which nodes are necessary to connect to in order to satisfy the connectivity requirement. Node $a$ indicates the current node. The graph $G$ is assumed to be a level-$i$ routing table of $a$.
The procedure connect$(x)$ indicates that $x$ will become a level-$(i+1)$ neighbor of $a$. Function bit$(x, l)$ returns the $(i + l)$-th bit of node $x$'s address, assuming the first bit is numbered~0, and XOR$(c, d)$ denotes bitwise exclusive OR.
Without loss of generality, assume $a$ is black in level-$i$ network.
\input{fig-bmlrp-connect.tex}
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Connect node $a$ to necessary nodes}
\label{alg:connect}
\begin{itemize}
\item connect$(b)$ for all black level-$i$ neighbors $b$ of $a$.
\item For every white level-$i$ neighbor $b$ of $a$:
let $s$ be the set of all black neighbors of $b$, execute ConnectInside$(s, 0)$.
\item Consider every path ${\mathcal{P}} = $ $a$--$b$--$c_1$--$c_2$--...--$c_k$--$d$ in $G$. \\
connect($d$) if all of the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $d$ is black ,
\item $b$ and $c_j$ ($1 \le j \le k$) are white ,
\item $c_j$ ($1 \le j < k$) do not have black neighbors ,
\item for any $c_j$ ($1 \le j \le k$) there is no black node $f$ in $G$, such that the distance
from $f$ to $c_j$ is smaller than the distance
from $c_j$ to $d$ in ${\mathcal{P}}$ and the distance from $c_j$ to $a$ in ${\mathcal{P}}$ ,
\item choose a black neighbor $e_1$ of $b$ and a black neighbor $e_2$ of $c_k$,
such that XOR$(e_1, e_2)$ is minimized.
$e_1$ equals $a$
\end{enumerate}
\end{itemize}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Procedure{ConnectInside}{${\rm nodes}, l$}
\State ${\rm white} \gets \{x \in {\rm nodes}: {\rm bit}(x, l) = 0\}$
\State ${\rm black} \gets \{x \in {\rm nodes}: {\rm bit}(x, l) = 1\}$
\If {${\rm white} = \emptyset$ \textbf{or} ${\rm black} = \emptyset$}
\State \textbf{return}
\EndIf
\State $w,b \gets \argmin_{x \in {\rm white}, y \in {\rm black}}{\rm XOR}(x, y)$
\If {${\rm bit}(a, l) = 0$}
\If {$w = a$}
\State connect($b$)
\EndIf
\State ConnectInside(${\rm white}$, $l + 1$)
\Else
\If {$b = a$}
\State connect($w$)
\EndIf
\State ConnectInside(${\rm black}$, $l + 1$)
\EndIf
\EndProcedure
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Figure~\ref{fig:bmlrp-connect} illustrates Algorithm~\ref{alg:connect} (solid edges show level-$i$ links, dashed edges indicate level-$(i+1)$ connections). First, note how black neighbors of white nodes are organized into trees. Additionally, some black nodes are chosen to connect to distant black nodes. For instance, nodes~4 and 6 are connected, and nodes~2 and 14 are connected.
So far we have only discussed which nodes are necessary to connect to. A real implementation will, however, try to maintain a constant number of closest neighbors on each level. This assumption will be necessary for
the analysis in Section~\ref{sec:analysis:stretch}.
\section{Analysis}
\label{sec:analysis}
\subsection{Absence of Stale Routes}
\label{sec:analysis:staleroutes}
To guarantee the connectivity between any two nodes, assuming network convergence, we need to be certain that the protocol will not send data through a non-existing edge. Suppose, node $c_k$ has learned about edge $c_1$--$c_2$ from node $c_{k-1}$. As explained earlier, a record of this edge contains path ${\mathcal{P}} = $ $c_1$--$c_2$--...--$c_{k-2}$ through which the edge has been sent to $c_{k-1}$ and then to $c_k$. In case some $c_j$ and $c_{j+1}$ ($1 \le j < k$) disconnect, $c_{j+1}$ eliminates a record of the edge, and if $j+1 < k$, sends an update to $c_{j+2}$. Eventually, $c_k$ receives an update after which it removes the record of edge $c_1$--$c_2$ containing path ${\mathcal{P}}$.
Hence for every record of an edge, the path recorded will not contain any broken edges. When any two nodes disconnect, this event will be propagated through every such path, and the edge will be removed from the memory of all nodes.
\subsection{Connectivity}
\label{sec:analysis:connectivity}
Theorems~\ref{thm:connectivity-levels} and \ref{thm:connectivity-colors} establish
two important connectivity properties maintained by the proposed protocol.
\begin{thm}
Let a level-$i$ network be a connected graph. Then, the level-$(i+1)$ network is also a connected graph.
\begin{IEEEproof}
\normalfont Assume, the level-$(i+1)$ graph is not connected (1). Now, let $c_0$ and $d$ be nodes from two distinct graph components in level-$(i+1)$ graph, such that the distance from $c_0$ to $d$ in level-$i$ network is minimized (2). Also, without loss of generality assume $c_0$ and $d$ are black on level~$i$. If $c_0$ and $d$ are neighbors on level~$i$, by Algorithm~\ref{alg:connect} they are connected on level~$(i+1)$ and this contradicts (1). Otherwise, let ${\mathcal{P}} = $ $c_0$--$c_1$--...--$c_k$--$d$ be a shortest path from $c_0$ to $d$ in level-$i$ network. By the assumption (2), nodes $c_j$ ($1 \le j \le k$) are white.
Assume, node $c_0$ does not know some edge in ${\mathcal{P}}$. Then, by Algorithm~\ref{alg:routes} some node $c_j$ ($1 \le j \le k$) does not forward this information to $c_{j-1}$ because it knows such black node $f$ that the distance from $f$ to $c_t$ (for some $j < t \le k$) is shorter than the distance from $d$ to $c_t$ in ${\mathcal{P}}$ and the distance from $c_t$ to $c_{j-1}$ in ${\mathcal{P}}$. If $c_t$ is not connected to either $c_0$ or $d$ on level~$(i+1)$, then this must contradict the minimality defined in (2). Otherwise, if $c_t$ is connected to both $c_0$ and $d$ on level~$(i+1)$, $c_0$ and $d$ must be from the same graph component in level-$(i+1)$ graph and this also contradicts (2). Hence, $c_0$ knows the whole ${\mathcal{P}}$.
Similarly, $c_0$ also knows edges from $c_{k-1}$ to all black neighbors of $c_{k-1}$, $d$ knows ${\mathcal{P}}$, $d$ knows edges from $c_1$ to all black neighbors of $c_1$. By Algorithm~\ref{alg:connect} some black neighbor of $c_1$ must be connected to some black neighbor of $d$. However, all black neighbors of $c_1$ form a connected level-$(i+1)$ graph and all black neighbors of $d$ form a connected level-$(i+1)$ graph. Hence, $c_0$ and $d$ are in the same graph component in the level-$(i+1)$ network.
\end{IEEEproof}
\label{thm:connectivity-levels}
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}
Let a level-$i$ network be a connected graph. Then, every node in this network must know at least one level-$i$ node of the opposite color, if such exists.
\begin{IEEEproof}
\normalfont Suppose, node $a$ does not know any node of the opposite color. Without loss of generality, let $a$ be black. Now, let $d$ be a white node, such that the distance from $a$ to $d$ in level-$i$ network is minimized. By this assumption, all nodes $c_j$ along a shortest path $a$--$c_1$--$c_2$--...--$c_k$--$d$ must be black. Similarly to the previous proof, $a$ must know a path to $d$, which contradicts the original assumption.
\end{IEEEproof}
\label{thm:connectivity-colors}
\end{thm}
Given the discussion in Section~\ref{sec:analysis:staleroutes} and Theorems~\ref{thm:connectivity-levels}~and~\ref{thm:connectivity-colors}, we are able to say that a node $a$ will always be able to forward a data packet with destination $d$ to the next hop $b$, such that $l(b,d) > l(a,d)$, satisfying the connectivity requirement.
\subsection{Path stretch}
\label{sec:analysis:stretch}
We will now roughly estimate the path stretch of the proposed protocol. Each data packet is routed on (possibly not all) level-0, level-1, ..., level-$k$ networks with respect to the destination until it finally reaches the destination. We assume equal properties across all levels 0, ..., $k - 1$, including each node maintaining a constant number of closest neighbors on each level.
The path stretch when routing data over a level-$(i+1)$ network has to be some constant multiple $q$ ($q \ge 1$) of the stretch when routing data over a level-$i$ network. Because $C_0\sqrt{N}$ is the average distance in a wireless network of $N$ identical uniformly placed nodes~\cite{Kleinrock} and level-$i$ nodes only route data to close level-$i$ nodes with longer common address prefix with destination, the distance in the physical network between the two nodes must be proportional to $\sqrt{2^i}$. We also know that the maximum level $k$ over which data is routed is less than $\log_2N$. We now find the average number of traversed hops:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
{\rm hops} & = C \left (1 + \sqrt{2} q + \sqrt{2^2} q^2 + ... + \sqrt{2^{k-1}} q^{k-1} + \sqrt{N} q^k \right ) \\
& < C \left( (\sqrt{2} q)^{k-1} \sum_{i = 0}^{\infty} (\sqrt{2}q)^{-i} + \sqrt{N} q^k \right ) \\
& < C \left ( \sqrt{N} q^k \frac{\sqrt{2} q}{\sqrt{2}q - 1} + \sqrt{N} q^k \right ) \\
& < C \left ( \frac{2\sqrt{2}q - 1}{\sqrt{2}q - 1} \right ) \sqrt{N} q^{\log_2 N} \\
& = C \left ( \frac{2\sqrt{2}q - 1}{\sqrt{2}q - 1} \right ) N^{\frac{1}{2} + \log_2 q} .
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Thus, an upper bound for the average number of hops is given by
\begin{equation*}
O({\rm hops}) = O \left ( N^{\frac{1}{2} + \log_2 q} \right ) .
\end{equation*}
Dividing by $\sqrt{N}$, we find the upper bound for the average path stretch:
\begin{equation*}
O({\rm stretch}) = O \left ( N^{\log_2 q} \right ) .
\end{equation*}
For example, when each new level increases the path stretch by 10\%, we have $O({\rm stretch}) \approx O \left ( \sqrt[7]{N} \right )$ and $O({\rm hops}) \approx O \left ( N^{0.64} \right )$, which can be considered scalable in many situations.
Communication between level-$i$ neighbors might be done over underlying level-$(i-1)$, level-$(i-2)$, level-$(i-3)$, ... networks, depending on the number of visible nodes on each level. Hence, increasing the routing tables decreases the constant $q$, and the upper bounds for average number of hops and stretch also decrease asymptotically.
\subsection{Average node degree}
\label{sec:analysis:nodedegree}
Despite several advantages, BMLRP does not guarantee that the routing table sizes for higher level networks remain low. To analyze this aspect, we implemented\footnote{\url{https://github.com/aszinovyev/bmlrp-simple}} and tested Algorithms~\ref{alg:routes} and \ref{alg:connect} on a static network to track the average degree of nodes across each level.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:degrees}, the black line shows the simulation result on $2^{14}$ identical nodes uniformly distributed in a square area. Note that the average number of neighbors first stabilizes around the value~6 and then continues decreasing as the network level $i$ grows. Additionally, we randomly connected 1\%, 5\% and 10\% nodes in the network independently of their coordinates. The blue, orange and red lines show that when random long-range edges are added, the higher level networks become close world networks and the number of mandatory connections fails to decrease. The impact, however, is small; the red line demonstrates that even when 10\% of the nodes are randomly connected, the average number of level-$i$ neighbors in the network does not exceed 21 for $2^{14}$ nodes.
\begin{figure}[H]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{degrees}
\caption{Average node degree vs.\ network level~$i$.}
\label{fig:degrees}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We have developed BMLRP, a new proactive DHT-based routing protocol for MANETs, which has several important features in comparison to previous protocols: scalability, guaranteed connectivity assuming network convergence, absence of single points of failure, low path stretch, and mobility. The proposed BMLRP protocol has a similar setup to the URBAN\_XOR\ protocol~\cite{Pasquini}, which employs a Kademlia DHT~\cite{kademlia} inspired approach for building the network structure. Unlike the URBAN\_XOR\ protocol, however, BMLRP guarantees that if two nodes are indirectly connected they are able to communicate. Furthermore, the proposed protocol generates lower overhead traffic and converges faster than URBAN\_XOR\ in mobile scenarios.
Connectivity properties of the proposed protocol were proven, and growth rates of the path stretch and number of hops for routes were given. The average node degree as a function of the network level $i$ was studied numerically. In ongoing work, we are implementing the protocol using ns-3 to evaluate path~stretch, overhead, delivery ratio and other properties through simulation.
|
\section{Introduction}
The narrow-line Seyfert galaxy {PG1211+143}\ is widely associated with ultra-fast, highly ionized outflows (UFOs), since the first detection in a non-BAL (broad absorption line) AGN (active galactic nucleus) of
strongly blue-shifted absorption lines of highly ionized gas, corresponding to a sub-relativistic outflow velocity of 0.15$\pm$0.01c (Pounds {et al.}\ 2003, Pounds and Page 2006). Archival data from {\it XMM-Newton}\
and {\it Suzaku}\ have since shown similar UFOs are relatively common in nearby, luminous AGN (Tombesi {et al.}\ 2010, 2011; Gofford {et al.}\ 2013).
The frequency of these detections confirms a substantial covering factor - and hence significant mass and momentum in such winds,with the potential to disrupt star formation in the host galaxy.
That realisation has led to the view (e.g. King 2003, 2010) that powerful AGN winds could explain the remarkable correlation of the supermassive black hole mass and the
velocity dispersion of the host galaxy's stellar bulge in a wide range of galaxies, the so-called M--$\sigma$ relation (Ferrarese and Merritt 2000, Gebhardt {et al.}\ 2000).
It is noteworthy that the great majority of UFO detections (defined in Tombesi {et al.}\ 2010 with an outflow velocity v $\geq$ 10000 km s$^{-1}$; 0.03c) are based on blue-shifted absorption lines being
identified with resonance transitions in Fe XXV and XXVI ions. The high ionization state has made absorption features difficult to detect in the soft x-ray region covered by higher
resolution grating spectrometers on {\it XMM-Newton}\ and {\it Chandra}. A recent exception came from a re-analysis of the 2001 Reflection Grating Spectrometer (RGS: den Herder 2001) data of {PG1211+143}, where a
wavelength-to-velocity transformation was used to combine Lyman-$\alpha$ absorption lines of several lower mass ions, finding compelling evidence for a soft x-ray UFO, with a Doppler-corrected velocity
v$\sim$0.076c, a factor $\sim$2 less than that for the highly ionized flow (Pounds 2014). That lower velocity was confirmation of a second ionized
absorption component required in a partial covering analysis of the combined 2001, 2004 and 2007 {\it XMM-Newton}\ broad band spectra of {PG1211+143}\ (Pounds and Reeves 2009), where modelling of continuum curvature made
the outflow velocity poorly constrained.
To further explore the velocity and ionization structure of the fast wind in {PG1211+143}, an extended {\it XMM-Newton}\ observation was carried out during 7 spacecraft orbits between 2014 June 2 and
July 9. On-target exposures for individual orbits ranged from $\sim$50 to $\sim$100 ks, with a total duration of $\sim$630 ks. Full details of the {\it XMM-Newton}\ observing log and data processing are given in
Lobban {et al.} (2016), reporting the results of a detailed timing analysis.
Pounds {et al.}\ 2016 (hereafter Paper 1) present an analysis of the hard x-ray spectrum, based on data from the pn camera (Strueder 2001), revealing new spectral structure in Fe K
absorption lines, and dual velocities (v$\sim$0.066c and v$\sim$0.129c) in the highly ionized wind. The present paper reports a corresponding analysis of the 2014 soft x-ray
spectrum of {PG1211+143}\ using data from the RGS.
We assume an AGN redshift of $z=0.0809$ (Marziani {et al.}\ 1996). Spectral fitting is based on the {\tt XSPEC} package (Arnaud 1996) and includes absorption due to the line-of-sight Galactic column of
$N_{\rm H}$ =3$\times10^{20}\rm{cm}^{-2}$ (Murphy {et al.}\ 1996, Willingale {et al.} 2013). 90 \% confidence intervals on model parameters are based on $\Delta\chi^{2}=2.706$. Estimates for the black hole
mass in {PG1211+143}\ range from $3\times 10^{7}$\hbox{$\rm ~M_{\odot}$}\ (Kaspi {et al.}\ 2000) to $1.5\times 10^{8}$\hbox{$\rm ~M_{\odot}$}\ (Bentz {et al.}\ 2009), with the lower value making the historical mean luminosity close to Eddington. All
quoted velocities are corrected for the relativistic Doppler effect.
\section{Soft X-ray absorption and emission from circumnuclear photoionized gas}
The composite 2014 RGS spectrum was produced by summing both RGS 1 and RGS 2 data over all 7 {\it XMM-Newton}\ orbits with the SAS tool RGScombine, for a combined exposure of 1.27 Ms. For spectral modelling, the
data were binned to a minimum of 25 counts per bin compatible with use of the $\chi^{2}$ statistic, with the additional constraint that no bin be narrower than 1/3 of
the mid-band FWHM resolution (Kaastra and Bleeker 2016).
Before attempting to model soft x-ray absorption and emission spectra we first fit the underlying soft X-ray continuum by extending the continuum model found in Paper 1, consisting of a
hard and a soft power law, with the addition of a blackbody to match the soft excess. The soft power law component was required in Paper 1 by inter-orbit
difference spectra, represented over the 2--10 keV spectral band by an unabsorbed power law of photon index $\Gamma$$\sim$2.9, and that continuum component was affirmed in the soft x-ray spectrum, finding
inter-orbit difference spectra described by a power law of index $\Gamma$$\sim$2.8$\pm$0.1. Such a steep continuum component has the potential to substantialy dilute the imprint of photoionized gas on
the overall soft x-ray spectrum and is included here in modelling spectral features in the
2014 RGS data.
Figure 1 illustrates the resulting continuum model for the stacked RGS data over the full 8--38 \AA\ waveband, with the corresponding data-model ratio indicating positive and
negative residuals suggestive of significant absorption and
emission from circumnuclear ionized gas. A measure of that spectral structure is given by the fit statistic {$\chi^{2}_{\nu}$}\ of 1251/721.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.3cm, angle=270]{newfig1.ps}
\caption
{Continuum model consisting of hard ($\Gamma$=1.67) and soft ($\Gamma$=2.9) power law components (black and green, respectively) taken from the higher energy spectral fit reported in Paper 1, with the
addition of two blackbody components (blue) to match the 'soft excess'. The ratio of data to continuum illustrates the spectral structure imprinted on the x-ray continuum by
photoionized absorption and emission from an outflowing wind}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Spectral modelling from 12--30 \AA\ with photoionized absorption and emission spectra}
We begin spectral modelling over the 12--30 \AA\ waveband where the data are of the highest statistical quality and the continuum fit gives a measure of spectral structure with {$\chi^{2}_{\nu}$}\ of 834/452.
Publicly available photoionized grids computed for a power law $\Gamma$ = 2 ionizing continuum
\footnote {ftp://legacy.gsfc.nasa.gov/software/plasma\_codes/xstar.xspectables}
failed to fit strong Fe UTA absorption at $\sim$16--17 \AA\ without an
unrealistically high Fe abundance. Since absorption modelling can be highly sensitive to the form of the photoionizing continuum (e.g. see Reeves et al. 2013), we therefore generated a self-consistent
set of multiplicative absorption and additive emission grids using the {\tt XSTAR} v2.2 code (Kallman et al. 1996), with the spectral energy distribution (SED) of {PG1211+143}\ based on concurrent data from the
Optical Monitor (Mason {et al.} 2001) and EPIC-pn cameras, extrapolated from 1-1000 Rydberg. The SED, described in more detail in Lobban {et al.} (2016), is represented by a double-broken
power-law, where the OM data have been corrected for reddening (E(B-V) = 0.035).
The new {\tt XSTAR} grids were computed in 10000 spectral bins between 0.1-20 keV, with an ionizing luminosity (1--1000 Ryd)
of 3.8$\times 10^{45}$ erg s$^{-1}$ based on the SED fit, and over a range in ionization log $\xi$ = 0-4 (where $\xi$ = L$_{ion}$/n r$^{2}$) and column density $N_{\rm H}$= $10^{19} -
10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$. Solar abundances were adopted for abundant elements (Grevesse \& Sauval 1998), with additional grids computed for 3- and 5-fold over abundances of Fe. In each case grids were
generated with turbulence velocities of $\sigma$ = 300, 1000 and 3000 km s$^{-1}$, and for each multiplicative absorption grid (mtable) we generated a corresponding emission grid (atable).
Absorption grids with a modest over-abundance of Fe were found to give the best fit to the mean 2014 RGS spectrum, and the present analysis is based on a 3-times-solar Fe abundance, with a turbulent velocity of 300 km s$^{-1}$ for
the absorber and 1000 and 3000 km s$^{-1}$ for low- and high-ionization photoionized emission, respectively, to encompass velocity broadening.
Free parameters in the absorption spectra are column density, ionization parameter, and outflow (or inflow) velocity in the AGN rest frame. For the emission spectra the column density is fixed at a suitably low
value ($N_{\rm H}$ = 10$^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$)to avoid significant opacity effects, with the ionization, flux level and velocity as free parameters.
The full {\tt xspec} model is TBabs*((po1 + bbody)*mt + at + po2), where components 'mt' and 'at' represent the mtable and atable grids of pre-computed photoionized absorption and emission spectra. Po2 represents the
unabsorbed power law and TBabs the Galactic absorption. The
absorbed power law has photon index ($\Gamma$=1.67) tied to the value found in the pn analysis, with a single blackbody of kT$\sim$0.1 keV completing the soft excess at 12--30 \AA.
The addition of a single photoionized absorber greatly improved the 12-30 \AA\ spectral fit ({$\chi^{2}_{\nu}$}\ of 681/451), for an ionization parameter log $\xi$=1.64$\pm$0.06, absorption column density $N_{\rm
H}$ = 5.0$\pm$0.6$\times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$ and outflow velocity 0.061$\pm$0.001c, close to the lower of the dual velocities reported in Paper 1. Adding a photoionized emission spectrum, with tied ionization
parameter, produced a further substantial improvement to the fit ({$\chi^{2}_{\nu}$}\ of
601/449), with the linked ionization parameter increasing to log $\xi$=1.77 $\pm$0.05, and the absorber column falling slightly to $N_{\rm H}$ = 4.3$\pm$0.6$\times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$. The absorber
outflow velocity was unchanged, while the integrated emission spectrum had a much lower outflow velocity in the AGN rest frame.
The interaction of emission and absorption grids can be partly understood by the effects of self absorption in resonance lines, while correctly modelling emission spectra also ensures a more accurate
fit to the intrinsic continuum. Joint emission and absorption modelling also played a key role in analysis of the complex Fe K absorption spectrum reported in Paper 1, and underlines the importance of including both emission and
absorption spectra in outflow studies of high quality data.
The addition of a second ionized absorber gave a further substantial improvement to the 12--30 \AA\ spectral fit ({$\chi^{2}_{\nu}$}\ of 569/446), with an ionization parameter log
$\xi$=1.8$\pm$0.1, absorption column density ($N_{\rm H}$ = 2.1$\pm$0.5$\times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$) and a significantly higher outflow velocity of 0.077$\pm$0.001c. A
second emission spectrum with tied ionization parameter yielded only a small further improvement in the spectral fit ({$\chi^{2}_{\nu}$}\ of 561/444).
Addition of the second absorber had the ancillary effect of reducing the ionization parameter of the first - lower velocity - absorber to log $\xi$=1.33$\pm$0.08, with a further decrease in
column density to $N_{\rm H}$ = 3.9$\pm$0.6$\times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$. While a second tied emission component had little effect, de-coupling the ionization parameters of both emission and absorption spectra
did yield a further significant
improvement in the fit ({$\chi^{2}_{\nu}$}\ of 534/442), with the emission components now covering a wider range
of ionization. Table 1 summarises the parameters of this best-fit 12--30 \AA\ model, including the luminosities added/extracted
by the respective ionized emission/absorption spectra.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.2cm, angle=270]{Fig2a.ps}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.18cm, angle=270]{Fig2b.ps}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5.85cm, angle=270]{Fig2c.ps}
\caption
{(top) A section of the mean soft X-ray spectrum of {PG1211+143}\ from the stacked RGS data of the 2014 {\it XMM-Newton}\ observation, with photoionized absorption and emission added by {\tt XSTAR} grids as described in the text. In the
model the absorption affects only the hard power law (black) and blackbody (blue) continuum but not the steeper power law (green) identified in inter-orbit difference spectra. (mid panel) Emission
spectra from low (red) and high (blue) ionization components, with the parameters listed in Table 1. (lower) RGS data plotted as a ratio to the underlying continuum, with several discrete emission
features identified with resonance emission lines and radiative recombination continua (R) of H- and He-like ions of Ne, O, N and C.}
\end{figure}
Figure 2 illustrates different aspects of the 12--30 \AA\ spectral fit. The top panel compares the data and final model, together with the three continuum components, unabsorbed power law (green), hard
power law (dark blue) and black body (light blue). Absorption over most of the RGS waveband is seen to predominently affect the black body emission component, representing the 'soft excess', a point which may be
important in comparing the column density of similar flows measured in soft and hard x-ray spctra (see Section 6).
Strong absorption features include the Fe-M UTA at
$\sim$16--17 \AA\ (Behar {et al.}\ 2001), and resonance absorption in OVIII Lyman-$\alpha$ and the OVII triplet observed at $\sim$19 \AA\ and $\sim$22 \AA, respectively. We find in Section 4 that the twin lines
apparent in each resonance transition correspond to the distinct velocities found in the {\tt xstar} modelling (Table 1). In turn, both low velocity outflow components contribute to the strong Fe UTA, with
a fit limited to the 14--18 \AA\ waveband confirming both velocities are required (see also Appendix). We note this finding differs from that in the deep {\it Chandra}\ observation of NGC 3783,
where Holczer {et al.} (2005) found the Fe
M-shell absorber to be separated from the main outflow and essentially stationary.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Parameters of the ionized outflow from 12--30 \AA\ fit to the combined 2014 RGS data, with two photoionized absorbers, each defined by an ionization parameter $\xi$ (erg cm s$^{-1}$), column
density $N_{\rm H}$ (cm$^{-2}$), outflow velocity (in units of c) and absorbed luminosity (erg s$^{-1}$), and two photoionized emission spectra defined by the respective ionization parameter, outflow
velocity, normalisation and luminosity. Velocities are in the AGN rest frame and luminosities are in the fitted spectral band. The significance of each spectral component is measured by the increase in $\chi^{2}$
when that component is removed and the spectrum re-fitted. }
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccccc@{}}
\hline
component & log$\xi$ & $N_{\rm H}$ ($10^{20}$) & v$_{out}/c $ & L$_{abs/em}$ & $\Delta \chi^{2}$ \\
\hline
absorber 1 & 1.35$\pm$0.09 & 3.6$\pm$0.7 & 0.061$\pm$0.001 & 1.5$\times10^{42}$ & 60/3 \\
absorber 2 & 1.8$\pm$0.1 & 1.9$\pm$0.5 & 0.077$\pm$0.001 & 6$\times10^{41}$ & 23/3 \\
emitter 1 & 1.1$\pm$0.3 & 10 & 0.0016$\pm$0.0005 & 6$\times10^{41}$ & 59/3 \\
emitter 2 & 3.1$\pm$0.3 & 10 & 0.001$\pm$0.002 & 1.0$\times10^{42}$ & 33/3 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
The modelled photoionized emission spectra are highlighted in the mid panel of Figure 2, and directly compared with the stacked data in the lower panel,
where the principal emission features are identified with resonance emission lines and radiative recombination continua (RRC) of the abundant H- and He-like ions of Ne, O, N and C. A more detailed
comparison of data and model identifies a relative weakness of the modelled resonance emission in the triplet of OVII, suggesting a missing contribution from photoexcitation (Kinkhabwala {et al.}\
2002) not included in the {\tt xstar} grids. Adding a Gaussian emission line to the model described above finds a (blue-shifted) line energy of 0.536$\pm$0.002 keV (23.13 \AA) and
equivalent width 1.6$\pm$0.4 eV, yielding an improvement in $\Delta \chi^{2}$ of 22/3.
In summary of Section 2, modelling of spectral structure in the 12--30 \AA\ waveband finds strong evidence for absorption in a photoionized outflow, with velocity components $\sim$0.061c and
$\sim$0.077c, which we assume are blended to match the lower of the dual velocities (v$\sim$0.066c) identified in the primary highly ionized outflow in the (lower resolution) hard x-ray data (Paper 1).
From the model spectral fit we obtain an overall spectral luminosity in the 12-30 \AA\ waveband of 5.73$\times 10^{43}$ erg s$^{-1}$, with the low ionization absorbers together removing 2.1$\times 10^{42}$ erg
s$^{-1}$. The low ionization emission spectrum contributes a luminosity over the same waveband of 6$\times 10^{41}$ erg s$^{-1}$, suggesting a covering factor of that
flow component of $\sim$30 \%. We return to considerations of the energy budget in Section 5.
\section{Extending the RGS spectral fit from 8-38 \AA\ waveband}
While the lower of the two outflow velocities (v$\sim$0.066c) reported in Paper 1 may be clearly identified, the higher velocity
(v$\sim$0.129c) seen in the pn data is not detected. Since that difference might be due the faster flow being more highly ionized (as was
found in the pn data of Paper 1), and the soft x-ray spectral model developed in Section 2 includes emission but not absorption from highly ionised outflow components,we now extend spectral modelling
over the full 8--38 \AA\ waveband shown
in Figure 1.
The more extended spectral fit confirms the two absorption
components (absorber 1 and absorber 2) listed in Table 1, which are now included with only
minor changes in the relevant parameters (abs1 and abs2) in Table 2.
Significantly, the increased high energy coverage now also finds highly ionized counterparts of both high velocity outflow components reported in Paper 1.
Visual examination of the new spectral model confirms these new detections (abs3
and abs4 in Table 2) are largely due to several strong absorption lines of Fe XVIII -- XX and resonance lines of Ne X
and Mg XI observed in the 8--14 \AA\ spectral region. The lower panels of Fig.3 illustrate this point.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.3cm, angle=270]{fig3_top.ps}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.15cm, angle=270]{fig3_mid.ps}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.77cm, angle=270]{fig3_lower.ps}
\caption
{(top) The soft x-ray spectrum of {PG1211+143}, where fine structure on the soft x-ray continuum in Figure 1 is successfully modelled by photoionized absorption and emission spectra from an outflowing wind
with the parameters listed in Table 2. The middle panel shows the data-model residuals of this multi-component fit, where comparison with the lower panel - based on the restricted model of Table 1 - provides
visual confirmation of the contributions of highly ionized components abs3 and abs 4 in the extended 8--38 \AA\ spectral fit}
\end{figure}
The extended model of the RGS soft x-ray spectrum now includes both low and highly ionized absorbers with
velocities close to those identified in the hard x-ray spectrum reported in Paper 1. In addition to offering compelling support for both
those primary (high column) outflow components, the higher resolution grating spectra provide an indication of additional fine structure
in the lower velocity flow. Modelling the ionized emission with components of widely differing ionization parameter is a further measure
of a complex flow.
A final search for additional absorption components to those noted above, provides evidence for a still higher velocity outflow of 0.188$\pm$0.001c (abs5 in Table), given added weight as that velocity coincides
closely with a
marginal detection of a third highly ionized outflow component in the hard x-ray spectrum reported in Paper 1 (see also Appendix).
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Parameters of the ionized outflow of {PG1211+143}\ over the full 8--38 \AA\ waveband. Five photoionized absorbers are detected, each defined by an ionisation parameter $\xi$ (erg cm s$^{-1}$), column
density $N_{\rm H}$ (cm$^{-2}$), outflow velocity (km s$^{-1}$) and absorbed luminosity (erg s$^{-1}$), with two photoionized emission spectra defined by the respective ionization parameter, outflow
velocity, normalisation and luminosity. Velocities are in the AGN rest frame and luminosities relate to the fitted spectral band.}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccccc@{}}
\hline
comp & log$\xi$ & $N_{\rm H}$ ($10^{20}$) & v$_{out}$/c & L$_{abs/em}$ & $\Delta \chi^{2}$ \\
\hline
abs 1 & 1.5$\pm$0.1 & 2.3$\pm$0.4 & 0.061$\pm$0.001 & 1.6$\times10^{42}$ & 60/3 \\
abs 2 & 1.9$\pm$0.2 & 1.5$\pm$0.5 & 0.077$\pm$0.001 & 7$\times10^{41}$ & 36/3 \\
abs 3 & 3.0$\pm$0.2 & 13$\pm$6 & 0.131$\pm$0.001 & 6$\times10^{41}$ & 15/3 \\
abs 4 & 3.2$\pm$0.1 & 28$\pm$15 & 0.061$\pm$0.001 & 8$\times10^{41}$ & 18/3 \\
abs 5 & 2.5$\pm$0.1 & 12$\pm$5 & 0.188$\pm$0.002 & 9$\times10^{41}$ & 18/3 \\
emit 1 & 1.7$\pm$0.3 & 10 & 0.0012$\pm$0.0006 & 9$\times10^{41}$ & 73/3 \\
emit 2 & 2.8$\pm$0.6 & 10 & 0.002$\pm$0.002 & 3$\times10^{41}$ & 13/3 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
Based on the extended spectral fit, the observed spectral luminosity from 8-38 \AA\ is 9.2$\times 10^{43}$ erg s$^{-1}$, with absorption components 1 and 2, corresponding to the lower of the two velocities
found in Paper 1, having removed
2.3$\times 10^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$, with components 3 an 4, associated with the more highly ionized outflow, removing 2.4$\times 10^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$. A lower ratio
of emission-to-absorption for the highly ionized components may indicate a lower covering factor, or
that much of the re-emission lies outside the RGS spectral band. We return to that question in Section 5.
Figure 3 overlays the 2014 RGS data with the final spectral model. Comparison of the data-model residuals with those of Fig. 1
illustrates how the addition of the photoionized absorption and emission spectra detailed in Table 2 greatly improve the overall
spectral fit.
\section{Identifying individual resonance lines}
As noted earlier, the high ionization characteristic of powerful AGN winds renders much of that outflow transparent at soft x-ray energies, while the presence of an unabsorbed continuum component has a further
diluting effect on observed soft x-ray absorption features. An added complexity in the soft x-ray spectrum of {PG1211+143}\ is the dominance across parts of the RGS waveband of multiple transitions in Fe-L,
including those partially screened by M-shell electrons (the Fe-M UTA, Behar {et al.}\ 2001). While the complexity of the Fe-L absorption can be accounted for reasonably well in spectral modelling,
it is difficult to reliably identify individual transitions for use in measuring a blue-shift.
Fortunately, the unusually deep {\it XMM-Newton}\ observation in 2014 has allowed the detection and identification of several absorption lines with physically resonance transitions in Ne, O, N and C (Figure 4).
Sequentially stepping through the stacked data with narrow Gaussians of width tied to the mid-band RGS resolution ($\sim$30 m\AA) yields the observed absorption line wavelengths listed in Table 3, where each
line identification provides a corresponding blue-shift and outflow velocity. The 90\% confidence error on each wavelength was obtained using the {\tt uncertainty} command for the relevant Gaussian
parameter, which was then carried over to give the listed velocity uncertainty.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5.8cm, angle=270]{newfigure4.ps}
\caption
{Gaussian line fitting to spectral structure in the stacked soft x-ray spectrum of {PG1211+143}\ when the absorption and emission spectra defined in Table 2 have been removed from the model. A blind search
reveals the 11 narrow absorption lines listed in Table 3, with 5 and 6 lines, respectively, found to match the two low ionization outflow velocities obtained from spectral modelling, when identified
with principal resonance lines of Ne, O and N. Two broader Gaussians, at $\sim$ 12--13 \AA\ and $\sim$ 16--17.5 \AA\ are used to fit a complex group of strong Fe L lines and the Fe-M UTA,
respectively.}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Observed wavelength of narrow Gaussians fitted to apparent absorption lines in the stacked 2014 RGS spectrum. 11 narrow lines are identified with
six resonance transitions in Ne, O, N and C, with common blue-shifts indicating two outflow velocities, both consistent with values obtained from spectral modelling}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lcccccc@{}}
\hline
line & lab (\AA) & obs (\AA) & rest (\AA) & v$_{out}$/c & $\Delta \chi^{2}$ \\
\hline
Ne9 He-$\alpha$ & 13.447 & 13.41$\pm$0.03 & 12.41$\pm$0.03 & 0.080$\pm$0.002 & 10/2 \\
Ne9 He-$\alpha$ & 13.447 & 13.73$\pm$0.02 & 12.70$\pm$0.02 & 0.057$\pm$0.002 & 15/2 \\
O8 L-$\alpha$ & 18.968 & 18.99$\pm$0.02 & 17.57$\pm$0.03 & 0.077$\pm$0.002 & 12/2 \\
O8 L-$\alpha$ & 18.968 & 19.31$\pm$0.02 & 17.86$\pm$0.03 & 0.060$\pm$0.002 & 16/2 \\
O7 He-$\alpha$ & 21.602 & 21.54$\pm$0.04 & 19.93$\pm$0.03 & 0.080$\pm$0.003 & 4/2 \\
O7 He-$\alpha$ & 21.602 & 21.94$\pm$0.03 & 20.29$\pm$0.03 & 0.062$\pm$0.002 & 20/2 \\
N7 L-$\alpha$ & 24.781 & 24.69$\pm$0.05 & 22.84$\pm$0.03 & 0.080$\pm$0.003 & 4/2 \\
N7 L-$\alpha$ & 24.781 & 25.17$\pm$0.02 & 23.28$\pm$0.03 & 0.062$\pm$0.002 & 11/2 \\
N6 He-$\alpha$ & 28.787 & 28.75$\pm$0.04 & 26.60$\pm$0.03 & 0.078$\pm$0.003 & 7/2 \\
N6 He-$\alpha$ & 28.787 & 29.50$\pm$0.05 & 27.29$\pm$0.03 & 0.054$\pm$0.003 & 14/2 \\
C6 L-$\alpha$ & 33.736 & 34.35$\pm$0.15 & 31.78$\pm$0.03 & 0.060$\pm$0.004 & 5/2 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
For the 9 lines with $\Delta \chi^{2}$ of 5 or greater, two distinct velocity groups are found, with weighted mean outflows of v$\sim$0.060$\pm$0.002c and v$\sim$0.078$\pm$0.002c, in close agreement with
the velocities of the two soft x-ray absorbers found in the {\tt XSTAR} modelling. That agreement provides strong, independent support for those modelled outflow velocities, and correspondingly for the similar low
velocity component found in the primary, highly ionized outflow of {PG1211+143}\ reported in Paper 1. The absence of identified absorption lines from the higher velocity outflow (v$\sim$0.13c) may be understood
from the relatively high ionization parameter of that component (abs3 in Table 2), with the strongest absorption falling in the 12--14 \AA\ waveband dominated by Fe-L transitions. This absorption complex is
represented by a broad Gaussian in Figure 4, where only two narrow lines are identified, both with NeIX He-$\alpha$. Interestingly, one narrow absorption line at $\sim$17 \AA\ does stand out from the broad Gaussian
fit to the Fe UTA
and we see in the Appendix that this very likely corresponds to OVIII Ly-$\alpha$ outflowing at the highest velocity component (abs5) in Table 3.
\section{Comparing the soft and hard x-ray spectral models}
The above analysis has shown that the dual outflow velocities, of $\sim$0.129c and $\sim$0.066c, identified in highly ionized absorbing matter in the 2014 pn data (Paper 1) have co-moving counterparts
in the soft x-ray RGS spectra, with the higher spectral resolution of the grating spectra suggesting the lower velocity is actually a blend of two components.
As in Paper 1, simultaneous modelling of photoionized emission spectra is found to be important, both in determining the correct absorption parameters of the flow and in showing that a substantial fraction
of the absorbed energy is returned via recombination and scattering from an extended outflow. To evaluate the energy budget of this re-processing requires extending the spectral bandwidth beyond that
covered by the RGS, not least as the major part of the flow is absorbed only in the higher energy band covered by the EPIC cameras.
A direct comparison with the spectral model obtained from analysis of the simultaneous pn data in Paper 1 shows a good measure of agreement - and some important differences. To that end, the 2--10 keV spectral fit
from Paper 1 was extended down to 0.4 keV to overlap the RGS spectrum. In making that
extension the soft x-ray continuum was modelled by the addition of a black body component (kT$\sim$0.1 keV), with soft x-ray absorption and emission requiring additional emission and absorption grids
compared with Paper 1.
The extended 0.4--10 keV pn spectral fit remained remarkably good ({$\chi^{2}_{\nu}$}\ of 1783/1676), with the emission and absorption parameters listed in Table 4.
Comparison of the low ionization absorbers in Tables 2 and 4 tests the conjecture that abs3 in Table 4 encompasses both abs1 and abs2 absorbers in the RGS spectra, with the
velocity of v$\sim$0.066c being a blend of two outflow components unresolved in the CCD data. Similar absorbed luminosities and column densities of the low ionization absorbers
in the RGS and extended pn spectral models are now seen to support that view.
More surprising is the large difference in the column densities of highly ionized absorbers with the same velocity, but measured against the soft x-ray continuum (Table 2, abs3 and abs4) as compared with
the hard x-rey
spectrum (Table 4, abs1 and abs2). In Section 6 we suggest an explanation in terms of different sight lines through the same outflow component, with potential to explore the x-ray source geometry.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Parameters of the ionized outflow from the previously published 2--10 keV spectral fit, extended down to 0.4 keV to overlap the soft x-ray spectrum covered by the
RGS data. The continuum is modelled with absorption of a hard power law $\Gamma$ $\sim$1.67 and blackbody (kT $\sim$0.1 keV), together with a softer
unabsorbed power law of photon index $\Gamma$ $\sim$2.9. Velocities are in the AGN rest-frame and luminosities in the 0.4--10 kev spectral band}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccccc@{}}
\hline
comp & log$\xi$ & $N_{\rm H}$ ($10^{22}$) & v$_{out}$/c & L$_{abs/em}$ & $\Delta \chi^{2}$ \\
\hline
abs 1 & 3.95$\pm$0.25 & 36$\pm$24 & 0.129$\pm$0.002 & 6$\times10^{41}$ & 19/3 \\
abs 2 & 3.50$\pm$0.07 & 20$\pm$9 & 0.066$\pm$0.002 & 1.2$\times10^{42}$ & 41/3 \\
abs 3 & 1.7$\pm$0.2 & 0.05$\pm$0.02 & 0.066 (t) & 1.4$\times10^{42}$ & 24/3 \\
emit 1 & 3.47$\pm$0.05 & 1 & 0.007$\pm$0.004 & 1$\times10^{42}$ & 22/2 \\
emit 2 & 1.46$\pm$0.07 & 0.1 & 0.002$\pm$0.002 & 1.3$\times10^{42}$ & 15/2 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
An indication of the large covering factor of the outflow in {PG1211+143}\ is now best measured from the broad band 0.4-10 keV fit, where we find a total luminosity of 1.47$\times 10^{44}$ erg s$^{-1}$, with the
high and low ionization photoionized absorbers removing 1.8$\times 10^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$ and 1.4$\times 10^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$, respectively, or $\sim$2.2\% of the spectral luminosity. In comparison, the
high and low ionization emission spectra contribute luminosities over the same spectral band of 1$\times 10^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$ and 1.3$\times 10^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$, respectively, with the total ionized emission
indicating a time-averaged covering factor of $\sim$60\%.
\section{Discussion}
An analysis of the soft x-ray spectrum of {PG1211+143}, produced by stacking RGS spectral data from all seven orbits of the 2014 {\it XMM-Newton}\ observation, has revealed both low and highly ionization outflow
components co-moving with each of the two primary high velocity outflows detected in the hard x-ray spectrum (Paper 1). The higher resolution of the grating spectrometers reveals additional velocity structure, with
outflow velocities of 0.061$\pm$0.002c and 0.077$\pm$0.002c, apparently blended in the $\sim$0.066c component detected in the CCD spectra.
As in Paper 1 we find photoionized emission spectra are of similar significance to photoionized absorption in modifying the observed soft x-ray spectrum, with {\tt xstar} modelling successfully reproducing
most of the observed features, dominated by resonance emission lines and radiative recombination continua (RRC) of the abundant lighter metals (C, N, O, Ne) having K-shell energies covered by the RGS.
Extending the 2-10 keV spectral fit of Paper 1 down to 0.4 keV provides a direct comparison of the hard and soft x-ray analyses, allowing a quantitative measure of the impact of the photoionized outflow on the
observed x-ray spectrum. From that assessment we find the outflow removes $\sim$2.3\% of the 0.4--10 keV spectral luminosity, with the ionized emission returning $\sim$80\% of that luminosity
from scattering
and recombination in an apparently extended outflow.
The relative column densities of co-moving low and high ionization absorption components in Table 2 suggest an outflow in line of sight to the soft x-ray continuum source with a small filling
factor of embedded higher density matter. Adopting that explanation, comparison of abs1 and abs4 (Table 2) shows a factor $\sim$12 in column
density and $\sim$50 in particle density, indicating a linear filling factor of $\sim$ 0.16\%.
It appears that while such co-moving absorbers may be readily understood in terms of higher density 'clouds' embedded in the main flow, perhaps caused by instabilities in the flow, the small filling factor implies a
negligible contribution to the outflow mass rate and momentum.
Explaining the large difference in column density for flow components detected in the
RGS and pn data {\it and having the same velocity and ionization parameter} is less straightforward. The highly ionized outflow components detected in the hard x-ray data (abs 1 and abs 2 in Table 4) have column
densities $\sim$300 and $\sim$70 times larger than their soft x-ray counterparts (abs3 and abs4, respectively, in Table 2). We suggest an explanation might involve different lines-of-sight to the dominant hard
and soft x-ray continuum sources (power law and blackbody in the model; Figure 1).
For a conventional disc-corona geometry the intrinsic hard x-ray source would probably be confined to a smaller radius, closer to the black hole and - importantly - to the likely wind launch site (King and Pounds
2003), compared with the more extended thermal soft x-ray source in the inner accretion disc. For a sufficiently small launch radius, a diverging wind (King and Pounds 2015) might then explain the large difference in
column density of the same flow component, observed in different sight lines to the hard and soft x-ray continuum sources. If confirmed, that possibility would offer the intriguing potential of using future
observations of outflow spectra to
explore the geometry of the x-ray continuum source in an AGN.
Finding multiple UFO velocities represents a new challenge to models of powerful AGN winds, not least to continuum-driving (King and Pounds 2003) which provides a natural mechanism for the highly ionized matter
characteristic of UFOs, and has been found to
provide a good match to their generic properties (King and Pounds 2015).
We noted in Paper 1 that chaotic accretion (King and Pringle 2006), consisting of random
prograde and retrograde events, could offer an explanation of a dual velocity wind, the two distinct outflow velocities relating to different orientations of the current inner accretion flow. With both
flows close to Eddington, the prograde and retrograde discs would have different limiting values of the accretion efficiency $\eta$ and hence of velocity (King and Pounds 2003).
Confirmation here of a third outflow velocity, marginally detected in Paper 1, may indicate further complexity in the inner accretion flow, which remains the natural site for the launch of a high speed,large
column wind. A further constraint is the relative variability in the primary (high colunn) flow components over the {\it XMM-Newton}\ observations of 2001, 2007 and 2014 which will be reported in a future paper.
Meanwhile, in summary, the deep RGS exposure of {PG1211+143}\ has provided an impressive demonstration of the application of high resolution spectra in studying the properties of a classical UFO. However, while the imprint of
overlying ionized gas on the soft x-ray spectrum provides detailed information on the dynamics of that outflow, with the soft x-ray absorption and emission being a high resolution tracer of lower
ionization matter entrained in the more massive highly ionized flows, it is important to note that the mass, momentum and mechanical energy rates of the UFO in {PG1211+143}\ remain dominated by the much high
column densities detected in the highly ionized (primary) flow components.
\section{Appendix}
We noted in Section 4 that it was difficult to identify the complex of Fe-L absorption lines at $\sim$ 11--14 \AA\ and in the strong Fe-M UTA at $\sim$ 15.5--17 \AA\
sufficiently reliably to allow a blue shift (and velocity) determination. That issue is made still more difficult when multiple velocities are involved, as illustrated in Figure 5.
There, the contributions of the v$\sim$0.061c and v$\sim$0.077c low ionization absorbers are shown separately, with the velocity difference resulting in a broader UTA
than for a single velocity.
The upper panel of Fig.5 also provides a direct confimation of several individual line identifications, for example those at $\sim$ 19 \AA\ and $\sim$ 19.3 \AA\ identified with
OVIII Ly-$\alpha$ and associated with the above outflow velocities in Table 3.
The lower panel of Fig. 5 shows the absorption profile for the highly ionized outflow component with v$\sim$0.188c (Table 2, abs 5), where the same OVIII Ly-$\alpha$ line is observed at $\sim$17 \AA.
While not fitted by a narrow Gaussian in Fig.4, for the reasons noted above, a strong absorption line is clearly visible at that wavelength.
The important point to note is that while individual blue-shifted line identifications are an important means of identifying an outflow - and a co-moving line-set is better still -
the most secure way to determine the parameters of any UFO is by spectral modelling, as described in Sections 2 and 3 for the present case of {PG1211+143}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5.8cm, angle=270]{newfigure5.ps}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4.3cm, angle=270]{newplot.ps}
\caption
{(top) photoionized absorption spectra of the two low ionization components listed in Table 2 as abs1 and abs2, with outflow velocities of v$\sim$0.061c (red) and v$\sim$0.077c (blue).
(lower) a similar plot for the more highly ionized absorber outflowing at v$\sim$0.188c (green)}
\end{figure}
\section{Acknowledgements}
{\it XMM-Newton}\ is a space science mission developed and operated by the European Space Agency. {We acknowledge in particular the excellent work of ESA staff at the European Space Astronomy Center in Madrid in
successfully planning and conducting the relevant {\it XMM-Newton}\ observations.} The UK Science and Technology Facilities Council funded the posts of AL and MC.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}
Music composition is considered creative, intuitive and therefore inherently human.
Nevertheless, it has a long history of mathematical approaches since Hiller
and Isaacson proposed to use \textit{Markov} chains for automatic
composition \cite{hiller1959experimental}. The field of automatic composition
includes a wide range of tasks such as the composition of melody, chord,
rhythm \cite{kleedorfer2008oh}, and even lyrics \cite{de2002ai}, i.e. every typical
components of music, and has been subject to numerous research studies.
There are many applications for automatic composition too; automatic
background music generation, AI-assisted
composition systems and
improviser software\footnote{\url{http://jukedeck.com}, \url{http://arpegemusic.com}, \href{https://www.pgmusic.com}{\textit{Band-in-a-Box, PG Music Inc.}}} for example.
Music can be represented as a sequence of events and thus it can be
modelled as conditional probabilities between musical events. For
example, in harmonic tracks, some chords are more likely to occur
than others given the previous chords, while the whole chord progressions often depend
on the global key of the music. In many automatic composition systems,
these relationships are simplified by assuming that the probability of
the current state $p(n)$ only depends on the probabilities of the states
in the past $p(n-k)...p(n-1)$. A sequence of musical events - notes, chords,
rhythm patterns - is generated by predicting the following event given a seed sequence.
{\em Hidden-Markov models (HMMs)} are one of the most popular methods to model and predict sequences. HMMs are based on the assumption of $k=1$ (Markov assumption) given the sequence of the hidden states which determine the visible states. Choral harmonisation is generated after learning chorales by Bach using a HMM in \cite{allan2005harmonising}, where $229$ and $153$ chorales are used for training and testing, respectively. In \cite{simon2008mysong}, chord progressions are generated to accompany a melody to help non-musicians to create music using a HMM. The training set of the HMM consists of $298$ lead sheets including pop, rock, R\&B, jazz, and country music. In the prediction, the system generates chords using a $62$$\times$$62$ chord transition probability matrix. In practice, HMMs had been the most suitable for time-series modelling given the data, computing power, and feasible optimisation strategies. One of the drawbacks of HMMs, however, is the inefficiency of {\em 1-of-K} scheme of its hidden states. The memory of HMM is limited to $log_2(N)$ bits when there is $N$ hidden states, which requires to learn $N^2$ parameters for the transition matrix.
{\em Recurrent Neural Networks} ({\em RNNs}) allow for incorporating long term dependency in the model. {\em Jordan net} \cite{jordan1986attractor}, a simple version of RNNs, is used in \cite{lewis1989algorithms} to generate chord sequences. In \cite{mozer1994neural}, melodies were generated by a system named \textit{CONCERT}, which is trained on sets of $10$ Bach pieces to generate melodies by note-wise prediction. One ability \textit{CONCERT} lacks is to learn the global structure; this may be due to the difficulty of training an RNNs.
Theoretically, it can remember infinitely long sequences, although in practice it is limited by the \textit{vanishing gradient} problem \cite{hochreiter2001gradient}. During the training of back-propagation through time, the gradient is extremely diminished by multiplications of sigmoid operations.
{\em LSTM (Long Short-Term Memory)} units solved this vanishing gradient problem \cite{hochreiter2001gradient}. LSTM allows the gradient to be flowed by a separate path with not multiplication but \textit{addition} operations. LSTM is adopted in \cite{eck2002first} to learn $12$-bar Blues chords progressions and melodies. \cite{lambert2015perceiving} focuses on the generation of percussive tracks using LSTM network. The network in \cite{lambert2015perceiving} directly analyses audio content of drum tracks and learns features using LSTM.
In this paper, we introduce applications of character- and word-based RNNs with LSTM units for the automatic generation of jazz chord progressions and rock music drum tracks. Our work is differentiated from previous works by two aspects. First, the LSTM networks we use are designed to learn from text data rather than representations of musical symbols or numeric values. Directly using text data minimises the overall design procedures for the encoding-decoding scheme and the network. Second, compared to the previous research \cite{allan2005harmonising},\cite{eck2002first},\cite{simon2008mysong}, the LSTM networks is trained using a large dataset, which enables itself to learn more complex relationship between the chords in a large set.
In the Section \ref{sec:arch}, we introduce character-based RNNs and the proposed architecture. In Sections \ref{sec:chord} and \ref{sec:rhythm}, two case studies on the applications of RNNs to automatic composition are explained - for jazz chord progressions and rock music drum tracks. We conclude the work in Section \ref{sec:con}.
\section{The architecture}\label{sec:arch}
\subsection{Character-based RNNs}
{\em Char-RNNs} are RNNs with character-based learning \cite{sutskever2011generating}, which is different from the conventional approach of word-based learning. When applied to the texts of chords, a char-RNN predict a vector that corresponds to a character (e.g. predict \textit{a} based on \textit{C:m}, and predict \textit{j} based on \textit{C:ma}), while a word-RNN predicts a vector, which corresponds to a unique chord (e.g. \textit{C:maj} based on \textit{G:maj}).
Using char-RNNs in this work has two merits.
First, it is based on the minimal assumption - there is no constraint on the form of the text representation of music. It is worth inspecting if RNNs can learn musical information with such a weak assumption.
Second, fewer number of characters means fewer number of states, which results in reducing the computational cost. From a linguistics point of view, sequence learning methods such as HMMs and RNNs used to model each {\em word}(e.g. chord) as a {\em state} as it is natural to find the relationships between words. One drawback of word-based learning is the large number of states (or the size of vocabulary); in natural language processing tasks, the vocabulary size easily exceeds few thousands to even few millions. In the proposed method the size of the chord vocabulary is $1$,$259$. With character-based prediction, this decreases to $39$.
The price of small vocabulary size is a longer sequence; as we need to learn character by character, the model should \textit{remember} a longer sequence of states. As mentioned above, the LSTM unit helps the RNNs to learn this long-term dependency better. This trade-off does not necessarily benefit as in Section \ref{sec:rhythm}.
\subsection{The Proposed Architecture}\label{sec:proposed}
We use two LSTM layers, each of which consists of 512 hidden units. Dropout of $0.2$ is added after every LSTM layers \cite{zaremba2014recurrent}.
We use the {\em Keras} deep learning framework \cite{chollet2015}. During the optimisation, categorical cross-entropy is used as a loss function and optimisation is performed by ADAM \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/KingmaB14}. This optimiser shows an equivalent final performance to Stochastic Gradient Descent with Nestrov momentum with faster convergence.
The prediction is stochastic. In each prediction for time index $n$, the network outputs the probabilities of every states. To make the system \textit{tunable}, We employ a diversity parameter $\alpha$ in the prediction stage (see Eqn. \ref{eq:diversity}), which suppresses ($\alpha<1$) or encourages ($\alpha>1$) the diversity of prediction by re-weighting the probabilities. In detail, the probabilities of $i$-th state, $p_i$, are re-weighted as $ \hat{p_i} = \exp{(\log(p_i)/\alpha)}$. Then, one of the states is selected by sampling a state according to the re-weighted probabilities.
As stated in Section \ref{sec:chord}, we perform experiments with char- and words-RNNs. We keep the same size and number of layers for both networks, although they result in different effective lengths; for example, manifold states are needed to be predicted to complete a chord in char-RNNs while each state correspond to a chord in word-RNNs.
The dataset, code and audio files are released on web.\footnote{\url{https://github.com/keunwoochoi/lstm_real_book}\\ \url{https://github.com/keunwoochoi/LSTMetallica} \\ \url{https://soundcloud.com/kchoi-research/sets/lstm-realbook-1-5} \\ \url{https://soundcloud.com/kchoi-research/sets/lstmetallica-drums}}
\section{Case Study 1: Chord progressions}\label{sec:chord}
\subsection{Representation}
The goal of this experiment is to generate chord progressions by training an LSTM network on jazz chord progressions. Here, we do not use any musical interpretation of the chords such as binary vectors to represent pitch and chords (as in \cite{franklin2006recurrent}) but completely rely on their text representations. Table \ref{table:chord_texts} shows an example of a chord progression and the corresponding texts. The left is an example of a chord notation in The Realbook score, where the positions of chords are loosely related to the timings of chord changes. The score on the left is converted into the text on the right, which specifies every chord for each quarter note.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
\parbox{3.1cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{F:9 \hphantom{ MMM M MM} $|$\\ D:min7 \hphantom{MM} G:9 \hphantom{M}$|$\\ C:maj \hphantom{MaM} F:9 \hphantom{al} $|$\\ C:maj \hphantom{MMMMl M} $|$} \vspace{.05\baselineskip}} &
\parbox{4.5cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{\small{F:9 F:9 F:9 F:9 D:min7 D:min7 G:9 G:9 C:maj C:maj F:9 F:9 C:maj C:maj C:maj C:maj}}
\vspace{.05\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{.05\baselineskip}
\caption{An example of the text representations of chord progressions in score (left) and the training data (right). A 4-bar chord progression is generally written in the form on the left, where the positions of the chords loosely indicate the chord change timings.
On the right, the text show how the score on the left is represented in the training data. Here, the chords for every quarter notes are explicitly written and bar indicators are removed.}
\label{table:chord_texts}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\vspace{0cm}
We used $2,486$ scores from The Realbooks and The Fakebooks as training data. Every score file was parsed from \textit{band-in-a-box} format to \textit{.xlab} format. Then they were transposed to the key of C while every blank quarter note was filled with its preceding chord as in the Table \ref{table:chord_texts}. Finally, we put \texttt{\char`_START\char`_} and \texttt{\char`_END\char`_} flags (any distinctive words can be used as flags) at the beginning and the end of each score.
Although the key was transposed to C, only $867$ (out of $2$,$846$) scores end with \textincon{C:maj} ($30\%$), followed by $489$ \textincon{G:7} (17\%), $186$ \textincon{C:maj6} ($7\%$), $52$ \textincon{F:maj} ($2\%$), and $1$,$252$ scores end with the others -- $237$ chords ($46\%$). This is because the The Realbook chord progressions usually end with chords for a \textit{turn-around} to make the progressions natural to repeat the score.
There were $1,259$ unique chords in the training dataset. In other words, the vocabulary size of word-RNN was $1,259$. However there were only $39$ characters in total, which significantly reduced the computation of char-RNN. The total numbers of chords (words) and characters were $539,609$ and $3,531,261$, respectively.
\subsection{Results}
We set the system to output a chord progression for every diversity parameter $\alpha$ after every iteration. In this paper, we present four results from each networks (char-RNNs and word-RNNs), part of which are reported in the Table \ref{table:chord_results}. For simplicity, we added bar symbols $|$ and removed repeating chords in the same bar, e.g. \textincon{$|$ C:7 C:7 C:7 C:7 $|$} reduced to \textincon{$|$ C:7 $|$} and \textincon{$|$ C:7 C:7 E:min E:min $|$} reduced to \textincon{$|$ C:7 E:min $|$}.
\begin{table}[b!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
\parbox{0.6cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
$i$
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
} &
\parbox{0.6cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
$\alpha$
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
} &
\parbox{10.0cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textbf{Chord progressions}
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 1 } &
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 0.8} &
\parbox{10.0cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{\small{C:maj $|$ G:7 $|$ ... $|$ G:7 $|$ C:maj}}
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 1 } &
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 1.2} &
\parbox{10.0cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{\small{A\#:maj $|$ A:7 $|$ A:7 D:min7 D:min7 D:min7 $|$ D:hdim C:hdim $|$C:hdim $|$ C:hdim G:9 G:9 D:min7 $|$ D:min7 D\#:dim}}
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 23 } &
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 0.8} &
\parbox{10.0cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{ \small{C:7 F:maj$|$F:min$|$C:maj...C:maj$|$G:7$|$ C:maj}}
\vspace{.1\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 23 } &
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 1.2} &
\parbox{10.0cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{\small{C:7/5 C:7 $|$ F:maj6 F\#:dim $|$ C:6(9) $|$ C:6(9) $|$ C:6(9) C:6(9) C:6(9) C:maj $|$ E:7(b9) $|$ A:min(6,9) A\#:min(6,9) $|$ A\#:min(6,9) $|$... D:min $|$ G:9 C:maj $|$ ... G:7 \texttt{\char`_END\char`_} \texttt{\char`_START\char`_} C:maj }}
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{c}{(a)} \\
\hline
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 1 } &
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 0.5} &
\parbox{10.0cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{\small{C:maj $|$ G:7 $|$ ... $|$ G:7 $|$ C:maj6}}
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 1 } &
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 1.2} &
\parbox{10.0cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{\small{...C:maj \texttt{\char`_END\char`_} ... \texttt{\char`_START\char`_} \texttt{\char`_START\char`_} C\#:maj A\#:min A:sus4/5 C:maj/3 $|$ F:min7 A:min7 D:min7 D:min7... \texttt{\char`_START\char`_} }}
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 8 } &
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 0.5} &
\parbox{10.0cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{ \small{C:maj A:min $|$ D:min7 G:7(b9) $|$ C:maj $|$ A:min7 $|$ D:9 $|$ D:9 $|$ D:7 $|$ D:min7 $|$ G:7 $|$ C:maj $|$ C:7 $|$ F:maj $|$ F:min $|$ C:maj }}
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 8 } &
\parbox{0.6cm}{ 1.2} &
\parbox{10.0cm}{
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
\textincon{\small{C:Maj $|$ G:min7 $|$ F:maj $|$ D:min7 D:min7 D:min7/4 G:sus4(b7) $|$ G:min9 G:min9 G:min9 F\#:(1,3,b5,b7,9,13) $|$ C:6(9) G:sus4(b7,9) ... ... C:min \texttt{\char`_END\char`_} \texttt{\char`_START\char`_} C:maj }}
\vspace{.2\baselineskip}
}
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
(b)
\caption{Chord progressions generated by char-RNN (a) and word-RNN (b). Bar symbols ($|$) are inserted for readability and repeated chords in each bar are omitted. }
\label{table:chord_results}
\end{center}
\end{table}
First, both char-RNN and word-RNN showed well-structured results. They learned the local structures of chords and bars after sufficient number of iterations. In the result, the majority of chords continued for multiples of four, implying a single chord for within a bar. They also learned the local relationships between flags and chord. After one iteration, the flags are not placed properly as in the table \ref{table:chord_results} (a), where \texttt{\char`_END\char`_} is not followed by \texttt{\char`_START\char`_} but repeats itself. As training continues, the flags start to appear in a sequence of \textincon{\texttt{\char`_END\char`_} \texttt{\char`_START\char`_} C:maj} as in the training texts. The last chords of the score, i.e., the chord before \texttt{\char`_END\char`_} are not always same as the first chord (C), which is also natural as they vary in the training file.
Second, after sufficient training, both results showed chord progressions that lie in Jazz grammar. Examples are II-V-I progressions (D:min7- G:9 - C:maj), passing chords (A:dim - Ab:dim - G:min7), modal interchange chords (C:min6, Db:maj ) and substitutions (B:7 as a tritone subdominant of F:7) in char-RNN; modal interchanges (G:min7), circle of fifths (Eb:sus - Gb:maj6 - B:maj7), and descending bass (C:maj6,9 - B:dim - A:min7 - Ab:7) in word-RNN. The authors noticed a subtle difference between the results from the two approaches. The results from word-RNN are more conventional progressions than those of char-RNN. However, it cannot be the fundamental difference of the two approaches. Instead, it may be caused by the difference of effective lengths between char- and word-RNNs layers - they have the same length of state sequences, but it results in a longer chord sequence in the word-RNN as mentioned in Section \ref{sec:proposed}. In other words, the short memory of char-RNN may result in predictions that seem to be less constrained and stereotyped.
\section{Case 2. Drum Tracks}\label{sec:rhythm}
\subsection{Representation}
There are issues when applying LSTM networks to drum tracks including finding a way to create and effective text representation. Both chord progressions and drum tracks are sequences of simultaneous events (pitches and drum components). However, drum tracks do not have a meaningful and compressive representation such as chord and it necessitate an encoding strategy of the track into text. We also need a finer time resolution as generally there are more than four events in a bar.
To encode simultaneous events in a track into texts, we used a binary representation of \textit{pitches}, i.e., components of drums - kick, snare, hi-hats, cymbals, and tom-toms. For example, \texttt{100000000} and \texttt{010000000} represent kick and snare, respectively, and a simultaneous playing of kick and snare can be represented by \texttt{110000000}
For efficient representation and learning, only nine components were allowed; kick, snare, open hi-hats, closed hi-hats, three tom-toms, crash cymbal, and ride cymbal.\footnote{Some of the components in the texts also represent other similar components, e.g. a closed hi-hats in the texts can mean either closed hi-hats or pedalled hi-hats in the original midi file.} We limited the number of events in a bar to $16$ by quantising the drum track by $16$th-note.
In the experiment, we first loaded $60$ midi files of drum tracks of \textit{Metallica} and quantised them. Then they were encoded into the above described binary representation. We also added a flag \texttt{\char`_BAR\char`_} as an annotation of the bar segments in order to check if the networks learns the local structure.
There can be theoretically $2^9=512$ words, but there are supposedly much fewer words because the combinations of drum components that are played simultaneously are limited. The size of the word vocabulary in the training file is $119$ and the file consists of $2$,$141$,$692$ words in total.
\subsection{Results}
\begin{center}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{drum_result.jpg}
\caption{A score of a generated drum track. }\label{fig:drum_result}
\end{figure*}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
Char-RNNs turned out to fail to learn the drum tracks and output arbitrary $0$'s and $1$'s without any structures (the results have no spaces or \texttt{\char`_BAR\char`_} flags). The length of network may be too short to learn the long-term relationship between characters. In char-RNNs, representing a single bar requires $16$ events$\times$$10$ characters$=$$160$ time steps. Encoding music sequences with only two characters - $0$ and $1$ (+space to for segmentation) - is an extreme approach for char-RNNs. In this paper, we therefore only report the result of word-RNNs.
Figure \ref{fig:drum_result} shows one example of our results - a part of the generated track with $\alpha=1.0$ after $25$ iterations.\footnote{The score uses the percussion clef where $\times$ refers to hi-hats, notes on middle and bottom lines refers to snare and kick, respectively.} It consists of reasonable rock drum patterns - $8$-beat hi-hats, combinations of kick and snare, and occasional crash cymbals and tom-toms. Although there are occasional kick/snare/tom-toms notes on back beats (of sixteen notes), hi-hats remain consistent, playing on $4$-beat and $8$-beat pattern, which is very common for instance in drum tracks of Metallica.\footnote{\url{https://soundcloud.com/kchoi-research/00-24-100-bonus-for-score},\\The score in the figure starts from 34-second.}
Controlling $\alpha$ provides a way to tune the technical virtuosity of the track. Since large $\alpha$ increases the probabilities of occasional events, large $\alpha$ (=$1.5$) results in tracks with many fill-ins with tom-toms and a crash cymbal. On the other hands, when $\alpha < 1$, the track almost never contains anything but kick, snare, and hi-hats. As a result, it is possible to use a combination of small and large $\alpha$ in a drum track generator that is guided by user, who specifies where to add fill-ins.
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:con}
We introduced an algorithm of text-based LSTM networks for automatic composition and reported results for generating chord progressions and rock drum tracks. Word-RNNs showed good results in both cases while char-RNNs only successfully learned chord progressions. The experiments show LSTM provides a way to learn the sequence of musical events even when the data is given as text. With the diversity parameter, the proposed algorithm can be used as a tool that helps human composers. In the future, a more complex network with the capability of learning interactions within music (instruments, melody/lyrics) will be examined for a more complete automatic composition algorithm.
\bibliographystyle{splncs03}
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
Wide-field, multi-object spectroscopic surveys such as the Sloan Extension for
Galactic Understanding and Exploration \citep[SEGUE;][]{Yanny2009}, RAdial
Velocity Experiment \citep[RAVE;][]{Steinmetz2006}, and Large sky Area
Multi-Object fiber Spectroscopic Telescope \citep[LAMOST;][]{Cui2012}, have
proved to be efficient for exploring the Milky Way galaxy.
Determining the fundamental parameters and chemical characteristics of a large
sample of stars is particularly important and essential for better
understanding the formation and structure of galaxies.
Stellar surface gravity, $\log{g}$, is one of the most crucial parameters in
stellar physics as it is closely related to the stellar luminosity and,
hence, to the position of a star on the Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram (HRD).
In addition, if the stellar mass is known, one can obtain the stellar radius and
reddening-independent distance with precision superior to that of
photometric calibrations \citep[e.g.][]{Breddels2010,Xue2014}.
On the other hand, precise determination of magnesium and calcium abundances
from Mg\,Ib and infrared Ca\,II triplets in low-resolution spectra rely
heavily on the accurate determination of $\log{g}$ \citep[e.g.][]{
Deeming1960,Chmielewski2000}.
In the high-resolution ($R>40,000$) spectroscopy, several approaches are often
used for determining the $\log{g}$ values of cool stars.
The first approach utilizes the ionization balance of neutral and singly ionized
atoms of the same element, such as Fe I/II \citep[e.g.][]{Fuhrmann1998,
daSilva2006, Boesgaard2011}.
A typical $\log{g}$ error in this approach is 0.1-0.2\,dex, which is limited by
the facts that
(1) the number of unblended, weak, singly ionized iron lines in stellar
spectra is too small;
(2) the equilibria of Fe I and Fe II are strongly affected by
$T_{\rm eff}$; and
(3) the non-local thermodynamic equilibrium (NLTE) effect affects the
abundance of neutral iron lines by up to 0.1\,dex \citep[e.g.][]{
Mashonkina2011, Lind2012}.
A different method for determining $\log{g}$ uses the basic relation
$\log{g}=\log{M}+4\log{T_{\rm eff}}+0.4M_{\rm bol}$ \citep[e.g.][]{Chen2000,
Reddy2003, Wang2011}, where the accurate absolute bolometric magnitude
$M_{\rm bol}$ relies on the data of precise trigonometric parallaxes (e.g.,
acquired by the {\sc Hipparcos} mission).
A relative parallax uncertainty of 20\% yields an error of 0.17\,dex in
$\log{g}$.
In the {\sc Hipparcos catalogue}, $\sim$60\% of the stars with distances above
100\,pc are characterized by a relative parallax uncertainty above 20\%
\citep{vanLeeuwen2007}.
Determination of stellar atmospheric parameters ($T_{\rm eff}$, $\log{g}$, and
[Fe/H]) from low- to medium-resolution spectra are mostly based on the
spectral synthesis technique, with a library covering a wide range of
$T_{\rm eff}$, $\log{g}$, and [M/H] values \citep[e.g.][]{Zwitter2004,
Prungniel2001,Sanchez2006, Cenarro2007}.
The precision associated with $\log{g}$ is generally lower than that obtained in
high-resolution spectroscopy.
For example, the error on $\log{g}$ determined from the SEGUE Stellar Parameter
Pipeline \citep[SSPP;][]{Lee2008} is $\sim$0.23\,dex, while it is 0.5\,dex
for RAVE \citep{Zwitter2008}.
The precision of $\log{g}$ for the ongoing LAMOST survey is $\sim0.2$\,dex for
both the LAMOST stellar parameter pipeline \citep[LASP,][]{Wu2014,Luo2015}
and LSP-3 \citep{Xiang2015,Ren2016}.
\cite{Carlin2015} developed a Bayesian model to derive stellar distances from
calibrated stellar spectra, and applied it to the LAMOST data.
They found that the precision with which distances could be determined was
limited to 40\% owing to large uncertainties associated with $\log{g}$.
Reducing the $\log{g}$ uncertainty by 0.1\,dex would increase the distance
accuracy by $\sim$12\% \citep[e.g.][]{Liu2015}.
Launched in 2009 March, the NASA {\em Kepler} space telescope
\citep{Borucki2010} uses a wide-field, 95-cm-aperture telescope to search
for transiting Earth-sized planets in a sample of $\sim$170,000 stars.
The data collected during the first four years of the operation of this
telescope not only revolutionized the extra-solar planet hunting campaign
but also significantly contributed to other fields, such as
asteroseismology.
With the unprecedented photometric precision, researchers are, for the first
time, able to precisely determine the $M$, $R$, $\log{g}$, and $\rho$ values
for $\sim10^4$ stars by consistently using the asteroseismology method
\citep[e.g.][]{Kallinger2010, Hekker2011, Stello2013, Chaplin2014,
Huber2014}.
These stars reveal solar-like oscillations in their power spectra, and their
spectral types range from early F to late K \citep{Chaplin2013}, including
both giants and dwarfs.
The uncertainty associated with asteroseismic $\log{g}$ is typically less than
0.02\,dex, which is one order of magnitude lower than the spectroscopically
determined one \citep{Hekker2013}.
\cite{Gai2011} showed that such asteroseismically determined $\log{g}$ values
are almost independent of the stellar evolution model grid and contain
nearly no systematic errors.
Derivation of stellar physical parameters ($M$, $R$, $L$) using
asteroseismology scaling relations relies on $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] from
``external" sources as inputs.
The majority of asteroseismically interesting stars in the {\em Kepler} field
\citep[e.g.][]{Chaplin2014} are analyzed by adopting photometric or
Infra-Red Flux Method (IRFM) calibrated $T_{\rm eff}$, together with Kepler
Input Catalog \citep[KIC;][]{Brown2011} metallicities, in which systematic
errors or large scatter have already been found \citep[e.g.][]{Dong2014}.
For these stars, $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] based on high-resolution spectroscopy
remain a challenge because most of these stars are too faint for
modest-sized telescopes.
Recently, a significant amount of data on low-resolution ($R\sim1,800$) spectra
in the {\em Kepler} field have been released by the LAMOST survey
\citep{Luo2015}, and a set of consistent, spectroscopic $T_{\rm eff}$ and
[Fe/H] values has been reliably determined.
Therefore, it is worthwhile to redetermine the physical parameters of these
stars by replacing the photometric or KIC inputs by this new set of
atmospheric parameters.
\section{LAMOST SPECTROSCOPIC DATA}
\subsection{LAMOST Observations in the {\em Kepler} Field}
LAMOST, also known as the ``Guoshoujing Telescope,'' is a reflecting Schmidt
telescope with an effective aperture of $\sim$4\,m and a field of view (FOV)
of 20\,deg$^2$.
Four thousand fiber units in its focal plane and 16 multi-object spectrographs
make it highly efficient for spectroscopic surveys.
During the first three years of operation, from 2011 October, to 2014 June,
LAMOST has collected over 4.1 million spectra with resolving power
($R=\lambda/\Delta\lambda$) of 1,800, and public access to these spectra has
been granted in the second data release
(DR2)\footnote{\url{http://dr2.lamost.org/}}.
We cross-matched the DR2 and DR3 Quarter 1 (DR3Q1) catalogs with the KIC, and
found 87,834 spectra of 70,703 common objects within 36 exposures in the
LAMOST-{\em Kepler} project \citep{DeCat2015}.
Atmospheric parameters for 48,486 stars out of these objects have been
determined by LASP \citep{Wu2014, Wu2011}.
The median uncertainties of $T_{\rm eff}$, $\log{g}$, and [Fe/H] were 128\,K,
0.47\,dex, and 0.15\,dex for spectra with signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) of
$\sim$50 at 477\,nm, and 101\,K, 0.44\,dex, and 0.12\,dex for spectra with
SNR of $\sim$100.
\subsection{LAMOST vs. High-Resolution Spectroscopy}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=15cm]{fig_para_diff.pdf}
\caption{
Differences between stellar parameters obtained from the LAMOST pipeline
and those obtained using the HR spectroscopy, as functions of
$T_{\rm eff}$, $\log{g}$ and [Fe/H], respectively.
Red circles, red squares, and red crosses represent the LAMOST stars in
common with M2014 (AST sub-sample), Th2012, and Br2012, respectively.
All of the above adopted asteroseismic $\log{g}$.
Blue circles, blue squares, blue crosses and blue triangles are those in
common with M2014 (SME sub-sample), Bu2012, MZ2013, and Hi2014, all of
which were obtained using spectral synthesis or excitation/ionization
equilibrium method.
}
\label{comp_lamost_hrs}
\end{figure*}
The asteroseismic scaling relations (see Section~\ref{method}) require
$T_{\rm eff}$ as an input parameter.
Thus, it is necessary to compare the LAMOST results with those of
high-resolution spectroscopy (HRS).
However, such a comparison for a large sample of stars is not always feasible,
because most targets of the LAMOST observing plan are not sufficiently
bright, and thus, are lacking of HR studies.
Fortunately, the wealth of planet candidate hosts and other stars with
noticeable values from the {\em Kepler} mission has generated significant
interest in ground-based follow-up observations, and many of these are
performed using HR spectrographs on large telescopes, such as the
10-m-aperture Keck I telescope and the Subaru telescope.
As a result, accurate stellar parameters for hundreds of FGK stars in the
{\em Kepler} field have been determined using various techniques, providing
a good opportunity to test the LAMOST low-resolution spectra parameters.
\citet[][hereafter, Br2012]{Bruntt2012} and
\citet[][hereafter, Th2012]{Thygesen2012} observed 93 solar-like and 82 red
giant stars using high-resolution spectrographs.
They determined the $\log{g}$ values for these stars from global oscillation
parameters, while the other atmospheric parameters $T_{\rm eff}$, [Fe/H],
and $\xi$ (micro-turbulent velocity) were determined using the spectroscopic
method.
\citet[][hereafter, MZ2013]{Molenda2013} also analyzed 169 {\em Kepler} targets
using spectral synthesis based on high resolution spectra collected by
different ground-based telescopes.
Moreover, \citet[][hereafter, Bu2012]{Buchhave2012} studied the HR spectra of
152 planet-host stars using Stellar Parameter Classification (SPC), which is
also a realization of spectral synthesis with a grid of template spectra.
To validate and characterize the planetary properties, \citet[][hereafter,
M2014]{Marcy2014} published stellar parameters of 22 {\em Kepler} Objects of
Interests (KOIs) using the reconnaissance spectra obtained using the HIRES
spectrometer \citep{Vogt1994}.
\citet[][hereafter, Hi2014]{Hirano2012, Hirano2014} also derived stellar
parameters for 40 KOIs using the excitation/ionization equilibrium of Fe I
and Fe II lines.
We divided the above samples into two groups -- depending on how the values of
$\log{g}$ were derived -- using either the asteroseismology method or purely
by using spectroscopic techniques.
Using the LAMOST AFGK-type star parameters catalog, we found 26, 41, 49, 39, 13,
and 21 common stars with Br2012, Th2012, MZ2013, Bu2012, M2014, and Hi2014,
respectively.
In Figure~\ref{comp_lamost_hrs}, we compare the stellar parameters extracted
from literature and the LAMOST catalog.
The mean differences between the LAMOST and high-resolution spectroscopy
parameters were
$\left<\Delta T_{\rm eff}\right> = -1 \pm 71$\,K,
$\left<\Delta\log{g} \right> = 0.06 \pm 0.17$\,dex, and
$\left<\Delta{\rm [Fe/H]}\right> = -0.03 \pm 0.12$\,dex
for 73 stars in the asteroseismic group (red points in
Figure~\ref{comp_lamost_hrs}), and
$\left<\Delta T_{\rm eff}\right> = 19 \pm 100$\,K,
$\left<\Delta\log{g} \right> = 0.02 \pm 0.19$\,dex, and
$\left<\Delta{\rm [Fe/H]}\right> = 0.00 \pm 0.09$\,dex
for 116 stars in the spectroscopic group (blue points in
Figure~\ref{comp_lamost_hrs}).
For all the common stars, the mean differences were
$\left<\Delta T_{\rm eff}\right> = 11 \pm 90$\,K,
$\left<\Delta\log{g} \right> = 0.01 \pm 0.18$\,dex, and
$\left<\Delta{\rm [Fe/H]}\right> = -0.01 \pm 0.10$\,dex.
The temperature values obtained by using the LAMOST catalog were in good
agreement with those obtained from high-resolution spectra (with
$\langle\Delta T_{\rm eff}\rangle=-14\pm86$\,K) for stars with
$T_{\rm eff}<5,500$\,K; however, the difference was slightly higher
($31\pm89$ K) for hotter stars.
Figure~\ref{comp_lamost_hrs} also shows that $\Delta\log{g}\,{\rm (LAMOST-HRS)}$
tend to increase with decreasing $\log{g}$ for $\log{g}\lesssim2.5$, and
with decreasing $T_{\rm eff}$ for $T_{\rm eff}<5,000$\,K, where the HR
samples were mostly from giant stars studied by Th2012, for which $\log{g}$
values were derived using the asteroseismology method.
Th2012 presented the stellar parameters based on pure spectroscopic methods as
well.
In Figure~\ref{comp_thygesen} we plot the differences between the LAMOST
$\log{g}$ and the asteroseismic and spectroscopic $\log{g}$ in Th2012, as
functions of $T_{\rm eff}$.
It is obvious that, for both cases, the trends of $\Delta\log{g}$ are quite
similar.
Moreover, previous studies (e.g. Th2012, \citealt{Takeda2015}) have shown that
$\log{g}$ obtained by the two methods are satisfactorily similar for giants.
These facts suggest that LASP overestimated $\log{g}$ by up to 0.5\,dex for cool
giants.
For metallicity, the scatter tends to increase with decreasing $T_{\rm eff}$ and
$\log{g}$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{fig_compare_thygesen.pdf}
\caption{
Differences between $\log{g}$ from the LAMOST pipeline and from Th2012,
as functions of $T_{\rm eff}$.
Similar to Figure~\ref{comp_lamost_hrs}, the red and blue squares
represent the parameters obtained by performing asteroseismic and
spectroscopic analysis in Th2012, respectively.
}
\label{comp_thygesen}
\end{figure}
\section{METHOD}
\subsection{Asteroseismic Analysis}
\label{method}
Solar-like oscillations are excited by the near-surface turbulent convection in
a star, which is characterized by the global oscillation parameters
$\Delta\nu$, corresponding to the average frequency separation between
oscillation modes with consecutive radial orders $n$ and the same spherical
degree $l$, and $\nu_{\rm max}$, the frequency at which the oscillation
power is maximum.
The parameter $\Delta\nu$ is proportional to the square root of the mean stellar
density ($\rho$) and is therefore given by \citep{Ulrich1986}:
\begin{equation}\label{dnu}
\Delta\nu = \sqrt{\frac{M/M_\odot}{(R/R_\odot)^3}}\Delta\nu_\odot
\end{equation}
with respect to the Sun.
The parameter $\nu_{\rm max}$ is assumed to be scaled with the acoustic cutoff
frequency \citep{Brown1991}, and \citet{Kjeldsen1995} used this assumption
to relate $\nu_{\rm max}$ to the fundamental stellar parameters as follows.
\begin{equation}\label{numax}
\nu_{\rm max} = \frac{M/M_\odot}{(R/R_\odot)^2\sqrt{T_{\rm eff}/T_{\rm
eff, \odot}}}\nu_{\rm max,\odot}
\end{equation}
By solving Equations~\ref{dnu} and \ref{numax}, one can obtain the relations
linking the stellar mass $M$, radius $R$, mean density $\rho$, and surface
gravity $\log{g}$ with the global oscillation parameters $\Delta\nu$ and
$\nu_{\rm max}$.
It is noted that $\log{g}$ only depends on $\nu_{\rm max}$ for a given $T_{\rm
eff}$.
The values of $\Delta\nu$ and $\nu_{\rm max}$ for different types of stars in
the {\em Kepler} field have been used to estimate $M$, $R$, $\rho$ and
$\log{g}$ in various studies.
For instance, \citet{Kallinger2010} determined the parameters for $>1,000$ red
giants based on the first 138 days of the {\em Kepler} photometric data.
\citet{Hekker2011} used the data of the first 33 days to characterize more than
10,000 giants for which solar-like oscillations have been detected.
This work was later refined by \cite{Stello2013} using the {\em Kepler} data
with a longer time baseline of 681 days.
The {\em Kepler} mission also detected solar-like oscillations for 500 out of
2,000 pre-selected main sequence and sub-giant stars during the first 10
months of its scientific operation \citep{Chaplin2011}.
The fundamental parameters of these stars were published in \cite{Chaplin2014}
and led to better characterization of planets \citep{Huber2013} and their
host stars \citep{Mathur2011,Johnson2014}.
\citet{Huber2014} presented the revised catalog of parameters for more than
190,000 stars for the {\em Kepler} Quarter 1-16 data.
Although stellar parameters can be directly derived Equations~\ref{dnu} and
\ref{numax} as
\begin{align}
\left(\frac{M}{M_\odot}\right) & = \left(\frac{\nu_\mathrm{max}}{\nu_\mathrm{max,\odot}}\right)^3
\left(\frac{\Delta\nu}{\Delta\nu_\odot}\right)^{-4}
\left(\frac{T_\mathrm{eff}}{T_\mathrm{eff,\odot}}\right)^{3/2}
\label{para1}
\\
\left(\frac{R}{R_\odot}\right) & = \left(\frac{\nu_\mathrm{max}}{\nu_\mathrm{max,\odot}}\right)
\left(\frac{\Delta\nu}{\Delta\nu_\odot}\right)^{-2}
\left(\frac{T_\mathrm{eff}}{T_\mathrm{eff,\odot}}\right)^{1/2}
\label{para2}
\\
\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_\odot}\right) & = \left(\frac{\Delta\nu}{\Delta\nu_\odot}\right)^2
\label{para3}
\\
\log{g} & = \log{g_\odot} + \log\left({\frac{\nu_\mathrm{max}}{\nu_\mathrm{max,\odot}}}\right)
+ \frac12\log\left({\frac{T_\mathrm{eff}}{T_\mathrm{eff,\odot}}}\right)
\label{para4}
\\
\left(\frac{L}{L_\odot}\right) & = \left(\frac{\nu_{\rm max}}{\nu_{\rm max,\odot}}\right)^2
\left(\frac{\Delta\nu}{\Delta\nu_\odot}\right)^{-4}
\left(\frac{T_{\rm eff}}{T_{\rm eff,\odot}}\right)^5
\label{para5}
\end{align},
some sets of ($M$, $R$, $T_{\rm eff}$) for a given metallicity are not
permitted according to the stellar evolution theories.
Grid-based methods containing a significantly large number of parameters ($M$,
$R$, $T_{\rm eff}$, [Fe/H]) returned by stellar evolution programs have been
widely used to find the best match to the observed parameters
\citep[see][and references therein]{Chaplin2013}.
We adopted the Geneva stellar evolutionary tracks \citep{Lejeune2001}, which
cover a wide range of mass and metallicity ($Z$) values.
The values of high-temperature opacities were taken from the OPAL data
\citep{Iglesias1996}, and those of low-temperature opacities were taken from
\citet{Kurucz1991} or \citet{Alexander1994}.
For stars with $M\le1.5M_\odot$, a core overshooting parameter of
$d/H_{\rm P}=0.2$ was adopted.
Mass loss of \citet{Reimers1975} and \citet{Jager1988} were taken into account.
In previous grid-based analyses \citep[e.g.][]{Basu2010, Kallinger2010,
Huber2014}, some widely used stellar models, such as the YREC \citep[Yale
Stellar Evolution Code;][]{Demarque2008}, DSEP \citep[Dartmouth Stellar
Evolution Program;][]{Dotter2008}, and BaSTI \citep[Bag of Stellar Tracks
and Isochrones;][]{Piersanti2004} models, did not account for the
evolutionary stages after the helium flash.
On the contrary, the evolution phases of Geneva database were calculated to the
end of the early asymptotic giant branch (EAGB) phase for intermediate-mass
stars ($2 \le M/M_\odot \le 5$), and to the end of the carbon burning phase
for larger mass stars ($M/M_\odot \ge 7$).
Therefore, the evolutionary stages following the helium flash were included for
stars with $M > 2 M_\odot$.
As a substantial number of our samples met the above condition, we considered
that our method naturally eliminates the systematic bias towards larger
masses for giants in \cite{Huber2014}, where post-helium flash data were not
included for calculations.
To ensure that at least $10^2$ models are available for the final probability
density function (PDF) of each star, we generated a dense grid by
interpolating the evolutionary tracks in steps of 0.02\,dex for [Fe/H],
ranging from $-2.0$ to +1.5, and steps of 0.02\,$M_\odot$ for the initial
mass ($M_0$), ranging from 0.8 to 5.0\,$M_\odot$.
For each track, the Geneva database contained at most 51 groups of data points
with $T_{\rm eff}$, $L$, age, and $M$.
Here, $M$ is the stellar mass, varying with time due to the mass loss.
We interpolated 500 points along the entire time span, and calculated $R$ and
$\log{g}$ using the basic physical relations, along with $\Delta\nu$ and
$\nu_{\rm max}$ that were calculated according to the scaling relations in
Equations~\ref{dnu} and \ref{numax}, for each interpolated point.
We adopted the solar seismic parameters $\Delta\nu_\odot=135.1\pm0.1\,\mu$Hz and
$\nu_{{\rm max},\odot}=3,090\pm30\,\mu$Hz that were based on the data
collected by VIRGO aboard SOHO spacecraft during $\sim$11,000 days
\citep{Huber2011}.
Our complete grid had a total of $\sim1.8\times10^7$ points, each containing
nine parameters, $T_{\rm eff}$, $Z$, $M$, $R$, $L$, $\log{g}$, age,
$\Delta\nu$, and $\nu_{\rm max}$.
Stellar fundamental parameters can be subsequently derived from the observed
oscillation parameters ($\Delta\nu$ and $\nu_{\rm max}$) using the Bayesian
approach, if $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] are known.
The Bayes' theorem can be stated as
\begin{equation}\label{bayesian}
p(\boldsymbol\theta|\boldsymbol{d},M) = \frac{p(\boldsymbol\theta|M)
p(\boldsymbol{d}|\boldsymbol\theta,M)}{p(\boldsymbol{d}|M)}
\end{equation},
where $p(\boldsymbol\theta|\boldsymbol{d},M)$ is the posterior probability
distribution of parameters $\boldsymbol\theta$ for a certain model $M$,
based on the observational data $\boldsymbol{d}$.
The model $M$ stands for an individual datum corresponding to an evolutionary
status in our grid.
The distribution $p(\boldsymbol\theta|M)$ is the prior probability distribution
of $\boldsymbol\theta$, and the likelihood function
$p(\boldsymbol{d}|\boldsymbol\theta,M)$ is the probability of obtaining
$\boldsymbol{d}$, given the parameters $\boldsymbol\theta$ for model $M$.
The quantity $1/p(\boldsymbol{d}|M)$ is the normalization term.
In our case, the observational data set is $\boldsymbol{d}=(T_{\rm eff},
{\rm [Fe/H]}, \Delta\nu, \nu_{\rm max})$, and
\begin{equation}
p(\boldsymbol{d}|\boldsymbol\theta,M) =
{\cal L}_{T_{\rm eff}}
{\cal L}_{\rm [Fe/H]}
{\cal L}_{\Delta\nu}
{\cal L}_{\nu_{\rm max}}
\end{equation}.
The likelihood functions of each parameter are calculated to match the
observational ones by assuming independent Gaussian-distributed errors.
Therefore, we have
\begin{equation}
{\cal L}_d = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_d}
\exp\left[-\frac{(d_{\rm obs}-d_{\rm model})^2}{2\sigma_d^2}\right]
\end{equation}.
Some previous studies adopted uniform priors $p(\boldsymbol\theta|M)$ for all
models in the grid \citep[e.g.][]{Kallinger2010}.
However, it should be noted that for a star with given ($M_0, Z$), the
probability of its physical quantities being ($T_{\rm eff}, R, L, \log{g}$)
when the star is being observed is inversely proportional to the star's
evolutionary speed in its current stage.
Otherwise, the resulting stellar parameters would be biased towards the rapid
evolution phases (see the description of the GOE pipeline in \citealt{
Chaplin2014}).
In our approach, the differential age of a track with a given ($M_0, Z$) can
well represent the reciprocals of the evolutionary speeds; thus
\begin{equation}\label{pnorm}
p(\boldsymbol\theta|M_{i,j}) = C
\frac{a_{i+1,j}-a_{i,j}}{a_{n,j}-a_{1,j}}
\quad i=1,2,\cdots n-1
\end{equation},
where $a_{i,j}$ is the age of the $i$-th interpolated point in the $j$-th
track, $C$ denotes the normalization factor, and $n=500$ is the number of
interpolated points along each track.
In the above equation, the time span of two adjacent points
($a_{i+1,j}-a_{i,j}$) is normalized by the total time ($a_{n,j}-a_{1,j}$)
of the $j$-th track; otherwise, the posterior probability distributions
would be biased towards low-mass stars.
Although larger-mass stars have shorter lifetimes than less massive stars, and
hence, have lower probabilities of being observed as their higher
luminosities make them visible over longer distances to a magnitude-limited
survey, which, to some extent, cancels out the above age selection effect.
Therefore, aim of Equation~\ref{pnorm} only corrects the bias caused by
different evolutionary speeds at different stages, rather than lifetimes, as
a function of the stellar masses.
In our study, uniform probabilities for stars with different ($M_0$, $Z$) were
assumed, because our observed data $\boldsymbol{d}$ were accurate, and the
prior probabilities of ($M_0$, $Z$) were not expected to vary significantly
over such a relatively narrow parametric range.
All the sample stars in this work have been monitored by the {\em Kepler} space
telescope with extremely high photometric precision during its scientific
operation.
Several research groups have devoted attention to extracting the values of
$\Delta\nu$ and $\nu_{\rm max}$ from the {\em Kepler} light curves using
various techniques \citep[e.g.,][]{Mosser2009, Huber2009, Kallinger2010a,
Hekker2010}.
We employed the parameters from different literature sources, as listed in
Table~\ref{tab-oscref}.
For nonseismic parameters $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H], we used the values returned
by the LASP in the LAMOST AFGK-type star parameters catalog.
\begin{table*}
\caption{
Sources of oscillation parameters ($\Delta\nu$ and $\nu_{\rm max}$) for
stars analyzed in this work. Methods for obtaining the seismic data are
described by \citealt{Kallinger2010a} (CAN), \citealt{Hekker2010} (OCT),
\citealt{Mosser2009} (COR), and \citealt{Huber2009} (SYD).
}\label{tab-oscref}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lllcrr}
\hline
\hline
Reference & Type of stars & Timespan & Method & $N_{\rm total}$ & $N_{\rm adopt}$ \\
\hline
\citet{Kallinger2010}&red giants and clump stars &$\sim$1200 days (Q1 $\sim$ Q13)& CAN &$>1000$ & 630 \\
\citet{Hekker2011} &red giants and clump stars &33 days & OCT &$>10^4$ & 1548 \\
\cite{Mathur2011} &two solar-type stars &8 months & -- & 2 & 1 \\
\citet{Mosser2012} &red giants and clump stars &690 days (Q1 $\sim$ Q8) & COR & 218 & 10 \\
\citet{Huber2013} &planet-candidate host stars &$\sim$1000 days (Q1 $\sim$ Q11)& SYD & 77 & 27 \\
\citet{Stello2013} &red giants and clump stars &681 days (Q0 $\sim$ Q8) & SYD &$\sim$13000 & 630 \\
\citet{Chaplin2014} &main-sequence and sub-giant stars&$\sim$300 days & SYD & 518 & 214 \\
\hline
& & & & Total & 3060 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Iterative Process}
\label{iterative}
In our work, the derived $\log{g}$ obtained using the above approach could
differ from spectroscopically obtained values by as much as 0.5\,dex (see
Section~\ref{lamost_calib}), which could in turn yield a significant bias in
$T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H].
Therefore, we determined our spectroscopic parameters ($T_{\rm eff}$, [Fe/H] and
$\log{g}$) iteratively.
First, asteroseismic $\log{g}$ values (hereafter, $\log{g}_{\rm iter0}$) were
obtained by using the above-mentioned grid method, with $T_{\rm eff}$ and
[Fe/H] listed in the LAMOST catalog (hereafter, $T_{\rm eff, LASP}$, and
[Fe/H]$_{\rm LASP}$), and oscillation parameters $\Delta\nu$ and
$\nu_{\rm max}$.
Then, the LAMOST spectra for all the sample stars were reanalyzed by LASP with
fixed $\log{g}_{\rm iter0}$, to acquire new $T_{\rm eff, iter1}$ and
[Fe/H]$_{\rm iter1}$ values, which were then used for calculating
asteroseismic $\log{g}_{\rm iter1}$.
We found that, in our sample, a change of +0.1\,dex in $\log{g}$ resulted in
$\Delta T_{\rm eff}\sim$ +27\,K and $\Delta$[Fe/H] $\sim$ +0.02\,dex for
giants, and in $\Delta T_{\rm eff}\sim$ +36\,K and $\Delta$[Fe/H] $\sim$
+0.01\,dex for dwarfs.
The differences between $\log{g}_{\rm iter1}$ and $\log{g}_{\rm iter0}$ were
within $\pm$0.03\,dex for 99\% of our giants, and $\pm$0.01\,dex for all of
our dwarfs, except for only one star.
These small changes in $\log{g}$ after the first iteration had negligible
effects on $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] compared with the observational
uncertainties because, according to Equation~\ref{para4}, asteroseismic
$\log{g}$ only depends weakly on $T_{\rm eff}$.
Consequently, our results regarding atmospheric parameters converged after one
iteration.
\section{RESULTS}
\subsection{Stellar Parameters}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=16cm]{fig_pdf.pdf}
\caption{
Examples of normalized PDFs of stellar parameters, for one dwarf
(KIC\,4646780) and two giants (KIC\,7374855 and KIC\,9025029).
Columns from left to right: $M$, $R$, $\log{g}$, age, and $L$.
Red and black histograms indicate time-weighted and nonweighted PDFs.
Vertical dashed lines represent the corresponding average values.
}
\label{fig_pdf}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Stellar parameters of {\em Kepler} planet candidate hosts.}
\label{tab-host}
\footnotesize{
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{rrllccrrrr}
\hline
\hline
KOI & KIC& Kepler name&$T_{\rm eff}$ (K) & $\log{g}$ & [Fe/H] & $M_\star/M_\odot$ & $R_\star/R_\odot$ & $L_\star/L_\odot$ & Age (Gyr) \\
\hline
\input{tab_hosts.dat}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Stellar parameters for all the stars in this study.
Only the first five rows are shown here to illustrate the format.
The full table is available online.}
\label{tab_allstars}
\scriptsize{
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llllllllrrrr}
\hline
\hline
KIC & Kepler & KOI &S/N& Kp &
$T_{\rm eff}$ & $\log{g}$ & [Fe/H] &
Mass & Radius & Luminosity &Age\\
& & & & &
(K) & & &
($M_\odot$) & ($R_\odot$) & ($L_\odot$) & (Gyr)\\
\hline
\input{table3_example.dat}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
\end{table*}
We applied the grid-based method, described in Section~\ref{method}, to derive
the PDFs of $M$, $R$, $\log{g}$, $L$, and age, for 3,060 stars with SNR
$>30$ spectra in the LAMOST-DR2 and DR3 Quarter 1 catalog.
For each PDF, we report its mean as the result, and use standard deviation as a
measure of uncertainty.
Figure~\ref{fig_pdf} shows examples of PDFs of $M$, $R$, $\log{g}$, age and $L$
for one typical main-sequence star and two evolved stars.
For comparison, we plot the time-weighted and non-weighted PDFs by using red and
black solid curves, respectively.
These results show that by taking into account the evolution speed effect as
discussed in Section~\ref{method}, the values of $M$, $R$, and $L$ shift
towards higher values whereas the resulting age becomes smaller.
This is expected because the weights of the phases are reduced after evolving
off the main sequence.
Stellar properties of planet candidate hosts are of particular interest because
they are directly related to the planetary radii and masses in transit and
Doppler detections.
Serious uncertainties in metallicities, surface gravities, and radii, mostly
based on broad-band photometry, have been found in the KIC \citep[e.g.][]{
Verner2011, Dong2014}, while high-resolution spectra are expensive for most
of the {\em Kepler} planet hosts with $K_{\rm p}<13$ \citep[e.g.][]{
Marcy2014}.
Alternatively, asteroseismology with spectroscopic inputs has been used for
characterizing these planetary systems \citep[e.g.][]{Huber2013,
Chaplin2013}.
There were 60 KOIs in our catalog, including 15 confirmed planet-host stars, 23
``false positives," and 22 host candidates awaiting validation.
In Table~\ref{tab-host} we list the results for the confirmed and candidate
hosts.
The entire sample is available via an online catalog, and the first five rows
are shown in Table~\ref{tab_allstars} to illustrate the format.
Figure~\ref{fig_compare_koi} compares the stellar parameters of the KOIs
obtained in our work with those obtained in the previous studies that
employed high-resolution spectroscopy.
There are five stars in common with M2014, and all of them show good agreements
in terms of $T_{\rm eff}$, $\log{g}$, [Fe/H], $M$, and $R$.
Our derived age values were systematically higher than those in M2014, which is
likely owing to the different theoretical evolution tracks used in these two
studies (Y$^2$ in M14, and Geneva model in our study).
We also analyzed four common KOIs with Hi2012 and Hi2014, for which, the values
of $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] obtained were systematically lower while the
values of $M$ and $R$ were higher than the previously reported results.
The stellar ages of two KOIs (KOI-269 and KOI-262) agreed within the
corresponding error ranges, while the age of KOI-280 determined by us was
lower.
Because the main-sequence stars evolve slowly on the HR diagram compared with
the post-main sequence phases, age estimation by fitting the isochrones or
evolution tracks is difficult and model-dependent (see \citealt{
Soderblom2010}, and references therein).
Our estimation based on global oscillation parameters remains meaningful because
the stellar ages are further constrained by $\Delta\nu$ and $\nu_{\rm max}$
in addition to $T_{\rm eff}$, $\log{g}$, and [Fe/H].
A more detailed approach involves spectral analysis of excited oscillation
modes \citep[e.g.][]{SilvaAguirre2015}.
Moreover, the field of gyrochronology, which has been developing with the help
of the {\em Kepler} data, has made remarkable progress in refining the
empirical relation between the stellar age and rotational period
\citep[e.g.][]{Garcia2014, Angus2015}.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=15cm]{fig_compare_koi.pdf}
\caption{
Comparison of stellar parameters for the KOIs in common with the
previous studies that used high-resolution spectroscopy.
Solid dots, open circles, and open diamonds represent parameters from
M2014, Hi2012, and Hi2014, respectively.
}
\label{fig_compare_koi}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Comparison with Huber et al. 2014}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.9cm]{fig_huber-cat01-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=9.2cm]{fig_huber-cat01-2.pdf}
\caption{
Comparisons of stellar parameters obtained in this work with those
obtained from H2014 sub-category C.1 (see their Table~1).
The values of $T_{\rm eff}$, $\log{g}$, and [Fe/H] in the H2014 study
were obtained using spectroscopy, asteroseismology, and spectroscopy,
respectively.
Panel (g) shows the different positions of the sample stars on the Kiel
diagram, by drawing solid lines to connect the parameters given by H2014
with those obtained in the present work.
The colors are coded with $\Delta M$ (this work $-$ H2014).
A series of Geneva evolution tracks with initial masses $M_0 = 1.0$,
2.0, and 3.0\,$M_\odot$, and [Fe/H] = 0.0 (solid lines), and $-0.5$
(dashed lines) are also shown in panel (g).
}
\label{fig_huber_cat01}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.9cm]{fig_huber-cat04-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=9.2cm]{fig_huber-cat04-2.pdf}
\caption{
Same as Figure~\ref{fig_huber_cat01}, but for stars in common with
sub-category C.4 in H2014, for which the values of $T_{\rm eff}$,
$\log{g}$, and [Fe/H] were obtained using photometry, asteroseismology,
and photometry, respectively.
}
\label{fig_huber_cat04}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.9cm]{fig_huber-cat05-1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=9.2cm]{fig_huber-cat05-2.pdf}
\caption{
Same as Figures~\ref{fig_huber_cat01} and \ref{fig_huber_cat04}, but for
stars in common with sub-category C.5 in H2014, for which the values of
$T_{\rm eff}$, $\log{g}$, and [Fe/H] were obtained using photometry,
asteroseismology, and the KIC, respectively.
}
\label{fig_huber_cat05}
\end{figure*}
Huber et al. (2014, hereafter, H2014) presented the stellar parameters for a
large sample of {\em Kepler} stars observed in Quarter 1-16.
Their catalog is composed of several sub-categories designated by C.1-C.14 (see
their Table~1), depending on the sources of input parameters ($T_{\rm eff}$,
$\log{g}$, and [Fe/H]).
In this sub-section we focus on common stars within the H2014 sub-categories
C.1, C.4, and C.5.
All of these three data sets adopted asteroseismic $\log{g}$, while
$T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] were obtained using various techniques
(spectroscopy, photometry, and KIC).
The category C.1 contains most of the ``gold-standard'' samples of H2014, for
which high-resolution spectroscopy was used for the best possible
characterization.
On the other hand, stars in C.4 and C.5 had no spectroscopic temperatures or
metallicities.
In such cases, the authors of H2014 used a revised temperature scale by \cite{
Pinsonneault2012}, and their [Fe/H] values were either fixed to $-0.2$ or
obtained from KIC.
Figures~\ref{fig_huber_cat01} -- \ref{fig_huber_cat05} show the differences
between the values of $M$, $R$, and $L$ (panels~a-c), as well as the
atmospheric parameters $T_{\rm eff}$, $\log{g}$, and [Fe/H] (panels~d-f)
that were used as inputs.
All of these reveal an excellent agreement between the values of $\log{g}$ in
the two works, despite the fact that the values of $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H]
were taken from different sources.
In each of the above figures, we also plot the differences between positions of
the stars in the Kiel diagram, where the colored circles correspond to our
results, and the other sides of solid lines correspond to the values from
H2014.
The colors are coded with $\Delta M$ (this work $-$ H2014).
Geneva evolution tracks with $M=1.0$, 2.0, and 3.0\,$M_\odot$, and [Fe/H] = 0.0
(solid gray lines) and $-0.5$ (dashed gray lines) are also shown.
Figure~\ref{fig_huber_cat01} shows the comparison of 76 common stars including
dwarfs and giants, for which both H2014 and this work used spectroscopic
$T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] as inputs for asteroseismic $\log{g}$ and other
physical parameters.
Our results are in a good agreement with the previous work, with mean
differences of only $0.00\pm0.02$, $-0.02\pm0.06$, and $-0.04\pm0.14$, for
$\log{g}$, $\log{R}$, and $\log{L}$, respectively.
All outlying points in panel~(a) correspond to giants with $\log{g}<3.5$, for
which evolution tracks are highly degenerated in the HR diagram.
We noted that our results on stellar masses for these giants are systematically
lower than those from H2014.
This can be explained by the bias towards higher mass in the previous studies,
as discussed in Section~\ref{method}.
Figure~\ref{fig_huber_cat04} compares the physical and spectroscopic parameters
for 199 dwarfs and sub-giants in common with sub-category C.4 in H2014.
Although for all of the stars in this sub-category the values of [Fe/H] were
fixed at $-0.2$, a good agreement between the two studies was found in terms
of the values of $R$, $L$, and $\log{g}$.
On average, our $T_{\rm eff}$ values were $91\pm120$\,K lower than the
previously reported values.
The mean difference between the stellar mass values was $0.01\pm0.10\,M_\odot$,
as shown in panel~(a).
Figure~\ref{fig_huber_cat05} shows the same comparison, but for sub-category C.5
in H2014.
In contrast to Figure~\ref{fig_huber_cat04}, the stars in C.5 are giants, with
$\log{g}<3.5$.
Our $T_{\rm eff}$ values were $226\pm130$\,K lower than those reported in H2014,
which subsequently significantly affected the stellar physical parameters.
In terms of $\log{g}$, our results were in good agreement with H2014, with the
mean difference of only $0.00\pm0.08$\,dex.
The mean differences were $-0.03\pm0.23$\,dex for [Fe/H], $-0.07\pm0.10$ for
$\log{R/R_\odot}$, and $-0.23\pm0.23$ for $\log{L/L_\odot}$.
Moreover, the derived stellar masses were generally lower than those in H2014,
and the comparison of stellar masses in panel~(a) reveals a chaotic
distribution.
We note that most of the masses in H2014 are in the 0.8-3.7\,$M_\odot$ range;
however, the range was 0.9-3.0\,$M_\odot$ in the present study, with only a
few exceptions corresponding to $M>3.1\,M_\odot$.
These deviations can be interpreted by the facts that (1) our spectroscopic
$T_{\rm eff}$ values obtained from low-resolution spectra were
systematically lower than those reported in H2014, which were photometric
$T_{\rm eff}$ from Sloan Digital Sky Survey {\it griz} filters \citep{
Pinsonneault2012}; and (2) our approach correct the bias caused by
different evolution speeds.
Therefore, the overall distribution shifted rightward towards the tracks of less
massive evolved stars on the Kiel diagram.
Despite this, as $M\propto T_{\rm eff}^{3/2}$ whereas
$\log{g}\propto0.5\log T_{\rm eff}$ according to Equations~\ref{para1} and
\ref{para4}, and $\log{g}\propto\log{M/R^2}$ is explicitly related to
$\nu_{\rm max}$ in Equation~\ref{numax}, independent of metallicity.
It is not surprising that a good agreement was found between the values of
$\log{g}$ in the two studies.
Figures~\ref{fig_huber_cat01}-\ref{fig_huber_cat05} show that although
asteroseismology yields satisfactory $\log{g}$ insensitive to $T_{\rm eff}$,
the determination of stellar masses, and especially for giants, remains a
challenge without reliable $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H].
Because the masses and radii of extra-solar planets are usually measured in
terms of ratios relative to their host stars, the influence of inaccurate
stellar $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] is inevitable.
For giant stars, we estimate that an error of +100\,K in $T_{\rm eff}$ results
in a mass error of about +0.20\,$M_\odot$ and a radius error of about
+0.61\,$R_\odot$ when using the asteroseismic grid-based method.
In addition, an error of +0.1\,dex in [Fe/H] results in a mass error of
+0.23\,$M_\odot$ and a radius error of about +0.74\,$R_\odot$.
This in turn emphasizes the importance of spectroscopic analysis of
planet-hosting giant stars, for characterizing the planetary properties.
However, this effect is not significant for dwarfs.
\subsection{Calibration of the LAMOST $\log{g}$ Values}
\label{lamost_calib}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{fig_dlogg_giant.pdf}
\caption{
$\Delta\log{g}\,({\rm LAMOST - Adopted})$ vs. $T_{\rm eff}$ for 2,094
giants.
Color code correspond to the LAMOST $\log{g}$ values.
Closed points are stars that were used in the least square fitting,
while open circles represent the excluded outliers (see Text).
}
\label{dlogg_giants}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{fig_dlogg_dwarf.pdf}
\caption{
Similar to Figure~\ref{dlogg_giants} but for 195 dwarfs.
The solid line is the best linear fit to the data points.
The color code used in this figure is different from that in
Figure~\ref{dlogg_giants}.
}
\label{dlogg_dwarfs}
\end{figure*}
By comparing the LAMOST $\log{g}$ values with asteroseismic $\log{g}$ values
adopted in this work, we found that their difference exhibited a clear trend
in the $T_{\rm eff}$ -- $\log{g}$ plane, implying a possibility to establish
calibration relations for $\log{g}$ values of LAMOST samples.
To obtain reliable relationships, we excluded all spectra with SNR $<50$, and
adopted the atmospheric parameters based on the spectra with highest SNR, if
there were multiple observations for the same star in the LAMOST DR2 and
DR3 Quarter 1 catalog.
This left us 2,289 samples, including 2,094 giants and 195 dwarfs.
In Figure~\ref{dlogg_giants} we show the differences between $\log{g}\,_{\rm
(LAMOST)}$ and $\log{g}\,_{\rm (Adopted)}$ as a function of $T_{\rm eff}$,
with color coded by LAMOST $\log{g}$, for 2,094 giants with $T_{\rm eff}<$
5,400\,K and $\log{g}<3.5$.
We used a first order 2D polynomial function $f(x,y)=p_0+p_1x+p_2y+p_3xy$ to
model $\Delta\log{g}$, where $x$ is $T_{\rm eff}$ and $y$ is $\log{g}$.
The coefficients $p_0 \sim p_3$ were determined by least squares fitting.
After the coefficients were determined, the residuals of the fitting for all the
data points were calculated.
In the next step, the points with residuals falling outside $\pm3\,\sigma$ were
removed, and the least squares fitting was performed again.
The procedure converged after two iterations, when all residuals were within
$\pm3\,\sigma$.
There are 2,044 stars left out of 2,094 giants.
This means that $\sim$2\% of the giants in Figure~\ref{dlogg_giants} are
outliers that were not included in the fitting procedure.
The final relation was
\begin{multline}\label{cal_giants}
\log{g}\,_{\rm (Adopted)} = \log{g}\,_{\rm (LAMOST)} \\
- 5.716 + 1.283\times T_3 + 1.188\times\log{g}\,_{\rm (LAMOST)} \\
- 0.2882\times T_3\times\log{g}\,_{\rm (LAMOST)}
\end{multline},
where $T_3=T_{\rm eff} / 10^3$\,K is the normalized temperature from the
LAMOST.
The range of temperatures in which this relation is applicable is 3,800\,K $\le
T_{\rm eff}\le$ 4,500\,K for stars with $+1.3\le\log{g}\le2.2$, or 3,800\,K
$\le T_{\rm eff}\le$ 5,200\,K for stars with $+2.2\le\log{g}\le3.5$.
In Figure~\ref{fig_dlogg_res}, we show the residuals of fitting, namely
$\Delta\log{g}\,\rm{(Adopted)}$ for giants against $T_{\rm eff}\,{\rm
(LAMOST)}$ within a range of 0.3\,dex in each panel, with $\log{g}$ in the
1.7-3.5 range.
The RMS values of $\log{g}$ in each panel were comparable, varying from 0.07
to 0.12\,dex.
We also calculated the RMS for these stars with $T_{\rm eff}$ in steps of
200\,K, and obtained a 0.07-0.10\,dex variation range.
The overall RMS for all giants, excluding the outliers, was 0.082\,dex.
Figure~\ref{dlogg_dwarfs} shows the same relation for dwarfs with $T_{\rm eff}>$
5,400\,K and $\log{g}>3.5$.
It is seen that $\Delta\log{g} ({\rm LAMOST} - {\rm Adopted})$ has a weak
dependence on $T_{\rm eff}$, but no dependence on $\log{g}$.
Therefore, we only performed a linear least squares fit, which yielded
\begin{multline}\label{cal_dwarfs}
\log{g}\,_{\rm (Adopted)} = \log{g}\,_{\rm (LAMOST)} \\
+0.525 - 0.0902\times T_3
\end{multline},
where $T_3$ and $\log{g}\,_{\rm (LAMOST)}$ are the same as those in
Equation~\ref{cal_giants}.
The applicable range is 5,400\,K $\le T_{\rm eff}\le$ 7,000\,K, and $+3.5\le
\log{g}\le+4.5$.
The RMS value was only 0.075\,dex, and the residuals are plotted in
Figure~\ref{fig_dlogg_res} (Right).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=5.4cm]{fig_dlogg_giant_res.pdf}
\includegraphics[height=5.4cm]{fig_dlogg_dwarf_res.pdf}
\caption{
$\Delta\log{g}\,{\rm (Adopted)}$ for giants (left panel) and dwarfs
(right panel) used in the least squares fitting.
The residuals for giants are divided into six groups of $\log{g}$
varying in steps of 0.3\,dex, from 1.7 (bottom panel) to 3.5 (top
panel).
The RMS values for data in each panel are also shown.
}
\label{fig_dlogg_res}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=5.4cm]{fig_dlogg_feh1.pdf}
\includegraphics[height=5.4cm]{fig_dlogg_feh2.pdf}
\caption{Panel~(a) shows the same relation as shown in
Figures~\ref{dlogg_giants} and \ref{dlogg_dwarfs}, but with colors coded
based on [Fe/H].
The right panels show the sub-samples falling into four metallicity
ranges:
(b) [Fe/H] $>+0.1$;
(c) $-0.1<$ [Fe/H] $<+0.1$;
(d) $-0.4<$ [Fe/H] $<-0.1$;
and (e) [Fe/H] $<-0.4$.
The number of stars in the four subsamples were 409, 702, 831, and 347,
respectively.
The right panels use the same color scale as panel~(a).
}
\label{fig_dlogg_feh}
\end{figure*}
In Figure~\ref{fig_dlogg_feh} we show the dependence of the relation on the
stellar metallicity ([Fe/H]) as given in the LAMOST AFGK-type star
parameters catalog.
We separated the entire sample into four groups, corresponding to different
metallicity ranges:
[Fe/H] $>+0.1$;
$-0.1<$ [Fe/H] $<+0.1$;
$-0.4<$ [Fe/H] $<-0.1$;
and [Fe/H] $<-0.4$,
as shown respectively in Panels~(b)-(e) of Figure~\ref{fig_dlogg_feh}.
Both the giants and dwarfs for different metallicities ranging from $-2.0$ to
$+0.4$ exhibited very similar trends.
Although our entire sample covered a wide range of metallicity values, from
$-2.26$ to $+0.50$, the number of stars at the metal-poor end was very small
(only 10 stars with [Fe/H] $<-1.0$).
Therefore, the calibration relations are applicable for stars with $-1.0<$
[Fe/H] $<+0.5$, and care must be taken for stars with metallicities outside
this range.
\subsection{Calibration of the LAMOST $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] Values}
\label{teff_calib}
As shown in Section~\ref{lamost_calib}, the correction of LAMOST $\log{g}$
reached 0.5\,dex for cool giants among our sample stars.
To quantify the impact of this change on $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H], we
iteratively performed asteroseismic and spectroscopic analyses (see
Section~\ref{iterative}).
Figures~\ref{dteff_giant} and \ref{dteff_dwarf} show the variations in
$T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] vs. $\Delta\log{g}({\rm Adopted}-{\rm LAMOST})$
for giants and dwarfs, respectively.
It is clear that the giants in Figure~\label{dteff_giant} can be divided into
two groups.
Giants with $T_{\rm eff}>$ 4,500\,K exhibit clear correlations of both
$\Delta T_{\rm eff}$ and $\Delta$[Fe/H] with $\Delta\log{g}$.
Linear fits yielded
\begin{equation}\label{dteff_hot_giant}
\Delta T_{\rm eff} = 284.9\times\Delta\log{g}\,_{\rm (Adopted - LAMOST)}
+ 3.8
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{dfeh_hot_giant}
\Delta{\rm [Fe/H]} = 0.216\times\Delta\log{g}\,_{\rm (Adopted - LAMOST)}
+ 0.008
\end{equation},
where the finally adopted equations were $T_{\rm eff} =
T_{\rm eff\,(LAMOST)} + \Delta T_{\rm eff}$ , and [Fe/H] =
[Fe/H]$\,_{\rm (LAMOST)}$ + $\Delta$[Fe/H].
The RMS values for the above two equations were 18.4\,K and 0.026\,dex,
respectively.
On the other hand, the $\Delta T_{\rm eff}$ for cooler giants ($T_{\rm eff}<$
4,500\,K) exhibited no clear trends with
$\Delta\log{g}({\rm Adopted}-{\rm LAMOST})$.
Figure~\ref{dteff_dwarf} shows that $\Delta T_{\rm eff}$ and $\Delta$[Fe/H] are
significantly correlated with $\Delta\log{g}({\rm Adopted}-{\rm LAMOST})$
for dwarfs.
Linear fits yielded
\begin{equation}\label{eqn_dteff_dwarf}
\Delta T_{\rm eff} = 292.4\times\Delta\log{g}\,_{\rm (Adopted - LAMOST)} +
14.3
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eqn_dfeh_dwarf}
\Delta{\rm [Fe/H]} = 0.103\times\Delta\log{g}\,_{\rm (Adopted - LAMOST)} +
0.009
\end{equation},
with the RMS values of 34.6\,K and 0.024\,dex, respectively.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=15cm]{fig_dteff_giant.pdf}
\caption{
Variations in $T_{\rm eff}$ (left panel) and [Fe/H] (right panel) vs.
$\Delta\log{g}$ for giants, with colors coded based on $T_{\rm eff}$.
The dashed lines are the linear least squares fits for stars with
$T_{\rm eff}>4,500$\,K (see Text).
}
\label{dteff_giant}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=15cm]{fig_dteff_dwarf.pdf}
\caption{
Same as Figure~\ref{dteff_giant} but for dwarfs.
The dashed lines are the linear least squares fits.
}
\label{dteff_dwarf}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Summary}
In this section, we propose empirical calibration relations for LAMOST $\log{g}$
in Equations~\ref{cal_giants} and \ref{cal_dwarfs} for giants and dwarfs,
respectively.
Generally speaking, the absolute values of $\log{g}$ corrections are much
larger for giants than dwarfs, which reflects the difficulty associated with
obtaining precise $\log{g}$ for evolved stars using low-resolution spectra.
For the coolest giants in our sample, with temperatures around 4,000\,K, the
magnitude of corrections reached 0.5\,dex.
Because no systematic bias between asteroseismic $\log{g}$ and spectroscopic
$\log{g}$ values has been found previously, the deviations of the LAMOST
$\log{g}$ values from the asteroseismic ones are likely attributed to the
adopted pipeline.
Because such major modifications of $\log{g}$ would inevitably affect the
determination of both $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H], we provided the
$T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] corrections in Equations~\ref{dteff_hot_giant} --
\ref{eqn_dfeh_dwarf}.
Although the relations were derived for the {\em Kepler} targets, they are
applicable to any LAMOST stars with spectroscopic parameters in the ranges
given in Sections~\ref{lamost_calib} and \ref{teff_calib}.
The corrections of $\log{g}$, $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] should always be applied
together.
Due to their high luminosity, giant stars are visible from longer distances
than dwarfs and play important roles in probing the Galactic structure,
kinetics, and chemical evolution.
Because $g\sim MR^{-2}$, an overestimation of 0.5\,dex of $\log{g}$ for a K4
giant with $T_{\rm eff}$ of 4,000\,K implies that the radius is
underestimated by $0.5\ln(10)\Delta\log{g}\simeq$, or 58\% by assuming a
fixed $M$.
This in turn causes $\sim$115\% underestimation of stellar luminosity as
$L\sim R^2T_{\rm eff}^4$.
Here $T_{\rm eff}$ is fixed because, according to Figure~\ref{dteff_giant}, it
nearly does not change with $\log{g}$.
Furthermore, considering that $L=4\pi D^2F$ , where $D$ denotes the distance and
$F$ is the observed flux density, the luminosity distance is also
underestimated by $\sim$58\% if the interstellar extinction is ignored.
For a typical K1 giant with $T_{\rm eff}$ of 4,600\,K and $\log{g}$ of 2.8,
LAMOST overestimates its actual $\log{g}$ by $\sim$0.22\,dex; consequently,
the values of $R$, $L$, and $D$ will be underestimated by 25\%, 50\%, and
25\%, respectively.
However, given that $T_{\rm eff}$ is also reduced by $\sim$56\,K (according to
Equation~\ref{dteff_giant}), the impact of increasing $R$ on $L$ will be
offset by $\sim$5\%.
Therefore, the resulting luminosity and distance need to be increased by 45\%
and 22\%, respectively.
Another example is a red-clump giant with $T_{\rm eff}=4,900$ K and $\log{g}=$
2.6, for which the correction of $\log{g}$ is close to zero.
Thus, previous works based on LAMOST red-clump giants \citep[e.g.][]{Wan2015}
are nearly not affected by the systematic deviations of $\log{g}$.
\section{CONCLUSIONS}
In this paper, we consistently derived stellar parameters for a large sample of
stars with the oscillation data from the {\em Kepler} mission, along with
the $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] values from the LAMOST low-resolution
($R\sim1,800$) spectra.
Spanning a wide range of metallicity values ($-2.3<$ [Fe/H] $<+0.5$), the entire
sample contained 2,831 giants and 229 dwarfs, of which 15 have been
confirmed to harbor extra-solar planets and 22 were potential planet-host
candidates.
The stellar properties were calculated using an improved grid-based method, by
considering the evolution speed effect and the post-RGB phases.
The fact that $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] values were derived from the spectra with
SNR $>$ 30 and $\log{g}$ values were derived from the {\em Kepler}
oscillation parameters ensure the accuracy of our results, compensating for
the shortage of low-resolution spectroscopy.
By comparing the asteroseismology and spectroscopic results, we found that
LAMOST yielded systematically higher $\log{g}$ for giants, and the
overestimation exhibited clear trends with $T_{\rm eff}$ and $\log{g}$.
We established calibration relations for the $\log{g}$ of LAMOST，for both
giants and dwarfs.
The post-calibration uncertainty in $\log{g}$ was 0.08\,dex for both giants and
dwarfs, corresponding to distance errors of only 8\%.
The empirical relations were established for a range of stars, from mildly
metal-poor ([Fe/H] $\sim -1.0$) to those with super-solar metallicity
([Fe/H] $\sim+0.4$).
This range covers most of the giants and FGK dwarfs that have been observed by
LAMOST.
We suggest that $\log{g}$ of stars in this metallicity range should be corrected
by using our derived relations.
Meanwhile, our results regarding stellar physical parameters show that
photometric $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H] are not sufficiently accurate for
obtaining reliable masses and radii for giants, even when augmented by
global asteroseismic quantities.
Therefore, spectroscopic studies are critical for characterization of these
parameters.
\acknowledgements
This research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
under grants No. 11390371 and 11403056.
The Guoshoujing Telescope (the Large Sky Area Multi-Object Fiber Spectroscopic
Telescope, LAMOST) is a National Major Scientific Project built by the
Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Funding for the project has been provided by the National Development and Reform
Commission.
LAMOST is operated and managed by the National Astronomical Observatories,
Chinese Academy of Sciences.
LW thanks Tim Bedding, William Chaplin, Saskia Hekker, Daniel Huber, Kalinger
and Dennis Stello for providing the seismic data, and Tanda Li for
helpful discussions.
|
\section{Introduction and preliminaries}
\hspace{8mm} Mursaleen et al. \cite{mka1} first applied the concept of $(p,q)$-calculus in approximation theory and introduced the $(p,q)$-analogue of Bernstein operators. Later on, based on $(p,q)$-integers, some approximation results for Bernstein-Stancu operators, Bernstein-Kantorovich operators, Bleimann-Butzer and Hahn operators, $(p,q)$-Lorentz operators, Bernstein-Shurer operators, $(p,q)$-analogue of divided difference and Bernstein operators etc. have also been introduced by them in \cite{mur8,mka3,mka5,m4,zmn, mnfa}.\\
For similar works in approximation theory \cite{pp} based on $q$ and $(p,q)$-integers, one can refer \cite{acar1,acar2,acar3,acar4,aral, cai,ali,lupas,ma1,sofia,kang,kadak2,kac,mahmudov1,wafi}.
Motivated by the work of Mursaleen et al \cite{mka1}, the idea of $(p,q)$-calculus and its importance.\\
Very recently, Khalid et al. \cite{khalid1,khalid2,khalid3,kblossom} has given a nice application in computer-aided geometric design and applied these Bernstein basis for construction of $(p,q)$-B$\acute{e}$zier curves and surfaces based on $(p,q)$-integers which is further generalization of $q$-B$\acute{e}$zier curves and surfaces \cite{bezier,hp,pl,phillips,pp,lp}. For similar works, one can refer \cite{bezier,hp}. Another advantage of using the parameter $p$ has been discussed in \cite{m4}.\\
Let us recall certain notations of $(p,q)$-calculus .\\
For any $p>0$ and $q>0,$ the $(p,q)$ integers $[n]_{p,q}$ are defined by
\begin{equation*}
[n]_{p,q}=p^{n-1}+p^{n-2}q+p^{n-3}q^2+...+pq^{n-2}+q^{n-1}\\
=\left\{
\begin{array}{lll}
\frac{p^{n}-q^{n}}{p-q},~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\mbox{when $~~p\neq q \neq 1$ } & \\
& \\
n~p^{n-1},~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\mbox{ when $p=q\neq1$ } & \\
& \\
[n]_q ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\mbox{when $p=1$ }& \\
n ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\mbox{ when $p=q=1$ }
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*}
~where $[n]_q $ denotes the $q$-integers and $n=0,1,2,\cdots$.\\
Obviously, it may be seen that $[n]_{p,q}= p^{n-1}[n]_{\frac{q}{p}}.\\$
The $(p,q)$-factorial is defined by
$$[0]_{p, q}!:=1~~\text{and}~~[n]!_{p, q}=[1]_{p, q}[2]_{p, q}\cdots [n]_{p, q}~~\text{if}~~n\ge 1.$$
Also the $(p,q)$-binomial coefficient is defined by
$${n \brack k}_{p, q}=\frac{[n]_{p, q}!}{[k]_{p, q}!~[n-k]_{p, q}!}~~\text{for all}~~n, k\in \mathbb N~~\text{with}~~n\ge k.$$
The formula for $(p,q)$-binomial expansion is as follows:
\begin{equation*}
(ax+by)_{p,q}^{n}:=\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}p^{\frac{(n-k)(n-k-1)}{2}}q^{\frac{k(k-1)}{2}}
\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}a^{n-k}b^{k}x^{n-k}y^{k},
\end{equation*}
$$(x+y)_{p,q}^{n}=(x+y)(px+qy)(p^2x+q^2y)\cdots (p^{n-1}x+q^{n-1}y),$$
$$(1-x)_{p,q}^{n}=(1-x)(p-qx)(p^2-q^2x)\cdots (p^{n-1}-q^{n-1}x),$$\\
Details on $(p,q)$-calculus can be found in \cite{mah,jag,mka1,khalid1,khalid2,kblossom}.\\
The $(p,q)$-Bernstein Operators introduced by Mursaleen et al. for $0<q<p\leq 1$ in \cite{mka1} are as follow:
\begin{equation}\label{ee1}
B_{n,p,q}(f;x)=\frac1{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}2}}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}p^{\frac{k(k-1)}2}x^{k}\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^{s}-q^{s}x)~~f\left( \frac
[k]_{p,q}}{p^{k-n}[n]_{p,q}}\right) ,~~x\in \lbrack 0,1].
\end{equation}
Note when $p=1,$ $(p,q)$-Bernstein Operators given by \eqref{ee1} turns out to be $q$-Bernstein Operators.\\
Also, we have
\begin{align*}
(1-x)^{n}_{p,q}&=\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-1}(p^s-q^{s}x) =(1-x)(p-qx)(p^{2}-q^{2}x)...(p^{n-1}-q^{n-1}x)\\
&=\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n} {(-1)}^{k}p^{\frac{(n-k)(n-k-1)}{2}} q^{\frac{k(k-1)}{2}}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}x^{k}
\end{align*}
Motivated by the above mentioned work on $(p,q)$-approximation and its application, this paper is organized as follows:
In Section 2, some basic results for $(p,q)$-analogue of Bernstein-Stancu Operators as given in \cite{mka3} has been recalled and based on it, second order moment is computed. In section 3, Korovkin's type statistical approximation properties has been studied for these operators. In section 4, rate of statistical convergence by means of modulus of continuity and Lipschitz type maximal functions has been investigated. Section 5 is based on monotonicity of $(p,q)$-Bernstein-Stancu Operators. In section 6, a global approximation theorem by means of Ditzian-Totik modulus of smoothness and a quantitative Voronovskaja type theorem is established.
The effects of the parameters $p$ and $q$ for the convergence of operators to a function is shown in section 7 .\\
\section{$(p,q)$- Bernstein Stancu operators}
Mursaleen et. al in \cite{mka3} introduced $(p,q)$-analogue of Bernstein-Stancu operators as follow:
\begin{equation}\label{ee2}
S_{n,p,q}(f;x)=\frac1{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}2}}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}p^{\frac{k(k-1)}2}x^{k}\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^{s}-q^{s}x)~~f\left( \frac
{p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+\alpha}}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}\right) ,~~x\in \lbrack 0,1].
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are real numbers which satisfy $0\leq\alpha \leq \beta$.\\
Note that for $\alpha=\beta=0,$ $(p,q)$-Bernstein-Stancu operators given by \eqref{ee2} reduces into $(p,q)$-Bernstein operators as given in \cite{mka1}.\\
Also for $p=1$, $(p,q)$-Bernstein-Stancu operators given by \eqref{ee2} turn out to
be $q$-Bernstein-Stancu operators.\\
For $p=q=1,$ it reduces to classical Bernstein-Stancu operators.\\
We have the following auxiliary lemmas:\newline
\parindent=0mm\textbf{Lemma 2.1.} For $x\in \lbrack [0,1],~0<q<p\leq 1$, and $\alpha,\beta \in\mathbb{R}$ with $0\leq\alpha \leq \beta$, we
have\\
\newline
(i)~~$S_{n,p,q}(1;x)=~1$,\newline
(ii)~$S_{n,p,q}(t;x)=~\frac{[n]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}x+\frac{\alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}$,\newline
(iii)~$S_{n,p,q}(t^{2};x)=\frac{q[n]_{p,q}[n-1]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^2}x^2+\frac{[n]_{p,q}(2\alpha+p^{n-1})}{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^2}x+\frac{\alpha^2}{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^2}$.\newline
\textbf{Proof:} Proof is given in \cite{mka3} using the identity
\begin{equation}
\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}p^{\frac{k(k-1)}2}x^{k}\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^{s}-q^{s}x)={p^{\frac{n(n-1)}2}}.
\end{equation}
We give complete proof of Lemma 1 (iii)
(iii)
\begin{eqnarray*}
S_{n,p,q}(t^2;x) &=&\frac1{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}2}}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}p^{\frac{k(k-1)}2}x^{k}\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^{s}-q^{s}x)~~{\bigg(\frac{p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+\alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}\bigg)}^2\\
&=&\frac{1}{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^2}~\frac1{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}2}}\Bigg[p^{2n}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}p^{\frac{k(k-1)}2}x^{k}\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^{s}-q^{s}x)~\frac{[k]_{p,q}^2}{p^{2k}}\\
&&+2\alpha ~p^n\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}p^{\frac{k(k-1)}2}x^{k}\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^{s}-q^{s}x)~\frac{[k]_{p,q}}{p^{k}}\\
&&+\alpha^2~\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}p^{\frac{k(k-1)}2}x^{k}\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^{s}-q^{s}x)\Bigg].\\
\end{eqnarray*}
$$S_{n,p,q}(t^2;x)=\frac{1}{([n]_p,q+\beta)^2} [(A)+(B)+(C)]$$
\begin{eqnarray*}
(A)&=&\frac {1}{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}2}} p^{2n}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}p^{\frac{k(k-1)}2}x^{k}\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^{s}-q^{s}x)~\frac{[k]_{p,q}^2}{p^{2k}}\\
&=&\frac{p^{2n}}{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}2}}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n} \frac{[n]}{[k]}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-1 \\
k-
\end{array
\right] x^{k}(1-x)^{n-k}~\frac{[k]^2}{p^{2k}}
\end{eqnarray*}
On shifting the limits and using $[k+1]_{p,q}=p^k+q[k]_{p,q}$, we get our desired result.
\begin{eqnarray*}
(A)&=&\frac{p^{2n}}{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}2}}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-1} \left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-1 \\
\end{array
\right] x^{k}(1-x)^{n-k-1}~\frac{p^k+q[k]}{p^{2k+2}}\\
&&= \frac{p^{2n-2}[n]x}{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}{2}}}\Bigg[ p^{\frac{(n-1)(n-2)}{2}}+ \frac{q[n-1]x}{p}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-2} \left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-2 \\
\end{array
\right] x^{k}(1-x)^{n-k-2}\Bigg]\\
&&=p^n[n]x+q[n][n-1]x^2
\end{eqnarray*}
n\\Similarly
$$(B)=\frac{2\alpha ~p^n}{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}{2}}}\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}x^{k}(1-x)^{n-k}~\frac{[k]_{p,q}}{p^{k}}=2\alpha [n]x$$
and
$$(C)=\frac{\alpha^2}{p^{\frac{n(n-1)}{2}}}~\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q}x^{k}(1-x)^{n-k}={\alpha}^2$$
\parindent=0mm\textbf{Lemma 2.2}. For $x\in [0,1],~0<q<p\leq 1$ and $\alpha,\beta \in\mathbb{R}$ with $0\leq\alpha \leq \beta$,\\
Let n be any given natural number, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
S_{n,p,q}\bigl{(}(t-x)^2;x\bigl{)}&= \big\{ \frac{q[n]_{p,q}[n-1]_{p,q}-[n]_{p,q}^2+{\beta}^2}{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^2}\big\}x^2+\big\{ \frac{p^{n-1}[n]_{p,q}-2 \alpha \beta}{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^2} \big\}x+\frac{\alpha^2}{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^2}\\
&\leq\frac{[n]_{p,q}p^{n-1} - 2\alpha\beta}{2([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^2}\phi^2(x)\leq \frac{[n]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}\phi^2(x)\\
\end{eqnarray*}
\section{ Main Results}
\subsection { Korovkin type approximation theorem}
We know that $C[a,b]$ is a
Banach space with norm
\begin{equation*}
\Vert f\Vert _{C[a,b]}:=\sup\limits_{x\in \lbrack a,b]}|f(x)|,~f\in C[a,b].
\end{equation*}
For typographical convenience, we will write $\Vert .\Vert $ in place of $\Vert .\Vert _{C[a,b]}$ if no confusion arises.\newline
\begin{definition} {\em Let $C[a,b]$ be the linear space of all real valued continuous functions $f$
on $[a,b]$ and let $T$ be a linear operator which maps $C[a,b]$ into itself.
We say that $T$ is $positive$ if for every non-negative $f\in $ $C[a,b],$ we
have $T(f,x)\geq 0$ for all $x\in $ $[a,b]$ .}
\end{definition}
\parindent=8mm The classical Korovkin type approximation theorem can be stated as follows \cite{brn,korovkin};\\
Let $T_n: C[a, b] \to C[a, b]$ be a sequence of positive linear operators.
Then $\lim_{n\to\infty}\|T_{n}(f; x)-f(x)\|_\infty=0,\,\,\textrm{for
all}~f\in C[a, b]$ if and only if $\lim_{n\to\infty}\|T_{n}(f_{i}; x)-f_i(x)\|_\infty=0,\,\,\textrm{for each}\,\,i=0,1,2,$ where the test function $f_i(x)=x^i$.
In next section, we study a statistical approximation properties of the operator $S_{n,p, q}$.
\subsection{Statistical approximation}
The statistical version of Korovkin theorem for sequence of positive linear operators has been
given by Gadjiev and Orhan \cite{go39}.
Let $K$ be a subset of the set $\mathbb{N}$ of natural numbers. Then, the asymptotic density $\delta(K)$ of $K$ is defined as $\delta(K)=\lim_{n}\frac{1}{n}\big|\{k\leq n~:~k \in K\}\big|$ and $|.|$ represents the cardinality of the enclosed set. A sequence $x=(x_k)$ said to be statistically convergent to the number $L$ if for each $\varepsilon >0$, the set $K(\varepsilon)=\{k\leq n:|x_k-L|>\varepsilon\}$ has asymptotic density zero (see \cite{erd37,fast}), i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray*}\label{117}
\lim_{n}\frac{1}{n}\big|\{k\leq n:|x_k-L|\geq \varepsilon\}\big|=0.
\end{eqnarray*}
In this case, we write $st-\lim x =L$.
Let us recall the following theorem:\\
\begin{theorem}\label{ta}\cite{go39}
Let $A_n$ be the sequence of linear positive operators from $C[0,1]$ to $C [0,1]$ satisfies the conditions
$st-\lim\limits_{n}\|S_{n,p,q}(( t^\nu;x))- (x)^\nu \|_C[0,1] = 0 $ for $\nu = 0,~ 1,~ 2.$
then for any function $f\in C[0,1],$
$st-\lim\limits_{n} \|S_{ n,p,q}(f) - f \|_C[0,1] = 0.$
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Korovkin Type statistical approximation properties}
The main aim of this paper is to obtain the korovkin type statistical approximation properties of operators defined in (\ref{ee2}) with the help of Theorem (\ref{ta}).\\
\begin{remark}\label{r5.1}
For $q\in(0,1)$ and $p\in(q,1]$, it is obvious that
$\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}[n]_{p,q}=0 $ or $\frac1{p-q}$. In order to reach to convergence
results of the operator $L^{n}_{p,q}(f;x),$ we take a sequence $q_n\in(0,1)$ and $p_n\in(q_n,1]$
such that $\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}p_n=1,$ $\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}q_n=1$ and $\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}p_n^n=1,$ $\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}q_n^n=1$. So we get
$\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}[n]_{p_n,q_n}=\infty$.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}
Let $S_{n,p,q}$ be the sequence of operators and the sequence $ p=p_n$ and $q=q_n$ satisfying Remark $(\ref{r5.1})$ then for any function $f\in C[0,1]$\\
$$ st-\lim\limits_{n} \|~S_{n,p_n,q_n}{(f,.)}-f\|=0$$
\end{theorem}
\textbf{Proof:}
Clearly for $\nu=0,$ $$ S_{n,p,q}{(1,x)}=1,$$
which implies $$ st-\lim\limits_{n}\|S_{n,p,q}(1;x)~-1~\|~~=~~0.$$\\
For $\nu~=~1$\\
\begin{align*}
\|S_{n,p,q}~(t;x)~-~x~~\|&\leq~\bigg|\frac{[n]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}x~~+~~\frac{\alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}~~-~~x\bigg|\\
&= \bigg|\bigg(\frac{[n]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}~~-~~1\bigg)x~+~\frac{\alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}\bigg|\\
&\leq \bigg|\frac{[n]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}~~-~~1\bigg|~~+~~\bigg|\frac{\alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}\bigg|.
\end{align*}
For a given $ \epsilon >0$, let us define the following sets.\\
$$U = \{n : \|S_{n,p,q}(t;x) -x\|\geq\epsilon\}$$\\
$$U^{\prime} = \{n: 1 - \frac{[n]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}\} \geq \epsilon $$\\
$$U^{\prime\prime} = \{n: \frac{\alpha}{[n]_{p,q} +\beta}\geq\epsilon\}$$
So using $\delta \{k\leq n:1-\frac{[n]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}~~\geq \epsilon\}, $
then we get
$$st-\lim\limits_{n}\|S_{n,p,q}(t;x) - x\|=0.$$
Lastly for $\nu=2,$ we have \\
\begin{align*}
\|S_{n,p,q}(t^2:x)- x^2\|&\leq \big|\frac{q[n]_{p,q}[n-1]_{p,q}}{{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)}^{2}}~~-1\big|\\
&+\big|\frac{[n]_{p,q}(2\alpha+p^{n-1})}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}^{2}x\big|+\big|\frac{\alpha^2}{{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)}^{2}}\big|.
\end{align*}
If we choose
$$\alpha_n=\frac{q[n]_{p,q}[n-1]_{p,q}}{{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)}^{2}}~~-1$$\\
$$\beta_n=\frac{[n]_{p,q}(2\alpha+p^{n-1})}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}^{2}$$\\
$$\gamma_n=\frac{\alpha^2}{{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)}^2}$$\\
$st-\lim\limits_{n}\alpha_n~~=~~st-\lim\limits_{n}\beta_n~~=~~st-\lim\limits_{n}\gamma_n~~=~~0$\\
Now given $\epsilon >0$, we define the following four sets:\\
$$U~~=~~\|S_{n,p,q}(t^2:x)- x^2\|\geq \epsilon$$\\
$$U_{1} =\{n:\alpha_{n} \geq \frac{\epsilon}{3}\}$$\\
$$U_{2}=\{n:\beta _{n}\geq \frac{\epsilon }{3}\}$$\\
$$U_{3}=\{n:\gamma _{n}\geq \frac{\epsilon }{3}\}.$$\\
It is obvious that$ U \subseteq U_1\bigcup U_2\bigcup U_3. $ Thus we obtain \\
$\delta\{K\leq n:\|S_{n,p,q}(t^2:x)- x^2\|\geq\epsilon\}$\\
$\leq\delta\{K\leq n:\alpha_{n} \geq \frac{\epsilon}{3} \}~+~\delta\{K\leq n:\beta _{n}\geq \frac{\epsilon }{3}\}+\delta\{K\leq n:\gamma _{n}\geq \frac{\epsilon }{3}\}$\\
So the right hand side of the inequalities is zero by $( \ref{117}).$\\
Then\\
$$st-\lim\limits_{n}\|S_{n,p,q}(t;x) -x\|=0$$ holds and thus the proof is completed.
If we choose
$$\alpha_n=\frac{q[n]_{p,q}[n-1]_{p,q}}{{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)}^{2}}~~-1$$\\
$$\beta_n=\frac{[n]_{p,q}(2\alpha+p^{n-1})}{[n]_{p,q}+\beta}^{2}$$\\
$$\gamma_n=\frac{\alpha^2}{{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)}^2}$$\\
$st-\lim\limits_{n}\alpha_n~~=~~st-\lim\limits_{n}\beta_n~~=~~st-\lim\limits_{n}\gamma_n~~=~~0$\\
Now given $\epsilon >0$, we define the following four sets:\\
$$U~~=~~\|S_{n,p,q}(t^2:x)- x^2\|\geq \epsilon$$\\
$$U_{1} =\{n:\alpha_{n} \geq \frac{\epsilon}{3}\}$$\\
$$U_{2}=\{n:\beta _{n}\geq \frac{\epsilon }{3}\}$$\\
$$U_{3}=\{n:\gamma _{n}\geq \frac{\epsilon }{3}\}.$$\\
It is obvious that$ U \subseteq U_1\bigcup U_2\bigcup U_3. $ Thus we obtain \\
$\delta\{K\leq n:\|S_{n,p,q}(t^2:x)- x^2\|\geq\epsilon\}$\\
$\leq\delta\{K\leq n:\alpha_{n} \geq \frac{\epsilon}{3} \}~+~\delta\{K\leq n:\beta _{n}\geq \frac{\epsilon }{3}\}+\delta\{K\leq n:\gamma _{n}\geq \frac{\epsilon }{3}\}$\\
So the right hand side of the inequalities is zero by $( \ref{117}).$\\
Then\\
$$st-\lim\limits_{n}\|S_{n,p,q}(t;x) -x\|=0$$ holds and thus the proof is completed.
\section{Rate of Statstical Convergence}
In this part, rates of statistical convergence of the operators $(\ref{ee2} )$ by means of modulus of continuity and LIPSCHITZ TYPE maximal functions are introduced.\\
The modulus of continuity for the space of function $ f\in C[0,1]$ is defined by\\
$$ w(f;\delta)=\sup\limits_{x,t\in C[0,1],~~ |t-x|<\delta} |f(t)-f(x)|$$\\
where ${w}(f;\delta)$ satisfies the following conditions:~~for all $f\in C[0,1],$\\
\begin{equation}\label{e118}
\lim\limits_{\delta\rightarrow0}~w (f;\delta) = 0.
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{e119}
|f(t)-f(x)|\leq w(f;\delta)\bigg(\frac{|t-x|}{\delta}+ 1\bigg)
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}
Let the sequence $ p=p_n$ and $q=q_n$ satisfy for $0<q_n<p_n\leq1$, so we have \\
$$|S_{n,p,q}(t;x) -f(x)|\leq w(f;\sqrt{\delta_n(x)})(1+q_n)$$\\
where
\begin{equation}\label{e10}
\delta_n(x)=\frac{1}{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^{2}}[(q[n]_{p,q}[n-1]_{p,q} -{[n]}^2+\beta^{2})x^2~~+~~([n]_{p,q}p^{(n-1)}-2\alpha\beta)x~+\alpha^2].
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Proof: $|S_{n,p,q}(t;x) -f(x)|\leq S_{n,p,q}(|f(t)-f(x)|:x)$\\
by using $(\ref{e119}),$ we get \\
$$|S_{n,p,q}(t;x) -f(x)|\leq w(f;\delta)\{S_{n,p,q}(1;x)+\frac{1}{\delta}S_{n,p,q}(|t-x|:x)\}.$$\\
By using Cauchy Schwarz inequality, we have\\
\begin{align*}
|S_{n,p,q}(t;x)-f(x)|&\leq w(f;\delta_n)\bigg(1+\frac{1}{\delta_n}[(S_{n,p,q}(t-x)^2;x)]^{\frac {1}{2}}~~[S_{n,p,q}(1;x)]^{\frac {1}{2}}\bigg)\\
&\leq w(f;\delta_n)\bigg(1+\frac{1}{\delta_n}\bigg\{\frac{1}{([n]_{p,q}+\beta)^{2}}[(q[n]_{p,q}[n-1]_{p,q} -{[n]}^2\\~~
&+~~\beta^2)x^2~~+~~([n]_{p,q}p^{(n-1)}~-~2\alpha\beta)x~~
+\alpha^2]\bigg\}\bigg)
\end{align*}
so it is obvious by choosing $\delta_n$ as in $(\ref{e10})$ the theorem is proved.\\
Notice that by the condition in (\ref{e118}) $st-\lim\limits_{n} \delta_n =0,$ by $(\ref{e118})$ we have \\
$$st-\lim\limits_{n} w(f;\delta)~~=~~0.$$\
This gives us the pointwise rate of statistical convergence of the operators $S_{n,p,q}(f;x)~ \text{to}~ f(x).$\\
\section{Monotonicity for convex functions}
Oru\c{c} and Phillips proved that when the function $f$ is convex on $[0,1]$, its $q$-Bernstein operators are monotonic decreasing. In this section we will study the monotonicity of $(p,q)$-Bernstein Stancu operators.\\
\begin{theorem}
If f is convex function on $[0,1],$ then
$S_{n,p,q}(f;x)\geq f(x), $ $0\leq x \leq1$\\
for all $n\geq 1$ and $0 < q < p \leq 1$
\end{theorem}
\textbf{Proof:} We consider the knots $x_k = \frac{p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}},$
$$\lambda_k = \left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q} p^{\frac{k(k-1)-n(n-1)}{2}} x^k \prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^{s}-q^{s}x),~~~~
0 \leq k \leq n.$$
Using Lemma 2.1, it follows that \\
$$\lambda_0+\lambda_1+\lambda_2+................\lambda_n = 1$$\\
$$x_0\lambda_0+x_1\lambda_1+x_2\lambda_2+................x_n\lambda_n = x.$$\\
From the convexity of the function $f,$ we get\\
$S_{n,p,q}(f;x) =\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\lambda_k f(x_k)\geq f\bigg(\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\lambda_k x_k\bigg ) =f(x).$\\
\begin{theorem}
Let f be convex on $[0,1]$. Then$S_{{n-1},p,q}(f;x)\geq S_{n,p,q}(f;x)$ for $0 < q < p\leq 1, $ $0 \leq x \leq 1,$ and $ n \geq 2 $. If $f \in C[0,1]$ the inequality holds strictly for $0 < x < 1 $ unless f is linear in each of the intervals between consecutive knots $\frac{p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}}$, $0 \leq k\leq n-1 $, in which case we have the equality.\\
\end{theorem}
\textbf{Proof:}
For $0<q<p\leq1,$ we begin by writing\\
$$\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-1}(p^s -q^sx)^{-1} [S_{n-1,p,q}(f;x) - S_{n,p,q}(f;x)]$$\\
\begin{eqnarray*}
&=&\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-1}(p^s -q^sx)^{-1}\bigg [\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-1} \left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-1 \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q} p^{\frac{k(k-1)-(n-2)(n-1)}{2}} x^k \prod \limits_{s=0}^{n-k-2}(p^s -q^sx)f \bigg (\frac {p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\\
&&-\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n} \left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q} x^k p^{\frac{k(k-1)-n(n-1)}{2}} \prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-k-1}(p^s -q^sx)f\bigg(\frac {p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\bigg]\\
&=&\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-1} \left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-1 \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q} p^{\frac{k(k-1)-(n-2)(n-1)}{2}} x^k \prod\limits_{s=n-k-2}^{n-1}(p^s -q^sx)^{-1}f\bigg (\frac {p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\\
&&-\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q} x^k p^{\frac{k(k-1)-n(n-1)}{2}}\prod\limits_{s=n-k-1}^{n-1}(p^s -q^sx)^{-1} f\bigg (\frac {p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg).
\end{eqnarray*}
Denote\\
\begin{equation}\label{e14}
\psi_{k}(x) = p^{\frac{k(k-1)}{2}} x^k \prod\limits_{s=n-k-1}^{n-1}(p^s -q^sx)^{-1}
\end{equation}
and using the following relation:\\
\begin{align*}
p^{n-1} p^{\frac{k(k-1)}{2}} x^k \prod\limits_{s=n-k-1}^{n-1}(p^s -q^sx)^{-1} = p^k \psi_{k}(x)+q^{n-k-1}\psi_{k+1}(x).\\
\end{align*}
We find\\
\begin{equation*}
\prod\limits_{s=0}^{n-1}(p^s -q^sx)^{-1}[S_{n-1,p,q}(f;x) - S_{n,p,q}(f;x)]\\
\end{equation*}
\begin{eqnarray*}
&=&\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-1}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-1\\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q} p^{\frac{-(n-2)(n-1)}{2}} p^{-(n-1)}(p^k \psi_{k}(x)+q^{n-k-1}\psi_{k+1}(x)) f\bigg (\frac {p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\\
&&-\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right] _{p,q} p^{\frac{-n(n-1)}{2}}\psi_{k}(x)f\bigg (\frac {p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\\
&=&p^{\frac{-n(n-1)}{2}}\bigg[\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-1}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-1\\
\end{array
\right]_{p,q} p^k \psi_{k}(x)f\bigg(\frac{p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+\alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\\
&&+ \sum\limits_{k=1}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-1 \\
k-1
\end{array
\right]_{p,q} q^{n-k} \psi_{k}(x) f \bigg(\frac {p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)-\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right]_{p,q} \psi_{k}(x) f \bigg(\frac {p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q} + \alpha}{[n]_{p,q} + \beta} \bigg)\bigg]\\
&=&p^{\frac{-n(n-1)}{2}} \sum \limits_{k=1}^{n-1}\Bigg\{\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-1\\
\end{array
\right]_{p,q} p^k f \bigg(\frac {p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\\
&&+\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n-1\\
k-
\end{array
\right] _{p,q} q^{n-k} f\bigg(\frac{p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg) -\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n \\
\end{array
\right]_{p,q} f \bigg (\frac {p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\Bigg\} \psi_{k}(x)\\
&=&p^{\frac{-n(n-1)}{2}} \sum\limits_{k=1}^{n-1}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n\\
\end{array}
\right]_{p,q}\Bigg\{\frac {[n-k]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}}p^k f\bigg(\frac {p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\\
&&+\frac{[k]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}} q^{n-k} f\bigg(\frac{p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)-f\bigg(\frac {p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)\Bigg\}\psi_{k}(x)\\
&=&p^{\frac{-n(n-1)}{2}} \sum \limits_{k=1}^{n-1}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
n\\
\end{array}
\right]_{p,q} a_k \psi_{k}(x)
\end{eqnarray*}
where\\
$a_k =\frac{[n-k]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}} p^k f \bigg(\frac {p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)+\frac{[k]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}} q^{n-k} f\bigg(\frac{p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg)- f \bigg (\frac {p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}\bigg).$\\
From \eqref{e14} it is clear that each $ \psi_k(x)$ is non-negative on $[0,1]$ for $0< q < p \leq 1 $ and, thus, it suffices to show that each $a_k$ is non-negative.\\
\noindent Since $f$ is convex on $[0,1]$ then for any $t_0 ,t_1$ and $\lambda \in [0,1]$ it follows that\\
$$ f(\lambda t_0 + (1-\lambda)t_1) \leq \lambda f(t_0) + (1-\lambda)f(t_1).$$\\
If we choose $t_0 = \frac {p^{n-k}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta}$, $ t_1 = \frac {p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q}+ \alpha}{[n]_{p,q}+ \beta},$ and\\
$\lambda = \frac {[k]_{p,q}}{[n]_{p,q}}q^{n-k},$ then $t_0 ,t_1$ $\in $ $[0,1]$ and $\lambda \in (0,1)$ for $1 \leq k \leq n-1,$ and we deduce that \\
$$a_k = \lambda f( t_0) + (1-\lambda)f(t_1)- f(\lambda t_0 + (1-\lambda)t_1)\geq0 $$\\
Thus $ S_{n-1,p,q}(f;x)\geq S_{n,p,q}(f;x).$\\
We have equality for $x=0$ and $x=1,$ since the Bernstein polynomials interpolate $f$ on these end points.The inequality will be strict for $ 0 < x < 1 $ unless when $f$ is linear in each of the intervals between consecutive knots
\begin{equation*}
\frac{p^{n-k-1}[k]_{p,q} + \alpha}{[n]_{p,q} + \beta},~~ 0 \leq k \leq n-1,
\end{equation*}
then we have\\
$$ S_{n-1,p,q}(f;x) = S_{n,p,q}(f;x)$$ for $ 0 \leq x \leq 1.$\\
\section{A Global Approximation theorem}
In this section, we establish a global approximation theorem by means of Ditzian-Totik modulus of smoothness and Voronovskaja type approximation result.\\
In order to prove our next result, we recall the definitions of the Ditzian-Totik first order modulus of smoothness and the K-functional. Let $\phi(x) = \surd{x(1-x)}$ and $f \in C[0,1]$. The first order modulus of smoothness is given by\\
\begin{equation}\label{e15}
\omega_\phi(f;t) = \sup \limits _ {0< h \leq t} \Big\{\big|f(x + \frac {h\phi(x)}{2}) - f(x - \frac {h\phi(x)}{2})\bigg| , x \pm \frac {h\phi(x)}{2} \in [0,1]\Big\}\\
\end{equation}
The corresponding k-functional to \eqref{e15} is defined by\\
$k_\phi(f;t) = \inf\limits_{g \in W_\phi [0,1]}\Big\{\|f - g\| + t \|\phi g^{\prime}\|\Big\} $ $(t > 0),$\\
where $W_\phi[0,1] = \{g: g \in AC_{loc}[0,1] , \|\phi g^{\prime}\|< \infty\} $ and $g \in AC_{loc}[0,1]$ means that $g$ is absolutely continuous on every interval $[a,b]\subset[0,1]$. It is well known \cite{dzk1} that there exists a constant $C >0$ such that\\
\begin{equation}\label{ab}
k_\phi(f;t) \leq Cw_\phi(f;t).\\
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}
Let $f \in C[0,1]$ and $\phi(x) = \surd{x(1-x)},$ then for every $x \in [0,1]$ we have \\
$\bigg| S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)\bigg| \leq C \omega_\phi\bigg(f;\frac{[n]_{p,q}}{\surd([n]_{p,q}+\beta)}\bigg)$
where C is a constant independent of n and x.\\
\end{theorem}
\textbf{Proof:} Using the representation \\
$$ g(t) = g(x)+\int_{x}^{t} g^{\prime}(u) du ,$$\\
we get \\
\begin{equation}\label{e15}
\bigg| S_{n,p,q}(g;x)- g(x)\bigg| = \bigg| S_{n,p,q}\bigg(\int_{x}^{t} g^{\prime}(u) du ;x\bigg)\bigg|.\\
\end{equation}
For any $x \in (0,1)$ and $ t \in [0,1],$ we find that \\
\begin{equation}\label{e16}
\bigg |\int_{x}^{t} g^{\prime}(u) du\bigg |\leq \| \phi g^{\prime}\| \bigg|\int_{x}^{t} \frac {1}{\phi(u)}du \bigg|
\end{equation}
Further, \\
\begin{align}\label{e17}
\bigg| \int_{x}^{t} \frac {1}{\phi(u)}du\bigg| &= \bigg|\int_{x}^{t} \frac {1}{\surd u(1-u)} du\bigg| \notag\\
&\leq \bigg| \int_{x}^{t} \bigg( \frac{1}{\surd u} + \frac{1}{\surd 1-u}\bigg)du\bigg |\notag\\
&\leq 2 ( |\surd{t} -\surd {x}|+ | \surd {1-t} - \surd {1-x}|)\notag\\
& = 2|t - x |\bigg (\frac {1}{\surd t + \surd x} + \frac{1}{\surd {1-t} + \surd {1-x}}\bigg)\notag\\
& < 2 |t - x | \bigg (\frac {1}{\surd x} +\frac {1}{\surd {1-x}}\bigg) \leq \frac { 2\surd 2 |t - x |}{\phi(x)}
\end{align}
From (\ref{e15}) - (\ref{e17}) and using the Cauchy - Schwarz inequality, we obtain \\
\begin{align*}
| S_{n,p,q}(g;x)- g(x)|&< 2\surd2 \|\phi g^{\prime}\| \phi^{-1}(x)S_{n,p,q}(|t - x|;x)\\
&\leq 2\surd2 \|\phi g^{\prime}\| \phi^{-1}(x)(S_{n,p,q}((t - x)^{2};x))^{\frac {1}{2}}.
\end{align*}
Using lemma (2.2), we get
\begin{align*}
| S_{n,p,q}(g;x)- g(x)| \leq \frac {2\surd2[n]_{p,q}}{\surd([n]_{p,q}+\beta} \|\phi g^{\prime}\|.
\end{align*}
Now using the above inequality we can write \\
\begin{align*}
| S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)|&\leq | S_{n,p,q}(f-g ;x)| + |f(x) - g(x)| + | S_{n,p,q}(g;x)- g(x)|\\
& \leq 2\surd 2 \bigg(\|f - g\|+ \frac {[n]_{p,q}}{\surd([n]_{p,q}+\beta)} \|\phi g^{\prime}\|\bigg).
\end{align*}
Taking the infimum on the right hand side of the above inequality over all $g \in W_\phi[0,1],$ we get\\
\begin{equation}\label{e18}
| S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)| \leq CK_\phi \bigg(f;\frac{[n]_{p,q}}{\surd([n]_{p,q}+\beta)} \bigg).
\end{equation}
Using equation $(\ref{ab})$ this theorem is proven.
where $g\in W_\phi [0,1]$.On the other hand, for any $ m = 1,2,.......$ and $ 0< q < p \leqslant 1$, there exists a constant $C_m > 0 $ such that\\
\begin{equation}\label{e20}
\vert S_{n,p,q}((t-x)_{p,q}^{m};x)\vert \leqslant C_m \frac{\phi^2(x)[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^{\lfloor \frac{m+1}{2}\rfloor}},
\end{equation}
where $x\in [0,1]$ and $\lfloor a \rfloor $ is the integral part of $a \geq 0.$\\
Throughout this proof, C denotes a constant not necessarily the same at each occurrence.\\
Now combining (\ref{e18}) -(\ref{e20}) and applying lemma (2.2), the cauchy-schwarz inequality,\\
We get \\
$\bigg| S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)\frac {p^{n-1}[n]_{p,q} - 2\alpha \beta}{2([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^2}f^{\prime\prime}(x)\bigg|$\\
\begin{align*}
&\leq 2 \|f^{\prime\prime} - g \|S_{n,p,q}((t- x )^{2};x) + 2 \|\phi g^{\prime} \|\phi^{-1}(x)S_{n,p,q}(|t - x|^3;x)\\
&\leq2\|f^{\prime\prime} - g\|\frac{\phi^2(x)[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)} + 2\|\phi g ^{\prime} \|\phi^{-1}(x)\{S_{n,p,q}((t- x )^{2};x)\}^{\frac{1}{2}}\{S_{n,p,q}((t- x )^{4};x)\}^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\leq2\|f^{\prime\prime} - g \|\frac{\phi^2(x)[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)} + 2\frac{C}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)}\|\phi g ^{\prime} \|\frac{ \phi(x)[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\leq \frac{C[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)}\{\phi^2(x)\|f^{\prime\prime} - g \| + ([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^\frac{-1}{2}\phi(x) \| \phi g ^{\prime}\|\}.\\
\end{align*}
since $\phi^2(x)\leq \phi(x)\leq 1,x\in[0,1],$ We obtain\\
\begin{align*}
\bigg|([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^2[S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)]-\frac {p^{n-1}[n]_{p,q}-2\alpha\beta}{2}\phi^2(x)f^{\prime\prime}(x)\bigg| & \leq C\{\|f^{\prime\prime}-g\| \\
&+([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^\frac{-1}{2}\phi(x)\|\phi g^{\prime}\|\}.\\
\end{align*}
Also, the following inequality can be obtained:\\
\subsection{Voronovskaja type theorem}
Using the first order Ditzian-Totik modulus of smoothnes, we prove a quantitative Voronovskaja type theorem for the $(p,q)$-Bernstein operators.
For any $f$ $\in C^2[0,1],$ the following inequalities holds:\\
\begin{equation}
\vert([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)[ S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)] - \frac{p^{n-1}- 2 \alpha\beta}{2} \phi^2(x)f^{\prime\prime}(x)\vert \leqslant C\omega_\phi(f^{\prime\prime}\phi(x)n^{\frac{-1}{2}}),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\vert([n]_{p,q}+\beta)[ S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)] - \frac{p^{n-1}- 2 \alpha\beta}{2}\phi^2(x)f^{\prime\prime}(x)\vert \leqslant C\phi(x)\omega_\phi(f^{\prime\prime},n^{\frac{-1}{2}}),
\end{equation}
where C is a positive constant.\\
\textbf{Proof:} Let $f \in C^2[0,1]$ be given and $t,x \in[0,1]$ using Taylor's expansion, we have \\
\begin{equation}
f(t)-f(x) = (t-x)f^{\prime}(x)+ \int_{x}^{t}(t-u)f^{\prime\prime}(u)du
\end{equation}
Therefore
\begin{align*}
f(t) -f(x) - (t-x)f^{\prime}(x)- \frac{1}{2}(t-x)^2f^{\prime\prime}(x) &= \int_{x}^{t}(t-u)f^{\prime\prime}(u)du - \int_{x}^{t}(t-u)f^{\prime\prime}(x)dx \\
&= \int_{x}^{t}(t-u)[f^{\prime\prime}(u) - f^{\prime\prime}(x)]du
\end{align*}
in view of lemma (2.2), we get\\
\begin{equation}
\bigg| S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x) - \frac {p^{n-1}[n]_{p,q} - 2\alpha \beta}{2([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^2}\phi^2(x)f^{\prime\prime}(x)\bigg| \leq S_{n,p,q} \bigg(\bigg| \int_{x}^{t}|(t-u)||f^{\prime\prime}(u)- f^{\prime \prime}(x)|du \bigg|;x \bigg).
\end{equation}
The quantity $ |\int_{x}^{t} |f^{\prime\prime}(u)- f^{\prime\prime}(x)||(t-u)|du|$ was estimated in [ ],p- , as follows:\\
\begin{equation}
\bigg|\int_{x}^{t}f^{\prime\prime}(u)- f^{\prime \prime}(x)||t-u|du \bigg| \leq 2 \|f^{\prime\prime} - g \|(t - x)^2 + 2\| \phi g^{\prime}\| \phi^{-1}(x)|t - x|^3,
\end{equation}
where $g\in W_\phi [0,1]$ . On the other hand, for any $ m = 1,2,.......$ and $ 0< q < p \leqslant 1$, there exists a constant $C_m > 0 $ such that\\
\begin{equation}
\vert S_{n,p,q}((t-x)_{p,q}^{m};x)\vert \leqslant C_m \frac{\phi^2(x)[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^{\lfloor \frac{m+1}{2}\rfloor}}
\end{equation}
where $x\in [0,1]$ and $\lfloor a \rfloor $ is the integral part of $a \geq 0.$\\
Throughout this proof, C denotes a constant not necessarily the same at each occurrence.\\
Now combining (8.4) -(8.5) and applying lemma (2.2), the cauchy-schwarz inequality,\\
We get \\
$\bigg| S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)\frac {p^{n-1}[n]_{p,q} - 2\alpha \beta}{2([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^2}f^{\prime\prime}(x)\bigg|$\\
\begin{align*}
&\leq 2 \|f^{\prime\prime} - g \|S_{n,p,q}((t- x )^{2};x) + 2 \|\phi g^{\prime} \|\phi^{-1}(x)S_{n,p,q}(|t - x|^3;x)\\
&\leq2\|f^{\prime\prime} - g\|\frac{\phi^2(x)[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)} + 2\|\phi g ^{\prime} \|\phi^{-1}(x)\{S_{n,p,q}((t- x )^{2};x)\}^{\frac{1}{2}}\{S_{n,p,q}((t- x )^{4};x)\}^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\leq2\|f^{\prime\prime} - g \|\frac{\phi^2(x)[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)} + 2\frac{C}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)}\|\phi g ^{\prime} \|\frac{ \phi(x)[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\leq \frac{C[n]_{p,q}}{([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)}\{\phi^2(x)\|f^{\prime\prime} - g \| + ([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^\frac{-1}{2}\phi(x) \| \phi g ^{\prime}\|\}\\
\end{align*}
since $\phi^2(x)\leq \phi(x)\leq 1,x\in[0,1],$ We obtain\\
\begin{equation}
\bigg|([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^2[S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)] - \frac {p^{n-1}[n]_{p,q} - 2\alpha \beta}{2}\phi^2(x)f^{\prime\prime}(x)\bigg| \leq C\{\|f^{\prime\prime} - g\| + ([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^\frac{-1}{2}\phi(x) \| \phi g ^{\prime}\|\}\\
\end{equation}
Also, the following inequality can be obtained:\\
\begin{equation}
\bigg|([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^2[S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)] - \frac {p^{n-1}[n]_{p,q} - 2\alpha \beta}{2}\phi^2(x)f^{\prime\prime}(x)\bigg| \leq C\phi(x)\{\|f^{\prime\prime} - g\| + ([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^\frac{-1}{2}\| \phi g ^{\prime}\|\}
\end{equation}
Taking the infimum on the right - hand side of the above relations over $g\in W_\phi[0,1],$ we get\\
\begin{equation}
\bigg|([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^2[S_{n,p,q}(f;x)- f(x)] - \frac {p^{n-1}[n]_{p,q} - 2\alpha \beta}{2}\phi^2(x)f^{\prime\prime}(x)\bigg| \leq {C\phi(x)K_\phi( f^{\prime\prime};([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^\frac{-1}{2})}{CK_\phi(f^{\prime\prime};\phi(x)([n]_{p,q}+ \beta)^\frac{-1}{2})},
\end{equation}
Using (8.9) and(7.2) the theorem is proved.\\
\newpage
\section{Graphical Analysis}
With the help of Matlab, we show comparisons and some illustrative graphics for the
convergence of operators $(\ref{ee2})$ to the function $f(x)=1+x^3~ sin(14x)$ under different
parameters.\\
From figure \ref{f1}(a), it can be observed that as the value the $q ~\text{and}~ p $ approaches towards $1$ provided $0<q<p\leq1$, $(p, q)$-Bernstein Stancu operators given by $(\ref{ee2})$ converges towards the function.\\
From figure \ref{f1}(a) and (b), it can be observed that for $\alpha=\beta=0,$ as the value the $n$ increases, $(p, q)$-Bernstein Stancu operators given by \ref{ee2} converges towards the function $f(x)=1+x^3~ sin(14x)$.\\
Similarly from figure \ref{f2}(a), it can be observed that for $\alpha=\beta=3,$ as the value the $q ~\text{and}~ p $ approaches towards $1$ provided $0<q<p\leq1$, $(p, q)$-Bernstein Stancu operators given by \ref{ee2} converges towards the function.\\
From figure \ref{f2}(a) and (b), it can be observed that as the value the $n$ increases, $(p, q)$-Bernstein Stancu operators given by $f(x)=1+x^3~ sin(14x)$ converges towards the function.
\begin{figure}[ht]\label{f1}
\centering
\subfigure[]
{
\includegraphics[height=4cm, width=6cm]{spq2.eps}
\label{fig:first_sub}
}
\subfigure[]
{
\includegraphics[height=4cm, width=6cm]{spq1.eps}
\label{fig:second_sub}
}
\caption{$(p, q)$-Bernstein Stancu operators}\label{f1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]\label{f2}
\centering
\subfigure[]
{
\includegraphics[height=4cm, width=6cm]{spq3.eps}
\label{fig:first_sub}
}
\subfigure[]
{
\includegraphics[height=4cm, width=6cm]{spq4.eps}
\label{fig:second_sub}
}
\caption{$(p, q)$-Bernstein Stancu operators.}\label{f2}
\end{figure}
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec-1}
A jet impinging on a flat plate may emanate incredibly loud tonal noise if the Mach number is sufficiently high $(M \gtrsim 0.7)$ and the plate is less than about 7.5 diameters away from the nozzle \cite{HoNosseir1981}. In addition to the discrete tones, the presence of the impinging plate increases the overall sound pressure level (OASPL). Marsh \cite{Marsh1961} observed that for subsonic impinging jets the OASPL increases with decreasing nozzle-to-plate distance ($h/D$).
The loud tonal components in the sound spectrum (impinging tones) were early found to be due to a feedback loop involving a shear layer instability travelling downstream and some acoustic wave travelling upstream in some, necessarily subsonic part of the flow \cite{RockwellNaudascher1979}. The same idea was convincingly applied by Ho and Nosseir 1981 \cite{HoNosseir1981} as well as Henderson and Powell \cite{HendersonPowell1993,Henderson2002}, but it remained unclear who are the culprits for the feedback loop at the wall. Ho and Nosseir identified primary vortices impinging on the wall as a possible link in the feedback chain. Powell and Henderson on the contrary identified standoff shock oscillations as the responsible mechanism within the loop.
Henderson and Powell \cite{HendersonPowell1993,Henderson2002} reported a \textit{zone of silence}: depending on the nozzle pressure ratio (NPR) and the nozzle-to-plate distance, some configurations do not allow the production of impinging tones. The analysed NPR ranges from 3.38 to 4.50. In contrast, for ideally expanded jets Krothapalli \cite{KrothapalliRajkuperan1999} et al. found continuously tones for nozzle-to-plate distances up to 10 diameters. Henderson \cite{Henderson2002} argued that both configurations (ideally and under-expanded) differ strongly in the shock-wave structure and therefore the zone of silence and the production of impinging tones must be affected by the shock-wave structure. He also proposed, that tones generated at $5 \leq h/D \leq10$ may be related to jet screech. Sinibali et al. \cite{SinibaldiMarino2015} conducted acoustic and PIV measurements of supersonic impinging jets. Nozzle pressure ratios between two and four were analysed for nozzle-to-plate distances of two, three and four diameters. The zone of silence shifts to higher values of NPR with increasing nozzle-to-plate distances ($h/D$). For $h/D=4$ the zone of silence ranges from $3.25 \leq$ NPR $\leq 4$. Sinibaldi et al. suggest that the interaction of the shear layer vortices with the wall is the only source of impinging tones in the pre-silence region, since the standoff shock is not present. In the post-silent region, the standoff shock oscillations are named as the only possible sources of the impinging tones. This is antithetical to the observations of Mitchell et al. \cite{MitchellHonnereySoria2012} and Buchmann et al. \cite{BuchmannMitchellSoria2011}, who were able to capture images of the receptivity at the nozzle by means of schlieren images from a high-speed camera. The investigated case lays in the pre-silence region (NPR$=3.2, h/D=4$) and clearly shows the presence of a standoff shock. Also Hirata et al. \cite{HirataKukita1971} observed standoff shock oscillations for large $h/D$.
Summing up, the generation of impinging tones is generally accepted to be due to a feedback mechanism. If the vortices impinging on the plate or the standoff shock oscillations generate the feedback wave is controversial and not presently clarified. Using direct numerical simulations, we are able to identify the sound source mechanism of the impinging jet in the pre-silence region for at least NPR$=2.15$ and $h/D=5$. We expect this result to hold for low NPR and sufficiently high $h/D$.
Our line of argumentation is as follows: First we shortly review some important characteristics of the free jet (section \ref{sec:jet-modes}), since there is a similar mechanism who produces tones, referred to as screech via a feedback loop mechanism. This phenomenon involves the modes of the jet. Then we shortly review what is known about the modes of the impinging jet (section \ref{sec:impinging-jet}). In section \ref{sec:flow} we describe the flow of the impinging jet using our DNS data. This includes a modal analysis focused on the frequency that appears as impinging tone. In addition, the behaviour of the two main actors (standoff shock and jet instability) are described separately. The influence of the Reynolds number and the ambient temperature are discussed.
Section \ref{sec:sound_source_mechan} contains the main argument and the crucial message of the article: Two different sound source mechanisms exist. Sound waves are emitted either by shock-vortex- or shock-vortex-shock-interactions.
The shock-vortex-interaction is similar to screech in free shear layers but differs significantly as the shock involved is the standoff shock ahead of the wall and not part of the shock cell structure.
Shock-vortex-shock-interaction is entirely new and can in short be described as the quenching of the sonic line in between two standoff shocks by the passing vortex.
Both mechanism are brought into accordance with the mode of the impinging jet and the feedback loop by direct observation as well as identification of dynamic modes. Ultimately we discuss the sound spectra, why this is not screech and the zone of silence.
\section{Free jet modes and screech}
\label{sec:jet-modes}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figs/JetModes.pdf}
\caption{Supersonic jet modes: dominant screech frequency as a function of $M_j$. Adapted from \cite{Schulze2013}. The experimental data is from Panda et al. 1997 \cite{PandaRaman1997}. The two triangles with the peak oriented to the top indicate direct numerical simulations of four own group. Filled: $Re=5000, M_j=1.55$ \cite{Schulze2013}. Not filled: $Re=3300, M_j=1.11$ \cite{WilkeSesterhenn2015}. $D_j, U_j, M_j$ denote the fully expanded values of the diameter, the jet velocity and the jet Mach number. The screech frequency is labelled $f_s$.}
\label{fig:SupersonicJetModes}
\end{figure}
Jets feature a wealth of different modes, even in the case of a round nozzle. What is important in our context is the fact that the shape of the mode determines the emanated sound. Presently not all of them are known. An overview of free chocked circular jets is given by Powell et al. \cite{PowellUmeda1992}. An impression of the different modes is given in figure (\ref{fig:SupersonicJetModes}). Depending on the fully expanded jet Mach number
\begin{equation}
M_j=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\kappa-1} \rk{\frac{p_0}{p_{\infty}}}^{\frac{\kappa-1}{\kappa}}} \quad,
\end{equation}
we find several dominant frequencies due to screech. $M_j$ is a reasonable choice, since chocked jet have $M=1$ at the orifice, thus this Mach number is a meaningless choice. $D_j$ is the fully expanded jet diameter. For the simulations carried out at NPR$=2.15$, $D_j \approx D$ holds with a negligible error of $0.4\%$. More significant is the choice of the physical $D$ or displaced diameter $D^*$ (eq. \ref{eq:D_st}), which is discussed in section \ref{sec:sound}. But what interests us presently in the graph is the fact that we find modes $A_1$, $A_2$, $B$, $C$, $D$ and $E$. $A_1$ and $A_2$ are axisymmetric. B and D are flapping. Powell at al. \cite{PowellUmeda1992} denote them ``primarily flapping'' as they can occasionally appear as helical. A flapping mode can be considered as a superposition of two helical modes with the same amplitude and opposite sense. In case one of them is weak or missing, what is possible since B and D are not very robust, the resulting mode remains helical. Mode $C$ is helical. Mode $E$ is unknown, but in the case of an elliptic nozzle it is known to split up in different modes denoted $E_1$, $E_2$ and $E_3$. The fact that it splits up in the elliptical case could indicate that we deal with several modes indeed.
Figure \ref{fig:SupersonicJetModes} describes the influence of the Mach number only. Little is known about Reynolds number effects. The primary cause for that is a lack of data and the fact that most experiments have been performed at high Reynolds numbers, naturally occurring if experiments are done with reasonable size. However, DNS from our own group \cite{Schulze2013} at $M_j=1.55$ and $Re=5000$ as well as \cite{WilkeSesterhenn2015} at $Re=3300$ and $M_j=1.11$ indicate that the correspondence of $M_j$ to modal structure might be distorted. From figure \ref{fig:SupersonicJetModes}, based on the measurements of Panda et al. 1997 \cite{PandaRaman1997}, one would expect a torodial mode appearing at $M_j = 1.11$. However, our simulation with a cold jet (ambient temperature $T_{\infty} = 373.15$ K and total inlet temperature $T_0 = 293.15$ K) features a helical mode corresponding to a Strouhal number of $Sr = 0.375$. This frequency fits into the range of mode B, which can be helical as well. This is also supported by the computation of Sesterhenn et al. \cite{SesterhennMiranda2013} who report a change in modal structure when particles are added to the jet. This might be due to the change of the density of the jet, which then would also lead to the conclusion that heating changes the modes.
One more issue deserves some special emphasis: A closer look at figure \ref{fig:SupersonicJetModes} shows that for some Mach numbers, more than one possible modes exist. For example at $M \approx 1.2$, we observe $A_1$, $A_2$, and $B$ as possible candidates, each of which having a different frequency. The mechanism of the mode selection is unclear and it would be worthwhile trying to force the jet in one or another mode. Given identical boundary conditions, a mode selection in form of initial conditions must come in. We do not discuss this issue further, but underline the different coexisting states.
The specific sound source in supersonic jets that depends on the described modes is referred to as screech. Screech is a mark for discrete tones that are generated by a feedback mechanism: Vortical structures develop in the shear layer of the jet and grow while they are convected downstream. When the large scale structures reach the fourth or fifth shock cell, both interact and emit strong acoustic waves that propagate upstream. These reach the nozzle lip or upper plate and excite the shear layer of the jet which leads to new instability waves and the close of the feedback mechanism.
The interaction was described by Suzuki and Lele \cite{SuzukiLele2003}, based on a two-dimensional DNS. Fernandez and Sesterhenn \cite{FernandezSesterhenn2015} performed a three-dimensional DNS of a round starting jet. They found that the shock-wave present in the core of the trailing jet is bent by
the vortices from the shear layer that reach the shock-wave. As a result, the shock transforms into a strong acoustic wave that is radiated into the outer region. This phenomenon is very similar to the shock-vortex-interaction, as described in section \ref{sec:sv}. However, the involved shocks are different: In the free jet, the shock diamond interacts with the vortices, whereas in the impinging jet it is the moving standoff shock.
\section{Impinging jet modes}
\label{sec:impinging-jet}
As explained in the previous section, free jet screech is strongly connected with the modal structure of the jet. Despite this topic is still being investigated, the gained knowledge during the past decades is considerable. In contrast, comparably little is known about the impinging jet modes.
In \cite{TamAhuja1990} Tam and Ahuja argue that only axisymmetrical modes are possible for subsonic impinging jets, whereas also helical modes can occur in the supersonic case. This statement is based on an analytical model and the studies found in literature: Neuwirth \cite{Neuwerth1974,Neuwerth1981} observed axisymmetrical, helical and flapping (superposition of two helical) modes for supersonic impinging jets. Additionally, a helical coherent structure for a free jet was observed at $M=0.8$. Adding an impinging plate (without changing any other parameter), the mode changed to axisymmetrical. Nosseir and Ho \cite{NosseirHo1982} likewise observed an axisymmetrical mode at $M=0.7$ for an impinging jet.
Krothapallo et al. \cite{KrothapalliRajkuperan1999} conducted an experiment involving ideally expanded free and impinging jets at $M_j=1.5$. The mode of the free jet is helical. Approaching the plate, this mode stays dominant until $h/D=8$. Between $h/D=4$ and 6, the axisymmetrical begins to dominate. A further decrease of $h/D$ leads to a re-emergence of the helical mode.
Tsubokura et al. \cite{TsubokuraKobayashi2003} conducted a DNS with a Reynolds number of 2000. This flow is not fully turbulent, since therefore Reynolds numbers above about 3000 are required. The simulation ($h/D=10$) showed a mode that is axisymmetrical close to the orifice plate, but develops an asymmetry close to the impinging plate.
A recent numerical investigation was performed by Uzun et al. \cite{UzunKumar2013}. He conducted a large eddy simulation with a plate distance of five diameters and a Mach number of 1.5. The coherent axisymmetrical structures found using a DMD, correspond to the dominant tone at $Sr\approx 0.33$.\\
\section{Computational setup}
\label{sec:geometry}
The governing Navier-Stokes equations are formulated in a characteristic pressure-velocity-entropy-formulation, as described by Sesterhenn \cite{Sesterhenn2001} and are solved directly numerically. This formulation has advantages in the fields of boundary conditions, parallelization and space discretisation. No turbulence modelling is required since the smallest scales of turbulent motion are resolved. The spatial discretisation uses 6th order compact central schemes for the diffusive terms and compact 5th order upwind finite differences for the convective terms. To advance in time a 4th order Runge-Kutta scheme is applied. In order to avoid Gibbs oscillations in the vicinity of the standoff shock an adaptive shock-capturing filter developed by Bogey et al. \cite{BogeyCacqueray2009} that automatically detects shocks is used.\\
The computational domain is delimited by four non-reflecting boundary conditions, one isothermal wall which is the impinging plate and one boundary consisting of an isothermal wall and the inlet. The walls are fully acoustically reflective. The location of the nozzle is defined using a hyperbolic tangent profile with a disturbed thin laminar annular shear layer as described in \cite{WilkeSesterhenn2014}.\\
A sponge region is applied for the outlet area $r/D >5$, that smoothly forces the values of pressure, velocity and entropy to reference values. This destroys vortices before leaving the computational domain. The reference values at the outlet were obtained by a preliminary large eddy simulation of a greater domain.\\
The grid is refined in the wall-adjacent regions in order to ascertain a maximum value of the dimensionless wall distance $y^+$ of the closest grid point to the wall not larger than one for both plates. For the wall-parallel-directions a slight symmetrical grid stretching is applied, which refines the shear layer of the jet. The refinements use hyperbolic tangent respectively hyperbolic sin functions resulting in a change of the mesh spacing lower than $1\%$ for all directions and cases. The table \ref{tab_para} shows the physical and geometrical parameters of the simulations.\\
\begin{table}
\caption{Geometrical and physical parameters of the simulation. $p_o, p_{\infty}, T_o, T_{\infty},T_W, Re, Pr, \kappa, R$ denote total- and ambient pressure, total-, ambient and wall temperature, Reynolds number, Prandtl number, ratio of specific heats and the specific gas constant.}
\begin{tabularx}{\columnwidth}{p{2mm} XXXXXXX p{17mm}}
\toprule
N$^{\circ}$ & $p_o/p$ & $p_{\infty}$ & $T_o$ & $T_{\infty}=T_W$ & $Re$ & $Pr$ & $\kappa$ & $R$\\
& & [Pa] & [K] & [K] & && &[J/(kg K)]\\
\midrule
\#1 & $2.15$ & $10^5$ & $293.15$ & $373.15$ & $3300$ & $0.71$ & $1.4$ & $287$\\
\#2 & $2.15$ & $10^5$ & $293.15$ & $293.15$ & $3300$ & $0.71$ & $1.4$ & $287$\\
\#3 & $2.15$ & $10^5$ & $293.15$ & $293.15$ & $8000$ & $0.71$ & $1.4$ & $287$\\
\end{tabularx}
\begin{tabularx}{\columnwidth}{p{2mm} X p{28mm} p{6mm} XX}
\toprule
N$^{\circ}$ & domain size & grid points & max. $y^+$ & grid width x,z & grid width y\\
& $[D]$ & & & $[D]$ & $[D]$\\
\midrule
\#1 & $12 \times 5 \times 12$ & $512 \times 512 \times 512$ & $0.67$ & $0.0199 .. 0.0588$ & $0.0017 .. 0.0159$\\
\#2 & $12 \times 5 \times 12$ & $512 \times 512 \times 512$ & $0.77$ & $0.0199 .. 0.0588$ & $0.0017 .. 0.0159$\\
\#3 & $12 \times 5 \times 12$ & $1024 \times 1024 \times 1024$ & $1.02$ & $0.0099 .. 0.0296$ & $0.0012 .. 0.0072$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}
\label{tab_para}
\end{table}
\section{Description of the flow}
\label{sec:flow}
\subsection{Dynamic mode decomposition}
\label{sec:DMD}
A dynamic mode decomposition (DMD) is used to relate coherent structures of the flow field to the tonal noise of the supersonic impinging jet. The DMD, as described by Schmid and Sesterhenn \cite{SchmidSesterhenn2008,Schmid2011}, extracts dynamic information out of a sequence of snapshots for a specific time interval that are either generated experimentally or numerically. In our case, 120 two-dimensional snapshots of the pressure field are used. Therewith we map six period length of the cycle described in the following. The temporal dynamics of the flow is approximated by a linear snapshot to snapshot operator. The dominant eigenfunctions of this evolution operator form a set of dynamically relevant modal structures (dynamic modes). The mathematical background as well as the algorithm are given in \cite{Schmid2011}.\\
In order to relate the correct structures of the impinging jet to the impinging tones, we anticipate that the sound is radiated with a Strouhal number of $Sr=0.32$, which is shown later in section \ref{sec:sound}. Performing the DMD, we find a relevant mode with this frequency. In the following, a description of the flow regarding that mode is given. Simulation \#3 (see table \ref{tab_para}) with a Reynolds number of 8000 is used for this purpose. Figure \ref{fig:DMD} shows a full period of the cycle including five snapshots, one in each row. Snapshot number six, which is not shown would be again at the same phase point like the first one. In the left and middle column, the original flow field is shown ($Q$ respectively pressure $p$). The right column shows the pressure obtained from the reconstruction of the flow field using only the 0-mode, which is the time mean and the two complex conjugated dynamic modes with the frequency of the impinging tone ($Sr=0.32$). In the first point in the phase (first row) there is a highly turbulent area with plenty of small vortices close to the stagnation point ($y/D \lesssim 1$). These vortices are left from the former period and will be explained later. However the flow in this area is mainly subsonic. Large vortical structures can be found in the upper part of the domain ($y/D\gtrsim 2$). These belong to the new period that we investigate now. The first vortex ring in streamwise direction ($y/D\approx 2$), that in this specific period includes a split off (see section \ref{sec:jet_instab}), is significantly stronger than the following ones. This can becomes clear regarding the original pressure field (middle), and especially the reconstructed pressure field (right). Therefore it is referred to as head vortex. Slightly in front of the head vortex is the sonic line. Advancing in time (second and third row), the following vortices accelerate, as described in section \ref{sec:jet_instab}. This leads to a split of the supersonic area, as indicated by the sonic line. In the fourth row, the supersonic area approaches the stagnation point, encounters high pressure and forms the standoff shocks. Now shock-vortex- and the shock-vortex-shock-interactions occur, as described later in section \ref{sec:sv} and \ref{sec:svs}. As a result of the thereby produced strong pressure waves, the large structures (vortex rings) get destroyed and the supersonic area disappears. This can be seen in the last row. The breakdown of the large vortices even continues in the beginning of the new period, as shown in the first row.\\
The dynamic mode decomposition proves two statements:
\begin{itemize}
\item The impinging tone frequency is the frequency with which a strong vortex ring (head) develops and draws in subsequent vortices leading to interactions of those structures with the standoff shock.
\item The mode is mainly axisymmetric and not flapping or helical.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q60}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{p60}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{DMDp60}.pdf}}\\[-14.5mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q64}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{p64}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{DMDp64}.pdf}}\\[-14.5mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q68}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{p68}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{DMDp68}.pdf}}\\[-14.5mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q72}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{p72}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{DMDp72}.pdf}}\\[-14.5mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q76}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{p76}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{figs/8000/{DMDp76}.pdf}}\\[-10mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/8000/colorbarQ.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/8000/colorbarp.pdf}}\\[-5.5mm]
\caption{Cycle of the sound source mechanism ($Re=8000$). First column: normalised values of $Q$. Second and third column: pressure of the original flow field and of the reconstruction using the mean field and the relevant dynamic mode with a Strouhal number of $Sr=0.32$. The snapshots (rows) are in consecutive order.}
\label{fig:DMD}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Standoff shock}
\label{sec:standoff-shock}
As described in the previous section, standoff shocks develop due to the approach of the supersonic area to locations of high pressure ($\gtrsim 1.3 \cdot p_{\infty}$), close to the stagnation point. This happens within a periodic cycle. As a result of this cycle, the shocks are not continuously present. This can be seen in the pressure snapshots of figure \ref{fig:DMD} (middle column). In the first two rows no standoff shock can be observed. Advancing in time, the shocks develop and can be clearly seen in the fourth row at $y/D\approx 0.6$ and $0.9$. The creation of the shocks occur at the border of locations with high pressure, connected to high pressure gradients. Those are either the stagnation point or a lump which was split-off from the stagnation point due to the strong pressure waves in the previous period. However the high pressure gradients tend to move away from the stagnation point. The interaction with the contrary moving vortices is inevitable. Due to the highly turbulent flow field ($Re=8000$) the stagnation point produces multiple high pressure lumps and therefore multiple standoff shocks.
\subsection{Jet instability}
\label{sec:jet_instab}
Vortex rings develop axisymmetric in shear layer of the free jet region due to a Kelvin-Helmholtz instability. Travelling downstream they grow and tend to develop an asymmetry. However, this asymmetry is due to the influence of the acoustic field. The mode of the impinging jet is toroidal, no flapping and no helical mode can be observed for the investigated set of parameters. During the movement in streamwise direction two different phenomenons are observed. Vortex rings can split off a new vortex or leapfrogging can occur. Both effects can be seen in figure \ref{fig:leapfrog}. In the first row are three consecutive snapshots that show leapfrogging. Two similar vortex rings (1a,1b) and (2a,2b) are travelling downstream behind each other (left). Due to their mutual interaction the frontal one decelerates and increases its diameter whereas the rear one accelerated and shrinks in diameter \citep{Riley1998}, (middle). In the next step (right) the rear vortex ring (2a,2b) passes through the front ring (1a,1b). Depending on the positions of the vortices , the process can either be complete, before the vortices interact with the shock or both events coincide. In the second row of figure \ref{fig:leapfrog} the split off of a vortex is shown. While the vortex ring on the left side (1a) is unchanged, the ring splits on the right side (1b,1c). Thereby the new developed part (1c) takes the position of the original structure (1b), which moves out of the free jet region and slows down.
\begin{figure}
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q.0000b}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q.0006b}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q.0012b}.pdf}}\\[-9mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q.0052b}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q.0058b}.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/8000/{Q.0064b}.pdf}}
\caption{Leapfrogging (first row) and vortex split off (second row) in the shear layer of the free jet region in an supersonic impinging jet with $Re=8000$. The consecutive snapshots advance from the left to the right in time. Shown is $Q D/u_{\infty}^2$ [-] in the range $-85$ (white) to $85$ (black).}
\label{fig:leapfrog}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Influence of the Reynolds number and the ambient temperature}
\label{sec:cycle3300}
The mode described above is based on the computation (\#3) of a supersonic impinging jet with a Reynolds number of 8000 and an ambient temperature of $293.15$ K, which is equal to the total inlet temperature. Two more simulations were carried out. The first one (\#2) has the same temperatures, but a lower Reynolds number of 3300. Analysing the data, we observe exactly the same mechanisms and feedback loop as in the case of $Re=8000$.
In the second simulation (\#1) at $Re=3300$ also the ambient and wall temperature were changed to $T_{\infty}=T_W=373.15$ K. The total inlet temperature was not changed, so we have a cold jet in a hot environment, which is typical for cooling configurations. This simulation shows a specific characteristic. The flow changes between two modes, which have the same frequency $Sr\approx0.35$. This effect occurs also in free jets, as described in section \ref{sec:jet_instab}. All calculated frequencies are summarised in table \ref{tab_tones}. The modes of this specific simulation are denoted A and B, but are different from the labels A and B of the free jet screech, as described in section \ref{sec:jet-modes}.
In mode A strongly axisymmetrical vortex rings develop with the characteristic frequency. Those vortex rings are so far from each other that they do not interact and no leapfrogging can be observed. Each vortex ring behaves exactly like the head vortex described in section \ref{sec:DMD}. The dynamic mode decomposition of this mode is described in \cite{WilkeSesterhenn2016}. Due to the strong symmetric flow field, the stagnation point is not disturbed as strong as in simulation \#3. As a result, no high pressure lumps are developed and therefore only one standoff shock is created for each period for this mode. This one is created at $y/D\approx0.25$, moves and interacts with the (only) vortex ring at $y/D\approx0.75$.
Mode B by contrast is equal to the mode observed in the simulations \#2 und \#3. Here the vortex rings develop more frequent and allow leapfrogging. Anyway, in both modes the head vortex formates with the same frequency.
If one ore more sound waves are produced within each cycle does not affect the frequency of the impinging tone, since the frequency of the head vortex and so the frequency of the entire cycle does not change. This leads to no difference in the emanated sound, as shown in section \ref{sec:sound}.
\begin{figure}
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\centering
\subfloat[Mode A]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/3300/0_Qsw_0721b.pdf}}
\subfloat[Mode B]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/3300/0_Qsw_0345c.pdf}}
\caption{Two different modes exist for a cold impinging jet at $Re=3300$ ($T_0=293.15$ K) in a hot environment ($T_{\infty}=T_W=373.15$ K) with the same frequency $Sr\approx0.35$. Shown is $Q D/u_{\infty}^2$ [-] in the range $-8.5$ (white) to $8.5$ (black).}
\label{fig:3300AB}
\end{figure}
\section{Sound source mechanism}
\label{sec:sound_source_mechan}
\subsection{Type 1: Shock-vortex-interaction}
\label{sec:sv}
This kind of sound-emitting interaction requires two components: One shock and one vortex or an aggregation of vortices. The computational results show that multiple shocks can occur near by the stagnation point. Usually two or three shocks are simultaneously present. The system of the shocks is highly unsteady within a periodical cycle. The cycle is described in section \ref{sec:DMD}.
Shock-vortex-interactions occur also in free jets, as described by Fernandez and Sesterhenn \cite{FernandezSesterhenn2015}. However, the strength of the shock due to the impinging plate is much stronger than the one in the shock-cell-system due to the under-expansion of the jet. This results in much higher sound pressure levels in the case of a present impinging plate, on which we concentrate in this paper. Therefore the term \textit{shock} refers here always to \textit{standoff-shock}.
This sound source mechanism can involve either the main vortical structure of the impinging jet, which are the vortex rings or a vortex within a turbulent aggregation of vortices. The first case is typical for low Reynolds numbers, like $Re=3300$ and was found by Wilke and Sesterhenn \cite{WilkeSesterhenn2016}. With increasing Reynolds numbers, the phenomenon shifts to the second case. In the following, the mechanism is explained using figure \ref{fig:sv} which shows snapshots of the simulation with $Re=8000$. All snapshots are a section of a slice through the jet axis. In the first column normalised values of $Q$ and of the divergence of the velocity field $div(u)$ are shown. At the starting point (first row) three shocks are present. For this mechanism only the upper one ($y/D\approx 0.85$) plays a role. For simplicity only that one is shown in the sketch. Additionally a vortex ring (1a,1b) is present, which is slightly asymmetric. The center of the ring in the left shear layer (1a) is at the same height of shock, whereas the the center of the ring in the right side (1b) is closer to the wall. A bunch of turbulent vortices (3) is above the shock. The vortex (2a) is a fragment that is left from the next vortex ring that lost its symmetric structure due to leap-frogging. This process is explained in section \ref{sec:DMD}. At this point in time the shock keeps its position due to an equilibrium between the stagnation pressure pushing the shock up and the flow pushing the shock down to the wall. The vortices however are transported by the jet with high velocity and approach the impinging plate. The vortex ring (1a,1b) is transported in wall normal direction around the shock, without interaction. Vortex (3) on the contrary crashes into the right end of the shock. As a consequence, the shock looses its equilibrium, turns to the left and strongly accelerates. This can be seen in the second row of figure \ref{fig:sv}. At this point in time the vortex bunch (3) already cut the right end of the shock. The shock transformed into a pressure wave and is now (third row of figure \ref{fig:sv}) in between the two vortices (1a) and (3), moving in north-west direction. At this point there are two possibilities for the pressure wave. The first option is shown in the forth row of figure \ref{fig:sv}: no vortex is in the way and the pressure wave can expand without disturbance. Here, the wave can pass between vortices (1a) and (2a). In this case, the wave leaves the jet and does not trigger a feedback loop. More often is the case that there is no gap for the wave to escape and the wave interacts with another vortex, that changes the direction of the wave. In this case, the wave goes through the whole jet and triggers another instability at the nozzle lip.\\
Important for this mechanism is a flow field that is at least slightly asymmetric. At low Reynolds number ($Re=3300$), we observe a flow field that switches between a mainly symmetric and a clear asymmetric state. Also the mainly symmetric state is slightly distorted, so that one side of the vortex ring touches the shock slightly before the other side and leads to the described sound wave. Those two different states are explained in section \ref{sec:cycle3300}.\\
\begin{figure}
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{figs/sv/sv110a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/sv/sv110b.pdf}}\\[-8mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{figs/sv/sv126a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/sv/sv126b.pdf}}\\[-8mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{figs/sv/sv147a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/sv/sv147b.pdf}}\\[-8mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{figs/sv/sv167a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/sv/sv167b.pdf}}\\[-7mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{figs/sv/color_Q.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{figs/sv/color_divu.pdf}}
\caption{Shock-vortex-interaction ($Re=8000$). First column: normalised values of $Q$ and of the divergence of the velocity field $div(u)$. Second column: sketch. The snapshots (rows) are in consecutive order.}
\label{fig:sv}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Type 2: Shock-vortex-shock-interaction}
\label{sec:svs}
The second kind of interaction that produces strong acoustic waves involves two shocks, a vortex ring and a sonic line. Figure \ref{fig:svs} shows snapshots of the simulation with $Re=8000$. All snapshots are a section of a slice through the jet axis. In the first column normalised values of $Q$ and of the divergence of the velocity field $div(u)$ are shown. This mechanism requires a periodical appearance and disappearance of the supersonic zone close to the stagnation point. Details about the entire cycle are given in section \ref{sec:DMD}. We start from a point in time where the supersonic zone close to the stagnation point was destroyed and a new one is transported downstream by the jet. This zone is circumscribed by the sonic line ($M=1$). As long as no obstacles are in the way, the sonic line travels together with vortex rings, but slightly ahead of them. Travelling further downstream the supersonic zone encounters zones of high pressure, which are fragments of the high pressure at the stagnation point. As mentioned, typically there are multiple of such zones. In our example, we have three of them. Each time the sonic line faces a zone of high pressure, it stops its downstream movement for a while until the jet pushes the sonic line over the shock by continuously delivering new fluid. The vortex rings travel in the shear layer, which is outside of the high pressure zone formed only in the core of the jet. Thus they are not affected by those high pressure zones. As a consequence, the vortex rings approach the sonic line and interact. This means they influence the shape of the sonic line due to its rotating velocity components. In the first row of figure \ref{fig:svs} the sonic line is confined by the shear layer of the jet in radial direction. Streamwise it consists of three parts: on the left side, the sonic line coincides with the upper shock, whereas on the right side, it coincides with the lower shock. The crossover coincides with the inner border of the left side of the vortex ring. The sound wave is produced when this arrangement collapses: The vortex is not able anymore to separate the sub- and supersonic areas. This can be seen in the following two time steps (second and third row of figure \ref{fig:svs}). The sonic line looses its connection to the vortex ring and the upper shock and jumps to the lower shock so that the upper shock gets embedded in the supersonic zone. Thereby a subsonic area is initially embedded and then collapses. A strong spheric pressure wave expands from that point. This goes through the whole jet and reaches the nozzle. The phenomenon therefore triggers new instabilities of the shear layer and is part of a feedback mechanism.
\begin{figure}
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{figs/svs/svs108a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/svs/svs108b.pdf}}\\[-8mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{figs/svs/svs109a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/svs/svs109b.pdf}}\\[-8mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{figs/svs/svs110a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/svs/svs110b.pdf}}\\[-8mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{figs/svs/svs114a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/svs/svs114b.pdf}}\\[-7mm]
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{figs/sv/color_Q.pdf}}
\hspace{0.2cm}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{figs/sv/color_divu.pdf}}
\caption{Shock-vortex-shock-interaction ($Re=8000$). First column: normalised values of $Q$ and of the divergence of the velocity field $div(u)$. Second column: sketch. The snapshots (rows) are in consecutive order.}
\label{fig:svs}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Closure of the feedback loop}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figs/cycleb.pdf}
\caption{Feedback loop of a supersonic impinging jet at $Re=8000$, inspired by the nomenclature of Raman \cite{Raman1998}, figure 1.}
\label{fig:loop}
\end{figure}
As stated in the introduction, it is generally accepted that a feeedback mechanism similar to the screech feedback loop is responsible for the impinging tones. No agreement could be found on how the loop works in detail: if the primary vortices impinging on the wall or the oscillations of the standoff shock close the feedback loop. Following the description of Raman \cite{Riley1998} of the free jet screech feedback loop, we apply the same steps for the impinging tone feedback loop:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Jet instability
\item Feedback wave produced by shock-vortex-interaction
\item Upstream propagation of feedback-wave
\item Receptivity at nozzle lip
\end{enumerate}
Vortex rings (primary vortices) develop axisymmetric in shear layer of the free jet region due to a Kelvin-Helmholtz instability (1) and perform leapfrogging as well as vortex split off's, as described in section \ref{sec:jet_instab}. Vortices interact with the standoff shocks, as described in section \ref{sec:sv} and \ref{sec:svs}, in form of shock-vortex- or shock-vortex-shock-interactions and produce strong pressure waves (2). Except for the special case, where the wave can leave the jet undisturbed, those waves usually interact again with structures of the jet and propagate as feedback-waves upstream (3). Reaching the nozzle lip, they trigger new instabilities at the shear layer (4). The feedback loop is illustrated in figure \ref{fig:loop}. The DMD showed, that it is not only one wave who triggers another wave through a direct feedback, in fact a much more complex cycle (section \ref{sec:DMD}) involving a periodical formation of head vortices and a destruction of the supersonic zone close to the stagnation point is responsible for the impinging tones.
\subsection{Emanated sound}
\label{sec:sound}
In order to obtain the sound spectra, the pressure was recorded in the near-field on three different cylinders around the jet axis at distances of two, three and four diameters. For the presented results, the position $r/D=4$ and $y/D=5$ was chosen. The upper wall has the advantage, that the velocity is zero and no flow disturbs the acoustic measurements. The choice of the radius does not influence the investigated tones (frequencies), since the different distances only move the sound pressure level up and down. For each of the 256 circumferential positions, the spectra was computed using a fast Fourier transform (FFT). The spectra were then averaged. The Strouhal number was calculated using:
\begin{equation}
Sr=\frac{f D}{u_{\infty}} \qquad.
\end{equation}
$D$ is the inlet diameter, $f$ the frequency and $u_{\infty}$ the fully expanded jet velocity. In the described simulations, a hyperbolic tangent profile was used to define the inlet. This profile has a radial displacement
\begin{equation}
\delta_r^*=\frac{D-D^*}{2}
\end{equation}
of $\delta_r^*=0.1 \cdot D$, based on the average flow field. The effects due to the boundary layer displacement are not taken into account while computing the Strouhal number, since the diameter $D$ and not the displaced diameter $D^*$
\begin{equation}
D^*= \left. \sqrt{\frac{4}{\pi} \frac{\dot{m}}{\rho v}} \quad \right|_{inlet}
\label{eq:D_st}
\end{equation}
is used. $\dot{m}$, $\rho$ and $v$ are the mass flow, density and velocity in axial direction at the inlet. Changing the reference length to $D^*$ effects the non-dimensional frequencies.
Figure \ref{fig:SPLRe} shows the spectra for all three simulations. It can be seen (a) that the frequency of the impinging tone is nearly independent of the Reynolds number in the range of $3300 \leq Re \leq 8000$. Both simulations show a peek at $Sr=0.32$ resp. $Sr=0.33$. The frequencies of the impinging tones are summarised in table \ref{tab_tones}. The high-frequent noise increases with increasing Reynolds number.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfloat[Influence of Reynolds number (cold)]{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{figs/SPL/SPL_Re.eps}}
\subfloat[Influence of temperature at $Re=3300$]{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{figs/SPL/SPL_heiss_kalt.eps}}
\caption{Sound pressure level (SPL) of different configurations of the impinging jet. Reference pressure: $p_{ref}=2 \cdot 10^{-5}$ Pa. Cold and hot classify the ambient temperature in comparison to the total inlet temperature of the jet. The parameters can be found in table \ref{tab_para}.}
\label{fig:SPLRe}
\end{figure}
In figure \ref{fig:SPLRe} (b) two impinging jets at $Re=3300$ with different wall and ambient temperatures are compared. The values of the cold respectively hot case are $T_W = T_{\infty}=293.15$ K and $T_W = T_{\infty}=373.15$ K. The total inlet temperature of the jet was kept constant at $T_0=293.15$ K. Heating the walls and therewith the ambient fluid leads to a shift of the impinging tone to slightly lower frequencies. However the profile is very similar to the cold case. This is despite the existence of an additional mode in the hot case, as described in section \ref{sec:cycle3300}. In order to compare the noise emitted by those modes, the spectra were generated additionally for the specific time span of each mode. The time spans are identical with the ones used for the dynamic mode decompositions. Figure \ref{fig:SPLmodAB} shows these spectra. It can be seen that the impinging tone is present in both cases. Furthermore the frequency is nearly identical $Sr\approx 0.35$. The small discrepancy can be explained due to the short time spans and the following coarse resolution of the Strouhal number for deeper frequencies. The data points are marked around the impinging tone. Comparing the first harmonics, we see a much smaller discrepancy due to the higher resolution of the Strouhal number on a logarithmic axis. In conclusion, the impinging tone can be either produced by only one shock-vortex-interaction per cycle (mode A) or by multiple interactions per cycle: shock-vortex-interactions and shock-vortex-shock-interactions (mode B). The frequency of the cycle is equal for both cases and is characterised by the formation of a head vortex, which is either one vortex ring or multiple vortices merged due to the leap-frogging mechanism.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{figs/SPL/SPL_Re3300_modAB.eps}
\caption{Sound pressure levels (SPL) of the impinging jet at $Re=3300$ with a hot ambient temperature ($T_W = T_{\infty}=373.15$ K) for different time spans: Mode A and B represent the time span where the impinging jet is situated in the respective mode; combined referres to the entire pressure date (\#1), including both modes. Reference pressure: $p_{ref}=2 \cdot 10^{-5}$ Pa.}
\label{fig:SPLmodAB}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\caption{Dimensionless frequencies of the impinging tones as observed in the spectra $Sr_{SPL}$ and in the dynamic mode decomposition $Sr_{DMD}$\\
$^*$ computed using the half frequency of the first harmonic of the tone. This is done, because the time span used for the spectrum $t_{SPL}$ is relatively short and therefore the resolution of the impinging tone frequency is coarse.}
\begin{tabularx}{\columnwidth}{p{10mm} p{25mm} XXXXX}
\toprule
N$^{\circ}$ & $T_{\infty}=T_W$ [K]& $Re$ & $t_{SPL}$ [s] & $Sr_{SPL}$ & $Sr_{DMD}$\\
\midrule
\#1 & $373.15$ & $3300$ & $0.250$ & $0.353$\\
\#1 A & $373.15$ & $3300$ & $0.046$ & $0.352^*$ & $0.345$\\
\#1 B & $373.15$ & $3300$ & $0.060$ & $0.345^*$ & $0.340$\\
\#2 & $293.15$ & $3300$ & $0.250$ & $0.330$ & $0.319$\\
\#3 & $293.15$ & $8000$ & $0.120$ & $0.320$ & $0.324$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabularx}
\label{tab_tones}
\end{table}
\subsection{Disqualification of screech}
Having a plate distance large enough, so that the relevant shock cells for the screech feedback loop (number three to five) fit into the domain, it is possible that screech noise is radiated by the impinging jet. However, in \cite{WilkeSesterhenn2016} it is shown, that for the investigated configuration of a plate distance of $h/D=5$, screech is not the relevant sound source. An impinging jet was compared to a free jet with equal parameters, except the presence of the plate. The observed tonal noise of the impinging tones is no screech, since the mode and the frequency differs between the two configurations. The pressure and axial velocity profiles were compared. It was found that the spacing of the first five shock cells does not differ between the two cases. This means, if the observed tone of the impinging jet were screech, it would need to have the exact same frequency like the tone of the free jet. Since this is not the case, screech can be excluded as the reason of tonal noise of the impinging jet. The sound pressure level of the impinging jet is more than 20 dB higher than the one of the free jet with the same parameters in the relevant frequency range $0.2 \leq Sr \leq 1$. Screech may exist additionally, but cannot be observed since the impinging tones are of much stronger nature and raise the ground sound pressure level above the screech peak of the free jet.
\subsection{Zone of silence}
As stated in the introduction, a hypothesis explaining the sound source mechanism according to Sinibaldi et al. \cite{SinibaldiMarino2015} can be summarised as follows: In the pre-silence region no standoff shock is present. Vortices interact directly with the impinging plate (direct shear layer-plate interaction). In the post-silence region the standoff shock disturbs the vortex-wall-interaction. The tones are only related to strong oscillations of the standoff shock. In the zone of silence, a smooth change between those two behaviours is observed.
The presently described simulations with $h/D=5$ and $NPR=2.15$ are located in the pre-silence zone. However we clearly observe standoff shocks in the numerical data. As described in the previous sections, the impinging tones are not caused by direct vortex-plate interactions but rather due to shock-vortex- or shock-vortex-shock-interactions. The observation of standoff shocks in the pre-silence zone is supported by the experiments of Buchmann et al.: in \cite{BuchmannMitchellSoria2011}, figure 2, schlieren images are shown for such a case ($h/D=4, NPR=3.2$) with present standoff shocks.
A hypothesis that explains the observations can be formulated as follows: Standoff shocks are present in both the pre- and the post-silence zone. However those shocks differ. In the pre-silence zone there is enough space for the jet shock cell system to damp before the flow reaches the impinging plate. Therefore the shocks can appear, disappear and move between the wall and the shock cell system. Those moving shocks are therefore difficult to detect in statistical values like root-mean-squares of velocity fluctuations. However, they can be observed using DNS or schlieren. In the post-silence zone, the impinging wall is directly located in the strong shock cells of the free jet and form a quasi-stationary system. Therefore they can be detected more easily in statistical data.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
Despite the general accordance that impinging tones are produced due to a feedback loop, inconsistent statements about the production of the sound waves can be found in literature. In addition, no consensus could be found if standoff shocks are present in the pre-silence zone.
In order to clarify the open questions, we performed direct numerical simulations with a nozzle pressure ratio of 2.15 and a nozzle-to-plate distance of five diameters at Reynolds numbers of 3300 and 8000. Analysing the data, we find that standoff shocks periodically appear, disappear and move between the impinging plate and the shock cell system. Multiple standoff shocks can exist simultaneously, usually two or three are present for the chosen set of parameters. Concerning the generation of impinging tones, we clearly observe the feedback loop and prove that the interaction between vortices and standoff shocks produce the sound waves via two different mechanisms. One of the two mechanism can analogously be found in free jets and is responsible for screech. The difference however is that not the shock diamonds, but the standoff shock is involved in the interaction with the vortices. The impinging tone is not related to screech. The mode of the impinging jet is axisymmetrical.
\section{Acknowledgments}
The simulations were performed on the national supercomputer Cray XE6 (Hermit) and Cray XC40 (Hornet, Hazelhen) at the High Performance Computing Center Stuttgart (HLRS) under the grant number GCS-ARSI/44027.
The authors gratefully acknowledge support by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) as part of the collaborative research center SFB 1029 "Substantial efficiency increase in gas turbines through direct use of coupled unsteady combustion and flow dynamics".
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec_intro}
Nonlinearity is important in many structural dynamic applications that are of interest to engineers, for example in structures with bolted interfaces \cite{Segalman}, machinery with rubber isolation mounts, microsystems subjected to thermal, magnetic or friction forces \cite{Czaplewski}, and biomechanical systems \cite{Garcia}. In other cases the baseline structure is linear, but its performance can be enhanced by adding or engineering certain types of nonlinearities \cite{Gendelman,VakakisJVA}. However, nonlinear dynamics is a rich and complicated field and so engineers tend instead to ignore nonlinearity or to seek a linear model that approximates the system at the forcing level of interest \cite{Segalman2}.
Vibration modes form the foundation of our understanding of linear dynamic systems, and influence efforts related to testing, modeling, validating and controller design. Rosenberg \cite{Rosenberg} extended modal analysis to nonlinear systems in the 1960's, coining the phrase nonlinear normal mode (NNM). The area received new attention in the 1990's \cite{Shaw,VakakisMSSP,VakakisBook} and now it is clear that NNMs can be used to obtain a wealth of insight into the response of a nonlinear system \cite{VakakisMSSP,Kerschen}. For example, NNMs have been used to explain internally resonant and non-resonant motions of structures \cite{Lacarbonara}, to design a nonlinear vibration absorber (also called a nonlinear energy sink) \cite{Gendelman}, to create or validate a reduced order model for a system \cite{Touze}, and to explain changes in the oscillation frequency and the deformation shape of the free and forced response of a structure \cite{Kerschen}.
In recent years important progress has been made in the numerical calculation of undamped \cite{Arquier,Kuether,Laxalde,Peeters} and damped NNMs \cite{Pesheck,Renson}. These new algorithms have been used to compute the nonlinear modes of a geometrically nonlinear finite element model of a component from a diesel exhaust system, a full-scale aircraft, a bladed disk from a turbine and a strongly nonlinear satellite in \cite{Kuether,Kerschen2,Krack,Renson2}, respectively. A framework for experimental identification of NNMs was recently presented in \cite{Peeters2} and validated on an academic structure \cite{Peeters3}. More recent works have begun to use this framework on more complicated structures \cite{Allen,Zapico}.
One fundamental property of undamped NNMs is the fact that they can be realized when a harmonic forcing function cancels the damping force in the damped system \cite{Peeters2}. As a result, they form the backbone of the nonlinear forced response (NLFR) curves \cite{VakakisBook,Kerschen,Wagg} and hence they approximate the oscillation frequency and deformation shape that are exhibited at resonance, when a structure is at the greatest risk of failure. The relationship between the NLFR and the NNM backbone is simple for mild nonlinearities, but most realistic systems exhibit complicated NNMs with many interactions between the various modes leading to internally resonant branches. Many works have explored interactions between nonlinear modes with commensurate linear frequencies, e.g., when a pair of the linearized natural frequencies of the system have an integer ratio \cite{NayfehB,Wagg2,Rega}. Some of them have even exploited these modal interactions for optimal design \cite{Dou}. In contrast, only a few have considered the case that is of interest in this work where the modal interactions occur between pairs of modes whose linear frequencies are not integer related. The investigation of such interactions requires one to resort to computational methods, which is another specific aspect of this study.
This work explores the relationships between these interacting NNMs and the forced response of the nonlinear system, especially for the case in which the forced response shows an isolated resonance curve (IRC). Specifically, we show that the interactions between NNMs are responsible for the IRCs in the forced response. We note that the paper \cite{Neild} discusses the relationships between bifurcations of backbone curves and IRCs; it is therefore the ideal companion of the present study. These detached families of solutions are frequently not detected because they do not emerge naturally from the fundamental response when numerical continuation is used. They can lie outside or inside the main resonance curve \cite{Gatti,Gatti2}, with the former case typically being more important because one is likely to underestimate the response of the nonlinear system \cite{Alexander,Duan}. Isolated resonances may also go undetected during laboratory experiments when stepped/swept sine testing is employed.
The paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{Periodic} briefly reviews the methodology used to compute the periodic motions of the undamped and damped form of the nonlinear equations of motion, along with a phase resonance condition extended to nonlinear systems. An adaptation of the energy balancing procedure presented by Neild et al.~\cite{NeildE1,NeildE2}, which can be used to estimate the forcing amplitude required to isolate the NNM, is also presented in Section \ref{Periodic}. Section~\ref{NNMsec} applies the energy balancing technique to a nonlinear cantilever beam with the aim to predict the resonances from the knowledge of the NNMs and of the damping matrix. The predictions of Section~\ref{NNMsec} are validated using the computation of NLFRs and bifurcation tracking in Section~\ref{NLFRsec}. Section~\ref{sec5} discusses the practical implications of IRCs by computing the beam response to sine sweep excitations of increasing amplitudes. The conclusions of the present study are presented in Section~\ref{sec_future}.
\section{Periodic Solutions of a Nonlinear System}\label{Periodic}
\subsection{Computation of Nonlinear Normal Modes and Nonlinear Frequency Responses}\label{Sec21}
The $N$-degree-of-freedom (DOF) equations of motion for a nonlinear system generally can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{EOM}
\mathbf{M\ddot{x}}+\mathbf{C\dot{x}}+\mathbf{Kx}+\mathbf{f}_{NL}(\mathbf{x})=\mathbf{f}(t)
\end{equation}
The $N\times N$ matrices $\mathbf{M}$, $\mathbf{C}$, and $\mathbf{K}$ represent the mass, damping and stiffness matrices, respectively. The displacement, velocity and acceleration are represented with the $N\times 1$ vectors $\mathbf{x}$, $\mathbf{\dot{x}}$, and $\mathbf{\ddot{x}}$, and the external loads are applied through the $N\times 1$ force vector $\mathbf{f}(t)$. The $N\times 1$ nonlinear restoring force vector, $\mathbf{f}_{NL}(\mathbf{x})$, accounts for the nonlinearities in the physical system. We only consider the case where the nonlinear restoring force depends on displacement.
The NNMs calculated in this study are defined as {\it not necessarily synchronous periodic motions of the undamped and unforced nonlinear system} \cite{Kerschen,Lee}. A variety of methods exist to find these periodic solutions, e.g., perturbation techniques \cite{Gendelman} and harmonic balance \cite{Cochelin}. In this paper, NNMs are computed using the shooting technique combined with numerical continuation \cite{Kuether,Peeters}. The outcome of the calculations is a frequency-energy plane which depicts the evolution of the fundamental frequency of the NNM as the energy changes.
Nonlinear forced responses (NLFRs), i.e., the periodic responses of the damped system to a monoharmonic excitation force
\begin{equation}\label{force}
\mathbf{f}(t)=\mathbf{A} \sin \left( \omega t\right)
\end{equation}
are also calculated herein using shooting and numerical continuation~\cite{Sracic}. NLFRs can reveal new phenomena that cannot be observed with linear theory, such as frequency-energy dependence, subharmonic and superharmonic resonances, coexisting solutions, and stable/unstable periodic motions.
\subsection{Connection between Nonlinear Normal Modes and Nonlinear Frequency Responses}\label{Sec22}
\subsubsection{Nonlinear Phase Lag Quadrature Criterion}
The first theoretical connection between NLFRs and NNMs can be derived thanks to the nonlinear phase lag quadrature criterion \cite{Peeters2}. Specifically, the damped system can be made to respond in a single NNM motion if the excitation exactly cancels out the damping force. To this end, a multi-point, multi-harmonic excitation is to be applied to the system so that the harmonics of the response are all in quadrature with the harmonics of the excitation.
In practice, it is unlikely that the forcing of interest will exactly cancel damping as outlined above, because this requires that the force be distributed in space and that it be comprised of many harmonics. A few studies \cite{Peeters2,Peeters3,Allen,Zapico,Kuether2} have shown that an accurate approximation to the NNM can be obtained by a much simpler force that excites resonance. For example, Peeters et al. \cite{Peeters2,Peeters3} explored whether a single-point, monoharmonic excitation could approximately isolate an NNM, and found good results in simulations and experiment with a lightly damped beam. In their efforts it was helpful to define a multi-harmonic mode indicator function (MIF) which indicates when the 90 degrees phase lag condition has been obtained. When a single-point sinusoidal force is applied to the nonlinear structure, which is the case considered in this paper, the MIF is defined as follows
\begin{equation}\label{MIF}
\Delta_1=\frac{\mbox{Re}(\mathbf{Z}_1)^*\mbox{Re}(\mathbf{Z}_1)}{\mathbf{Z}_1^*\mathbf{Z}_1}
\end{equation}
where the operator $(\cdot)^*$ represents the complex conjugate transpose and $\mathbf{Z}_1$ is the complex Fourier coefficient of the fundamental harmonic of the computed NLFR. The MIF in Eq. (\ref{MIF}) indicates that resonance occurs when $\Delta_1$ is equal to one.
\subsubsection{An Energy Balancing Technique}\label{Sec222}
The relationship between NLFRs and NNMs was also studied using an energy balancing technique in \cite{NeildE1,NeildE2}. Based on the second-order normal form theory, the analytical developments hold for weakly nonlinear regimes of motion. This technique is slightly revisited herein by employing a numerical viewpoint, which allows one to consider more strongly nonlinear regimes.
Let us first consider a linear system. As shown in \cite{Geradin}, if the system is oscillating in a linear normal mode denoted as $\mathbf{x}(t)$, then the damping forces instantaneously exert a distributed force $\mathbf{C\dot{x}(t)}$ and the power dissipated at any instant is
\begin{equation}\label{power}
P_{diss}=\mathbf{\dot{x}}(t)^{\mbox{T}}\mathbf{C\dot{x}(t)}
\end{equation}
and the total energy dissipated over one cycle is
\begin{equation}\label{energy}
E_{diss/cyc}=\int_0^T P_{diss}\,dt
\end{equation}
Similarly, an arbitrary forcing function $\mathbf{f}(t)$ inputs energy into the system as
\begin{equation}\label{energy2}
E_{in/cyc}=\int_0^T \mathbf{\dot{x}}(t)^{\mbox{T}} \mathbf{f}(t)\,dt
\end{equation}
At resonance, the energy dissipated by the damping forces must match the total energy input to the system over the period $T$. The balance is enforced by setting $E_{diss/cyc}=E_{in/cyc}$ \cite{Geradin}. For a single-point, monoharmonic force with amplitude $A$, the scaling on $A$ can be computed by satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{puissancereactive}
A\int_0^T \mathbf{\dot{x}}(t)^{\mbox{T}}\left(\mathbf{e}_n \sin{i\omega t}\right)\,dt=\int_0^T \mathbf{\dot{x}}(t)^{\mbox{T}}\mathbf{C\dot{x}(t)} \,dt
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{e}_n$ is a vector of zeros with a value of one at the location $n$, which is the point at which the force is applied. This energy balancing criterion is a useful result, because it enables the practitioner to establish formally the direct link from the computed linear normal modes, i.e., the periodic motions of the undamped, unforced system, to the resonant response of the damped forced system.
The energy balance, $E_{diss/cyc}=E_{in/cyc}$, also holds for nonlinear systems. So, if both the NNMs $\mathbf{x}(t)$ and the damping $\mathbf{C}$ in the system are known, Eq. (\ref{puissancereactive}) can be readily used to estimate the forcing amplitude $A$ that would excite the system at resonance with associated motion $\mathbf{x}(t)$. While it is common practice to excite a system using a monoharmonic force, one should note that higher harmonics might be necessary to achieve a reasonable approximation to the NNM motion, especially near internal resonances, so any calculations based on Eq. (\ref{puissancereactive}) should be regarded as approximate.
\section{Prediction of the Forced Response of a Cantilever Beam using Nonlinear Normal Modes}\label{NNMsec}
In the present and next sections, a model of a cantilevered beam with a cubic nonlinear spring attached at the beam tip is used to investigate the connection between NNMs and NLFRs.
The beam was 0.7 m in length, with a width and thickness of 0.014 m, and was constructed of structural steel with a Young's modulus of 205 GPa and a density of 7800 kg/m$^3$. A schematic of the FEA model is shown in Fig. \ref{fig1}. A linear finite element model of the planar beam was created in Abaqus using 20 B31 Euler-Bernoulli beam elements, giving it a total of 60 DOF. A mass and stiffness proportional damping model was used, defining the damping matrix as $\mathbf{C}=a\mathbf{K}+b\mathbf{M}$ with $a=-0.0391$ and $b=1.47\,10^{-4}$. These parameters were chosen such that the damping ratios of the first and second linear modes were 1\% and 5\%, respectively. The cubic nonlinear spring had a coefficient of $K_{NL} = 6\,10^9 N/m^3$, and was attached at the beam tip affecting only the transverse direction.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig1.eps}
\caption{Schematic of a cantilever beam with a cubic nonlinear spring attached to the beam tip and a modifying lumped mass of 0.5 kg. The addition of the mass shifted the location of the 3:1 modal interaction with NNM 2 on the first NNM branch (as seen later in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a)).}
\label{fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{Fig2BCD.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{The nonlinear normal modes of the nonlinear beam: (a) NNM 1, (b) NNM 2, (c) NNM 3, and (d) NNM 4. Solid black represents a stable solution, and dotted red represents an unstable solution. The detailed view of NNM 1 shows the crossing of higher order NNMs in dashed lines at fractions of their fundamental frequency.}
\label{fig2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The frequency-energy plots (FEPs) of the first four NNMs are shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}. These FEPs have two distinct features, namely a backbone, and tongues that emanate from the backbone. The backbone of NNM 1 in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a) shows an increase in fundamental frequency as the energy in the periodic solutions increased revealing that the nonlinear spring has a stiffening effect on this mode. Each of the first four NNMs showed this stiffening behavior, but the energy level at which the nonlinearity began to affect the frequency and deformation varied for each. The tongues that emerged from the backbones along each NNM are referred as modal interactions, or internal resonances, and occur when two or more NNMs interact. The response of the NNM at locations on these tongues showed a strong, multi-harmonic response at an integer frequency ratio of the interacting nonlinear mode.
Figure \ref{fig2}(a) displays a detailed view of the FEP of NNM 1, where the dashed, colored lines represent the frequency-energy behavior of the higher order NNMs after dividing the frequency by various integers. By shifting these NNMs down the frequency axis, it was possible to observe the location where the backbones of higher modes intersect with the NNM 1 backbone and cause a modal interaction to occur. Considering the modal interaction at approximately 37 Hz, which has the appearance of the Greek letter $\alpha$ and will hereafter be referred to as an $\alpha$-tongue, the 1/3rd frequency branch of the NNM 2 branch intersects the backbone of NNM 1. This causes NNM 1 to bifurcate and create a 3:1 internal resonance tongue that has solutions where NNM 1 and 2 interact. The other three modal interactions along NNM 1 were a 9:1 interaction with NNM 3 near 44 Hz, a 15:1 interaction with NNM 4 near 47 Hz, and a 13:1 interaction with NNM 4 near 54 Hz. It is important to note that NNM 1 in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a) was almost certainly incomplete, because in reality many more tongues could emanate from the backbone as the frequency is equal to many other integer fractions of higher NNMs. These additional tongues must have been missed by the continuation algorithm. In principle they could be found using a smaller stepsize but this becomes time consuming and was not pursued.
Focusing our attention on the first beam mode, our objective is to exploit the energy balancing technique of Section \ref{Sec222} to predict the system's nonlinear resonances based on the knowledge of the NNMs of Figure \ref{fig2}(a) and of the damping matrix. Specifically, Eq. (\ref{puissancereactive}) was used to estimate the monoharmonic driving force required to excite the NNM motion. The computed force amplitude and the corresponding frequency are displayed for the first NNM in Fig. \ref{fig4}(b); the NNM is repeated in Fig. \ref{fig4}(a). For forcing amplitudes smaller than 22.3 N, there is a unique solution meaning that, at a specific forcing amplitude, there exists a single resonance. For greater forcing amplitudes, this is no longer the case. For example, a force of 22.6 N could achieve multiple resonances at 37.5 Hz, 45.8 Hz and 47.4 Hz. One important remark is that the nonuniqueness of the resonances is due to the nonmonotonic increase in the forcing amplitude in Fig. \ref{fig4}(b), which is itself produced by the modal interactions (tongues) in the FEP in Fig. \ref{fig4}(a).
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig_4_updated_3.eps}
\caption{First NNM: (a) FEP, (b) estimate of force amplitude required to obtain the motion given at each point on NNM 1. Circular markers indicate achievable resonance frequencies for a force of 22.6 N.}
\label{fig4}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Calculation of the Forced Response of a Cantilever Beam using Numerical Continuation}\label{NLFRsec}
\subsection{Frequency Response Curves}\label{sec42}
To validate the predictions made from Figure \ref{fig4}(b), the FEPs of the forced response were computed at different forcing amplitudes. Forcing amplitudes lower than the critical value of 22.3 N were first considered in Fig. \ref{fig7}. A classical behavior is observed in this figure where the forced response wraps around the NNM, acting as the backbone to the NLFR. The MIF from Eq. (\ref{MIF}) in the right plot in Fig. \ref{fig7} is approximately equal to 1 at resonance where a fold bifurcation changes the stability of the NLFR.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{Fig7.eps}
\caption{(Left) NLFRs at frequencies near the first NNM where (solid) are stable periodic motions and (dash dot) are unstable periodic motions. The energy on the horizontal axis represents the maximum energy of each steady-state solution in the NLFR, and the vertical axis represents the forcing frequency. (Right) MIF of the forced response. The force amplitudes for each curve are (red) 0.445 N, (green) 0.890 N, (blue) 2.22 N, and (magenta) 4.45 N. The NNM is in black.}
\label{fig7}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Higher forcing amplitudes were considered in Fig. \ref{fig8}. For $A$ = 11.3 N in Fig. \ref{fig8}(a), the NLFR again wrapped around the backbone of the first NNM, as previously observed in Fig. \ref{fig7}. When the force amplitude doubled ($A$ = 22.6 N in Fig. \ref{fig8}(b)), three resonances were revealed by the MIF indicator at about 38.0 Hz (classical resonance), 44.2 Hz and 48.1 Hz. As clearly displayed in the NLFR, the two new resonances (associated with fold bifurcations) are responsible for the creation of an IRC. The response on this IRC is much larger than on the main branch so one would significantly underestimate the response if it was not detected. These results were found to be entirely consistent with the predictions of the energy balancing technique, which predicted multiple resonances from 22.3 N, and resonances at 37.5 Hz, 45.8 Hz and 47.4 Hz for 22.6 N. The fact that the IRC still wrapped around the backbone of NNM 1 underlines the essential role played by the NNM in the forced response. Fig. \ref{fig8}(b) also shows that the IRC was created when the NLFR branch approached the 3:1 interaction between NNM 1 and NNM 2; this observation suggests that interactions between NNMs are one possible driving mechanism for IRC onset.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{Fig_8_updated2.eps}
\caption{(Left) NLFRs at frequencies near the first NNM where (solid) are stable periodic motions and (dash dot) are unstable periodic motions. (Right) MIF of the forced response. The force amplitudes for each curve (a - e) are (red) 11.3 N, (green) 22.6 N, (blue) 26.7 N, (magenta) 35.6 N, and (cyan) 45.2 N, respectively. . The NNM is in black.}
\label{fig8}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{Fig9bis.eps}
\caption{Time histories projected onto unit displacement normalized modal coordinates at the three resonant conditions of the NLFR for $A$ = 26.7 N. The color code for the time response is (black) mode 1, (magenta) mode 2 and (blue) mode 3.}
\label{fig9}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The forcing amplitude was slightly increased in Fig. \ref{fig8}(c) ($A$ = 26.7 N), and the resonant frequency on the main branch did not shift very much (from 38.1 Hz to 38.5 Hz). The IRC persisted and became larger, increasing its frequency range from 41 Hz to 51 Hz. A stable portion of the IRC has however become unstable through the emergence of Neimark-Sacker bifurcations (not represented). The latter will persist at higher forcing levels and are responsible for the quasiperiodic oscillations discussed in Section~\ref{sec5}. Further evidence of the connection between IRCs and modal interactions is given in Fig. \ref{fig9} which compares the time histories of the three resonant solutions (represented by circle markers) along the NLFR curve together with the time histories of the NNM near them. The periodic responses were projected onto the linear modal coordinates to better highlight the modal interaction. Indeed, the first two linear modal coordinates dominated all three of the resonant responses, and the comparison between the NLFR and the corresponding NNM all were in good agreement. There was slight phase shift however for solution (a), which can be explained by the use of a monoharmonic force input, whereas a multi-harmonic force would be needed to exactly isolate the NNM.
Increasing the amplitude even more ($A$ = 35.6 N in Fig. \ref{fig8}(d)) caused the main branch and the IRC to merge together, forming one continuous NLFR branch up to 55 Hz. The merging of these two branches therefore leads to a sudden and substantial change in the resonant frequency. For the highest forcing amplitude ($A$ = 45.2 N in Fig. \ref{fig8}(e)), the resonant frequency shifted to 56.6 Hz. This smooth increase in the resonant frequency continued at higher forces as well. Moving from Fig. \ref{fig8}(d) to Fig. \ref{fig8}(e) also caused one resonance to be eliminated, as indicated by the MIF.
For further validation of the energy balancing criterion (\ref{puissancereactive}), Figure \ref{fig10} superposes the responses of Figs. \ref{fig7} and \ref{fig8} where the MIF is equal to 1 onto Fig. \ref{fig4}(b). The cross markers, which represent the forced resonant response, are in close, though not exact, agreement with the predictions of the energy balancing criterion.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{Fig_10_complete.eps}
\caption{Comparison between the predictions of the energy balancing criterion (solid black) and the forced resonance where the MIF is equal to one in Figs. \ref{fig7} and \ref{fig8} (cross markers).}
\label{fig10}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Fold Bifurcations}
Because IRCs possess fold bifurcations, bifurcation tracking in the codimension-2 space (frequency-forcing amplitude-energy) is another tool that can reveal their existence. The procedure used in this section is based on the harmonic balance method described in \cite{Detroux}.
The 3D bifurcation locus is presented as an orange line in Fig. \ref{fig11}(a), which also shows the NLFR in black for forcing amplitudes of 25 N, 33.1 N and 40 N. Figure \ref{fig11}(b) gives a convenient projection of the bifurcation branch onto the frequency versus forcing amplitude plane. The turning point indicated with a diamond marker shows the frequency/forcing amplitude at which the fold bifurcations at the tips of the IRC were created. The corresponding values (20.7 N and 45.7 Hz) reflect the good predictive capability of the energy balancing criterion (22.3 N and 46.5 Hz in Section \ref{NNMsec}). The square marker indicates when the IRC merges with the main resonance peak (33.1 N).
\begin{figure}[!htp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig11B.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{Fig_2_B_Damping_X10_LP_tracking_2D_NH7_f_w_closeup.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{(a) Tracking of fold bifurcations. The black lines denote nonlinear forced response curves at forcing amplitudes of 25 N, 33.1 N and 40 N, and the orange line represent the locus of fold bifurcations. (b) Projection of the bifurcation branch onto the (forcing amplitude - energy) plane. The diamond and square markers indicate the apparition and the merging of the IRC, respectively.}
\label{fig11}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The fold bifurcation tracking analysis was also used to study the effect of structural damping on the observed IRCs. The damping matrix introduced in Section~\ref{NNMsec} was perturbed by adding a scaling term, $\kappa$, such that $\mathbf{C}=\kappa\left(-0.0391\mathbf{K}+1.47\,10^{-4}\mathbf{M}\right)$. Several bifurcation branches are given in Fig. \ref{fig12} for different values of $\kappa$, namely 1, 1.5, 1.8 and 1.9. The IRC was robust against damping since it was still visible for higher levels of damping ($\kappa>1$), however, increasing $\kappa$ caused the IRC to appear later in forcing amplitude, and shorten the range where it existed. For the largest damping case studied, for $\kappa = 1.9$, the IRC was no longer present. This analysis shows that a sufficiently large value of structural damping can destroy the IRCs. It may also explain why the other modal interactions in Fig. \ref{fig4}(a) did not produce IRCs.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{Fig_3_LP_tracking_2D_NH7_various_damping_f_w2.eps}
\caption{Influence of damping on the bifurcation branches. The black, red, blue and green lines depict the branches of the system with $\kappa$ = 1, 1.5, 1.8 and 1.9, respectively. The diamond and square markers indicate the apparition and the merging of the IRC, respectively.}
\label{fig12}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
\section{Beam Response to Sine Sweep Excitation}\label{sec5}
To better understand the practical implications of IRCs, the beam was subjected to sine sweep excitations of increasing amplitudes with a sweep rate of 0.5 Hz/s. The outcome of the numerical simulations is plotted in Figure \ref{fig5}. For reference, the response of the linear model at a force amplitude of $A$ = 4.45 N (black) was computed, and resulted in the largest tip displacement (even though the force amplitude was lowest), with a resonance at the linear natural frequency.
For the nonlinear sweep for $A$ = 11.3 N, resonance occurred near 37 Hz, resulting in a sudden jump, the so-called jump phenomenon, to a lower response amplitude as the frequency continued to sweep upwards. When the force amplitude doubled, the resonant frequency occurred near 39 Hz. However, doubling the force amplitude once more ($A$ = 45.2 N) caused a dramatic shift in resonant frequency. Now the response dropped off around 57 Hz, indicating that the increased force amplitude shifted the resonance nearly 18 Hz. Considering the amplitudes $A$ = 32.5 N and 35.6 N shows that the shift in resonant frequency occurred in this range of forcing amplitudes. In other words, the sine sweeps at $A$ = 22.6 N, $A$ = 26.7 N and $A$ = 32.5 N fell off around 38 Hz, because the IRC was disconnected from the main branch, and there was no path for the response to follow to the higher frequency resonance. However, once the two NLFR branches merged together ($A$ = 35.6 N), the sine sweeps were able to stay along the high amplitude path up to resonance around 55 Hz.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{Fig5.eps}
\caption{Numerical sine sweeps at a rate of 0.5 Hz/s where the displacement of the beam tip is plotted for force amplitudes of (red) 11.3 N, (green) 22.6 N, (blue) 26.7 N, (yellow) 32.5 N, (magenta) 35.6 N and (cyan) 45.2 N.}
\label{fig5}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{Fig6.eps}
\caption{Beam displacement at tip. Response to a swept- and a stepped-sine (numerical continuation) excitation of 45.2 N depicted in cyan and black, respectively. Solid- and dashed-black lines denote stable and unstable periodic solutions, respectively. Fold and Neimark-Sacker bifurcations are pictured with orange bullets (\textcolor{myorange}{$\bullet$}) and magenta squares (\scriptsize{\textcolor{magenta}{$\blacksquare$}}\normalsize), respectively.}
\label{fig6}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Another dynamical phenomenon, which only appeared for $A$ = 35.6 N and 45.2 N, is the modulation of the signal's envelope in the range of 40-45 Hz. It was further examined by monitoring fold and Neimark-Sacker bifurcations~\cite{KuznetsovBook} along the NLFR. Figure~\ref{fig6} superposes the sine sweep and NLFR responses for $A$ = 45.2 N. Around 40 Hz, a Neimark-Sacker bifurcation originally located on the IRC changes the stability of the NLFR and generates a new branch of quasiperiodic oscillations (not shown in the figure). As a result, a stable torus attracts the dynamics and is responsible for the observed envelope modulation. Around 45 Hz, a second Neimark-Sacker bifurcation transforms the quasiperiodic motion back into stable periodic motion. There is a small delay between the first (second) bifurcation and the onset (disappearance) of quasiperiodic motion; this delay can be attributed to the transient character of the swept-sine excitation.
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec_future}
This paper studied the intimate connection that exists between nonlinear normal modes, i.e., the periodic motions of the undamped, unforced system, and the forced response of the damped system, with a specific focus on modal interactions and isolated resonance curves. To bridge the gap between these two types of response, the energy balancing technique was adapted to estimate the resonant response to harmonic forcing from the nonlinear modes and the damping matrix. Because it is able to reveal the presence of isolated resonance curves, the combination of nonlinear normal modes and energy balancing represents a very useful tool for global analysis of nonlinear systems.
Isolated resonance curves, which might easily be missed during numerical continuation or experimental testing, have important practical consequences for the design and testing of engineering structures. The associated response can be much larger than on the main branch, and, when they connect to the main resonance branch, they may lead to a dramatic and sudden change in resonance frequency, something which is rarely discussed in the mechanical engineering literature.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The author RJ Kuether would like to acknowledge the funding for this part of this research from the National Physical Science Consortium (NPSC) Fellowship. The author L. Renson is Research Fellow (FRIA fellowship) of the {\it Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique - FNRS}, which is gratefully acknowledged. The authors T. Detroux, C. Grappasonni and G. Kerschen would like to acknowledge the financial support of the European Union (ERC Starting Grant NOVIB 307265).
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
When selected inclusions are integrated as fillers into soft polymeric matrices, new composite materials of extended functional application can be created \cite{stankovich2006graphene,balazs2006nanoparticle,thevenot2013magnetic}. Particularly interesting cases concern fillers that can be addressed from outside by external fields.
One such example are soft magnetic gels \cite{filipcsei2007magnetic,menzel2015tuned,odenbach2016microstructure}, where magnetic colloidal particles \cite{klapp2005dipolar,messina2014self} are embedded into soft elastic environments.
The result are soft elastic materials, the mechanical properties of which, such as the dynamic behavior \cite{jarkova2003hydrodynamics,bohlius2004macroscopic, filipcsei2007magnetic,tarama2014tunable}, elastic moduli \cite{stepanov2007effect,filipcsei2007magnetic,camp2011modeling,ivaneyko2012effects, borin2013tuning,han2013field,pessot2014structural,menzel2015tuned}, or nonlinear stress-strain behavior \cite{cremer2015tailoring},
can be reversibly tuned and switched from outside.
Another motivation has medical background and mainly concerns cancer treatment.
Magnetic colloidal particles, possibly loaded with drugs, can be guided to and embedded into cancer tissue using magnetic field gradients \cite{alexiou2006targeting,dobson2006magnetic, tietze2013efficient,zaloga2014development,matuszak2015endothelial}. During hyperthermic cancer treatment \cite{jordan1999magnetic,babincova2001superparamagnetic,lao2004magnetic,hergt2006magnetic}, the colloidal particles are
heated up. Heat is generated in the particles for instance by rapidly alternating external magnetic fields, as the ongoing remagnetization processes lead to hysteretic losses. When transmitted to the environment, the generated heat can destroy the surrounding cancer cells.
The nature of the coupling of such colloidal particles to their soft environment has been the subject of ongoing research \cite{messing2011cobalt,weeber2012deformation,gundermann2014investigation,roeder2015magnetic,huang2016buckling}. One point that should be clarified in more detail is the thermal coupling to the environment, which naturally becomes important upon heating the particles. As one aspect, one may ask whether thermophoretic effects \cite{rauch2002diffusion,rauch2003collective} become significant. Thermophoresis describes the observation that temperature gradients induce net forces on molecular and colloidal constituents.
In recent experiments, this question has been studied on relatively extreme polymeric model variants of the above situation \cite{schwaiger2011transient,schwaiger2013photothermal}. For this purpose, colloidal gold particles were embedded into a polymer solution on the one hand \cite{schwaiger2011transient} and into a strongly entangled
ultra-high-molecular-weight
polymer network on the other hand \cite{schwaiger2013photothermal}. An individual gold particle could then be selectively heated by external laser irradiation. In this way, \rev{its} surface temperature increased by more than $100$~K and thermophoretic effects could clearly be observed \cite{schwaiger2011transient,schwaiger2013photothermal}.
For the strongly entangled
ultra-high-molecular-weight polymer network \cite{schwaiger2013photothermal},
the disentanglement time was huge.
An overall elastic response of the polymer matrix on the time scale of the
experiment becomes conceivable. In this case, a very long-ranged
outward-oriented radial displacement field around the heated particle was
observed. It was tracked by the displacement of other, non-heated colloidal
particles.
\rev{These tracers are trapped in the mesh of the transient polymer network. Their motion reflects the local displacement of the polymer matrix. Approximately conserving the local volume, this displacement of the polymer is balanced by a
counter-displacement of the small solvent molecules such that no net flow of
the fluid as a whole is observed. On the one hand, in the experiments, a linear decay of the radial outward displacements around the heated particle was observed \cite{schwaiger2013photothermal}. On the other hand, the associated decay length was of the order of the sample thickness, and the displacements \textit{had} to decay with distance due to the confinement between two rigid plates of high thermal conductivity \cite{schwaiger2013photothermal}. In other words, the
confining boundaries of the sample cavity do not allow an outward
displacement on their inner surfaces \cite{schwaiger2013photothermal}. Therefore, it was conjectured that, remarkably, in an infinite system, the radial outward displacement of the polymer network is in principle constant in magnitude.} That is, the magnitude of the radial displacement
field does not decay with the distance from the center particle.
So far, this conjecture has not been tested by theoretical analysis. Previous qualitative arguments \cite{schwaiger2013photothermal} did not explicitly include the elasticity of the embedding polymer matrix. Particularly, a theoretical description of the situation would need to cover the possibility for the polymer network to move relatively to the solvent. This enables the relative displacement during the observed thermophoretic motion.
Here, we perform an according theoretical analysis in \rev{Sec.~\ref{theory_nodecay}}, employing a previously developed macroscopic two-fluid theory \cite{pleiner2004general,pleiner2004generalaip}. We confirm the experimental conjecture of an --- in principle --- non-decaying large-scale radial displacement field around the heated particle. An expression for the magnitude of this displacement field is calculated as a function of the material parameters and the heat rate. Moreover, our analysis demonstrates that elasticity is indeed the likely source for the experimentally observed behavior.
Our theoretical approach is complemented by experiments on solutions of polystyrene in toluene, see Secs.~\ref{experimental1} and \ref{experimental2}. These experiments are similar to the ones
reported in Ref.~\onlinecite{schwaiger2013photothermal} and contain new data on the heating power
dependence and the time evolution of the thermophoretic displacement of the
transient entanglement network. They highlight the role of elasticity by comparison to less entangled polymer solutions. The experimentally observed linear decay in the radial displacement field is attributed to the finite size of the sample, which is confined between rigid cavity walls. When \rev{confining} boundary conditions are imposed, \rev{a similar} linear decay \rev{is likewise found from our} theoretical results as demonstrated in Sec.~\ref{theory_finite_system}.
\section{Two-fluid description including thermophoretic effects}\label{theory_nodecay}
\rev{To perform our analysis, we employ a recently derived macroscopic two-fluid description \cite{pleiner2004general,pleiner2004generalaip}. For two-component systems, such theories explicitly allow for relative displacements and motion of one component with respect to the other \cite{pleiner2004general,pleiner2004generalaip,pleiner2013active}. In the present case, one component is a simple isotropic liquid playing the role of a solvent, while the other component corresponds to the isotropic elastic polymer network.}
\rev{We are interested in the far-field behavior of the radial displacement field $\mathbf{u}(\mathbf{r})$ of the polymer matrix.
Therefore, we assume weak elastic distortions far from the heated central
particle and thus study a linearized version of the macroscopic two-fluid equations derived in
Refs.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general,pleiner2004generalaip}. Moreover, we
consider the case of a perfect and permanent elastic network. Due to the long
times of disentanglement for the experimentally employed
ultra-high-molecular-weight
polymer
\cite{schwaiger2013photothermal},
this represents a reasonable approximation.}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=5.0cm]{figure1.pdf}
\caption{\rev{Sketch of the system considered in Sec.~\ref{theory_nodecay}. The red wave represents the laser irradiation that heats the central particle at the origin, resulting in a spherically symmetric displacement field $\mathbf{u}(\mathbf{r})$ (indicated by the black arrows).}}
\label{fig:sketch}
\end{figure}
\rev{In the two-fluid picture, the first fluid of mass density $\rho_1$ represents the solvent, while the second fluid of mass density $\rho_2$ corresponds to the polymer. Assuming constant local density here means that the total mass density $\rho=\rho_1+\rho_2$ be constant. Then the solvent concentration $\phi$ is given by $\phi=\rho_1/\rho$ and the polymer concentration by $1-\phi=\rho_2/\rho$.
In equilibrium, i.e., in the non-heated state, the solvent concentration is given by a constant value $\phi_{\text{eq}}$. Upon heating, the concentration profile varies by $\delta\phi$, leading to $\phi=\phi_{\text{eq}}+\delta\phi$. The same applies for the entropy density, $s=s_{\text{eq}}+\delta s$.
Moreover, the displacement field $\mathbf{u}$ of the polymer matrix vanishes in equilibrium and becomes non-zero upon heating.
In summary, we characterize the state of our system by the three variables solvent concentration $\phi=\phi_\text{eq}+\delta\phi$, entropy density $s=s_\text{eq}+\delta s$, as well as displacement field $\mathbf{u}$ of the polymer matrix.
The theory in Refs.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general,pleiner2004generalaip} provides central equations for all these quantities.}
\rev{In the following, we assume a heated colloidal particle in the center at the origin of our coordinate system and perfect spherical symmetry around it. A sketch of the geometry is depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:sketch}.
As a consequence, we only obtain a radial variation of our variables, i.e.~a concentration field $\phi(r)=\phi_{\text{eq}}+ \delta\phi(r)$, an entropy density $s(r)=s_\text{eq}+\delta s(r)$, as well as a displacement field of the polymer matrix,
\begin{equation}\label{disp}
\mathbf{u}(r)={}u(r)\mathbf{\hat{r}},
\end{equation}
see Fig.~\ref{fig:sketch}.
Here, $\mathbf{\hat{r}}$ is the radial unit vector in spherical coordinates. From now on, the dependence on $r$ is omitted for briefness of our notation.}
\rev{The central heat source is considered as point-like. This appears to be a reasonable simplification as the embedded particles in the experiment are of colloidal size and as we use a macroscopic continuum theory for the characterization of the set-up. As will be illustrated in more detail below, the colloidal particles are of approximately $100\,$nm in diameter, while separation distances of about $10-100\,\upmu$m were evaluated, which leads to a separation of length scales of at least two orders of magnitude.
We mentioned above that, in the experimental samples, additional non-heated colloidal particles are embedded that serve as tracer particles for the displacement field \cite{schwaiger2013photothermal}. Their possible influence on the overall behavior is likewise ignored.}
\rev{Due to the strongly entangled state of the polymer matrix, we assume that a final stationary state is reached under steady heating, which will be corroborated by the experimental results below. Therefore, in the following, all time derivatives and macroscopic velocities are equated to zero. This strongly simplifies the situation under investigation. Furthermore, as already mentioned above, we consider the composed system to keep its local density --- commonly a reasonable assumption for polymeric gels.
As a final prerequisite, we need to introduce the linearized strain tensor \cite{landau1986elasticity}
\begin{equation}\label{lstrain}
U_{ij}={}\frac{1}{2}(\nabla_i u_j+\nabla_j u_i).
\end{equation}
Inserting Eq.~(\ref{disp}), we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{strain}
U_{ij}={}u'\hat{r}_i\hat{r}_j+\frac{u}{r}(\hat{\vartheta}_i\hat{\vartheta}_j+\hat{\varphi}_i\hat{\varphi}_j)
\end{equation}
in spherical coordinates with the unit vectors $\mathbf{\hat{r}}$, $\bm{\hat{\vartheta}}$, and $\bm{\hat{\varphi}}$. Moreover, $u'=\partial u(r)/\partial r$. Only the diagonal elements are non-zero.}
\rev{Under all these assumptions, we can now adopt the macroscopic two-fluid equations derived in Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general} to our situation, before we evaluate them.
We start with the macroscopic equation for the concentration field [Eq.~(120) in Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}], which in the stationary limit and for isotropic systems becomes
\begin{equation}\label{conc}
d\nabla^2(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2)+\phi(1-\phi)d^{(T)}\nabla^2 T ={} 0.
\end{equation}
\noindent Here, $d$ is the diffusion coefficient and $d^{(T)}$ denotes the thermodiffusion coefficient.
The field $T$ describes the temperature profile, while $\mu_1$ and $\bar{\mu}_2$ are the chemical potential and effective chemical potential for the mass densities $\rho_1$ and $\rho_2$, respectively.
The first term of Eq.~(\ref{conc}) corresponds to the stationary part of the diffusion equation for a concentration variation $\delta\phi$. This is revealed, when $\delta(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2)$ is expressed in our variables, which leads to a contribution $\sim\delta\phi$ [see Eq.~(\ref{deltamu}) below].
In our case, due to thermophoretic effects included by the second term $\sim\nabla^2 T$, nontrivial concentration profiles may arise due to the influence of spatially varying temperature fields.
Here, in the stationary limit, conventional diffusion given by the first term in Eq.~(\ref{conc}) can be balanced by thermodiffusion, described by the second term.}
\rev{Similarly, the} equation for the entropy density [Eq.~(123) in Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}] \rev{in the stationary limit for isotropic systems} reads
\rev{\begin{equation}
\kappa\nabla^2 T + \frac{\rho_1\rho_2}{\rho}d^{(T)}\nabla^2(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2) ={}-q\delta_D(\mathbf{r}),\label{entr}
\end{equation}
\noindent with $\kappa$ the thermal conductivity. On} its right-hand side, Eq.~(\ref{entr}) contains the source term due to the external heating of the particle at the origin.
$\delta_D(\mathbf{r})$ denotes the Dirac delta function, \rev{treating the heated particle as point-like,} and $q$ sets the external heat rate.
\rev{Without the second term on the left-hand side, Eq.~(\ref{entr}) describes the stationary part of the conventional heat equation with a point-like heat source.
The second term on the left-hand side then includes variations in the temperature profile due to thermophoretic effects.}
Multiplying Eq.~(\ref{conc}) by $\kappa/(d^{(T)}\phi(1-\phi))$ and subtracting the result from Eq.~(\ref{entr}), the \rev{$\nabla^2 T$-terms} are eliminated and we obtain after linearization
\begin{equation}\label{nabla_deltamu_A}
A\nabla^2\delta(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2)={}-q \delta_D(\mathbf{r}),
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
A={}\rho d^{(T)}\phi_{\text{eq}}(1-\phi_{\text{eq}})-\frac{d\kappa}{ d^{(T)}}\frac{1}{\phi_{\text{eq}}(1-\phi_{\text{eq}})}.
\end{equation}
Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{deltamu_A}
\delta(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2)={}\frac{q}{4\pi A}\frac{1}{r}+\tilde{A},
\end{equation}
\noindent with a constant $\tilde{A}$. As a function of $U_{ij}$, $\delta s$, and $\delta\phi$, variations $\delta(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2)$ can be expressed as [see Eq.~(131) in Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}]
\begin{equation}\label{deltamu}
\delta(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2)={}\frac{1}{\kappa_u}U_{kk} + \frac{1}{\rho\alpha_\phi}\delta s+\frac{1}{\rho\kappa_\phi}\delta\phi,
\end{equation}
with the expansion coefficient $\alpha_\phi$ and the compressibilities $\kappa_{\phi,u}$.
The trace of the strain tensor, see Eq.~(\ref{strain}), reads
\begin{equation}\label{trace}
U_{kk}={}u'+\frac{2u}{r}.
\end{equation}
Inserting Eqs.~(\ref{deltamu_A}) and (\ref{trace}) into Eq.~(\ref{deltamu}), we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{GL1}
\frac{q}{4\pi A}\frac{1}{ r}+\tilde{A} ={} \frac{1}{\kappa_u} \left(u'+\frac{2u}{r}\right) +\frac{1}{\rho\alpha_\phi}\delta s+ \frac{1}{\rho\kappa_\phi}\delta\phi.
\end{equation}
In a subsequent step, we return to Eq.~(\ref{conc}). There, we \rev{insert} Eq.~(\ref{nabla_deltamu_A}) and find
\begin{equation}
B\nabla^2 T ={} -q\delta_D(\mathbf{r}),\label{laplace_T}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
B ={} -A\frac{d^{(T)}\phi_{\text{eq}}(1-\phi_{\text{eq}})}{d}.
\end{equation}
Integration of Eq.~(\ref{laplace_T}) yields
\begin{equation}
\delta T = \frac{q}{4\pi B}\frac{1}{r}+\tilde{T}\label{T},
\end{equation}
with a constant $\tilde{T}$.
Moreover, an expansion of the temperature variation is given by [Eq.~(130) in Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}]
\begin{equation}\label{TEMP}
\delta T={} \frac{1}{\alpha_3}U_{kk} + \frac{T_{\text{eq}}}{C_V}\delta s+\frac{1}{\alpha_\phi}\delta\phi ,
\end{equation}
with $\alpha_3$ an expansion coefficient, $C_V$ the specific heat, and $T_{\text{eq}}$ the equilibrium temperature. Inserting Eq.~(\ref{T}) into Eq.~(\ref{TEMP}), we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{GL2}
\frac{q}{4\pi B}\frac{1}{r}+\tilde{T} ={} \frac{1}{\alpha_3}\left(u'+\frac{2u}{r}\right)+\frac{T_{\text{eq}}}{C_V}\delta s+\frac{1}{\alpha_\phi}\delta\phi.
\end{equation}
Next, from the equation for the relative velocity between the two components [Eq.~(128) in Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}], we find in the stationary limit
\begin{equation}\label{musigma}
\nabla_i(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2)+\nabla_j\frac{1}{\rho_2}\sigma_{ij}={}0,
\end{equation}
with $\sigma_{ij}$ the stress tensor.
\rev{Summation over repeated indices is implied.}
After linearization, this equation may be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\nabla_j\big[\sigma_{ij} + \rho(1-\phi_{\text{eq}})\delta(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2)\delta_{ij} \big] ={}0.\label{sigma_gamma_grundgleichung}
\end{equation}
Thus, we may express $\sigma_{ij}$ as
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{ij} ={} -\rho(1-\phi_{\text{eq}})\delta(\mu_1-\bar{\mu}_2)\delta_{ij}+\Gamma_{ij},\label{sigma_integriert}
\end{equation}
where we have introduced a diagonal tensor $\Gamma_{ij}$ that satisfies $\nabla_j\Gamma_{ij}=0$. The diagonal form of $\Gamma_{ij}$ is justified by the expression for the stress tensor $\sigma_{ij}$ as a function of $U_{ij}$, $\delta s$, and $\delta\phi$ [see Eqs.~(90) and (91) in Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}], which takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma_{ij}&=&{} c_{\text{tr}}\left(U_{ij}-\frac{1}{3}\delta_{ij}U_{kk}\right)+\frac{1}{3}c_{\text{l}}\delta_{ij}U_{kk} \nonumber\\
&&{}+\frac{1}{3\alpha_3}\delta_{ij}\delta s+\frac{1}{3\rho\kappa_u}\delta_{ij}\delta\phi.\label{stress}
\end{eqnarray}
In this expression, $c_{\text{tr}}$ and $c_{\text{l}}$ are the transversal and longitudinal elastic moduli, respectively.
From Eq.~(\ref{stress}) together with Eq.~(\ref{strain}) it follows that
$\sigma_{\vartheta\vartheta}=\sigma_{\varphi\varphi}$. An analogous relation thus applies for $\Gamma_{ij}$. $\nabla_j\Gamma_{ij}=0$ therefore yields the additional condition
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{rr}'+2\frac{\Gamma_{rr}}{r}-2\frac{\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta}}{r} ={} 0.\label{GL3}
\end{equation}
Introducing Eq.~(\ref{sigma_integriert}) into Eq.~(\ref{stress}), we obtain two different equations, namely the
$\mathbf{\hat{r}\hat{r}}$ component,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{GL4}
\frac{q}{4\pi C}\frac{1}{r}+ \tilde{C} +\Gamma_{rr} &={} & \frac{2}{3}c_{
\text{tr}}\left(u'-\frac{u}{r}\right) +\frac{1}{3}c_{\text{l}} \left(u'+\frac{2u}{r}\right) \notag\\
&{}&+ \frac{1}{3\alpha_3}\delta s+\frac{1}{3\rho\kappa_u}\delta\phi,
\end{eqnarray}
and the $\bm{\hat{\vartheta}\hat{\vartheta}}$ or $\bm{\hat{\varphi}\hat{\varphi}}$ component,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{GL5}
\frac{q}{4\pi C}\frac{1}{r}+ \tilde{C} +\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta} &={} & \frac{1}{3}c_{
\text{tr}}\left(\frac{u}{r} - u'\right) +\frac{1}{3}c_{\text{l}} \left(u'+\frac{2u}{r}\right) \notag\\
&{}&+ \frac{1}{3\alpha_3}\delta s+\frac{1}{3\rho\kappa_u}\delta\phi,
\end{eqnarray}
with the constants
\begin{equation}
C = -\frac{A}{\rho(1-\phi_{\text{eq}})}, \qquad \tilde{C}= -\rho(1-\phi_{\text{eq}})\tilde{A}.\label{C_schlange}
\end{equation}
In the macroscopic two-fluid description of Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}, there is another equation resulting for the elastic degrees of freedom [Eq.~(124) in Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}]. However, in the stationary case and for our assumptions, this equation is satisfied identically (we consider a perfectly elastic network, which on the considered time scale does not disentangle; moreover, vacancy diffusion \cite{martin1972unified} is neglected). Apart from that, the assumption of overall constant density sets the pressure field [see Eqs.~(127) and (129) in Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}].
Therefore, our remaining task is to solve the system of Eqs.~(\ref{GL1}), (\ref{GL2}), (\ref{GL3}), (\ref{GL4}), and (\ref{GL5}). We use as an ansatz for $u$, $\delta s$, $\delta\phi$, $\Gamma_{rr}$, and $\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta}$, respectively, a power series in the radial distance~$r$,
\begin{eqnarray}
u &={} &\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} u_n r^n,\label{ansatz_u}\\
\delta s &={} &\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} \delta s_n r^n,\label{ansatz_s}\\
\delta\phi &={} &\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} \delta\phi_n r^n,\label{ansatz_phi}\\
\Gamma_{rr} &={} &\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} \Gamma_{rr,n}r^n,\\
\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta} &={} &\sum\limits_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} \Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,n}r^n.\label{ansatz_gamma_theta}
\end{eqnarray}
Inserting this ansatz into Eqs.~(\ref{GL1}), (\ref{GL2}), (\ref{GL3}), (\ref{GL4}), as well as (\ref{GL5}), \rev{we obtain equations that can be sorted by order in $r^n$.
Solving the equations for each order of $r^n$ separately, we find the system of equations}
\begin{eqnarray}
0&={}&(n+2) \frac{1}{\kappa_u} u_n + \frac{1}{\rho\alpha_\phi} \delta s_{n-1} + \frac{1}{\rho\kappa_\phi} \delta\phi_{n-1}, \label{alle_n_A}\\
0&={}&(n+2) \frac{1}{\alpha_3} u_n + \frac{T_{\text{eq}}}{C_V} \delta s_{n-1} + \frac{1}{\alpha_\phi} \delta\phi_{n-1}, \label{alle_n_B}\\
0&={}&(n+1)\Gamma_{rr,n-1}-2\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,n-1},\label{alle_n_Gamma}\\
0&={}& \frac{1}{3}\big(2(n-1)c_{\text{tr}} +(n+2)c_{\text{l}} \big)u_n\notag\\
&{}& + \frac{1}{3\alpha_3}\delta s_{n-1} + \frac{1}{3\rho\kappa_u}\delta\phi_{n-1} -\Gamma_{rr,n-1} \label{alle_n_sigma1},\\
0 &={}& \frac{1}{3}\big((1-n)c_{\text{tr}} + (n+2)c_{\text{l}}\big) u_n \notag\\
&{} &+ \frac{1}{3\alpha_3}\delta s_{n-1} + \frac{1}{3\rho\kappa_u}\delta\phi_{n-1} -\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,n-1} \label{alle_n_sigma2},
\end{eqnarray}
where $n\in\mathbb{Z}\setminus\{0,1\}$.
We note that there is no coupling between sets $\{u_n, \delta s_{n-1}, \delta\phi_{n-1},\Gamma_{rr,n-1},\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,n-1}\}$ of different $n\in\mathbb{Z}\setminus\{0,1\}$. Moreover, the heat source $q$, which here is responsible for driving the system out of equilibrium, does not appear in the above equations.
Thus it follows from the equations that \rev{our} expansion coefficients for $n\in\mathbb{Z}\setminus\{0,1\}$ keep their equilibrium values equal to zero.
An exception, for which no strict statement is obtained, are the coefficients $u_{-2}$, $\Gamma_{rr,-3}$, and $\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,-3}$. $u_{-2}$ cancels in Eqs.~(\ref{alle_n_A}) and (\ref{alle_n_B}), while we obtain from the remaining equations:
\begin{equation}
u_{-2} ={} -\frac{\Gamma_{rr,-3}}{2c_{\text{tr}}}, \qquad \Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,-3} ={} -\frac{\Gamma_{rr,-3}}{2}. \label{eq:redundance}
\end{equation}
Thus, the precise magnitude of the coefficient $u_{-2}$, strictly speaking, remains unassigned in the present framework. It may be determined by the microscopic processes and properties on the heated particle surface, which are not captured by our macroscopic theory \cite{pleiner1996pattern}. Yet, this coefficient is insignificant for our purpose as we are interested in the far-field behavior, while the contribution $\sim r^{-2}$ decays rapidly in the far-field displacement. The far-field displacement is dominated by a \rev{long-ranged} leading order identified in the following.
For $n=1$, we find from Eqs.~(\ref{GL1}), (\ref{GL2}), (\ref{GL3}), (\ref{GL4}), and (\ref{GL5}) the expressions
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{A}&={}& \frac{3}{\kappa_u} u_1 + \frac{1}{\rho\alpha_\phi} \delta s_{0} + \frac{1}{\rho\kappa_\phi} \delta \phi_{0},\label{u_1_a} \\
\tilde{T}&={}& \frac{3}{\alpha_3} u_1 + \frac{T_{\text{eq}}}{C_V} \delta s_{0} + \frac{1}{\alpha_\phi} \delta \phi_{0}, \\
0&={}&\Gamma_{rr,0}-\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,0}, \label{redundant}\\
\tilde{C}&={}& c_{\text{l}} u_1 + \frac{1}{3\alpha_3}\delta s_{0} + \frac{1}{3\rho\kappa_u}\delta \phi_{0} -\Gamma_{rr,0}.\label{u_1_e}
\end{eqnarray}
One of the two relations in Eqs.~(\ref{alle_n_sigma1}) and (\ref{alle_n_sigma2}) becomes redundant due to Eq.~(\ref{redundant}).
Thus, additional conditions are necessary to fix the magnitude of the expansion coefficients $u_1$, $\delta s_{0}$, $\delta \phi_{0}$, and $\Gamma_{rr,0}$.
At $r\rightarrow\infty$ the magnitude of displacement should not diverge. This sets $u_1=0$. In addition to that, we assume that for $r\rightarrow\infty$ the temperature and the (effective) chemical potentials keep their equilibrium values, e.g., via coupling to external heat and substance reservoirs. From Eqs.~(\ref{deltamu_A}), (\ref{T}), and (\ref{C_schlange})
it then follows that $\tilde{A}=\tilde{T}=\tilde{C}=0$ and $\delta s_0=\delta\phi_0=\Gamma_{rr,0}=\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,0}=0$.
Finally, we find for the remaining order $n=0$ \rev{the following system of linear equations:}
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{q}{4\pi A}&={}& \frac{2}{\kappa_u} u_0 + \frac{1}{\rho\alpha_\phi}\delta s_{-1} + \frac{1}{\rho\kappa_\phi} \delta\phi_{-1}, \label{n_0_gl_a}\\
\frac{q}{4\pi B}&={}& \frac{2}{\alpha_3} u_0 + \frac{T_{\text{eq}}}{C_V} \delta s_{-1} + \frac{1}{\alpha_\phi} \delta\phi_{-1},\\
\frac{q}{4\pi C}&={}& \frac{2}{3}(c_{\text{l}}-c_{\text{tr}}) u_0+ \frac{1}{3\alpha_3}\delta s_{-1} \notag\\
&{}& + \frac{1}{3\rho\kappa_u}\delta\phi_{-1} -\Gamma_{rr,-1}, \\
\frac{q}{4\pi C} &={}& \frac{1}{3}(c_{\text{tr}} + 2c_{\text{l}}) u_0 + \frac{1}{3\alpha_3} \delta s_{-1} \notag\\
&{} &+ \frac{1}{3\rho\kappa_u}\delta\phi_{-1} -\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,-1}, \\
0&={}&\Gamma_{rr,-1}-2\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,-1}.\label{n_0_gl_e}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, the heat source $q$ directly enters and drives the system out of equilibrium.
\rev{These equations can be solved explicitly, which leads to expressions for the coefficients $u_0$, $\delta s_{-1}$, $\delta\phi_{-1}$, $\Gamma_{rr,-1}$, and $\Gamma_{\vartheta\vartheta,-1}$.
They are rather lengthy and therefore are listed in the appendix. The important point is that we have now obtained an analytical solution of the macroscopic equations, which reveals the overall long-ranged response of the system.}
In \rev{summary}, the \rev{results for the} entropy density and the concentration \rev{profile are obtained as}
\begin{eqnarray}
s(r) &=&{} s_{\text{eq}}+\frac{\delta s_{-1}}{r},\label{s_final} \\
\phi(r) &=&{} \phi_{\text{eq}}+\frac{\delta\phi_{-1}}{r}. \label{phi_final}
\end{eqnarray}
\rev{Very illustratively, in these expressions the $1/r$ dependence of the entropy and concentration deviations can be viewed as a direct consequence of the spherical symmetry with the heated source in the center. From the heat equation, see Eq.~(\ref{entr}), we find the $1/r$ temperature profile given by Eq.~(\ref{T}). This well-known result survives the thermophoretic coupling to the concentration field described by Eqs.~(\ref{conc}) and (\ref{entr}). With the $1/r$ temperature profile at hand, already the expansion of the temperature fluctuations in our variables in Eq.~(\ref{TEMP}) suggests the $1/r$ dependence of the entropy and concentration deviations found in Eqs.~(\ref{s_final}) and (\ref{phi_final}), see also Fig.~\ref{fig:th_infinite}.}
\rev{Thus, the irradiated heat drives the system out of equilibrium, which is directly reflected by the modified entropy density and, via thermophoretic coupling, by the modified concentration field.
Changing the local concentration in our spherically symmetric situation is only possible by radial displacement of the elastic polymer network. However, radial displacements imply strains, see also Eq.~(\ref{trace}), which directly contribute to the chemical potential and temperature variations, see Eqs.~(\ref{deltamu}) and (\ref{TEMP}). Naturally, opposing stresses arise from these distortions, see Eq.~(\ref{stress}), which counteract the effect. Overall,}
the general solution for the \rev{radial} displacement field reads
\begin{equation}\label{u_final}
u(r)={}u_0+\frac{u_{-2}}{r^2},
\end{equation}
\rev{and contains a \textit{non-decaying} component $u_0$.}
As discussed above, the precise magnitude of the coefficient $u_{-2}$ remains unassigned in the present framework. Yet, its impact decays rapidly as a function of distance and does not influence the leading-order \rev{far-field} behavior connected with the coefficient $u_0$.
\rev{The leading-order deviations of $u(r)$, $s(r)$, and $\phi(r)$ from static equilibrium are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:th_infinite} as functions of $r$.}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figure2.pdf}
\caption{\rev{Plots of the rescaled leading-order deviations from static equilibrium for $u(r)$, $s(r)$, and $\phi(r)$ as functions of the distance $r$ from the heated center, see Eqs.~(\ref{s_final})--(\ref{u_final}). The rapidly decaying $r^{-2}$ term in Eq.~(\ref{u_final}) is neglected. Overall, our macroscopic solutions highlight the long-ranged far-field behavior, see also the discussion in the text.}}
\label{fig:th_infinite}
\end{figure}
\rev{At first glance, one might wonder how a non-decaying radial outward displacement of constant magnitude is energetically possible throughout the system. After all, the amount of displaced material diverges with increasing distance $r$ from the center. For the moment, let us consider spherical shells of thickness $\mathrm{d}r$ around the center. Then, the number of displaced volume elements on each shell diverges with its volume as $\sim r^2\mathrm{d}r$. These volume elements are stretched along the directions tangential to the shell surface during radial outward displacement, which costs elastic energy. However, the corresponding local strain energy density\cite{landau1986elasticity} following via the strain given by Eq.~(\ref{trace}) decreases as $\sim 1/r^2$. Overall, we obtain a constant strain energy $\sim\mathrm{d}r$ per shell. Illustratively, the reason for this result is the following. There are many more strained volume elements on the shells for large $r$. However, the curvature of these shells decreases with increasing $r$. As a consequence, the outward displacement with increasing $r$ locally more and more resembles a rigid outward translation of the locally nearly flat parts of the shell surfaces. Rigid translations do not cost elastic energy. Still, in total, the non-decaying radial displacement field requires an infinite input of strain energy in our infinite system. Yet, it is provided via the infinite input of heat energy (already the $1/r$ temperature profile resulting for the simple decoupled static heat equation corresponds to an infinite energy input in an infinite system).}
Overall, \rev{with our central result in Eq.~(\ref{u_final})}, we here confirmed in a two-fluid approach that it is indeed the elastic response of one of the two components that can induce \rev{a} \textit{non-decaying} radial \rev{outward} displacement \rev{$u_0$}, as conjectured in Ref.~\onlinecite{schwaiger2013photothermal}. Moreover, we derived an expression for the magnitude of $u_0$, \rev{see Eq.~(\ref{sol_u}) in the appendix}, as a function of the macroscopic material parameters, \rev{where, however,} several numerical values of these macroscopic parameters are not known at present.
\section{Experimental setup and sample preparation}\label{experimental1}
To further elaborate on the role of elasticity during the temperature-induced
deformation process and to further study the influence of a finite system
size, we have performed additional experimental investigations of the
thermophoretic effect around laser-heated gold nanoparticles (GNPs) in
transient polymer networks.
GNPs (BBInternational) of approximately $100\,\text{nm}$ diameter show a
strong optical absorption in their plasmon resonance. They serve as tunable
heat sources that can individually be addressed by a tightly focused laser
beam ($\lambda = 525\,\text{nm}$, Coherent Verdi V5), see Fig.~\ref{fig:setup} for an illustration of our set-up.
The non-heated GNPs, which are randomly distributed over the sample, serve as
tracers to visualize the deformation of the transient network. Their
displacement is monitored with an optical microscope (Olympus IX71) equipped
with an sCMOS camera (Tucsen Discovery MH15). Phase contrast imaging is used
for the observation of smaller particles.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figure3.pdf}
\caption{Experimental set-up to visualize thermophoretically induced
displacements. A focused laser beam heats a single gold nanoparticle (GNP),
indicated in yellow. Other GNPs (grey) are trapped as tracers in an entangled
polymer network and follow its displacement. The sample consists of a thin
film of about $200\,\upmu\text{m}$ in thickness, confined between rigid
cuvette walls. }
\label{fig:setup}
\end{figure}
Samples were prepared by first dissolving polystyrene (PS) of different
molecular weight ($M_w = 16\,800\,\text{kg}\,\text{mol}^{-1}$, $M_w =
500\,\text{kg}\,\text{mol}^{-1}$, PSS) in toluene (Sigma Aldrich, 99.9\%) at a
weight concentration of 6\%, yielding a highly entangled polymer solution.
It is then slowly stirred with 20 rpm for at least 10 days. A small droplet
of the polymer solution is filled into a detachable cuvette (Hellma 106-QS).
After evaporation of the solvent, the thin left-over polymer film is overlayed
with a droplet of the aqueous GNP dispersion. The GNPs are given approximately
10 minutes to sediment and attach to the polymer layer, before the remaining
GNP dispersion is removed by flushing with deionized water (Millipore).
After drying, the remaining volume is filled with polymer
solution. The cuvette is closed and sufficient time is given for the
polymer solution to redissolve the lower polymer layer and to homogenize,
resulting in a transient entangled polymer network with randomly embedded
GNPs.
The final polymer concentration in the cuvette is approximately
twice the one of the stock solution.
Sedimentation of the GNPs is very slow and can be compensated by occasionally
turning over the cuvette.
Several samples were examined
using laser powers between $2\,\text{mW}$ and $20\,\text{mW}$. Due to the
small cross section of the GNPs and the much wider laser focus, the absorbed
laser power is several orders of magnitude smaller. Particle displacement was
determined
by fitting a two dimensional Gaussian function, which allows for a position
accuracy of roughly $\pm$ $50\,\text{nm}$.
\section{Measurements}\label{experimental2}
\rev{We have recorded the displacements of the tracer particles in the plane parallel to the cell windows, which we define as the $xy$ plane. The optical axis was perpendicular to this plane.}
The displacements of GNPs within a distance of $10\,\upmu\text{m}$ to
$120\,\upmu\text{m}$ to the heated center have been tracked and are plotted
in Fig.~\ref{fig:displacement}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figure4.pdf}
\caption{Distance-dependent radial displacements of GNPs for different
heating powers as indicated on the top right. Linear fits illustrate an approximately linear decay with radial distance from the heated center. All data points were acquired at a time of $2\,\text{s}$ after switching on the heating.
(The initial concentration of the polymer was $c=0.06$.)}
\label{fig:displacement}
\end{figure}
These displacements
show a behavior similar to the
ones reported by Schwaiger et al.\ \cite{schwaiger2013photothermal},
however, with a somewhat extended range.
Most likely, this is a consequence of
the higher polymer concentration of the stock solution ($c=0.06$ as compared
to $c=0.03$), but no systematic study of the concentration dependence has been
carried out so far.
As indicated in Fig.~\ref{fig:displacement}, the amplitude of the long-ranged
radial displacements shows an approximately linear decay
with the distance from the heated center. This linear decay is
attributed to the finite size of the sample, which is confined by rigid
cuvette walls \rev{of sevenfold higher thermal conductivity} that enforce vanishing displacements at the cell boundaries
\cite{schwaiger2013photothermal}.
Thus, our experimental data do not contradict our theoretical results in
Sec.~\ref{theory_nodecay}. There, an infinitely extended system has been
considered, while a rigidly confined system will be discussed below in
Sec.~\ref{theory_finite_system}. Apart from that, a sublinear dependence of
the displacement
amplitude
on the heating power was observed.
All displacements in Fig.~\ref{fig:displacement} were measured at a fixed time
of $2\,\text{s}$ after turning on the heating. We plot the time evolution of
the displacement for two different examples of lower laser power in
Fig.~\ref{fig:time_evolution}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figure5.pdf}
\caption{Time dependence of the displacement of two different GNPs at
different distances from the heated center as indicated on the top left. The fits were performed using an exponential with a single relaxation time, yielding $(0.54\pm0.04)\,\text{s}$ and $(1.27\pm0.19)\,\text{s}$ for the two distances,
respectively \cite{supplemental}.
A laser power of $2.25\,\text{mW}$ was applied.}
\label{fig:time_evolution}
\end{figure}
As can be inferred from Fig.~\ref{fig:time_evolution},
the characteristic time scale
to reach a \mbox{(quasi-)}stationary displacement increases with radial
distance from the heated GNP. The fits
correspond to
an exponential with a single relaxation time. As we can
see, relaxation is to a
large
extent completed at our measurement time of
$2\,\text{s}$.
We have checked that the linear decay in Fig.~\ref{fig:displacement} is still
observed when plotting the extrapolated asymptotic displacements instead of
the transient values after $2\,\text{s}$ \cite{supplemental}.
Finally, we underline the role of the elastic response of the strongly
entangled polymer network. In accord with our theoretical considerations in
Sec.~\ref{theory_nodecay}, it is the most likely source for the observed
long-ranged displacements. For this purpose, we performed identical
measurements using, however, polymers of significantly lower molecular weight
of $M_w =
500\,\text{kg}\,\text{mol}^{-1}$ at the same concentration. This hardly entangled polymer solution does not feature a long-time elastic response.
Typical example trajectories of tracer GNPs in the high- and low-molecular-weight samples relatively close to the heated center are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:trajectory_high} and \ref{fig:trajectory_low}, respectively.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figure6.pdf}
\caption{Example trajectory of a tracer GNP at an initial distance of approximately
$15\,\upmu\text{m}$ from the heated center in a $c = 0.06$ solution
of molecular weight $M_w = 16\,800\,\text{kg}\,\text{mol}^{-1}$.
\rev{The heated center is located at the origin.}
A protocol of sudden stepwise increase and subsequent decrease of the laser power $0\,\text{mW}\rightarrow2.25\,\text{mW}\rightarrow6.75\,\text{mW}\rightarrow11.25\,\text{mW}\rightarrow16.75\,\text{mW}\rightarrow2.25\,\text{mW}$ is performed. The numbers on the trajectory mark switches to the new (indicated) laser power, from where relaxation to the new steady state occurs.
The coincidence of the point of switching $2.25\,\text{mW}\rightarrow6.75\,\text{mW}$ and of the end point at $2.25\,\text{mW}$ highlights the reversible character of the displacements.}
\label{fig:trajectory_high}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{figure7.pdf}
\caption{Example trajectory of a tracer GNP at an initial distance of approximately
$15\,\upmu\text{m}$ from the heated center in a $c = 0.06$ solution
of $M_w =500\,\text{kg}\,\text{mol}^{-1}$.
\rev{The heated center is located at the origin.}
Here, the GNP is subject to visible
Brownian motion due to the relatively low viscosity compared to the highly entangled
solution in Fig.~\ref{fig:trajectory_high}. The laser is switched on only at the point marked by the arrow at about
$1.5\,\text{s}$ into the recorded trajectory. Turning on the laser does not have any visible effect.
} \label{fig:trajectory_low}
\end{figure}
During a heating protocol of switching on and off the laser, the GNP in the high-molecular-weight sample is undergoing
a directed and reversible displacement. In contrast to that, the displacements of the GNP in the lower-molecular-weight sample are dominated by Brownian motion. In this lower-molecular-weight case, Brownian motion is more pronounced because of the lower viscosity of the solution. Other than for the entangled system, switching on the laser does not lead to correlated displacements.
\section{Theoretical description of rigidly confined systems}\label{theory_finite_system}
Our generalized theoretical derivation in Sec.~\ref{theory_nodecay}
has been
performed for an infinitely extended system, while in the experiments, by
construction, samples of finite size were investigated. Most importantly, the
experimental samples are confined by rigid cuvette walls and an approximately
linear decay in the outward displacement field was observed, see
Fig.~\ref{fig:displacement}. We explain in the following that \rev{similar results can be found within} our theoretical \rev{framework}, \rev{when modified}
boundary conditions \rev{are applied}.
To address finite size, we consider the system to be confined within a spherical shell of effective radius $R$ \cite{schwaiger2013photothermal}. This \rev{geometry} keeps the problem within our analytical framework of Sec.~\ref{theory_nodecay}. Assuming the shell to be rigid, the outward displacement must vanish on its surface:
\begin{equation}\label{finite_u_bc}
u(r=R) ={} 0.
\end{equation}
\rev{Naturally, the rigid spherical shell does not exactly match the experimental configuration of rigid confinement between two parallel plates. However, the presence of the confining cuvette windows in the experiments sets a dominant length scale for the overall response of the system. The cuvette walls have a sevenfold higher thermal conductivity, which tends to bend the direction of the heat fluxes towards the plate surfaces. As a consequence, both geometries, the experimental situation and the rigid sphere, are strongly influenced by the one dominating length scale set by the confinement.}
Returning to Sec.~\ref{theory_nodecay}, we find that our results and conclusions from Eqs.~(\ref{alle_n_A})--(\ref{eq:redundance})\rev{, (\ref{n_0_gl_a})--(\ref{n_0_gl_e}), and (\ref{sol_u})--(\ref{sol_abb})}, particularly our expression for $u_0$, remain unchanged \rev{upon imposing Eq.~(\ref{finite_u_bc})}. Modifications only concern our conclusions from Eqs.~(\ref{u_1_a})--(\ref{u_1_e}). Previously, the coefficient $u_1$ only vanished from our requirement that $u(r\rightarrow\infty)$ \rev{should not diverge}. Under the modified boundary condition Eq.~(\ref{finite_u_bc}), we instead obtain
\begin{equation}
u_1 = -\frac{u_0}{R},
\end{equation}
where we now directly neglected a possible --- but within the present framework undetermined --- coefficient $u_{-2}$. Its contribution $\sim r^{-2}$ vanishes rapidly with increasing distance from the heated center.
Altogether, this leads to
\begin{equation}\label{u_finite}
u(r) ={} u_0\left(1-\frac{r}{R}\right)
\end{equation}
and thus \rev{coincides with} the linear decay observed in the experiments.
Let us briefly discuss the implications for the other variables in
Eqs.~(\ref{u_1_a})--(\ref{u_1_e}). For instance, one may maintain the
equilibrium temperature $T(r=R)=T_{\text{eq}}$ on the system boundary by
coupling to an external heat bath. This sets the constant $\tilde{T}=-q/4\pi B
R$. Assigning a value to $\tilde{A}$ is difficult as it, in principle,
requires knowledge about chemical interaction details with the shell surface.
In an actually closed spherical cavity, the overall confined material should
be conserved. The constant $\tilde{A}$ can be used to tune $\delta\phi_0$ to
achieve this overall goal within the framework of our solution. It should be
recalled, however, that in our experiment the system is not enclosed in a
sphere and exchange of material in the lateral direction is possible.
\section{Conclusions}
In this work, we have analyzed the situation of
an elastic two-fluid system subjected to thermophoretic effects. The two-fluid environment consists of an elastic matrix suspended in a fluid solvent. These two components can be displaced relatively with respect to each other by externally heating a colloidal particle embedded in the system center. Recent experiments reported here and in Ref.~\onlinecite{schwaiger2013photothermal} suggest a long-ranged \textit{non-decaying} component of the resulting thermophoretically induced radial displacement field \rev{in an idealized infinite system}. The elastic response of the polymer matrix seems to play a central role in these observations.
Using a macroscopic two-fluid description \cite{pleiner2004general,pleiner2004generalaip}, our theoretical analysis confirms this experimental conjecture \rev{in the linearized regime}.
Moreover, for rigidly confined systems, a \textit{linear decay} in the radial displacement field is experimentally observed. \rev{Similar results are found from} theoretical considerations for rigidly bounded spherical systems.
\rev{We should recall at this point that our analysis was performed for small deviations from equilibrium only, using a macroscopic theory. That is, we lost several couplings between different variables during the linearization of the equations. For example, Eqs.~(\ref{conc}) and (\ref{entr}) initially contain nonlinear couplings to the concentration deviations. In dynamic situations, further nonlinearities are present due to the convective terms but also due to nonlinear contributions to the reversible stress, see Ref.~\onlinecite{pleiner2004general}. Predominantly, deviations from the linearized regime are of course obtained close to the heated center. Yet, in the very vicinity of the center, the macroscopic description loses its significance in any case and microscopic processes need to be taken into account. Most immediately, our macroscopic approach serves to characterize the far-field behavior, which was the central scope of our investigation.}
Concerning future investigations, we remark that our present analysis is restricted to the case where a final steady state is attained. As a next step of significantly higher complexity,
dynamic situations could be addressed. On the one hand, this applies for the dynamic path towards a final steady state. \rev{In nonlinear situations, the final state may even depend on the chosen dynamic path towards it.} On the other hand, a final steady state might not be reached at all \rev{on the considered time scales}, if the polymer matrix is not perfectly elastic but shows disentanglement or vacancy diffusion \cite{martin1972unified,pleiner2004general,pleiner2004generalaip}. Moreover, both theoretically and experimentally, situations of more than one heated particle could be addressed. Finally, the significance of the observed effect in similar situations but different systems should be analyzed. A related example with medical background is biological tissue exposed to hyperthermic cancer treatment \cite{jordan1999magnetic,babincova2001superparamagnetic,lao2004magnetic,hergt2006magnetic}.
|
\section{Introduction}
During their lifetimes, sunspots show several dynamic phenomena whose underlying physical processes can be clarified only by additional observational and theoretical studies \citep{Sol03}. In particular, the mechanisms responsible for penumbra formation remain unclear because their study requires time series observations of sunspots with high temporal, spatial, and spectral resolution carried out from their first appearance as a pore \citep{Thom04}.
Currently, there are two main explanations for penumbra formation. \citet{Lek98} suggested that emerging, horizontal field lines could be trapped and form a penumbra rather than continuing to rise to higher layers, due to the presence of the overlying magnetic canopy in the emerging region. In contrast, \citet{Shi12} and \citet{Rom13, Rom14} showed that some signatures of penumbra formation around pores in the chromosphere appear earlier than in the photosphere. Their findings suggest that the field lines of the magnetic canopy, already existing at a higher level of the solar atmosphere and overlying the pore, may be responsible for the formation of the penumbra if they sink down into the photosphere and below the solar surface. Thus, \citet{Shi12}, using images in the Ca II H 396.8 nm line acquired with the Hinode~Solar Optical Telescope, showed that in Active Region (AR) NOAA 11039 a 3\arcsec- 5\arcsec\/ wide annular zone surrounding a pore already existed in the chromosphere some hours before the penumbra became visible in the photosphere. Using spectro-polarimetric scans through the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line, \citet{Rom13, Rom14} detected the presence of several patches at the edge of the annular zone around a pore of the AR NOAA 11490, with a typical size of about 1\arcsec\/, that were characterized by a rather vertical magnetic field with polarity opposite to that of the pore. These patches showed radially outward displacements with horizontal velocities of about 2 km s$^{-1}$, that have been interpreted as due to portions of the pore's magnetic field returning beneath the photosphere, being progressively stretched and pushed down by the overlying magnetic fields.
Other studies assessed the presence of a critical value of some physical parameters above which penumbra formation takes place.
\citet{Lek98} found a threshold of 1-1.5 $\times$ 10$^{20}$ Mx, above which a pore can develop a penumbra. From the analysis of a data set taken at the German Vacuum Tower Telescope, \citet{Rez12} studied the formation of a sunspot penumbra in AR NOAA 11024 and proposed a critical magnetic field strength B$_{crit}\leq1.6$ kG and a critical inclination angle of the magnetic field $\alpha\geq60^{\circ}$ with respect to the normal to the photosphere, above which the penumbra begins to form. \citet{Jur11} investigated nine stable sunspots and concluded that the umbra-penumbra (UP) boundary, traditionally defined by an intensity threshold, is also characterized by a [critical] value of the vertical component of the magnetic field, $B_{ver}^{stable}=1860$ $(\pm 190)$ G. \citet{Jur15} confirmed this result: extending the analysis to cover the phase of penumbra formation, they also deduced that the UP boundary migrates toward the umbra and $B_{ver}$ increases. Therefore, during penumbra formation, the pore is partially converted into penumbra. To explain this critical value of $B_{ver}$, they propose that there are two modes of magneto-convection. The penumbral mode takes over in areas with $B_{ver}<B^{stable}_{ver}$, while the umbral mode prevails instead in areas with $B_{ver}>B^{stable}_{ver}$. Moreover, through the study of the AR NOAA 11024, \citet{Sch10b} found that the penumbra forms in segments and that, initially, it cannot settle down on the side towards the opposite polarity where flux emergence is still occurring.
Another important issue that needs to be clarified in the formation of the penumbra is the initiation of the Evershed flow \citep{Eve09}. It consists of a nearly horizontal outflow along the penumbral filaments, mainly manifested as red and blue wavelength shifts in the photospheric absorption lines at the limb side and disc-center side of the penumbra, respectively. This flow, with typical, spatially averaged speeds of 1-2 km s$^{-1}$, is confined in nearly horizontal magnetic field channels (i.e., the so-called interspines, \citealp{Bor08}). In one set of models \citep{Mey68} it is ascribed to the difference in the magnetic field strength between the two footpoints of a penumbral filament. This causes a difference of gas pressure and drives a flow towards the footpoint with higher magnetic field strength, i.e., the footpoint further away from the umbra \citep{Bor11} although often still located inside the sunspot, since most of the flow returns back inside the Sun within the penumbra (see Solanki et al. 1994). Alternatively, \citet{Scha08}, \citet{Spr06}, \citet{Scha06} proposed that the Evershed effect is produced by convection (i.e., that the Evershed effect is mainly driven by gas pressure gradients produced by horizontal gradients of temperature).
However, before the formation of the penumbra a line-of-sight (LOS) velocity of opposite sign with respect to that displayed by the typical Evershed flow was observed at some azimuths \citep{Schl12}. This flow seemed to be associated with the early stages of penumbra formation and reversed its sign as the penumbra formed. In fact, also \citet{Rom14} found persistent photospheric plasma upflow before the formation of the penumbra at the locations of the patches at the outer edge of the annular zone, and downflows in the inner part of the annular zone, which
were interpreted as the signature of an inflow towards the pore. They interpreted this plasma motion as a counter-Evershed flow.
It is clear that the comprehension of the counter-Evershed flow during the early stages of the penumbra formation may be useful to explain the processes of energy transport in the formed penumbra where, in principle, the presence of a rather strong (1500 G) and horizontal (40$^{\circ}$-80$^{\circ}$) magnetic field should inhibit the convective motions.
Various models have been proposed to explain the presence of convective motions in the penumbra: the {\em hot rising flux-tube model} \citep{Sch02}, the {\em azimuthal convection model} \citep{Spr06} and more sophisticated geometries of elongated convection cells \citep{Remp09}. The former predicts the presence of upflows at the inner footpoints of the flux tubes near the umbra and downflows at their outer footpoints at the edge of the sunspot. In this case, the convection is radial with respect to the sunspot barycenter, with convective flows occurring along the penumbral filaments. The latter model provides a very efficient heat transport mechanism: the convective motions are present over the entire length of the bright penumbral filaments, with upflows at the center of the filaments and downflows at the filament edges. Observations suggest that some combination of both types of flows is acting, with both, a flow directed along the penumbral filaments and a flow directed perpendicularly to them playing a role \citep{Jos11, Scha11, RuizRamos13, Scha13, Tiw13, EstPo15}.
In this scenario, understanding the presence of the counter-Evershed flow before the penumbra formation could be useful to shed light on the dynamics of the penumbral region. For this reason, we present new results obtained from the study of the formation of the penumbra in a sunspot already studied by \citet{Rom13, Rom14}. In this Paper, we analyze a new data set, consisting of spectro-polarimetric scans of the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line acquired after the formation of the penumbra, as well as using HMI observations. In particular, we analyze the plasma motions inside the annular zone, providing new constraints for modeling the formation phase of the sunspot penumbra. We focus on the onset of the classical Evershed flow, which is observed to occur during penumbra formation.\\ In the next Section we describe the whole data set and its analysis. In Section 3 we present the results. Finally, in Section 4 we summarize the main conclusions.
\section{Observations and analysis}
We study AR NOAA 11490 using high temporal, spatial, and spectral resolution data acquired by the Interferometric Bidimensional Spectrometer \citep[IBIS;][]{Cav06} operating at the NSO/Dunn Solar Telescope (DST). The observations were carried out on 2012 May 28 from 13:39 UT to 14:12 UT and on May 29 from 13:49 UT to 14:32 UT when the AR was characterized by a cosine of the heliocentric angle $\mu=0.95$ and $\mu=0.97$, respectively.
The data set, whose relevant characteristics were already described by detail in \citet{Rom13}, consists of 30 scans for each day of observation through the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line, with 67 s cadence. The line was sampled with a spectral profile having a FWHM of 2 pm, an average wavelength step of 2 pm and an integration time of 60 ms. The \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line was sampled in spectro-polarimetric mode with 30 spectral points. The field of view (FOV) was 500 $\times$ 1000 pixels with a pixel scale of 0\farcs09.
For each spectral frame, a simultaneous broad-band (at $633.32 \pm 5$ nm) frame, imaging the same FOV with the same exposure time, was acquired. To reduce the seeing degradation, the images were restored using the Multi-Frame Blind Deconvolution \citep[MFBD;][]{Lof02} technique (see details in \citealp{Rom13}).
To determine the evolution of the LOS plasma velocity, magnetic field strength, inclination and azimuth angles, we performed a single-component inversion of the Stokes profiles for all the available scans of the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line using the SIR code \citep{RuizIniesta92}. We used a different procedure to invert the Stokes profiles of the data set acquired after the penumbra formation, with respect to the procedure used in \citet{Rom13}. The spectra were normalized to the quiet sun continuum, $I{_c}$. More precisely, we divided the FOV into three regions, identified by different thresholds in the continuum intensity $I{_c}$ to account for the different physical conditions: quiet Sun ($I{_c}>0.9$), penumbra ($0.7<I{_c}<0.9$), umbra ($I{_c}<0.7$). For the quiet Sun model we used as an initial guess the temperature stratification of the Harvard-Smithsonian Reference Atmosphere \citep[HSRA,][]{HSRA} and a value of 0.1 km s$^{-1}$ for the line-of.sight (LOS) velocity. In the penumbral model, we changed the initial guess of the temperature (T) and the electron pressure ($p_{e^{-}}$) according to the penumbral stratification provided by \citet{Iniesta94}, and we used an initial value for the magnetic field strength of 1000 G and 1 km s$^{-1}$ for the LOS velocity. For the umbral model we changed the initial T and $p_{e^{-}}$ using the values provided by \citet{Col94}, (an umbral model for a small spot), and we also started from a value of 2000 G for the magnetic field strength.\\
The temperature stratification of each component was modified with three nodes, although all other quantities were assumed to be height independent. We modelled the stray-light contamination by averaging over all Stokes I spectra in the 64 pixels characterized by the lowest polarization degree. A magnetic filling factor was introduced as a free parameter of the inversion, which described the weight being assigned to the local atmosphere relative to the stray-light. The spectral point-spread function of IBIS \citep{Rea08} was used to take into account the finite spectral resolution of the instrument.
Once we obtained the magnetic field strength, the inclination and azimuth angles, we solved the 180$^{\circ}$-azimuth ambiguity and transformed the components of the vector magnetic field into the local solar frame using the Non-Potential Field Calculation code \citep{Geo05}.
In general, the results obtained by the SIR inversion code appear reasonable, but in a few places in the penumbra, anomalous velocities were obtained (small patches of strong upflows, with jumps in the velocity at their edges). Various tests, such as changing the number of nodes, starting from different initial values of the free parameters, etc. did not improve the situation. Since the velocity is the most central variable of this study, we also measured the LOS plasma velocity using Gaussian fits to the line profiles, i.e., we reconstructed the profiles of the \ion{Fe}{1} line in each spatial pixel by fitting the corresponding Stokes I component with a linear background and a Gaussian shaped line. The values of LOS velocity were deduced from the Doppler shift of the centroid of the line profiles in each spatial point. We estimated the uncertainty affecting the velocity measurements considering the standard deviation of the centroids of the line profiles estimated in all points of the whole FOV. Thus, the estimated relative error in the velocity is $\pm$0.2 km s$^{-1}$.
The temperature in the umbra is low enough to allow for the formation of molecules, in particular blending with the 630.25 nm line. Therefore, all umbral profiles with $I_{c}<0.7 I_{qs}$, were excluded from the calculation of the line shift, and the Doppler velocity in the umbra were set to zero. The reference for the local frame of rest was calibrated by imposing that the plasma in a quiet Sun region has on average a convective blueshift \citep{Drav81} for the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 line, equal to -124 m s $^{-1}$ following \citet{Balth88}.
We also analyzed both Space-weather HMI Active Region Patches
\citep[SHARPs,][]{Bobra14} continuum filtegrams and Dopplergrams taken by the Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI) on the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) \citep{Sch12} satellite in the Fe I 617.3 nm with a resolution of 1\arcsec\/ to study the evolution of the velocity field in the forming penumbra. These data cover one day of observation, starting from 2012 May 28 at 14:58:25 UT until May 29 at 14:58:25 UT. The cadence of these data is 12 minutes. To calibrate SDO/HMI Dopplergrams we choose the same calibration method used for IBIS velocity maps, with convective blueshift equal to -95 m s$^{-1}$ \citep{Balth88}. Moreover, to study the variation of the magnetic field of the active region we analyzed the components $B_{r}$, $B_{\theta}$, $B_{\phi}$ of the vector magnetic field \textit{B} deduced from SDO/HMI SHARPs data. The uncertainties in the field strength and in the inclinations are $\pm$240 G and $\pm$ 20$^{\circ}$, respectively.
IBIS and SDO/HMI observations were co-aligned using the first spectral image in the continuum of the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line in the sequence of IBIS data taken at 13:39 UT and 13:59 UT, for 2012 May 28 and 29, respectively, and a SDO/HMI continuum image closest in time (13:36 UT and 13:58 UT, for 2012 May 28 and 29, respectively). We used the IDL \textit{SolarSoft} mapping routines to take into account the different pixel sizes.
To analyze the evolution of the plasma flow in the forming penumbra, we aligned the SDO/HMI images from 19:00 UT to 24:00 UT taking as reference image the first of these images. Our aim was to overlay the images of the pore exactly on top of each other, so that the evolution of individual parts of the pore (and hence of the forming penumbra) can be followed. The displacement between the reference image and the other images was obtained with cross-correlation techniques. The rapid evolution and motion of the forming sunspot limits the precision of the alignment, which is of the order of the pixel size of SDO/HMI, i.e., 0\farcs5. From the SDO/HMI observations, we extracted sub-arrays for further analysis, as shown in Figure 1.
\section{Results}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=20 120 50 280]{Fig1a.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=70 120 50 280]{Fig1b.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=20 120 50 280]{Fig1c.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=70 120 50 280]{Fig1d.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=20 90 50 280]{Fig1e.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=70 90 50 280]{Fig1f.ps}\\
\caption{Continuum filtergrams (\textit{first and second rows}) and LOS magnetograms (\textit{third row}) taken by SDO/HMI at the times given at the top of each panel, showing the evolution of NOAA AR 11490. In these and in the following images North is at the top, West is to the right. In the \textit{top left panel} the boxes indicate the FoVs of IBIS (dashed line) and SDO/HMI (solid line) displayed in Figure 2 and 3, respectively. The axes give the distance from solar disc center in arcsec. The arrow points to the disc center. \label{fig1}}
\end{figure*}
We can see in the sequence of continuum filtegrams shown in Figure 1 the evolution of AR NOAA 11490 from May 28 at 13:58 UT to May 29 at 13:58 UT. We note that the pore in the boxes in Figure 1 (\textit{top left panel}), characterized by positive polarity (Figure 1, \textit{bottom left panel}), forms its penumbra in the course of the depicted 24 hours. In particular, the pore changes its initial shape, as shown in the \textit{top right panel} of Figure 1 (17:22 UT), and the penumbra initially develops only on the north and south part of the pore. Later, the penumbra develops in the western part of the pore, and only at 23:58 UT does it also develop in the part towards the opposite polarity (see Figure 1, \textit{middle right panel}, showing the situation at 13:58 UT on 29 May). This development is in agreement with the findings of \citet{Sch10a} that the penumbra forms later in the direction of the opposite polarity of an active region, where flux is still emerging. Therefore, we estimated that the pore becomes surrounded by its penumbra in about 10 hr, i.e., from 13:58 UT to 23:58 UT on 28 May.
Figure 2 shows maps of the continuum intensity, magnetic field strength, and inclination angle on May 28 at 14:00 UT (\textit{left panels, first, second, and third rows}), before the penumbra formed, as obtained from the SIR inversion of the Stokes profiles of the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line. These maps reveal that the pore is characterized by an umbra which does not appear to be homogeneous (see also \citealp{Rom13}). The magnetic field strength in the pore is about 1.5 kG. Around the pore we distinguish an annular zone where the magnetic field exceeds 500 G (shown by the yellow contour in Figure 2, \textit{left panel second row}). In this zone the inclination is not constant but there are a number of sectors with different magnetic inclination. One can imagine this as an (upside down) ballerina skirt structure of the magnetic field on a large azimuthal scale (Figure 2, \textit{left panel, third row}). There are also patches, characterized by an inclination of about 180$^{\circ}$, corresponding to the polarity opposite to that of the sunspot. They are located only in some sectors of the annular zone and $\sim$ 3\arcsec\/- 4\arcsec\/ from the pore.
In Figure 2 (\textit{right panels}) we show the continuum intensity, the magnetic field strength, and the inclination angle after the formation of the penumbral region on May 29. The magnetic field in the penumbra gradually decreases from about 1.5 kG at the edge of the umbra to about 500 G at the external border of the penumbra. The inclination angle in the penumbra increases gradually from about on average 40$^{\circ}$-50$^{\circ}$ in the inner most penumbra to about 80$^{\circ}$-90$^{\circ}$ at its outer boundary. We also note that the patches of polarity opposite to that of the sunspot, are now more numerous and are located $\sim$ 10\arcsec\/ from the edge of the umbra, i.e., farther than the previous day. In this case they are visible all around the sunspot.
The \textit{bottom panels} of Figure 2 show the LOS velocity measured by Doppler shift of the centroid of the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line. The saturation level chosen for these maps is $\pm$0.8 km s$^{-1}$ to better display the velocities in the annular zone and along the penumbral filaments. Before the penumbra is formed the annular zone is characterized by downflows larger than 1 km s$^{-1}$ in its inner part (Figure 2, \textit{left bottom panels}). These flows are particularly evident in the north-western sector of the annular zone, where upflows slightly larger than the granular pattern are also visible at greater distance from the pore, but close to the downflows. This region is also characterized by elongated ``cells'' in intensity and an inhomogeneous field strength, with elongated structures (marked by red squares in the \textit{left panels} of Figure 2).
After the penumbra had formed, on May 29, the LOS velocity map is dominated by the classic Evershed flow all around the spot (Figure 2, \textit{bottom right panel}), characterized by flow towards the observer of about -0.5 km s$^{-1}$ in the north-eastern part of the penumbra, and by flow away from the observer of 0.6-0.7 km s$^{-1}$ in the south-western part.
To further study the evolution of the plasma flow in the forming penumbra, we analysed the SDO/HMI data, which allowed us to follow the evolution of the spot over a longer time span, although with lower spatial resolution. Figure 3 shows the evolution of the continuum intensity (\textit{first column}), LOS velocity (\textit{second column}), strength and inclination angle of the magnetic field (\textit{third and fourth column}) from May 28 at 13:58 UT to May 29 at 14:58 UT, as deduced by SDO/HMI SHARP data. On May 28 13:58 UT we identify three sectors characterized by different values of inclination (see the arrows in Figure 3, \textit{fourth column}). In particular, we can see in the north-western part of the annular zone a sector (indicated by label 1 in the\textit{ top rightmost panel}) where the inclination is between 90$^{\circ}$ and 110$^{\circ}$; in the south-eastern part and in the north-eastern part two sectors (indicated by labels 2 and 3) where the inclination is between 30$^{\circ}$ and 60$^{\circ}$. This configuration was identified earlier in the IBIS observations, and described as an (upside down) ballerina skirt structure. In the subsequent 24 hours the region 1, characterized by horizontal field, surrounds the pore in the outer part of the penumbra, while the inner part shows an inclination of about 60$^{\circ}$-80$^{\circ}$.
In Figure 3 (\textit{second column}) we show the LOS velocity deduced from SDO/HMI data. In these maps we can see that before the formation of the penumbra, on May 28, similarly to the IBIS observations, in the north-western (center discward) part of the pore there is a significant redshift corresponding to velocities around 0.4-0.6 km s$^{-1}$. This line shift is opposite to that of the expected Evershed flow. Furthermore, the sequence of the LOS velocity maps show that, while the penumbra is forming, a different velocity pattern appears and a flow of opposite sign, in agreement with the Evershed flow, becomes more and more extended.
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=30 250 100 250]{Fig2a.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=85 250 100 250]{Fig2b.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=30 250 100 250]{Fig2c.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=85 250 100 250]{Fig2d.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=30 250 100 250]{Fig2e.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=85 250 100 250]{Fig2f.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=30 200 100 250]{Fig2g.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=85 200 100 250]{Fig2h.ps}
\caption{Maps of intensity, magnetic field strength and inclination angle (first, second, and third row) on 2012 May 28 at 14:00 UT (left, before penumbra formation) and on 2012 May 29 at 14:31 UT (right, after penumbra formation), obtained from the SIR inversion of the Stokes profiles of the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line acquired by IBIS. The red or black contours indicate the edge of the pore and of the umbra as seen in the continuum intensity image. In the left panel of the second row, the contours indicate the edge of the pore as seen in the continuum intensity image (red contour) and the annular zone as seen in the magnetic field image (yellow contour), respectively. LOS velocity maps (bottom panels) on 2012 May 28 at 14:00 UT and 2012 May 29 at 14:31 UT, are deduced from the Doppler shift of the centroid of the \ion{Fe}{1} 630.25 nm line profile (see the main text for details). Downflow and upflow correspond to positive and negative velocities, respectively. The red or black square encloses a region of particular interest (see main text for details). The arrow points to the disc center. \label{fig2}}
\end{figure*}
One striking feature of Figure 3 is seen in the inclination images. At the beginning of the time series there are a number of small magnetic features surrounding the pore with polarities opposite to the pore. As time goes by more of these appear, forming a nearly complete ring around the sunspot. This opposite polarity ring is itself surrounded (on the outside) by a partial ring with the same polarity as the sunspot. As it forms, this ring moves away from the spot with time, presumably driven by the moat flow. Such features can also be seen in the third right panel of Figure 2.
In order to investigate the conditions that lead to the establishment of the classical Evershed flow, we analyze the evolution of the continuum intensity, LOS velocity, inclination and strength of the magnetic field in the 2-pixel wide (and 25-pixels long) segment A overplotted in the \textit{second row} of Figure 3 and in all frames of Figure 4, which shows the evolution of the continuum intensity and the LOS velocity from 21:12 UT to 21:58 UT on May 28. During this time interval the selected segment lies in a sector where the penumbra is forming. As time passes the blueshifted region covers a larger range of azimuths around the growing spot in the upper right of these images, while the azimuth coverage of the redshifted region decreases. In Figure 5 we can see the evolution of the continuum intensity and the LOS velocity along the segment on May 28 from 19:00 UT to 24:00 UT. In the \textit{top left panel} of Figure 5 we indicated the positions of the umbra-quiet sun boundary before the penumbra formation at 19:00 UT (the black vertical bar) and the umbra-penumbra boundary at 24:00 UT (the vertical orange bar). These positions have been determined by computing the maxima in the derivative of the continuum intensity signal along the selected segment. Analyzing the \textit{bottom panels}, in the inner part of the selected segments we note a clear evolution from redshift with a maximum of about 500 m s$^{-1}$ (see the curves taken at 19:00, 20:00 and 21:00 UT) to blueshift, whose maximum velocity of about 700 m s$^{-1}$ is reached at 22:00 UT. Figure 5, (\textit{bottom right panel}) shows in more detail the transition from redshift to blueshift that occurred between 21:00 UT and 22:00 UT on May 28.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=0 200 76 230]{Figure3a.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3b.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3c.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3d.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=0 200 76 230]{Figure3e.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3f.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3g.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3h.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=0 200 76 230]{Figure3i.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3j.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3k.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3l.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=0 200 76 230]{Figure3m.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3n.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3o.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3p.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=0 200 76 230]{Figure3q.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3r.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3s.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3t.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=0 200 76 230]{Figure3u.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3v.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3w.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 200 76 230]{Figure3x.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=0 155 76 550]{barra_cont.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 155 76 550]{barra_vel.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=70 155 66 550]{barra_mag.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.245, clip, trim=82 155 72 550]{barra_inc.ps}
\caption{From left to right: Maps of the intensity, LOS velocity, magnetic field strength and inclination angle at different times from 2012 May 28 at 14:58 UT (\textit{top row}) to 2012 May 29 at 14:58 UT \textit{bottom row}) as deduced by SDO/HMI data acquired at 617.3 nm. The black contour in the inclination map indicates the edge of the pore or umbra as seen in the continuum intensity image. Positive and negative velocities correspond to downflows and upflows, respectively. The arrows in the first inclination map indicate the sectors described in the text. The 2-pixel wide segment A in each image of the second and third row is used for the analysis shown in Figure 5, 6 and 7. The arrow points to the disc center. (An animation of this figure is available on-line.) \label{fig3}}
\end{figure*}
Figure 6 presents the evolution of the inclination angle and strength of the magnetic field along the segment A shown in Figure 3. These plots reveal that the magnetic field strength (\textit{bottom panels} of Figure 6) changes significantly ( about 400 G) between 6\arcsec\/ and 13\arcsec\/ from the inner edge of the segment. The inclination angle of the magnetic field in the region between 3\arcsec\/ and 7\farcs5 (\textit{top panels} of Figure 6) reaches values up to 80$^{\circ}$, indicating positive polarity. We also notice that at 7\farcs5 (corresponding to the outer edge of the penumbra), it varies from 80$^{\circ}$ to 70$^{\circ}$, becoming more vertical. However, note that this variation is within the uncertainty of the inclination determined from SDO/HMI. Finally, from 8\arcsec\/ to 13\arcsec\/ beyond the outer penumbral boundary, the magnetic field changes sign, in fact at 19:00 UT it is larger than 90$^{\circ}$ while at 24:00 UT it has values smaller than 90$^{\circ}$. We notice that the area where the inclination changes sign does not correspond to the penumbra but it belongs to the moat region. Also, the field strength along the same cut at the location of the forming penumbra increased mainly only some minutes after the Evershed-like flow had already been established.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=0 200 0 230]{Figure4a.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=84 200 0 230]{Figure4b.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=0 200 0 230]{Figure4c.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=84 200 0 230]{Figure4d.ps}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=0 180 0 230]{Figure4e.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.40, clip, trim=84 180 0 230]{Figure4f.ps}\\
\caption{Maps of the continuum intensity and LOS velocity from 2012 May 28 at 21:12 UT to 2012 May 28 at 21:58 UT as deduced by SDO/HMI. The arrow points to the disc center. \label{fig4}}
\end{figure*}
In order to highlight the variations of the continuum intensity, the magnetic field strength and inclination temporal, we report in Figure 7 the differences between the values of these quantities measured on May 28 at 24:00 UT and at 19:00 UT. The \textit{left panel} of Figure 7 indicates that the continuum intensity decreases by about 20\% of the quiet Sun value in 5 hours between 6\arcsec\/ and 11\arcsec\/ from the inner edge of the segment and it increases by about 27\% between 2\arcsec\/ and 6\arcsec\/. This increase can be ascribed to the shrinking of the pore along this particular segment (to become the umbra of the forming sunspot). We note that the intensity of the magnetic field increases by about 500 G in 5 hours between 6\arcsec\/ and 9\arcsec\/ from the inner edge of the segment (see the \textit{middle panel} of Figure 7). The decrease of the magnetic field between 4\arcsec\/ and 6\arcsec\/ can be attributed to the shrinking of the pore field and to the consequent inward migration of the UP boundary (Fig. 5)(see \citealp{Jur15}). Finally, a variation in the inclination angle of the magnetic field up to 20$^\circ$ can be detected, with the vertical component of the field changing sign (Figure 7, \textit{right panel}).
The same analysis has been performed along the segment B (see the second row of Figure 3). In this region the penumbra formed a few hours before than region marked by the segment A, with significant changes in the magnetic field strength but slight changes in the inclination. In particular, along the region indicated by the segment B the onset of the Eversed flow occurs in about 3 hours, i.e., from 15:00 UT to 19:00 UT.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=10.0cm, width=8.0cm, clip, trim=0 20 0 30]{Fig5a.ps}
\includegraphics[height=10.0cm, width=8.0cm, clip, trim=0 20 0 30]{Fig5b.ps}\\
\includegraphics[height=10.0cm, width=8.0cm, clip, trim=0 20 0 0]{Fig5c.ps}
\includegraphics[height=10.0cm, width=8.0cm, clip, trim=0 20 0 0]{Fig5d.ps}
\caption{Variation of the continuum intensity (\textit{top panels}) and of the LOS velocity (\textit{bottom panels}) along the segment A in the western part of the pore indicated in Figure 3 (\textit{second row}) and Figure 4. The origin of the horizontal axis denotes the end of the segment within the umbra. The figure is based on SDO/HMI data. The left and right panels cover intervals of 5 hours and 1 hour, (when the largest changes in LOS velocity and continuum intensity occur), respectively. In the \textit{top left panel} we report the positions of the umbra-quiet Sun boundary at 19:00 UT and the positions of the umbra-penumbra (UP) boundary at 24:00 UT using vertical bars at coordinates 3\arcsec\/ and 5\arcsec\/, respectively. \label{fig5}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=10.0cm, width=8.0cm, clip, trim=0 20 0 30]{Fig6a.ps}
\includegraphics[height=10.0cm, width=8.0cm, clip, trim=0 20 0 30]{Fig6b.ps}
\includegraphics[height=10.0cm, width=8.0cm, clip, trim=0 20 0 0]{Fig6c.ps}
\includegraphics[height=10.0cm, width=8.0cm, clip, trim=0 20 0 0]{Fig6d.ps}
\caption{Variation of inclination angle (\textit{top panels}) and strength of the magnetic field (\textit{bottom panels}) along the segment in the western part of the pore indicated in Figure 3 (\textit{second row}) and Figure 4. The origin of the horizontal axis denotes the end of the segment within the umbra. The figure is based on SDO/HMI data. The left and right panels cover intervals of 5 hours and 1 hour, (when the largest changes in LOS velocity and continuum intensity occur), respectively. In the \textit{left panels} we report the positions of the umbra-quiet Sun boundary at 19:00 UT and the positions of the outer edge of the penumbra at 24:00 UT using vertical bars at coordinates 5\arcsec\/ and 7.5\arcsec\/, respectively. \label{fig6}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3, clip, trim=35 20 20 20]{Fig7b.ps}%
\includegraphics[scale=0.3, clip, trim=35 20 20 20]{Fig7a.ps}%
\includegraphics[scale=0.3, clip, trim=35 20 20 20]{Fig7c.ps}
\caption{Differences between the continuum intensity, magnetic field strength, and inclination angle measured on May 28 at 24:00 UT and at 19:00 UT (SDO/HMI dataset). \label{fig7}}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion and Conclusions}
In this paper we presented results concerning the formation of the penumbra of a sunspot and the associated onset of the Evershed flow. We studied the magnetic field and the LOS velocity field of the preceding sunspot of the AR NOAA 11490, whose penumbra formed in about 10 hours. We found that the LOS component of the velocity field compatible with the Evershed flow appeared in parallel with the formation of the penumbra. The velocity field changed sign in $1-3$ hours along a cut passing from the pore into the nearby quiet Sun and the Evershed flow has been established. This occured at the same time as the continuum intensity was lowered from quiet-Sun values to typical penumbral values. Interestingly, the field strength along the same cut at the location of the forming penumbra increased mainly only some minutes after the Evershed-like flow had already been established.
Before the formation of the penumbra, the photospheric magnetic field configuration of the pore that later turned into the sunspot showed the presence of an annular zone just outside its boundary, characterized by a magnetic field strength larger than 1000 G, having an (upside down) ballerina skirt structure of the magnetic field on a large azimuthal scale. During this phase, in the inner part of this annular zone we observed redshifts of the spectral lines of about 500 m s$^{-1}$. If we assume that the flow follows the field and that the magnetic field lines connect the pore with the other photospheric structures of opposite polarity, then the inferred direction of flow was opposite to that expected for plasma motion related to the Evershed radial outflow.
This flow, however, changed its direction at the same time as the local part of the penumbra formed, from 21:00 UT to 22:00 UT, when a plasma blueshift with a maximum velocity of about 700 m s$^{-1}$ was observed in the northern part of the penumbra. We found that the change in velocity preceded the change in magnetic field. In fact, the velocity had already changed sign (at 21:24 UT) while the magnetic field had still a very low value in the penumbral region (it increased to a higher value at 22:00 UT). Moreover, the magnetic field changes inclination from 80$^{\circ}$ to roughly 70$^{\circ}$ becoming slightly more vertical at the outer edge of the penumbra (at 7\farcs5). This could indicate that a nearly horizontal canopy-like field is converted into a more penumbra-like field, i.e., one that is more inclined on average. Before the penumbra forms the field is mostly a nearly horizontal canopy field, i.e. it does not pass through the solar surface at these locations. However, after the formation of the penumbra at least some of the field (that emerging in the spines within the penumbra) passes through the solar surface at a considerable angle to the horizontal. This aspect needs to be verified by future, high-resolution observations as well as by detailed sunspot modelling. Furthermore, beyond the outer penumbral boundary in the moat region the magnetic field changes sign from a flat opposite polarity field, to having the same polarity as the sunspot.
The results obtained here may provide us some insight into where the penumbral field comes from. A hint is given by the ring of redshifted material surrounding the pore. This may be the material flowing up through the solar surface in the outer opposite polarity magnetic footpoints, now flowing down again as was proposed by \citet{Rom14}.
We present the following scenario for the formation of the penumbra and the start of the Evershed flow to explain the observations presented here and in earlier papers. The canopy field of the initial pore gets weaker at greater distances from the boundary of the pore. At some distance the field is sufficiently weak that convective flows can drag field lines down into the photosphere forming small U-loops whose inner footpoint has the opposite magnetic polarity to the pore. Such a magnetic structure is found around our forming spot in Figure 3. This footpoint is at the same time now the outer footpoint of an inverted U-loop connecting it to the pore. Such a pulling down of a canopy field has been demonstrated with the help of numerical simulations by \citet{Piet10} and has also been proposed to explain the formation of bipolar moving magnetic features around sunspots \citep{Zha03,Zha07}. Since the external footpoint of the inverted U-loop is brighter (hotter) than the pore, has little magnetic flux and has a comparatively weak field, a siphon flow directed towards the pore is set up (which may be driven by either the temperature or the magnetic field strength difference between the pore and the the external footpoint). This seemingly inverse Evershed flow is compatible with the findings of \citet{Rom14} and of this paper.
With time more and more flux is dragged down, increasing the flux in the external footpoint of the inverted U-loop. This loop is kept flat and low-lying by the overlying canopy, as proposed by Romano et al. (2014) in the cartoon shown in their Figure 4. A similar action of the canopy was indeed found by \citet{Gugl14} during the formation of penumbral-like structures. As its flux increases, at some point the field lines reach the solar surface along the complete length of the loop. The region darkens as the magnetic field inhibits convection, but the darkening stops, i.e., the brightness reaches a new equilibrium at a lower value, as magneto-convection starts. At the same time the Evershed flow is set up as part of the magneto-convective process. This flow is directed radially outward, as within the penumbral filaments harbouring this flow both the brightness and the magnetic field are distributed such as to accelerate the gas away from the umbra \citep{Tiw13}.
This scenario is compatible not only with the present observations, including the ring of opposite polarity features surrounding the forming sunspot (and the ring of same polarity flux surrounding this ring), but also nicely explains why the process does not work on the side of the spot where flux is still emerging. There the field of the outer footpoint of the inverted U-loop gets cancelled by the emerging flux. Also, because the formation starts in the canopy near the final outer boundary of the penumbra (assuming that this is the place where the canopy field becomes sufficiently weak to be dragged down by convective and other flows) the scenario leads to a natural explanation of why the penumbra first leaves a mark in the low chromosphere/upper photosphere before becoming visible at the solar surface.
The analyzed IBIS/DST observations available for the time, before and after penumbra formation, together with the complementary SDO/HMI data have guided us in coming up with a new scenario for the formation of the penumbra, including the start of the Evershed effect. These and future such observations are likely to set useful constraints on quantitative models describing the beginning of the Evershed flow in sunspot penumbrae. For example, we found that a flow qualitatively compatible with a radial outflow starts in a short time, in our case in less than one hour (see Figure 4, \textit{top right panel}). It would be interesting if future numerical simulations of penumbra formation could reproduce this fast evolution of the plasma flow, accompanied or followed shortly afterwards by an increase of the total magnetic field and a slight change of its inclination.
In the near future we plan to perform new observing campaigns with high performance instruments, such as IBIS or CRISP, in order to obtain other high-quality data sets where the evolution of the annular zone may be observed for a longer time. Also, studying more sunspots will help to determine how universal the observational results obtained here are. In this context, the next generation solar telescopes with larger aperture such as the GREGOR telescope \citep{Schm12}, the Daniel K. Inouye Solar Telescope \citep[DKIST, formerly the Advanced Technology Solar Telescope (ATST),][]{Kei10}, and the European Solar Telescope \citep[EST,][]{Col10}, are expected to provide more information on the processes underlying the formation of the penumbra and the beginning of the Evershed flow. Additional observations will provide further tests of the proposed scenario and should enable us to further refine and extend it.
\acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the DST staff for its support during the observing campaigns. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme under the grant agreement SOLARNET (project n$^{o}$ 312495). This work was also supported by the Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (PRIN-INAF-2014), by the University of Catania (PRIN MIUR 2015) and by Space Weather Italian COmmunity (SWICO) Research Program. This work was partly supported by the BK21 plus program through the National Research Foundation (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education of Korea.
{\it Facilities:} \facility{DST (IBIS)}, \facility{SDO (HMI)}
|
\section{Introduction}
The purpose of this letter is to show that it is possible, in principle, to measure alternate energy eigenbases of a given superposition state of the infinite square well and that the highest energy eigenstate in a given superposition may have a different energy in different bases.
The origin of this idea goes back to the study of superoscillations initiated by Aharonov \textit{et al}., who first raised the question about extracting a particle from a superposition state with an energy greater than that of its highest mode \cite{aharonov2016super, aharonov2002superoscillations, ferreira2002energy, berry2006evolution, ferreira2006superoscillations, tollaksen2007novel, ferreira2007construction, berry2009natural, berry2012pointer, aharonov2013some, lee2014direct}. Transient zeros of the wavefunction have also been considered in the study of quantum revival and quantum carpets \cite{berry2001quantum,kaplan2000multimode,friesch2000quantum}.
We consider only the 1-D infinite square well, but the findings here can be trivially generalized to the 3-D case. We proceed with the simplest example of the effect in question, and after this, we~give the general derivation for arbitrary superposition states.
The measurement of an alternate energy eigenbasis is performed in two stages. In the first stage, at a moment when there is a zero in the wavefunction, an infinite delta-function potential barrier is suddenly raised at the location of a zero, which has the effect of dividing the original infinite square well into two adjacent infinite square wells, while causing virtually no perturbation to the wavefunction (a similar process is discussed in \cite{potovcek2015quantum}, although with quite a different purpose, and an analysis of perturbation theory with singular potentials is given in \cite{sen1999perturbation}). This division results in a superposition state of the particle being on one side of the barrier or the other and, furthermore, a superposition of the energy levels of each individual well. We call the combined spectra of the two individual wells an {\it interference spectrum
. This process has effectively accomplished a spectrum and, thus, frequency conversion of the state, which may be quite novel when compared to other related techniques \cite{remez2015super, suchowski2014adiabatic, leshem2014experimental, jain1996efficient, stolen1982parametric, huang1992observation, cerny2004solid, milchberg1995high}.
In the second stage, the energy of the state is measured and is now found in an energy eigenstate of one of the two new wells, rather than an eigenstate of the original well. This is the real effect of raising the barrier: it changes the list of eigenstates onto which the state can collapse when measured.
Of particular interest is the fact that in the new spectral decomposition of the state, it may be possible to measure an energy higher than the energy of the highest mode in the original spectral decomposition of the state. In general, there is no evidence of a violation of conservation of energy because the sudden barrier introduces a large energy uncertainty due to the energy-time uncertainty relation \cite{mandelstam1945uncertainty, aharonov1961time, moshinsky1976diffraction, kobe1994derivation, deffner2011energy}.
A wavefunction that contains a region of superoscillation turns out to be a special case of this phenomenon, wherein very particular superposition states have transient zeros that remain stable for extended \mbox{durations \cite{berry2006evolution}}. Because of the stability of these zeros, barriers can be raised very slowly, and the new spectrum can be obtained without introducing a large energy uncertainty, which may be interpreted as causing a violation of the conservation of energy \cite{aharonov2016super}.
Here, we propose that all we have done through this two-stage process is to effect a measurement in an energy eigenbasis that does not commute with the original energy eigenbasis of the state. The barrier can be raised with virtually no perturbation to the wavefunction, and this has the effect of changing the discrete energy spectrum of that wavefunction. With this interpretation, the wavefunction itself does not have a definite preferred energy spectrum until it is measured with specific boundary conditions (\emph{i.e.}, one spectrum without the barrier or another with the barrier). This~nullifies the issue of a violation of the conservation of energy, since the original spectrum places no special restriction on what energies can be obtained from a measurement.
While the idea of alternative energy eigenbases for the infinite square well may seem somewhat radical, we point out that a spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ particle can be measured in complementary Pauli-spin eigenbases, and each measurement is performed by coupling the spin to a different Hamiltonian. Just as in the present case, the change of spectrum has no effect on the state; all that has changed is the list of eigenstates into which the particle can collapse when a measurement of the energy is performed.
Finally, we have performed extensive numerical simulations of the evolution of several key wavefunctions as a Gaussian barrier of various widths is raised at various rapid speeds to a finite potential. We used the simulation data over this range of parameters to come up with an approximate characterization of how a narrow barrier changes the wavefunction as a function of the barrier's speed, width and the characteristics of the \mbox{initial state}.
Our simulations verify that if a very narrow barrier is raised sufficiently fast at a zero of the wavefunction, the splitting of the well and the change of energy spectrum can indeed be accomplished with virtually no change to the wavefunction.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: in the next section, we explore the simplest case of a wavefunction with a single transient zero in complete detail and introduce an example case that might allow experimental verification of these ideas. Next, we discuss the details of raising the barrier; the sudden and adiabatic approximations and the parametric conversion of the spectrum and splitting of the the eigenstates. After this, we discuss a preliminary idea for an experimental implementation of this effect. We then present the formalism for the general interference spectrum of a general superposition state. Finally, we discuss energy conservation and energy-time uncertainty in alternative interpretations of this effect and end the paper with a few concluding remarks. In the Appendix, we discuss the numerical simulations of the time-dependent Schr\"{o}dinger equation that we conducted in order to characterize the effect of rapidly raising a Gaussian barrier.
\section{Results}
\subsection{The Simple Case}
To begin, we will take our infinite square well, which we will call Well 0, to be of width $L$, with boundaries located at $x=0$ and $x=L$. The energy eigenstates of this well are,
\begin{equation}
\psi^0_l(x) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}}\sin\frac{l \pi x}{L},
\end{equation}
and have corresponding energies,
\begin{equation}
E_0(l) = \frac{\hbar^2 \pi^2 l^2}{2ML^2}.
\end{equation}
Consider the following normalized superposition of the ground state ($l=1$) and first excited state ($l=2$),
\begin{equation}
\psi(x) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{L (\alpha^2+1)}}\left(\alpha \sin\frac{\pi x}{L} - \sin\frac{2 \pi x}{L}\right), \label{Psi}
\end{equation}
with $\alpha \equiv 2\cos\left[\frac{\pi x_0}{L}\right]$, and $x_0 \in (0,\frac{L}{2})$ is a zero of $\psi(x)$. This zero is transient and quickly vanishes as the state evolves in time. During a complete period of evolution, this state also develops a transient zero at $x_1 = L-x_0$, and so, we define the list of zero points for $\Psi(x,t)$ as $s = \{(x_0,t_0), (x_1, t_1) \}$.
Thus, at any given time, this function has at most one zero inside the well, and by symmetry, we only need to consider the case of $(x_0, t_0)$. This zero is technically only present at a single instant in time, and thus, the barrier must be raised instantaneously. Clearly, both the delta-function potential and the sudden implementation are the nonphysical ideal case.
Now, suppose that at time $t_0=0$, we raise a new infinite delta-function potential barrier at $x_0$, splitting the original well into two smaller wells of widths $x_0$ and $L-x_0$, which we will call Well 1 and Well 2, respectively. $\psi(x)$ already satisfies the new boundary conditions, and so, there is no instantaneous change in the wavefunction or the expectation value of any observable. The probabilities to find the particle in either well are,
\begin{equation}
P_1=\int_{0}^{x_0} |\psi(x)|^2 dx, \hspace{1cm} \hspace{1cm} P_2=\int_{x_0}^{L} |\psi(x)|^2 dx.
\end{equation}
Defining the truncated and renormalized wavefunctions in each well as:
\[ \psi_1(x) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\psi(x)/\sqrt{P_1} & 0 \leq x \leq x_0 \\
0 & x_0 < x \leq L \\
\end{array}
\right. \]
and
\[ \psi_2(x) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
0 & 0 \leq x \leq x_0 \\
\psi(x)/\sqrt{P_2} & x_0 < x \leq L \\
\end{array},
\right. \]
we can rewrite the original wavefunction as:
\begin{equation}
\psi(x) = \sqrt{P_1}\psi_1(x) + \sqrt{P_2}\psi_2(x).
\end{equation}
If we note that after the barrier goes up, a classical particle must either be in Well 1 or Well 2, we can interpret this wavefunction as a superposition of the particle being in Well 1 in the state $\psi_1(x)$ with probability $P_1$ or in Well 2 in the state $\psi_2(x)$ with probability $P_2$.
Defining,
\begin{equation}
\langle E \rangle = \int_0^L \psi^*(x) \hat{H} \psi(x) dx,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\langle E_1 \rangle = \int_{0}^{x_0} \psi_1^*(x) \hat{H} \psi_1(x) dx,
\end{equation}
and:
\begin{equation}
\langle E_2 \rangle = \int_{x_0}^L \psi_2^*(x) \hat{H} \psi_2(x) dx,
\end{equation}
gives us the relation,
\begin{equation}
\langle E \rangle = P_1\langle E_1 \rangle + P_2\langle E_2 \rangle.
\end{equation}
The state has expectation value $\langle E \rangle$ because with probability $P_1$, the particle is in Well 1 with average energy $\langle E_1 \rangle$, and with probability $P_2$, it is in Well 2 with average energy $\langle E_2 \rangle$.
Wells 1 and 2 have energy eigenstates,
\[ \psi^1_n(x) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\sqrt{\frac{2}{x_0}}\sin\frac{n \pi x}{x_0} & 0 \leq x \leq x_0 \\
0 & x_0 < x \leq L \\
\end{array}
\right\}, \]
and:
\[ \psi^2_m(x) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
0 & 0 \leq x \leq x_0 \\
\sqrt{\frac{2}{L-x_0}}\sin\frac{m \pi (x-x_0)}{L-x_0} & x_0 < x \leq L \\
\end{array}
\right\}, \]
respectively, with corresponding energy eigenvalues,
\begin{equation}
E_1(n) = \frac{\hbar^2 \pi^2 n^2}{2Mx_0^2},
\end{equation}
and:
\begin{equation}
E_2(m) = \frac{\hbar^2 \pi^2 m^2}{2M(L-x_0)^2}.
\end{equation}
In general, these energy levels are different from one another and from $E_0(l)$. Furthermore, it is possible to measure an energy $E_1(n)$ or $E_2(m)$ larger than $E_0(2)$, which is the highest mode of Well 0 present in the superposition state $\psi(x)$. This is then an example of a superoscillatory effect.
If we measure the energy of the original well, we will find energy $E_0(1)$ with probability \linebreak $\alpha^2/(\alpha^2+1)$ and energy $E_0(2)$ with probability $1/(\alpha^2+1)$, indicating that we have projected the state onto states $\psi^0_1(x)$ or $\psi^0_2(x)$. If instead, we split the well by putting up the barrier at $x_0$ and then measure the energy, the measurement projects onto states $\psi^1_n(x)$ or $\psi^2_m(x)$.
To find the probability to collapse onto eigenstates of the split well, we decompose $\psi(x)$ into the modes of the split wells:
\begin{equation}
\psi(x) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n \psi^1_n(x) + \sum_{m=1}^\infty b_m \psi^2_m(x) \label{PsiDecomp}
\end{equation}
with $a_n$ and $b_m$ as shown below:
\begin{equation}
a_n = \frac{2}{\sqrt{x_0 L (\alpha^2+1)}}\mathlarger{\int_{0}^{x_0}}\left(\alpha \sin\frac{\pi x}{L} - \sin\frac{2 \pi x}{L}\right)\sin\frac{n \pi x}{x_0}dx
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
=\frac{2 n L^{\frac{3}{2}} \sqrt{x_0} (-1)^n }{\pi \sqrt{\alpha^2+1}} \left( \frac{\alpha \sin\frac{ \pi x_0 }{L}} {{x_0}^2 - n^2L^2} - \frac{\sin\frac{2 \pi x_0 }{L}} {4{x_0}^2 - n^2L^2} \right)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
b_m =\frac{2}{\sqrt{(L-x_0)L(\alpha^2+1)}}\mathlarger{\int_{x_0}^{L}} \left(\alpha\sin\frac{\pi x}{L}-\sin\frac{2 \pi x}{L}\right)\sin\frac{m \pi (x - x_0)}{L - x_0} dx
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
= \frac{-2 m L^{\frac{3}{2}} }{\pi}\sqrt{\frac{L - x_0}{\alpha^2+1}}\left(\frac{\alpha\sin\frac{\pi x_0}{L}}{(L-x_0)^2-m^2L^2} - \frac{\sin\frac{2 \pi x_0}{L}}{4(L-x_0)^2-m^2L^2}\right).
\end{equation}
The mod-squared coefficients $|a_n|^2$ and $|b_m|^2$ are then the probabilities to find the particle in each eigenstate. Additionally, of course,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n=1}^\infty |a_n|^2 + \sum_{m=1}^\infty |b_m|^2 = P_1 + P_2 = 1.
\end{equation}
The two alternate energy eigenbases ($\{\psi^0_l(x)\}$ and $\{\psi^1_n(x),\psi^2_m(x)\}$) each span the space of normalizable functions that are zero at $x_0$, but the corresponding Hamiltonians do not commute; thus, these two energy eigenbases are complementary (or at least, there is some uncertainty relation between them).
We call the new energy spectrum that is available using this measurement procedure the {\it interference energy spectrum of the state} $\psi(x)$. This name is appropriate because the available energies that can be measured are only different from $E_0(l)$ if $\psi(x)$ is a superposition of different $\psi^0_l(x)$.
The simplest way to see this is by considering the state $\psi^0_2(x)$ by itself, which is also obtained by considering the above treatment for $\psi(x)$ in the limit that $x_0 \rightarrow L/2$. This state has a definite energy $\langle E \rangle = E_0(2) = \frac{2 \hbar^2 \pi^2}{ML^2}$ and a stationary zero at $x=L/2$. If we insert an infinite barrier at this zero and split the well, we get equal probability to find the particle in the ground state of each sub-well (\mbox{left or right}), with energy $\langle E_1 \rangle = \langle E_2 \rangle = \frac{2 \hbar^2 \pi^2}{ML^2} = E_0(2)$. Thus, even if we split the well, we always find the particle with the same wavelength and, thus, the same energy. It is trivial to see that this generalizes to splitting any eigenstate at any subset of its nodes.
Of particular interest for experiments would be to prepare the state $\psi(x)$ with~\mbox{$x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$}, shown in Figure \ref{SpecState}. If we put up the barrier at $x_0$ and measure the energy, we find that the probability to find the particle in the ground state of the first well, \mbox{$P(n=1) \approx 6\%$}, with energy $E_1(1) = \frac{64}{9}\frac{\hbar^2 \pi^2}{2ML^2}$, which exceeds the energy $E_0(2) = 4\frac{\hbar^2 \pi^2}{2ML^2}$~of~the~highest mode in $\psi(x)$ by a factor of $\frac{16}{9}$. Thus, if the experiment can be performed, it should be possible to measure superoscillatory interference energies with plausible \mbox{success rates}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Special_Big.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Plot of $\psi(x)$ with $x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$ where a sudden barrier can divide the well.}\label{SpecState}
\end{figure}
For all values of $x_0$, the ground states of either split well are always the most probable, with the probabilities, $|a_n|^2$ and $|b_m|^2$, of measuring higher modes converging toward zero as $n,m \rightarrow \infty$. It is nevertheless possible to measure arbitrarily high energy outcomes with nonzero probability, whereas only the two lowest modes were present in the original well.
\subsection{Raising the Barrier: The Sudden Approximation and the Adiabatic Limit}
We made the assumption above that if the delta-function barrier is raised very quickly at a transient zero of the wavefunction, then the wavefunction itself is not significantly changed by the process, and as a result, the expectation values of all observables are also unchanged.
Because both a delta-function barrier and an instantaneous potential change are nonphysical, we have performed extensive numerical simulations of the time-dependent Schr\"{o}dinger equation with a Gaussian barrier of varying widths $w$, raised linearly to a large finite height over a finite period of time that is very short relative to the characteristic frequencies of the initial states. The simulation was run over a representative range of physically plausible parameters, with emphasis on the narrow-barrier regime.
We used $\psi(x)$ with $x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$ for the simulation, which was performed using a modified fourth-order Runge--Kutta method. More technical details about the simulation can be found \mbox{in Section \ref{Simulation}}.
The results of the simulation show that as the barrier is made wider, the change to the energy of the state grows smaller and goes to zero, and in the nonphysical limit that the width goes to zero (the delta-function limit), it appears to go to infinity as $~1/w^3$ (see Equations (\ref{DKfit}) and (\ref{DVfit}). This can be overcome in the equally nonphysical limit that the barrier is raised instantaneously, in which case there is no change in energy. We do find that for physically-reasonable barrier widths, final barrier magnitudes and raising periods, the lowest modes of the well can be effectively split with a negligibly small perturbation to the state and its energy. We obviously do not get the exact spectrum we would if the well had been split by a delta-function, but the spectrum and eigenstates are certainly close enough to obtain a superoscillatory energy.
For example, set the width to $w = 10^{-3}[L
$ and the total period to raise the barrier to a maximum scale of $V=10^4 [\hbar^2/2ML^2
$ to $\tau = 10^{-10}[2ML^2/\hbar]$. The kinetic energy of the original state is $\langle K \rangle~=~2.8918 [\hbar^2\pi^2/2ML^2]$, and the change in kinetic energy is on the order of $10^{-9} [\hbar^2/2ML^2]$, which is below the error threshold of the simulation. With this barrier, the ground state kinetic energy is $E(1) \approx 2.5605 [\hbar^2\pi^2/2ML^2]$ (this is a numerical result), compared to $E(1) = 2.5600 [\hbar^2\pi^2/2ML^2]$ for the delta-function barrier, and the corresponding wavefunctions are also nearly identical; thus, the desired splitting has been performed.
We have also considered the adiabatic limit in which a delta-function barrier at $x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$ is raised very slowly, such that energy levels of the original un-split well transition gradually into the energy levels of the two wells after splitting. The shifting of the first seventeen energy levels is shown in Figure \ref{KCurves} in terms of the wave number $k = \sqrt{2ME}$. This figure and also Figures \ref{Ground_First} and \ref{7th_8th} were obtained by parametric solutions of the time-independent Schr\"{o}dinger equation, rather than a simulation of adiabatic evolution in time.
In general, as the barrier magnitude $V$ increases, many eigenstates of the well become gradually more and more confined to one side of the barrier or the other, with tunneling rates vanishing as the barrier becomes infinite. Figure \ref{Ground_First} shows the ground state and first excited state of the well as a function of the potential of the delta-function \mbox{barrie}.
However, this is not true of all eigenstates, which leads to some interesting physics for the cases where the two new wells have degenerate energy levels. In these cases, the adiabatic approximation fails, strictly speaking, because there will be a significant probability of transitions between the nearly-degenerate levels.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5.5in]{17_Big.pdf}
\caption{Spectrum of the infinite square well with a delta-function potential of magnitude $V$ located at $x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$. The levels are shown in terms of the wave number $k = \sqrt{2ME}$ and a logarithmic scale for $V$ (which has units of $[\hbar^2/2ML^2]$).}\label{KCurves}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=6in]{K_1_Big.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=6in]{K_2_Big.pdf} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{The ground state (top) and first excited state (bottom) of the infinite square well with a delta-function potential of magnitude $V$ located at $x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$. Clearly, as the barrier magnitude increases each eigenstate becomes confined on one side of the barrier or the other, becoming eigenstates of the individual wells.}\label{Ground_First}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure} [H]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=6in]{K_7_Big.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=6in]{K_8_Big.pdf} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{The seventh (top) and eighth (bottom) excited state of the infinite square well with a delta-function potential of magnitude $V$ located at $x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$. These eigenstates become degenerate and clearly fail to become confined on one side of the barrier or the other as the barrier magnitude increases, and thus they do not become eigenstates of the individual wells. Instead, the eigenstates of the individual wells are orthogonal superpositions of these two eigenstates of the original well, as shown in Equations (\ref{Left}) and (\ref{Right}).}\label{7th_8th}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The $l=8$ energy level of the unsplit well is degenerate with the $n=3$ and $m=5$ levels of the two wells after splitting ($E_0(8) = E_1(3) = E_2(5)$), but a single energy level cannot divide into two orthogonal energy levels under adiabatic evolution. In fact, it is easy to see analytically that because the $l=8$ mode has a node at $x_0$, it will remain unchanged no matter how quickly or slowly the barrier is raised, meaning that it does not become confined to one side of the barrier, but rather becomes a superposition of the particle being on either side. As the barrier goes up, the $l=7$ mode gradually becomes degenerate with the $l=8$ mode, but also fails to become confined to one side of the barrier (see Figure \ref{7th_8th}). The $l=7$ mode develops a slope-discontinuity at $x_0$, such that the $l=8$ and $l=7$ eigenstates remain orthogonal, even as their energies become degenerate,
\[ \psi^0_8(x) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}}\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\sin\frac{8 \pi x}{L} & 0 \leq x \leq x_0 \\
-\sin\frac{8 \pi (L-x)}{L} & x_0 < x \leq L \\
\end{array}
\right. \]
\[ \lim_{V\rightarrow\infty} \psi^0_7(x) = A\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\sin\frac{8 \pi x}{L} & 0 \leq x \leq x_0 \\
\frac{3}{5}\sin\frac{8 \pi (L-x)}{L} & x_0 < x \leq L \\
\end{array}
\right. \]
where $A$ is a normalization constant.
Remarkably, since neither state becomes confined, it is not the case that the $l=7$ and $l=8$ eigenstates of the original well gradually become the $n=3$ and $m=5$ eigenstates of the two wells after splitting. Instead, the confined eigenstates of the two wells are superpositions of the these two degenerate states of the unsplit well. In the limit of infinite $V$, the left well $n=3$ eigenstate is,
\begin{equation}
\psi^1_3(x) = B \left( \psi^0_7(x) + \frac{3A}{5} \sqrt{\frac{L}{2}} \psi^0_8(x) \right), \label{Left}
\end{equation}
and the right well $m=5$ eigenstate is,
\begin{equation}
\psi^2_5(x) = C \left( \psi^0_7(x) - A \sqrt{\frac{L}{2}} \psi^0_8(x) \right), \label{Right}
\end{equation}
where $B$ and $C$ are new normalization constants.
For $x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$, the same thing happens for all pairs of levels $l=8s$ and $l=8s-1$ for all integers $s\geq1$ and with the same coefficients in the superposition. In general, this effect happens whenever the specified degeneracy condition is present for any location of $x_0$ where a barrier is raised.
\subsection{Proposed Experiment}
The analysis of this paper can be applied equally well to a photon in a cavity, and this leads to a proposition for a simple experimental test of the ideas we present here, which would ultimately take the form of a type of frequency converter, similar to other work using superoscillations \cite{remez2015super}.
The idea is to use a square multimode fiber that acts as an infinite square well in two dimensions while being effectively free in the third dimension. If the superposition state of Equation (\ref{Psi}) can be created in one or both of the constrained dimensions, then there would be particular positions along the free dimension, corresponding to specific propagation times, for which the zero would be present in the wavefunction. A split in the fiber could begin at the location of such a zero, with the split now playing the role of a barrier that is raised very quickly inside the infinite square well, with the effective quickness coming from the propagation speed of the photon along the longitudinal direction.
Figure \ref{SpecialSplit} shows the time evolution $|\psi(x,t)|^2$ of the initial state $\psi(x)$ of Equation (\ref{Psi}), such that the state evolves within the original well for one revival period; then, the infinite barrier appears suddenly at $x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$, and the state evolves for the same period in the new potential. The presence of higher energy modes with small amplitudes is clearly visible in the erratic behavior of $|\psi(x,t)|^2$ after the barrier is raised.
If our analysis is correct, then this should result in frequency conversion in the transverse mode(s) of the photon, such that the spectral superposition of a photon that emerges after the split will be changed, although the average energy is nearly unchanged. Components of the new superposition that remain inside the operating band of the multimode fiber will be incident on transverse frequency-sensitive detectors along the line, and components that are outside the band may escape, but could also potentially be captured by external detectors.
We should again stress that this frequency conversion is not in the direction of propagation along the fiber, but rather, it is the modes oscillating perpendicular to this direction that are converted.
Numerous technical details will need to be addressed before this experiment can be realized, but this goes beyond the scope of this paper.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5.42in]{SpecialSplitPlot.pdf}
\caption{The initial probability amplitudes for $|\psi(x,0)|^2$ appear on the right of the figure, and time evolves to the left. After one revival period, when the zero has reappeared at $x_0 = \frac{3}{8}L$, an infinite barrier is raised there, and the state evolves for the same period in the new potential.}\label{SpecialSplit}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The Interference Energy Spectrum}
In this section, we develop the general theory of interference spectra for arbitrary superposition states. True superoscillatory functions are a special case of this phenomenon that contain stable zeros, which allow barriers to be raised much more slowly; although it remains unclear if they can be raised slowly enough to justify the adiabatic approximation.
Let us begin with a general superposition state of the 1-D
square well,
\begin{equation}
\Psi(x,t) = \sum_{l=1}^\infty c_l \psi^0_l(x) e^{\frac{-i E_l t}{\hbar}}.
\end{equation}
This state has a unique set of zero points $S = \{(x_i, t_i)\}$, such that $\Psi(x_i,t_i) = 0$ and $0<x_i<L$ for all $(x_i,t_i) \in S$. At a given time $\tau$, it is possible to place infinite barriers at any or all points $(x_i,t_i)$ for which $t_i=\tau$ in order to split the well into smaller wells.
Let us suppose that at time $\tau$, we choose to divide the well into $N+1$ smaller wells by placing barriers at a set of $N$ available zeros from $S$, $\{\chi_j\}$ with $j=1,...,N$. We append the two endpoints $\chi_0=0$ and $\chi_{N+1}=L$ to this set and expand the index, such that $\chi_j>\chi_{j-1}$ is defined for all $j=1,...,N+1$. The resulting interference energy spectrum that is now available is,
\begin{equation}
E_j(k_j) = \frac{\hbar^2 \pi^2 k_j^2}{2M(\chi_j-\chi_{j-1})^2},
\end{equation}
for wells $j=1,...,N+1$, where $k_j = 1,2,...,\infty$ is the quantum number of the $j$-th well
In general, the union set of all possible spectra that can be obtained by placing any number of barriers at any number of points $(x_i,t_i)$ in $S$ is the {\it complete interference spectrum} of the state $\Psi(x,t)$.
We now switch to the Hilbert space representation of this problem in order to give the calculated probabilities, noting that the domain of each well, $(\chi_{j-1},\chi_j)$, is a different Hilbert space. We introduce the ket $|0\rangle$ to represent the original well and a $d$-level quantum system with basis $\{|j\rangle\}$ to represent the different split wells, with $d=N+1$. Each well is an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, but the projectors onto each well have {\it relative rank} (subscript) proportional to the well size, such that,
\begin{equation}
|0\rangle\langle 0|_L \equiv \sum_{j=1}^{N+1} |j\rangle\langle j|_{\chi_j-\chi_{j-1}}.
\end{equation}
To begin, we represent $\Psi(x,\tau)$ as,
\begin{equation}
|\Psi\rangle = \sum_{l=1}^\infty d_l |l\rangle |0\rangle = \sum_{l=1}^\infty d_l \sum_{j=1}^{N+1} |l_j\rangle |j\rangle,
\end{equation}
where $|l\rangle$ represents ${\psi^0_l(x)}$, and $|l_j\rangle$ is the unit ket for the (unnormalized) truncated eigenfunction in the $j$-th well, such that $\{|j\rangle|l_j\rangle\}$ is a complete orthonormal basis.
We compute the similarity matrices $\{\hat{A}_j\}$ that perform the change of basis on each well,
\begin{equation}
\hat{A}_j = |j\rangle\langle j| \sum_{k_j=1}^\infty \sum_{l=1}^\infty A_{k_j l} |k_j\rangle\langle l_j|, \label{MatrixEls}
\end{equation}
where $|k_j\rangle$ are the normalized energy eigenstates of the $j$-th well, corresponding to,
\begin{equation}
\psi^j_{k_j}(x) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{\chi_j - \chi_{j-1}}} \sin\left[ \frac{k_j \pi (x-\chi_{j-1})}{\chi_j - \chi_{j-1}} \right],
\end{equation}
and the matrix elements are given by,
\begin{equation}
A_{k_j l} = \langle k_j|l_j\rangle = \int_{\chi_{j-1}}^{\chi_j} \frac{2}{\sqrt{L(\chi_j - \chi_{j-1})}} \sin\left[ \frac{k_j \pi (x-\chi_{j-1})}{\chi_j - \chi_{j-1}} \right] \sin\left[\frac{l \pi x}{L}\right] dx
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
=\frac{2 k_j L}{\pi}\sqrt{L(\chi_j - \chi_{j-1})}\left[\displaystyle\frac{(-1)^{k_j}\sin\left(\displaystyle\frac{l \pi \chi_j}{L}\right) - \sin\left(\displaystyle\frac{l \pi \chi_{j-1}}{L}\right)}{l^2(\chi_j-\chi_{j-1})^2-k_j^2L^2}\right].
\end{equation
Finally, letting the matrices $\hat{A_j}$ act on the wavefunction, we obtain the representation in terms of the new energy eigenbasis:
\begin{equation}
\sum_{j=1}^{N+1} \hat{A}_j |\Psi\rangle = \sum_{j=1}^{N+1} |j\rangle\langle j| \left[\sum_{k_j=1}^\infty \sum_{l=1}^\infty A_{k_j l} |k_j\rangle\langle l_j| \right] \sum_{l'=1}^\infty d_{l'} \sum_{j'=1}^{N+1} |l'_{j'}\rangle |j'\rangle
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
= \sum_{j=1}^{N+1} |j\rangle \sum_{k_j=1}^\infty \sum_{l=1}^\infty d_l A_{k_j l} |k_j\rangle.
\end{equation}
In this form, it is clear that this is an entangled state in the sense that the energy levels are correlated to specific wells. If we project onto a particular well $|j\rangle$, we get a superposition of the energy eigenstates of that well. Likewise, if we project onto a specific energy eigenstate $|k_j\rangle$, we are also projecting onto a specific well (or several wells with degenerate energies).
The probability of finding the particle in the $j$-th well with energy $E_{k_j}$ is,
\begin{equation}
P(k_j) = \left|\sum_{l=1}^\infty d_l A_{k_j l} \right| ^2,
\end{equation}
and the total probability of finding it in each well is,
\begin{equation}
P(j) = \int_{\chi_{j-1}}^{\chi_j} |\Psi(x)|^2 dx = \sum_{k_j=1}^\infty \left|\sum_{l=1}^\infty d_l A_{k_j l} \right| ^2.
\end{equation}
\section{Discussion}
The results given here raise interesting questions about the conservation of energy. Unlike the genuine superoscillating functions that have been studied elsewhere, the method we are using to split the wells requires that the barrier be raised very quickly, and because the $\Delta t$ of this process is so small, it necessarily introduces a large $\Delta E$ due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Thus, even though $\langle E \rangle$ is unchanged by the sudden addition of the barrier at a zero of the wavefunction, the change in energy between the individual pre-barrier and post-barrier levels can be supplied by the $\Delta E$. Therefore, in this case, the uncertainty principle washes out any possibility that the conservation of energy is violated.
In general, one may consider the condition $\Delta \langle E \rangle = 0$ sufficient to show that energy conservation is obeyed. Even though the Hamiltonians are different before and after the barrier is present, the complete eigenbases of the two Hamiltonians both span the space of normalizable functions on the interval $x\in[0,L]$ with zeros at $x=\{0, x_0, L\}$. If $|\psi\rangle$ is a true superposition state, then there is nothing unexpected about finding energies $E_1(n)$ or $E_2(m)$ when the energy is measured in the eigenbasis $\{ |n\rangle, |m\rangle \}$. The potential problem arises if one assumes that the discrete spectrum $E_0(l)$ is an inherent property of the state $|\Psi\rangle$, and it should be impossible to measure other energies.
Supposing there is an inherent preferred spectrum, then as the barrier goes up, the energy levels of the original well divide and smoothly transition to the energy levels of the split well. The particle only interacts with the barrier, and so, by energy conservation, it must be the case that the change in energy is supplied by the barrier. If the particle is found with energy eigenvalue $k_j$ in the split well, it has probability $P_{k_j}(l)$ to have transitioned from energy eigenvalue $l$ of the original well, for which the barrier must have supplied the energy change $\Delta E_{k_jl} = E_j(k_j) - E_0(l)$. We thus define the barrier state $|B_{k_j l}\rangle$ as the state in which the barrier lost this energy. Each split-well energy eigenstate of the joint particle-barrier system $PB$ is then of the form,
\begin{equation}
|k_j\rangle\langle k_j|^{PB} = \sum_{l=1}^\infty P_{k_j}(l) |l_j\rangle\langle l_j||B_{k_j l}\rangle\langle B_{k_j l}|.
\end{equation}
Thus, we see that after the barrier is raised, the state $|\Psi\rangle$ is entangled with the barrier through energy conservation. The amount of free energy needed to produce the individual shifts $\Delta E_{k_jl}$ is easily provided by the large uncertainty $\Delta E$ for a sudden barrier.
It should be possible to experimentally test this interaction by performing an ensemble of runs of the experiment and taking the average of all barrier-energy measurements conditioned on post-selecting a particular energy eigenstate $|k_j\rangle$ of the particle in the split well. This average should wash out the noise introduced by the large $\Delta E$, making it possible to measure the average \mbox{barrier energy},
\begin{equation}
\langle E^B \rangle = -\sum_{l=1}^\infty P_{k_j}(l)\Delta E_{k_jl}.
\end{equation}
Now, there are several viable interpretations of how $P_{k_j}(l)$ should be defined if we wish to assume a preferred spectrum $|l\rangle$ as an inherent property of the superposition state: a property not specified by the wavefunction alone.
One simple choice is $P_{k_j}(l) = |d_l|^2$, which means that regardless of which $|k_j\rangle$ the state is found in, the probability that it transitioned from energy level $E_0(l)$ is the same as the probability to find the state with that energy in the original well. Using this form for our simple example case with $x_0 = 3L/8$ and the initial superposition state of Equation (\ref{Psi}), the probability to find the particle in the ground state of the smaller well, with energy $(8/3)^2 E_0(1)$, is roughly 6\%, and the average energy of the barrier, post-selected on this outcome, is $\langle E^B \rangle = -4.22 E_0(1)$. This case is particularly interesting because the wavefunction is zero at the location of the barrier, and yet, the particle and barrier seem to exchange significant quantities of energy as the barrier is raised.
Alternatively, we can consider a quasi-probability treatment of the superposition state. Given the initial state $|\Psi\rangle$ corresponding to Equation (\ref{Psi}) and the final state $|k_j\rangle$, the best estimate for the probability that the intermediate state was $|l\rangle$ is given by the weak value of the projector $|l\rangle\langle l|$ \cite{dressel2015weak, hall2001exact, johansen2004value, hall2004prior},
\begin{equation}
\tilde{P}_{k_j}(l) = \Re \frac{\langle k_j |l\rangle\langle l|\Psi \rangle}{\langle k_j |\Psi \rangle} = \Re \frac{A_{k_j l}d_l}{\sum_{l'=1}^\infty A_{k_j l'}d_{l'}}.
\end{equation}
We should stress that this quasi-probability can be less than zero or greater than one, which makes its physical interpretation somewhat unclear. Indeed, in our example case, post-selecting on the ground state of the smaller well, we find that the quasi-probabilities that the previous energy level was $l=1$ or $l=2$ are $\tilde{P}_{k_1}(1) = -1.037$ and $\tilde{P}_{k_1}(2) = 2.037$, respectively. Nevertheless, if we use $|k_j\rangle\langle k_j| = \sum_{l=1}^\infty \tilde{P}_{k_j}(l) |l_j\rangle\langle l_j||B_{k_j l}\rangle\langle B_{k_j l}|$ after the barrier is raised, then the average energy of the barrier, post-selected on this outcome, is $\langle E^B \rangle = 0$, which is quite a striking result, that turns out to be completely general, as we now show.
For a general superposition state $\Psi(x) = \sum_{l=1}^\infty d_l \sqrt{\frac{2}{L}} \sin \frac{l \pi x}{L}$, the condition that $\Psi(x)$ has a zero at $x_0$ is simply $\sum_{l=1}^\infty d_l \sin \frac{l \pi x_0}{L} = 0$. If a barrier is placed at $x_0$ for a general wavefunction and the particle subsequently collapses into eigenstate $|k_1\rangle$ of the well between $x=0$ and $x=x_0$, the average energy of the barrier using the quasi-probability, $\tilde{P}_{k_1}(l)$, is,
\begin{equation}
\langle E^B_{k_1} \rangle = \frac{\sum_{l=1}^\infty d_l \sin \frac{l \pi x_0}{L}}{\sum_{l'=1}^\infty \frac{d_{l'}}{\Delta E_{k_1l'}} \sin \frac{l' \pi x_0}{L}}.
\end{equation}
Thus, we see that for any initial wavefunction with a zero at $x_0$, the average energy of a barrier that is suddenly raised at $x_0$, conditioned on the post-selection of any one outcome $|k_1\rangle$ in the split well, is always zero. We used a quasi-probability distribution to obtain this result, but we are not actually predicting that any physical event occurs with probability $\tilde{P}_{k_1}(l)$; rather, it is used as an intermediate calculation tool to address the fact that the initial state was a superposition of multiple $|l\rangle$ eigenstates. Quasi-probabilities outside the range zero to one are also known to be related to quantum contextuality \cite{pusey2014anomalous,spekkens2008negativity}.
There is one other definition one might use for $P_{k_j}(l)$, which are the probabilities for the mixed state prepared as $\rho = \sum_{l=1}^\infty |d_l|^2 |l\rangle \langle l |$. This is the least physical choice, because the quantum interference terms have been removed, and the predicted probabilities of different outcomes are entirely different than for $|\Psi\rangle$. Nevertheless, $\rho$ does explicitly have the energy spectrum $|l\rangle\langle l|$, which is unclear for $|\Psi\rangle$, and thus, it may be relevant here. We can obtain,
\begin{equation}
P_{k_j}(l) = \frac{|A_{k_j l}|^2|d_l|^2}{\sum_{l'=1}^\infty |A_{k_j l'}|^2|d_{l'}|^2},
\end{equation}
and using these probabilities in our example case, we obtain $\langle E^B \rangle = -3.73 E_0(1)$. In this case, the exchange of energy between the particle and barrier can be explained by local interaction, since the individual $|l\rangle$ are not generally zero at $x_0$.
Regardless of which explanation we use for the shifts of individual levels, the wavefunction is unchanged, and the overall average energy provided by the barrier is still zero. This raises interesting questions about the physics of measuring any quantum state in an alternate eigenbases, even a spin. If the preferred spectrum (both eigenvalues and eigenstates) is an inherent property of the quantum state of a system, then changing the basis prior to a measurement has a direct effect on that inherent property, but without changing the state vector itself (\emph{i.e.}, without collapse). This would then be an explicit manifestation of quantum contextuality \cite{KS, spekkens2005contextuality}, in that the choice of measurement context physically changes an internal property of the state: the preferred basis.
Conducting the experiment to measure the barrier energy may prove technically challenging, but it would allow us to test our suppositions for the form of ${P}_{k_j}(l)$.
On the other hand, taking the viewpoint that the state has no inherent discrete energy spectrum (and thus, ${P}_{k_j}(l)$ is meaningless) and noting that the barrier cannot interact locally with the particle, which has zero probability to be found in the same place as the barrier, then the average energy of the barrier should be $\langle E^B \rangle=0$, regardless of post-selection.
It is interesting that even this experiment cannot distinguish the case of an inherent preferred spectrum with a quasi-probability distribution from the case of no inherent spectrum at all, since both predict $\langle E^B \rangle=0$.
Finally, if we consider the case of a superoscillating wavefunction \cite{aharonov2016super}, the barrier can be raised very slowly at quasi-stable nodes of the superoscillation, and the large $\Delta t$ leads to a small $\Delta E$, small enough that it may not be enough to encompass the individual shifts $\Delta E_{k_jl}$. Thus, if we insist that the wavefunction has an inherent preferred spectrum, we may be presented with a violation of conservation of energy, especially if $\langle E^B \rangle\neq0$. If $\langle E^B \rangle=0$, then it may still be that the barrier simply facilitates exchanges of energy between different levels of the particle, in which case its own $\Delta E$ may not matter. On the other hand, if the wavefunction has no inherent preferred spectrum, there are no shifts $\Delta E_{k_jl}$, and the issue vanishes.
\section{Materials and Methods}
The details of our numerical simulation of the time-dependent Schr\"{o}dinger equation can be found in the Appendix. The simulation was written in MATLAB 2014a, and the code and data are available upon request.
\section{Conclusions}
We have explored the idea, and verified through simulation, that the energy eigenbasis of a state of the infinite square well can be altered through the addition of sudden potential barriers without a change to the state or its average energy. We consider the interpretation that this is a measurement in an alternate energy eigenbasis, because the energy eigenstates onto which the particle can collapse after the barrier is raised are different than the eigenstates of the original well and have different energies. The main point of contention with this view is that it is common to interpret a superposition state of the infinite square well as having a discrete list of preferred spectral energies as an inherent property, such that it is impossible to measure any energy not on this list. This is inconsistent with the idea that a genuine superposition state can be measured in different bases and can collapse onto any eigenstate in the measured basis. If we ascribe an inherent discrete spectrum directly to the superposition state, then the barrier must exchange energy with the particle in order to adjust that spectrum. This interaction must occur despite the fact that the particle has zero probability to be found at the location where the barrier is raised ($|\psi(x_0)|^2=0$), but this may be consistent, because the discrete energy spectrum of a bound particle is not usually considered a local property of the wavefunction; thus, the inherent spectrum must be a de-localized, or possibly nonlocal, property of the quantum state of the particle. In principle, an experiment might allow us to determine if this inherent preferred spectrum exists by measuring the barrier energies post-selected on obtaining particular measurement outcomes.
The alternative viewpoint, that the state has no inherent discrete spectrum, raises interesting questions about dynamical collapse, since it implies that the particle must somehow probe the entire shape of its binding potential as part of the dynamical collapse process, in order to cause a collapse into an eigenstate of the correct Hamiltonian.
Following this research, we have continued to explore the idea that there is no preferred discrete energy spectrum inherent to a wavefunction at all; but rather, it is always the measurement Hamiltonian that determines the spectrum, and this is where quantization appears. The wavefunction itself is not quantized, and its evolution can be modeled by considering its Fourier transform into a continuous spectrum of plane waves. While this work is ongoing, one preliminary result of some interest is the fact that for certain states, there are discrete zeros in the Fourier transform of the state, which means that in any discrete energy eigenbasis that can be used to measure the state, the probability of obtaining that spectral energy is zero. Thus, while the allowed energy levels of such wavefunctions are not generally quantized, the forbidden energies {\it are} quantized. We call this amusing phenomenon {\it unquantum mechanics}. The only states that do have discrete quantum spectra in the Fourier transform domain are unnormalizable continuous plane waves. We plan to develop these ideas further in a subsequent paper.
We have found little in the literature that seems specifically relevant to the new ideas presented here, so we provide a collection of citations on work that is somewhat more distantly related in order to flesh out the state of the art. These topics include, frequency conversion using nonlinear optics and other systems, double-well potentials in Bose--Einstein condensates and other systems \cite{zin2006method, mahmud2002bose, shin2004atom, schumm2005matter, jaaskelainen2005dynamics,infeld2006statics, spekkens1999spatial, bavli1992laser, kierig2008single}, energy-time uncertainty, and superoscillations \cite{aharonov2012superoscillation2,aharonov2011some,aharonov2013cauchy,aharonov2015superoscillating1,aharonov2015mathematics, aharonov2015superoscillating2, buniy2014quantum}.\newline\newline
\textbf{Acknowledgments:} We would like to thank Sandu Popescu, Michael Berry, Justin Dressel, Matthew Leifer and \mbox{Jeff Tollaksen} for helpful conversations as this research took shape. This research was supported (in part) by the Fetzer-Franklin Fund of the John E. Fetzer Memorial Trust. This work has been supported in part by the Israel Science Foundation Grant No. 1311/14. The authors would also like to acknowledge the use of the Samueli Laboratory in Computational Sciences in the Schmid College of Science and Technology, Chapman University, for the computers we used for the simulation.
|
\section{Introduction}
Fractional Poisson processes of various forms have been introduced and studied in the last years by many researchers (for example, the
time-fractional Poisson process in \cite{Laskin,Scalas,be}, the space-fractional Poisson process in \cite{macci,fede,Enrico}).
The space-fractional Poisson process, introduced in \cite{fede} is a time-changed Poisson process $N(H^{\alpha}(t))= N^{\alpha}(t)$
where $H^{\alpha}(t)$ is a stable subordinator, independent from the homogeneous Poisson process $N(t)$.
In a paper appeared at the end of 2015 \cite{bruno}, a new class of time-changed Poisson processes $N(H^{f}(t))= N^f(t)$,
including the space-fractional Poisson process as a special case, has been introduced.
Here $H^{f}(t)$, $t>0$ is a subordinator related to the Bern\u{s}tein function $f$ with Laplace transform
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E} e^{-\mu H^f(t)}= e^{-t f(\mu)} =e^{-t\int_0^{\infty}(1-e^{-\mu s})\nu(ds)},
\end{equation}
where $\nu(ds)$ is the related L\'evy measure. The point processes
$N^f(t)$, $t>0$, have jumps of arbitrary size whose distribution
is given in formula \eqref{for1} below.\\
In the first part of the paper we study the first-passage times
\begin{equation}
T_k^{\alpha}:= \inf \left(s:N^{\alpha}(s)= k\right), \quad k\geq 1
\end{equation}
for the space-fractional Poisson process. We are able to give the explicit form of the hitting probabilities
\begin{equation}
P\{T^{\alpha}_k<\infty\}= \frac{\Gamma(k+\alpha)}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\frac{1}{k!}<1, \quad \mbox{for all $k\geq 1$}.
\end{equation}
The hitting probabilities $P(T_k^{\alpha}<\infty)$ are strictly less than one for all $k\geq 1$ because $N^{\alpha}(t)$ is a process with
independent increments and jumps of arbitrary size and thus - with positive probability - can skip over every level $k$.
For the process $N^f(t)$, $t>0$, we will show that for the first-passage times $T_k^f$ it is not possible to obtain the explicit
value of $P\{T_k^f<\infty\}$, for arbitrary Bern\u{s}tein functions
$f$. However we are able to show that $P\{T_1^f<\infty\}<1$ for all $f$.\\
For the space-fractional Poisson process $N^{\alpha}(t)$ we study the $n$-times iterated process
\begin{equation}\label{1}
N^{\alpha}(H^{\alpha_1}(H^{\alpha_2}(\dots H^{\alpha_n}(t))\dots)),
\end{equation}
with $H^{\alpha_j}(t)$, independent stable subordinators and analyse its limiting process.
Under suitable conditions, the process defined in \eqref{1} for $n\rightarrow +\infty$ converges to a space-fractional
Poisson process. This property does not hold for the iterated process
\begin{equation}
N^{\alpha}(H^{f_1}(H^{f_2}(\dots H^{f_n}(t))\dots)),
\end{equation}
where $f_j$ are arbitrary Bern\u{s}tein functions and $f_j(x)\neq x^{\alpha_j}$.\\
It is well-known that the time-fractional Poisson process (see e.g. \cite{be},\cite{gorenflo}) is a renewal process
with Mittag-Leffler distributed intertimes, that is the random times $U_j$ between the $j$-th and $(j+1)$-th
event have distribution
\begin{equation}
P\{U_j>t\}= E_{\nu,1}(-\lambda t^{\nu}), \quad \lambda>0, \nu \in (0,1),
\end{equation}
for all $j\geq 0$, where $E_{\nu,1}(x)= E_{\nu}(x)$ is the classical Mittag-Leffler function. \\
We will show, instead, that the space-time fractional Poisson process $N^{\alpha, \nu}(t)$ with probability generating
function (p.g.f.)
\begin{equation}
G_{\alpha, \nu}(t)= \mathbb{E}u^{N^{\alpha,\nu}(t)}= E_{\nu, 1}(-\lambda^{\alpha}(1-u)^\alpha t^\nu),
\end{equation}
does not have the structure of a renewal process.
We also note that the process $N^{f,\nu}(t)$ with probability generating function
\begin{equation}
G_{f, \nu}(t)= E_{\nu, 1}(-f(\lambda(1-u)) t^\nu),
\end{equation}
for all Bern\u{s}tein functions $f$, does not possess the structure of renewal processes.\\
Generalizations of the time-changed Poisson process $N^f(t)$ have been considered
in the form $N(\sum_{j=1}^n H^{f_j}(t))$, where $H^{f_j}(t)$ are independent subordinators related to the
Bern\u{s}tein functions $f_j$ and independent from the homogeneous Poisson process $N(t)$ (see also \cite{Enrico}).\\
In some papers (see e.g. \cite{stoca}) time-changed Poisson processes
where the role of time is played by some form of Brownian motions
(for example, the elastic Brownian motion) or functionals of Brownian
motions have been analyzed.
In \cite{be} it was proved that the time-fractional Poisson process $N^{\nu}(t)$, $t>0$ for $\nu = 1/2$
coincides in distribution with
\begin{equation}
N^{1/2}(t)\stackrel{d}{=}N\left(|B(t)|\right).
\end{equation}
Inspired by this result we consider here the Poisson process where the role of time is played
by the generalized grey Brownian motion. The generalized grey Brownian motion, $\mathcal{G}_{H,\nu}(t)$,
has probability distribution $u(y,t)$ satisfying the following fractional equation (see \cite{jmp})
\begin{equation}\label{2}
{}^C\left(t^{1-2H}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)^{\nu} u(y,t)=
c^2\frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2}u(y,t), \quad \nu \in (0,1), H\in (0,1), y\in\mathbb{R}, t>0.
\end{equation}
The fractional operator appearing in \eqref{2} denotes the $\nu$-th order regularized Caputo-like operator, see the Appendix for further
details on this point.
We show that the probabilities
\begin{equation}
p_k(t)= P\{N\left(|\mathcal{G}_{H,\nu}(t)|\right)= k\}
\end{equation}
satisfy the difference-differential equations
\begin{equation}
{}^C\left(t^{1-2H}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)^{\nu/2}p_k(t)= -\lambda' p_k(t)+\lambda' p_{k-1}, \quad k\geq 0,
\end{equation}
with $\lambda' = \lambda (2H)^{\nu/2}$.
The treatment of the time-fractional operator appearing in \eqref{2} can be performed by applying the theory
developed by McBride and coauthors (see e.g. \cite{Mcbride},\cite{jmp} and the Appendix for details on this point).
For $\nu = 2$, we have, as special case, the Poisson process at a reflected fractional Brownian motion, i.e. $N(|B_H(t)|)$.
\section{First-passage times of the space-fractional Poisson process}
The space-fractional Poisson process $N^{\alpha}(t)$, $t>0$,
first introduced by Orsingher and Polito in \cite{fede}, has state probabilities $p_k^{\alpha}(t)$ satisfying the following infinite
system of difference-differential equations
\begin{equation}\label{s-f}
\begin{cases}
\frac{d}{dt}p_k^{\alpha}(t)=-\lambda^{\alpha}(1-B)^{\alpha}p_k^{\alpha}(t), \quad \alpha \in (0,1]\\
p_k^{\alpha}(0)=\begin{cases}
0 & k>0\\
1 & k=0
\end{cases}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $B$ is the classical backward-shift operator ($Bp_k(t)= p_{k-1}(t)$).
The process $N^{\alpha}(t)$ has independent increments; probability distribution
\begin{align}
\label{stato} &P\{N^{\alpha}(t)=k\}= p_k^{\alpha}(t)= \frac{(-1)^k}{k!}\sum_{r=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-\lambda^{\alpha}t)^r}{r!}\frac{\Gamma(\alpha r+1)}{\Gamma(\alpha r+1-k)}\\
\nonumber &=\frac{(-1)^k}{k!}\frac{d^{k}}{du^{k}}
e^{-t\lambda^{\alpha}u^{\alpha}}\bigg|_{u=1}, \qquad k \geq 0
\end{align}
and probability generating function
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E} u^{N^{\alpha}(t)}= e^{-t\lambda^{\alpha}(1-u)^{\alpha}}, \quad |u|\leq 1.
\end{equation}
Furthermore
\begin{equation}\label{salti}
P\{N^{\alpha}[t,t+dt)=k\}=
\begin{cases} \frac{(-1)^{k+1}\lambda^{\alpha}\Gamma(\alpha+1)}{k!\Gamma(\alpha+1-k)} \, dt \qquad k \geq 1\\
1-\lambda^{\alpha}\,dt\qquad k=0.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E} \ N^{\alpha}(t)= \mbox{Var} \ N^{\alpha}(t)= +\infty, \quad \forall \ \alpha \in (0,1), \ t>0.
\end{equation}
In the next Theorem we present the hitting probabilities
$P\{T_k^{\alpha}<\infty\}$
of the first passage times of the space-fractional Poisson process $N^{\alpha}(t)$ defined as
\begin{equation}
T_k^{\alpha}:= \mbox{inf} \ (s:N^{\alpha}(s)=k), \quad k\geq 1.
\end{equation}
\begin{te}
For the random times $T_k^{\alpha}$ we have that
\begin{equation}\label{bel}
P\{T_k^{\alpha} <\infty\} = \frac{\alpha(\alpha+1)\dots(\alpha+k-1)}{k!}=\frac{\Gamma(k+\alpha)}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\frac{1}{k!}<1, \quad \forall \ k\geq 1,
\end{equation}
when $\alpha\in(0,1)$. Clearly $P\{T_k^{1} <\infty\} = 1$.
\end{te}
\begin{proof}
The hitting time distribution of the space-fractional Poisson process
is given by
\begin{equation}
P\{T_k^{\alpha}\in ds\}= P\bigg\{\bigcup_{j=1}^k \{N^{\alpha}(s)=k-j, N^{\alpha}[s,s+ds)=j\}\bigg\}
\end{equation}
and by the independence of the increments and by using \eqref{salti}
and \eqref{stato}, we have
\begin{align}
P\{T_k^{\alpha}\in ds\}&= \sum_{j=1}^{k}P\{N^{\alpha}(s)=
k-j\}P\{N^{\alpha}[s,s+ds)=j\}\\
\nonumber &=\sum_{j=1}^k\frac{(-1)^{k-j}}{(k-j)!}\frac{d^{k-j}}{du^{k-j}}
e^{-s\lambda^{\alpha}u^{\alpha}}\bigg|_{u=1} \frac{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}{j!\Gamma(\alpha+1-j)}(-1)^{j+1}\lambda^{\alpha}ds.
\end{align}
Therefore
\begin{align}
\label{a}&P\{T_k^{\alpha}<\infty\}= \sum_{j=1}^k\frac{(-1)^{k+1}}{(k-j)!}\frac{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}{j!\Gamma(\alpha+1-j)}\frac{d^{k-j}}{du^{k-j}}u^{-\alpha}\bigg|_{u=1}\\
\nonumber &= (-1)^{k+1}\frac{\alpha}{k!}\sum_{j=1}^{k}\binom{k}{j}
\frac{\Gamma(\alpha+k-j)}{\Gamma(\alpha+1-j)}(-1)^{k-j}.
\end{align}
By using the identity
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(\alpha+1-j)= \frac{\pi}{\sin \pi(j-\alpha)}\frac{1}{\Gamma(j-\alpha)}
\end{equation}
and the fact that
\begin{equation}
\sin\pi(j-\alpha)= (-1)^{j+1}\sin \pi \alpha,
\end{equation}
we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{b}
P\{T_k^{\alpha}<\infty\}=\frac{\alpha\Gamma(k)}{k!}\frac{\sin \pi \alpha}{\pi}\sum_{j=1}^{k}\binom{k}{j}
B(\alpha+k-j, j-\alpha),
\end{equation}
where we have multiplied and divided for $\Gamma(k)$ inside the summation formula appearing in \eqref{a}.
We have denoted with $B(\alpha+k-j, j-\alpha)$ the Beta function, whose integral representation leads to the following equivalent form of
formula \eqref{b}
\begin{align}
&P\{T_k^{\alpha}<\infty\}=\frac{\alpha\Gamma(k)}{k!}\frac{\sin \pi \alpha}{\pi}\sum_{j=1}^{k}\binom{k}{j}\int_0^1 x^{\alpha+k-j-1}
(1-x)^{j-\alpha-1}dx\\
\nonumber &= \frac{\alpha\Gamma(k)}{k!}\frac{\sin \pi \alpha}{\pi}\int_0^1 x^{\alpha-1}
(1-x)^{-\alpha-1}\sum_{j=1}^{k}\binom{k}{j}x^{k-j}(1-x)^jdx\\
\nonumber &= -\frac{\alpha\Gamma(k)}{k!}\frac{\sin \pi \alpha}{\pi}\frac{\Gamma(k+\alpha)\Gamma(-\alpha)}{\Gamma(k)}.
\end{align}
Finally using the following equality
\begin{equation}
-\alpha\Gamma(-\alpha)= \Gamma(1-\alpha)= \frac{\pi}{\sin \pi \alpha}
\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)},
\end{equation}
we obtain the claimed result.
\end{proof}
\begin{os}
Since
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{\Gamma(k+\alpha)}{\Gamma(k+1)}\geq \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{\Gamma(k)}{\Gamma(k+1)}= \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{k}= \infty,
\end{equation}
we have that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{k\rightarrow 0}\frac{\Gamma(k+\alpha)}{\Gamma(\alpha)k!}\rightarrow 0,
\end{equation}
slowly with $k$.
\end{os}
\begin{coro}
We have that
\begin{equation}
P\{T_k^{\alpha}<\infty\}<1, \quad \forall \ k\geq 1
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
P\{T_k^{\alpha}<\infty\}< P\{T_{k-1}^{\alpha}<\infty\}, \forall \ k\geq 1
\end{equation}
Observe also that, from \eqref{bel} the following interesting recursive
relationship holds
\begin{equation}
P\{T_k^{\alpha}<\infty\}= \left[\frac{\alpha+k-1}{k}\right]P\{T_{k-1}^{\alpha}<\infty\}
\end{equation}
\end{coro}
\begin{os}
We note that the hitting probabilities \eqref{bel} are increasing
functions of $\alpha$ since
\begin{equation}\label{psi}
\frac{d}{d\alpha}\frac{\Gamma(k+\alpha)}{\Gamma(\alpha)}=
\frac{\Gamma(k+\alpha)}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\bigg[\psi(k+\alpha)-\psi(\alpha)\bigg]>0,
\end{equation}
where the function
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\psi(x)= \frac{d}{dx}\ln \Gamma(x),
\end{equation}
has different representations. Furthermore, in order to prove the inequality \eqref{psi}, we recall the following useful representation
(see \cite{grad}, pag.944, formula 8.363, n.3)
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\psi(k+\alpha)-\psi(\alpha)= \sum_{r=0}^{\infty}\left(\frac{1}{\alpha+r}-\frac{1}{\alpha+r+k}\right)
\end{equation}
\end{os}
On the basis of the result of Theorem 2.1, we can give some asymptotic estimates of the hitting probabilities $P\{T_k^\alpha <\infty \}$ for large values of $k$.
\begin{prop}
For $k\rightarrow +\infty$, we have the following asymptotic estimate
\begin{equation}\label{stima}
P\{T_k^{\alpha}<\infty\}\sim \frac{e^{-\alpha}}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\frac{1}{k^{1-\alpha}}, \quad \alpha\in (0,1).
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We will use the following asymptotic approximation for the Gamma function
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(x) \sim x^{x-\frac{1}{2}}e^{-x}\sqrt{2\pi}, \quad \mbox{for $x\rightarrow +\infty$,}
\end{equation}
and the classical Stirling formula, in order to obtain result \eqref{stima}
\begin{align}
P\{T_k^{\alpha} < \infty\} &= \frac{\Gamma(k+\alpha)}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\frac{1}{k!}
\sim \frac{(k+\alpha)^{k+\alpha-\frac{1}{2}}e^{-(k+\alpha)}}{\Gamma(\alpha)k^{k+1/2}e^{-k}} \\
\nonumber &\sim \frac{e^{-\alpha}}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\frac{1}{k^{1-\alpha}}.
\end{align}
\end{proof}
Observe that, for $\alpha = 1/2$, the hitting probability has the following representation
\begin{equation}\label{mezzo}
P\{T_k^{1/2}<\infty\}= \binom{2k}{k}\frac{1}{2^{2k}}, \quad k >0
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
P\{T_k^{1/2}<\infty\}\sim \frac{e^{-1/2}}{\sqrt{\pi k}}, \quad \mbox{for $k\rightarrow +\infty$}.
\end{equation}
Equation \eqref{mezzo} coincides with
$P\{\mathcal{B}(2k,\frac{1}{2})=0\}$, where $\mathcal{B}(\cdot,\cdot)$ stands for the binomial distribution.
\subsection{Iterated compositions}
As previously noticed, the space-fractional Poisson process $N^{\alpha}(t)$ can be regarded as an homogeneous Poisson process $N(t)$ subordinated to a positively-skewed stable subordinator $H^{\alpha}(t)$, with $\alpha \in (0,1)$. In \cite{fede}, it was also proved (Theorem 2.3)
that, given a $\gamma$-stable subordinator and a space-fractional Poisson process $N^{\alpha}(t)$, the following equality in distribution holds
\begin{equation}\label{fedez}
N^{\alpha}(H^{\gamma}(t))\stackrel{d}{=}N^{\alpha \gamma}(t).
\end{equation}
Our aim is to generalize this observation, by considering the composition of a space-fractional Poisson process with $n$ independent stable subordinators
$H^{\gamma_j}(t)$. From equation \eqref{fedez} we have that, for any value of $n$, the following equality in distribution holds
\begin{equation}
N^{\alpha}(H^{\gamma_1}(H^{\gamma_2}(\dots H^{\gamma_n}(t))))
\stackrel{d}{=} N^{\alpha \prod_{j=1}^n \gamma_j}(t),
\end{equation}
that is the $n$-fold subordination of a space-fractional Poisson process $N^\alpha$
yields a space-fractional Poisson process of degree $\alpha = \displaystyle{\prod_{j=1}^n} \gamma_j$.\\
For $n\rightarrow +\infty$, the \textit{infinitely stable subordinated} space-fractional Poisson process is a space-fractional Poisson process
if $1>\displaystyle{\prod_{j=1}^{\infty}}\gamma_j>0$. This happens, for example for
$\gamma_j = e^{-\mu_j}$ with $\displaystyle{\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}}\mu_j<\infty$.
If $\displaystyle{\prod_{j=1}^{\infty}}\gamma_j= 0 $ we have a degenerate case with a r.v. taking value $0$ with probability $e^{-t}$
and $\infty$ with probability $1-e^{-t}$.
This auto-conservative property of the space-fractional Poisson process does not hold for the other counting processes with Bern\u{s}tein intertimes considered in Section 3.
\subsection{Relationship between space-time fractional Poisson process and renewal process with Mittag-Leffler intertimes}
The space-time fractional Poisson process is simply obtained by replacing in equation \eqref{s-f} the ordinary time derivative
with the Caputo time-fractional derivative of order $\nu \in (0,1]$.
The space-time fractional Poisson process is a time-changed Poisson process of the form $N^{\alpha,\nu}(t)= N(H^{\alpha}(L^\nu(t)))$
where $L^\nu(t)$, $0<\nu<1$, is the inverse of the stable subordinator
$H^\nu(t)$ and is independent from $H^\alpha$ and $N$.
The distribution $p_k^{\alpha,\nu}(t)$ of $N^{\alpha,\nu}(t)$ reads
\begin{align}
p_k^{\alpha,\nu}(t)= P\{N^{\alpha,\nu}(t)=k\}= \frac{(-1)^k}{k!}\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-\lambda^{\alpha}t^{\nu})^m}{\Gamma(\nu m+1)}
\frac{\Gamma(\alpha m+1)}{\Gamma(\alpha m+1-k)}
\end{align}
and the related probability generating function has the form
\begin{equation}
G(u,t)= E_{\nu,1}(-\lambda^{\alpha}(1-u)^{\alpha}t^{\nu}), \quad |u|\leq 1.
\end{equation}
Let us construct a renewal process $\mathcal{N}^{\alpha,\nu}(t)$
with intertimes $\mathcal{T}_j$ with the following distribution
\begin{equation}
P\{\mathcal{T}>t\}\equiv P\{\mathcal{N}^{\alpha,\nu}(t)=0\}= E_{\nu,1}(-\lambda^{\alpha}t^{\nu}).
\end{equation}
Then we have that
\begin{align}
\nonumber &P\{\mathcal{N}^{\alpha, \nu}(t)=k\}= P(\mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_k<t,
\mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_{k+1}>t)\\
\nonumber &= P( \mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_{k}<t)- P(\mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_{k+1}<t)\\
&=\int_0^{t}P\{\mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_{k}\in ds\}-
\int_0^{t}P\{\mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_{k+1}\in ds\},\label{renew}
\end{align}
whose Laplace transform is given by
\begin{align}
&\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t}P\{\mathcal{N}^{\alpha,\nu}(t)= k\}dt\label{aa}\\
\nonumber &= \int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t}\left(\int_0^{t}P\{\mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_{k}\in ds\}\right)dt-
\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t}\left( \int_0^{t}P\{\mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_{k+1}\in ds\}\right)dt\\
\nonumber &= \frac{1}{\gamma}\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\gamma s}P\{\mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_k\in ds\}-\frac{1}{\gamma}\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\gamma s}P\{\mathcal{T}_1+\dots+\mathcal{T}_{k+1}\in ds\}\\
\nonumber&= \frac{1}{\gamma}\bigg[\left(\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma s}P\{\mathcal{T}_1\in ds\}\right)^k-\left(\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma s}P\{\mathcal{T}_1\in ds\}\right)^{k+1}\bigg]= \frac{\lambda^{\alpha k}\gamma^{\nu-1}}{(\gamma^{\nu}+\lambda^{\alpha})^{k+1}},
\end{align}
where we have used the fact that
\begin{equation}
\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t}\lambda^{\alpha }t^{\nu-1}E_{\nu,\nu}(-\lambda^\alpha t^{\nu})dt= \frac{\lambda^{\alpha}}{\gamma^{\nu}+\lambda^{\alpha}}.
\end{equation}
We observe that the Laplace transform of the state probabilities of the renewal process previously considered, for $\alpha = 1$ coincides with the Laplace transform of the state probabilities of the time-fractional Poisson process studied by Beghin and Orsingher in \cite{be}. It is well-known that the time-fractional Poisson process is a renewal process with Mittag-Leffler distributed intertimes. The same is not true for the space-time fractional Poisson process. Indeed the Laplace transform \eqref{aa} does not coincide with the Laplace transform of the state probabilities of the space-time fractional Poisson processes for all $k\geq 0$, as can be shown by plain calculations.\\
Moreover, we observe that we have the following interesting recursive relation for the Laplace transform of the space-time fractional Poisson process
\begin{align}
&\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t} P\{N^{\alpha,\nu}(t)=k\}dt=
\frac{(-1)^k}{k!}\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-\lambda)^{\alpha m}}{\gamma^{\nu m+1}}\frac{\Gamma(\alpha m +1)}{\Gamma(\alpha m+1-k)}\\
\nonumber & = \frac{(-1)^k\lambda^k}{k!}\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}
\frac{(-1)^{\alpha m}}{\gamma^{\nu m+1}}\frac{d^k}{d\lambda^k} \lambda^{\alpha m}
= \frac{(-1)^k\lambda^k}{k!}\frac{d^k}{d\lambda^k} \frac{\gamma^{\nu-1}}{\lambda^{\alpha}+\gamma^{\nu}}\\
\nonumber& = \frac{(-1)^k\lambda^k}{k!}\frac{d^k}{d\lambda^k}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t} P\{N^{\alpha, \nu}(t)= 0\}dt= \frac{(-1)^k\lambda^k}{k!}\frac{d^k}{d\lambda^k}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t} P\{\mathcal{N}^{\alpha, \nu}(t)= 0\} dt.
\end{align}
\section{Counting processes with Bern\u{s}tein intertimes: general results}
In a recent paper (see \cite{bruno}), Orsingher and Toaldo have considered more general counting processes with Bern\u{s}tein intertimes and random jumps.
In this section we also show that the space-fractional Poisson process is a special case of this wide family of counting
processes, that admits an explicit and simple form for
$P\{T_k<\infty\}$.\\
We briefly recall that the counting processes $N^f(t)$ considered in \cite{bruno} have independent and stationary increments,
generalizing the classical Poisson process and their jumps have distribution given by
\begin{equation}\label{for1}
P\{N^f[t,t+dt)=k\}= \begin{cases}
dt\frac{\lambda^k}{k!}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\lambda s}s^k \nu(ds)+o(dt), \quad &k\geq 1, \\
1-dt \int_0^{\infty}(1-e^{-\lambda s})\nu(ds)+o(dt), \quad &k=0,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
f(\lambda)= \int_0^{\infty}(1-e^{-\lambda s})\nu(ds),
\end{equation}
is a Bern\u{s}tein function with L\'evy measure $\nu$.
In \cite{bruno} it was proved that the state probabilities $p_k^f(t)$
of the processes $N^f(t)$ satisfy the difference-differential equations
\begin{equation}
\frac{d}{dt}p^f_k(t)=-f(\lambda)p^f_k(t)+\sum_{m=1}^k\frac{\lambda^m}{m!}p^f_{k-m}(t)\int_0^\infty e^{-s\lambda}s^m \nu(ds), \quad k\geq 0, t>0,
\end{equation}
with the usual initial conditions and have the form
\begin{equation}\label{for2}
P\{N^{f}(t)=k\}= p_k^f(t)= \frac{(-1)^k}{k!}\frac{d^k}{du^k}e^{-tf(\lambda u)}\bigg|_{u=1}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, the probability generating function of $N^f(t)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
G^f(u,t)=e^{-tf(\lambda(1-u))}, \quad |u|\leq 1.
\end{equation}
Note that, for $\nu(ds) = \frac{\alpha s^{-\alpha-1}}{\Gamma(1-\alpha)}ds$, the space-fractional Poisson process is retrieved.
By repeating the arguments of Theorem 2.1 and having in mind
\eqref{for1} and \eqref{for2} we have that
\begin{align}
\nonumber P\{T_k^f\in ds\}&=P\bigg\{ \bigcup_{j=0}^{k-1}\{N^f(s)= j,
N^f[s,s+ds) = k-j\}\bigg\}\\ &= \sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\frac{(-1)^j}{j!}\frac{d^j}{du^j}e^{-tf(\lambda u)}\bigg|_{u=1}\cdot dt \frac{\lambda^{k-j}}{(k-j)!}\int_0^{\infty}
e^{-\lambda z}z^{k-j} \nu(dz), \label{uno}
\end{align}
for $s>0$.
Therefore
\begin{align}\label{due}
P\{T_k^f<\infty\}&= \sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\frac{(-1)^j}{j!}\frac{d^j}{du^j}\frac{1}{f(\lambda u)}\bigg|_{u=1}\cdot \frac{\lambda^{k-j}}{(k-j)!}\int_0^{\infty}
e^{-\lambda z}z^{k-j} \nu(dz)\\
\nonumber &=(-1)^{k-1}\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\frac{1}{j!}\frac{d^j}{du^j}\frac{1}{f(\lambda u)}\bigg|_{u=1}\frac{\lambda^{k-j}}{(k-j)!}\frac{d^{k-j} }{d\lambda^{k-j}}f(\lambda) .
\end{align}
Equation \eqref{uno} provides the hitting time distribution
of level $k$ for the process $N^f(t)$ while
\eqref{due} gives the hitting probability of level $k$.\\
The crucial point is the evaluation of $\frac{d^j}{du^j}\frac{1}{f(\lambda u)}\bigg|_{u=1}$ which seems possible for a small subset of the Bern\u{s}tein functions
of which $f(\lambda)= \lambda^\alpha$, $0<\alpha<1$, is a particular case.
\begin{os}
For all Bern\u{s}tein function $f$ we have that
\begin{equation}
P\{T_1^f<\infty\}<1.
\end{equation}
This is because
\begin{align}
\nonumber P\{T_1^f<\infty\}&= \frac{\lambda}{f(\lambda)}\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\lambda s}s\nu(ds)= \frac{\displaystyle{\lambda \frac{d}{d\lambda}
\int_0^{\infty} (1-e^{-\lambda s)}\nu(ds)}}{\int_0^{\infty} (1-e^{-\lambda s})\nu(ds)}\\
\nonumber &= \lambda \frac{d}{d\lambda}\ln f(\lambda)<1,
\end{align}
since $f(\lambda)<\lambda$ because $f(0)=0$ and $f''(\lambda)<0$.
\end{os}
\section{A generalization of counting processes with Bern\u{s}tein intertimes}
In this section we consider the process related to the following Cauchy problem
\begin{equation}\label{s-f2}
\begin{cases}
\frac{d}{dt}p_k(t)=-\displaystyle{\sum_{j=1}^n} f_j(\lambda(I-B))p_k(t)\\
p_k(0)=\begin{cases}
0 & k>0\\
1 & k=0,
\end{cases}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $f_1, f_2,\dots, f_n$ are $n$ different Bern\u{s}tein functions. We will consider below point processes of the form
$ N\left(\sum_{j=1}^n H^{f_j}(t)\right)$ whose distribution is governed by equations \eqref{s-f2}. These processes are time-changed point processes where the role of time is played by the superposition of independent subordinators $H^{f_j}(t)$.
\begin{te}
The distribution of the subordinated Poisson process
\begin{equation}\label{aioo}
\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots, f_n}(t)= N\left(\sum_{j=1}^n H^{f_j}(t)\right), \quad t\geq 0
\end{equation}
is the solution to the Cauchy problem \eqref{s-f2}. In \eqref{aioo} $H^{f_1}(t), H^{f_2}(t), \dots,H^{f_n}(t)$ are $n$ independent subordinators with
Bern\u{s}tein functions $f_1, f_2,\dots, f_n$, respectively.
\end{te}
\begin{proof}
Let us determine the probability generating function of the r.v.
\eqref{aioo}
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}u^{\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots, f_n}(t)}=
\int_0^{\infty} \mathbb{E}u^{N(s)}P \bigg\{\sum_{j=1}^n H^{f_j}(t) \in ds \bigg\}.
\end{align}
Then
\begin{align}
\nonumber\mathbb{E}u^{\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2,\dots, f_n}(t)}&= \int_0^{\infty}
e^{-\lambda s(1-u)}P\bigg\{\sum_{j=1}^n H^{f_j}(t)\in ds\bigg\}\\
\nonumber & = \prod_{j=1}^n \int_0^{\infty}
e^{-\lambda s(1-u)}P\bigg\{H^{f_j}(t)\in ds\bigg\}\\
&= exp\left(-t\displaystyle{\sum_{j=1}^n} f_j(\lambda (1-u))\right).\label{pgr}
\end{align}
On the other hand, from \eqref{s-f2}, we can construct the equation governing the probability generating function $G$ by taking into account that (see \cite{bruno}, Remark 2.2 for details)
\begin{equation}
-f(\lambda(I-B))p_k(t)= -f(\lambda)p^f_k(t)+\sum_{m=1}^k\frac{\lambda^m}{m!}p^f_{k-m}(t)\int_0^\infty e^{-s\lambda}s^m \nu(ds).
\end{equation}
Thus from \eqref{s-f2}, by multiplying both members by $u^k$ and summing up w.r. to $k$, after calculation similar to those of Theorem 2.1 of \cite{bruno}, we arrive at the equation
\begin{equation}\label{pgr2}
\begin{cases}
&\displaystyle{\frac{\partial G}{\partial t}}= -\displaystyle{\sum_{j=1}^n} f_j(\lambda (I-B))G(u,t)\\
&G(u,0)=1
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
It is now straightforward to check that \eqref{pgr} satisfies \eqref{pgr2}
\end{proof}
\begin{os}
On the basis of the Theorem 4.1, we are also able to obtain explicitly the state probabilities of the subordinated process \eqref{aioo} for $n=2$, as follows
\begin{align}
\label{alse} p_k(t)&= \int_0^{\infty}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\lambda s}
\frac{(\lambda(s+u))^k}{k!}e^{-\lambda u}P\{H^{f_1}(t)\in ds\}
P\{H^{f_2}(t)\in du\}\\
\nonumber & = \frac{\lambda^k}{k!}\sum_{j=0}^{k}
\binom{k}{j} \int_0^{\infty}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\lambda s}s^j u^{k-j}
e^{-\lambda u}P\{H^{f_1}(t)\in ds\}
P\{H^{f_2}(t)\in du\}\\
\nonumber &= \frac{\lambda^k}{k!}\sum_{j=0}^{k}
\binom{k}{j}\left[\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\lambda s}s^j
P\{H^{f_1}(t)\in ds\}\right]\left[\int_0^{\infty}
e^{-\lambda u} u^{k-j} \ P\{H^{f_2}(t)\in du\} \right]\\
\nonumber &= (-1)^k\frac{\lambda^k}{k!} \sum_{j=0}^{k}
\binom{k}{j}\frac{d^j}{d\lambda^j}e^{-t f_1(\lambda)}
\frac{d^{k-j}}{d\lambda^{k-j}}e^{-tf_2(\lambda)} .
\end{align}
It is simple to prove that, in the case where $f_1(s)= s^{\alpha}$, with $\alpha\in (0,1)$ and $f_2=0$
we recover the explicit form of the state probabilites of the space-fractional Poisson process (see Theorem 2.2 in \cite{fede}).
For $f_2 = 0$, formula \eqref{alse} yields $p_k(t)$ for the process $N^{f}(t)$. It is clear that only in the case $n = 2$, the state probabilities can be calculated in explicit form in a rather simple way.
\end{os}
\smallskip
We now consider the following subordinated Poisson process
\begin{equation}\label{inve}
\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots, f_n}(L^{\nu}(t))= N\left(\sum_{j=1}^n H^{f_j}(L^{\nu}(t))\right),
\end{equation}
where $L^{\nu}(t)$ is the inverse of the stable subordinator $H^{\nu}(t)$ and $H^{f_1}(t), H^{f_2}(t), \dots,H^{f_n}(t)$ are $n$ independent subordinators with
Bern\u{s}tein functions $f_1, f_2,\dots, f_n$, respectively.
The distribution of $L^\nu(t)$ is obtained from that of $H^\nu(t)$
because
\begin{equation}
P\{L^{\nu}(t)>s\}= P\{H^{\nu}(s)<t\}
\end{equation}
and thus
\begin{equation}
P\{L^{\nu}(t)\in ds\}= -\frac{d}{ds}\int_0^t P\{H^{\nu}(s)\in dz\}.
\end{equation}
We have the following result.
\begin{te}
The distribution of the subordinated Poisson process \eqref{inve}
is the solution to the Cauchy problem
\begin{equation}\label{s-f3}
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle{\frac{d^\nu}{dt^\nu}}p_k(t)=-\displaystyle{\sum_{j=1}^n} f_j(\lambda(I-B))p_k(t), \quad \nu\in(0,1)\\
p_k(0)=\begin{cases}
0 & k>0\\
1 & k=0,
\end{cases}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
involving time-fractional derivatives in the sense of Dzerbayshan--Caputo.
\end{te}
\begin{proof}
The p.g.f. of \eqref{inve} is given by
\begin{align}
\nonumber &\mathbb{E}u^{\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots, f_n}(L^{\nu}(t))}=
\int_0^{\infty} \mathbb{E} u^{\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots, f_n}(s)}P\{L^{\nu}(t)\in ds \}\\
& =-\int_0^{\infty}e^{-s\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(\lambda(1-u))}
\bigg\{\frac{d}{ds}\int_0^t P\{H^{\nu}(s)\in dz\}\bigg\} ds.\label{pgfa}
\end{align}
The Laplace transform of \eqref{pgfa} becomes
\begin{align}
\nonumber &\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\gamma t} \mathbb{E}u^{\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots,f_n}(L^{\nu}(t))} dt\\
\nonumber & = -\int_0^{\infty} dt \ e^{-\gamma t} \int_0^{\infty}e^{-s\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(\lambda (1-u))}
\bigg\{\frac{d}{ds}\int_0^t P\{H^{\nu}(s)\in dz\}\bigg\}ds\\
\nonumber &=- \int_0^{\infty} e^{-s\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(\lambda (1-u))}\frac{d}{ds}\bigg\{
\int_0^{\infty} P\{H^{\nu}(s)\in dz\} \int_z^{\infty}
e^{-\gamma t}dt\bigg\}ds\\
\nonumber &= -\int_0^{\infty}e^{-s\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(\lambda (1-u))} \frac{1}{\gamma}\frac{d}{ds}\bigg\{\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma z}P\{H^{\nu}(s)\in dz\} \bigg\}ds\\
\nonumber &=\gamma^{\nu-1}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma^{\nu}s-s\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(\lambda(1-u))} ds\\
&= \frac{\gamma^{\nu-1}}{\gamma^{\nu}+\displaystyle{\sum_{j=1}^n} f_j(\lambda(1-u))}. \label{bell}
\end{align}
The inverse Laplace transform of \eqref{bell} yields the p.g.f
of the process $\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots f_n}(L^{\nu}(t))$ as
\begin{equation}\label{bell1}
\mathbb{E}u^{\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots,f_n}(L^{\nu}(t))} =
E_{\nu, 1}\left(-t^{\nu}\bigg[\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(\lambda(1-u))\bigg]\right).
\end{equation}
On the other hand, by multiplying both terms of \eqref{s-f3} for
$u^k$ and summing over all $k$ we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
&\displaystyle{\frac{\partial^\nu G}{\partial t^\nu}}= -\displaystyle{\sum_{j=1}^n} f_j(\lambda (1-u))G(u,t)\\
&G(u,0)=1,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
whose solution clearly coincides with \eqref{bell1} as claimed.
\end{proof}
From the p.g.f \eqref{bell1} we can extract the mean value of $\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots, f_n}(L^{\nu}(t))$ as
\begin{align}
\nonumber &\mathbb{E}\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots, f_n}(L^{\nu}(t))=
\frac{d}{du}E_{\nu, 1}\left(-t^{\nu}\bigg[\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(\lambda (1-u))\bigg]\right)\bigg|_{u=1}\\
\nonumber & =\frac{\lambda t^{\nu}}{\nu}E_{\nu, \nu}\left(-t^{\nu}\bigg[\sum_{j=1}^n f_j(0)\bigg]\right)\sum_{j=1}^{n} f_j'(0)\\
\nonumber &= \frac{\lambda t^{\nu}}{\Gamma(\nu+1)}\sum_{j=1}^n f_j'(0)=
\frac{\lambda t^{\nu}}{\Gamma(\nu+1)}\sum_{j=1}^n \ \int_0^{\infty}
s \ \nu_j(ds),
\end{align}
which for $n=2$, $f_1= x$ and $f_2 = 0$, yields the mean-value of the time-fractional Poisson process (see \cite{be}).
In the special case of L\'evy measure equal to
\begin{equation}
\nu_j(ds)= \frac{\alpha_j s^{-\alpha_j-1}e^{-\theta_j s}}{\Gamma(1-\alpha_j)}ds,
\end{equation}
with Bern\u{s}tein function $f_j(x)= (x+\theta_j)^{\alpha_j}-\theta_j^{\alpha_j}$, $\alpha_j \in (0,1)$, we have that
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}\mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2}(L^{\nu}(t))= \frac{ \lambda t^{\nu}}{\Gamma(\nu+1)} \sum_{j=1}^n\left(\alpha_j \theta_j^{\alpha_j-1}\right).
\end{equation}
We also notice that
\begin{align}
\nonumber &\mbox{Var} \ \mathfrak{N}^{f_1,f_2, \dots,f_n}(L^\nu(t))=\lambda
t\bigg[\lambda\sum_{j=1}^n f_j''(0)+\sum_{j=1}^n f_j'(0)\bigg]
\end{align}
\section{Poisson process with Generalized Grey Brownian clocks}
In a previous paper \cite{be}, Beghin and Orsingher have proved that the time-fractional Poisson process $N^{\nu}(t)$ can be represented as
\begin{equation}
N^{\nu}(t)\stackrel{d}{=}N(\mathcal{T}_{2\nu}(t)), \quad t>0,
\end{equation}
where $N(\cdot)$ is the homogeneous Poisson process with rate $\lambda$ and the random time variable $\mathcal{T}_{2\nu}(t)$ possesses density
obtained by folding the solution of the time-fractional diffusion equation. A relevant consequence of this result is given by the special case $\nu = 1/2$, where the process $N^{1/2}(t)$ becomes
\begin{equation}
N^{1/2}(t)\stackrel{d}{=}N(|B(t)|), \quad t>0,
\end{equation}
where $B(t)$ is the standard Brownian motion.
Starting from this analysis, further results about Poisson processes with different Brownian clocks have then been obtained in \cite{stoca}.\\
Following these ideas, we here consider the Poisson process at generalized grey Brownian times, namely $N(|\mathcal{G}_{H,\nu}(t)|)$.
The generalized grey Brownian motion (ggBm) $\mathcal{G}_{H,\nu}(t)$ is a non-Markovian stochastic process recently introduced in the literature by Mura and coauthors (see for example \cite{mura,mura1})
to model anomalous diffusions.
The ggBm includes as special cases the Brownian motion (for $\nu = 2H = 1 $), the fractional Brownian motion (for $\nu = 1$) and
time-fractional diffusions (for $2H = 1$ and $0<\nu<1$). We also observe, that in the recent paper \cite{gianni2}, the authors
gave a physical motivation for the application of the ggBm related to random walks in random complex media.
The ggBm $\mathcal{G}_{H,\nu}(t)$ has probability law satisfying
the Cauchy problem
\begin{equation}\label{ggbm}
\begin{cases}
&{}^C\left(t^{1-2H}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)^{\nu} u(y,t)=
c^2 \frac{\partial^2}{\partial y^2}u(y,t), \quad \nu \in (0,1), H\in (0,1), y\in \mathbb{R}, t>0,\\
& u(y,0)= \delta(y).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The fractional operator appearing in equation \eqref{ggbm} can be expressed in terms of Erd\'elyi-Kober integral operators, according to the McBride theory \cite{Mcbride} (we refer to the Appendix for more details on this point).\\
It is well-known that the Fourier transform of the solution of \eqref{ggbm} is given by (see \cite{jmp})
\begin{equation}
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} e^{i\gamma y}u(y,t)dy =
E_{\nu,1}\left(-\frac{c^2}{(2H)^\nu}\gamma^2t^{2H\nu}\right),
\end{equation}
whose inverse is given by
\begin{equation}
u(y,t)= \frac{(2H)^{\nu/2}}{2 c t^{\nu H}} W_{-\nu/2,1-\nu/2}
\left(-\frac{|y|(2H)^{\nu/2}}{c t^{\nu H}}\right),
\end{equation}
where $W_{-\nu/2,1-\nu/2}(\cdot)$ is the well-known Wright function.
In order to simplify our calculations we assume that
$$c^2 = (2H)^\nu.$$
We have now the following result
\begin{te}
For Poisson process at a generalized grey Brownian time the following equality in distribution holds
\begin{equation}
N(|\mathcal{G}_{H,\nu}(t)|)\stackrel{d}{=}\mathcal{N}^{H,\nu}(t),
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{N}^{H,\nu}(t)$, $t>0$, is the fractional Poisson process whose state probabilities $p_k(t)$ are governed by the following fractional difference-differential equations
\begin{equation}\label{genn}
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle{{}^C\left(t^{1-2H}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)^{\nu/2}}p_k(t)=
-\lambda'(1-B) p_k(t), \quad \nu\in(0,2], \ H\in(0,1)\\
p_k(0)=\begin{cases}
0 & k>0\\
1 & k=0
\end{cases}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda'= \lambda (2H)^{\nu/2}$.
\end{te}
\begin{proof}
The p.g.f. of the process $N(|\mathcal{G}_{H,\nu}(t)|)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
G(u,t)=\int_0^{\infty} e^{\lambda y(u-1)}\bar{u}(y,t)dy,
\end{equation}
where $\bar{u}(y,t)$ is obtained by folding the fundamental solution of \eqref{ggbm} (for $c^2 = (2H)^\nu$) and is given by (see \cite{jmp}, Theorem 3.1)
\begin{equation}
\bar{u}(y,t)= \begin{cases} \displaystyle{\frac{1}{t^{H\nu}}W_{-\nu/2, 1-\nu/2}\left(-\frac{y}{t^{H\nu}}\right)},\quad & y\geq 0, t>0,\\
0, \quad & y<0,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
with $\nu>-1$.
Therefore we have that
\begin{equation}\label{gen 1}
G(u,t)=\int_0^{\infty} e^{\lambda y(u-1)}\frac{1}{t^{H\nu}}W_{-\nu/2, 1-\nu/2}\left(-\frac{y}{t^{H\nu}}\right)dy.
\end{equation}
In the next steps, we will use the following integral representations of the Wright function and of the Mittag-Leffler function on the Hankel path $Ha$ (see e.g. \cite{be}, p.1799 and \cite{gorenflo})
\begin{align}
W_{-\nu/2, 1-\nu/2}(x)= \frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{Ha}\frac{e^{z+x z^{\nu/2}}}{z^{1-\nu/2}}dz, \label{wri}\\
E_{\nu/2,1}(x)= \frac{1}{2\pi i }\int_{Ha}\frac{e^z z^{\nu/2-1}}{z^{\nu/2}-x}dz \label{mitta}.
\end{align}
By using \eqref{wri} in \eqref{gen 1}, we obtain
\begin{align}
\nonumber G(u,t)&= \frac{1}{2\pi i {t^{H\nu}}}\int_0^{\infty}
e^{\lambda y(u-1)}dy\int_{Ha}\frac{e^{z-yz^{\nu/2}t^{-H\nu}}}{z^{1-\nu/2}}dz\\
\nonumber & =\frac{1}{2\pi i {t^{H\nu}}}\int_{Ha}\frac{e^z}{z^{1-\nu/2}}dz
\int_0^{\infty}e^{\lambda y(u-1)-yz^{\nu/2}t^{-H\nu}}dy \\
\nonumber &= \frac{1}{2\pi i {t^{H\nu}}}\int_{Ha}\frac{e^z z^{\nu/2-1}}{z^{\nu/2}t^{-\nu H}-\lambda (u-1)}dz\\
&= E_{\nu/2,1}\left(-\lambda (1-u)t^{H\nu}\right),\label{pgre}
\end{align}
where in the last step, we used equation \eqref{mitta}.\\
On the other hand, the p.g.f. of the process $\mathcal{N}^{H,\nu}(t)$
can be simply obtained by multiplying both terms of \eqref{genn} by $u^k$ and summing over all $k$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
{}^C\left(t^{1-2H}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)^{\nu/2} G(u,t)= -\lambda' (1-u) G(u,t),\\
G(u,0)= 1,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
whose solution (see \cite{jmp} for detailed calculations) is given by
\begin{equation}\label{pgff}
G(u,t)= E_{\nu/2,1}\left(-\frac{\lambda'}{(2H)^{\nu/2}} (1-u)t^{ H\nu}\right),
\end{equation}
that coincides with \eqref{pgre} iff $\lambda'= \lambda (2H)^{\nu/2}$
as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{coro}
The Poisson process composed with a fractional Brownian motion time $N(|B_H(t)|)$
can be represented as
\begin{equation}\label{pdif}
N(|B_H(t)|)\stackrel{d}{=}\mathcal{N}^{H,2}(t),
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{N}^{H,2}(t)$, $t>0$, is the counting process whose state probabilities $p_k(t)$ are governed by the following difference-differential equations
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
{}^C\left(t^{1-2H}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)p_k(t)=
-\lambda'(1-B) p_k(t)\\
p_k(0)=\begin{cases}
0 & k>0\\
1 & k=0
\end{cases}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{coro}
\begin{os}
We observe that for $H= 1/2$ and $\nu = 1$ in \eqref{pdif} we recover the Poisson process at a reflected Brownian motion whose state probabilities are governed by the classical fractional difference-differential equations of order $1/2$ as proved by Beghin and Orsingher in \cite{be}.
\end{os}
It is also simple to prove that this kind of counting process with random time is not a renewal process, as we are
going to show by means of explicit calculations. From the p.g.f. \eqref{pgff} we obtain the explicit form of the state probabilities of
the process $\mathcal{N}^{H,\nu}(t)$
\begin{equation}
p_k(t)= \frac{(\lambda t^{H\nu})^k}{k!}\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\frac{(m+k)!}{m!}\frac{(-\lambda t^{H\nu})^m}{\Gamma(\frac{\nu}{2}(k+m)+1)},
\end{equation}
with $\lambda = (2H)^{\nu/2}\lambda$, whose Laplace transform is given by
\begin{equation}\label{latra}
\int_0^\infty e^{-st} p_k(t)dt= \frac{\lambda^k}{k!}\sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \frac{(m+k)!}{m!}\frac{\Gamma(H\nu(m+k)+1)}{\Gamma(\frac{\nu}{2}(m+k)+1)}
\frac{(-\lambda)^m}{s^{H\nu(m+k)+1}}.
\end{equation}
Let us now consider the renewal process $\tilde{N}(t)$ with the following distribution of the i.i.d. intertimes
\begin{equation}
P\{\mathfrak{T}>t\}\equiv P\{\mathcal{N}^{H,\nu}(t)=0\}= E_{\nu/2,1}(-\lambda t^{H\nu}).
\end{equation}
Then we have that (see equation \eqref{renew})
\begin{align}
\nonumber &P\{\tilde{N}(t)=k\}=\int_0^{t}P\{\mathfrak{T}_1+\dots+\mathfrak{T}_{k}\in ds\}-
\int_0^{t}P\{\mathfrak{T}_1+\dots+\mathfrak{T}_{k+1}\in ds\},
\end{align}
whose Laplace transform is given by
\begin{align}
&\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t}P\{\tilde{N}(t)= k\}dt\label{latra1}\\
\nonumber &= \int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t}\left(\int_0^{t}P\{\mathfrak{T}_1+\dots+\mathfrak{T}_{k}\in ds\}\right)dt-
\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t}\left( \int_0^{t}P\{\mathfrak{T}_1+\dots+\mathfrak{T}_{k+1}\in ds\}\right)dt\\
\nonumber &= \frac{1}{\gamma}\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\gamma s}P\{\mathfrak{T}_1+\dots+\mathfrak{T}_k\in ds\}-\frac{1}{\gamma}\int_0^{\infty} e^{-\gamma s}P\{\mathfrak{T}_1+\dots+\mathfrak{T}_{k+1}\in ds\}\\
\nonumber&= \frac{1}{\gamma}\bigg[\left(\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma s}P\{\mathfrak{T}_1\in ds\}\right)^k-\left(\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma s}P\{\mathfrak{T}_1\in ds\}\right)^{k+1}\bigg]\\
\nonumber &=
\frac{1}{\gamma}\bigg[K(\gamma)\bigg]^k\bigg\{1-K(\gamma)\bigg\} ,
\end{align}
where we have used the fact that
\begin{equation}\nonumber
K(\gamma)=2H\lambda\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\gamma t}t^{H\nu-1}E_{\nu/2,\nu/2}(-\lambda t^{H\nu})dt = 2H\lambda \sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{(-\lambda)^m}{\Gamma(\frac{\nu}{2}(m+1))}\frac{\Gamma(H\nu+H\nu m)}{\gamma^{H\nu+H\nu m}}.
\end{equation}
Clearly equations \eqref{latra} and \eqref{latra1} do not coincide and therefore we can conclude that $\mathcal{N}^{H,\nu}(t)$
is not a renewal process.\\
We consider in the next Proposition the case of a counting process with Bern\u{s}tein intertimes randomized by means of
the random time $\mathcal{G}_{H,\nu}(t)$.
\begin{prop}
The process whose state probabilities are governed by the fractional difference-differential equations
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
{}^C\left(t^{1-2H}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)^{\nu/2}p_k(t)=
-f\left(\lambda(1-B)\right) p_k(t)\\
p_k(0)=\begin{cases}
0 & k>0\\
1 & k=0
\end{cases}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
admits the following representation
\begin{equation}
N(H^f(|\mathcal{G}_{H,\nu}(t)|)),
\end{equation}
where $H^f$ is the subordinator with Bern\u{s}tein function
$f$.
\end{prop}
The proof directly follows by applying the results presented in \cite{bruno} and also by taking
into account the previous analysis.
\section{Appendix: Fractional operators with time-varying coefficients}
In this Appendix, we briefly recall some useful preliminaries about the theory of fractional powers of operators with time-varying coefficients.
In \cite{Mcbride} McBride considered the generalized hyper-Bessel operators
\begin{equation}
\label{L}
L=t^{a_1}\frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm{d}t}t^{a_2}\dots t^{a_n}\frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm{d}t}t^{a_{n+1}},\qquad t>0,
\end{equation}
where $n$ is an integer number and $a_1,\dots, a_{n+1}$ are real numbers. The operator $L$ defined in \eqref{L} acts on the functional space
\begin{equation}
F_{p,\mu}=\{f \colon t^{-\mu}f(t)\in F_p\},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
F_p=\left\{f\in C^{\infty} \colon t^k \frac{\mathrm d^k f}{\mathrm dt^k} \in L^p(0, \infty), \: k=0,1,\dots\right\},
\end{equation}
for $1 \leq p < \infty$ and for any real number $\mu$.
Let us introduce the following constants related to the general operator $L$.
\begin{align*}
a=\sum_{k=1}^{n+1}a_k, \qquad m= |a-n|,
\qquad b_k= \frac{1}{m}\left(\sum_{i=k+1}^{n+1}a_i+k-n\right), \quad k=1, \dots, n.
\end{align*}
The definition of the fractional hyper-Bessel-type operator is given by
\begin{definition}
Let $m= n-a>0$, $f\in F_{p,\mu}$ and
\begin{align*}
b_k\in A_{p,\mu,m}:=\left\{\eta \in \mathbb{R}
\colon m\eta+\mu+m\neq \frac{1}{p}-ml, \: l=0, 1, 2,\dots\right\}, \qquad k=1,\dots, n.
\end{align*}
Then
\begin{equation}
\label{pot}
L^{\alpha}f=m^{n\alpha}t^{-m\alpha}\prod_{k=1}^{n}I_{m}^{b_k,-\alpha}f,
\end{equation}
where, for $\alpha >0$ and $m\eta+\mu+m > \frac{1}{p}$
\begin{equation}
\label{mc1-2}
I_m^{\eta, \alpha}f=
\frac{t^{-m\eta-m\alpha}}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^t(t^m-u^m)^{\alpha-1}u^{m\eta}f(u)\, \mathrm{d}(u^m),
\end{equation}
and for $\alpha\leq 0$
\begin{equation}
\label{mc2}
I_m^{\eta, \alpha}f=(\eta+\alpha+1)I_m^{\eta, \alpha+1}f+\frac{1}{m} I_m^{\eta, \alpha+1}
\left(t\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}f\right).
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
For a full discussion about this approach to fractional operators we refer to \cite{Mcbride}.
The regularized Caputo-like counterpart of the operator \eqref{pot} was introduced in \cite{jmp} in order to obtain meaningful results for the fractional diffusion with time-varying coefficients.
\begin{definition}
Let $\alpha$ be a positive real number, $m= n-a>0$, $f\in F_{p,\mu}$ is such that
\begin{equation*}
L^\alpha\left( f(t) - \displaystyle\sum_{k=0}^{b-1}\frac{t^{k}}{k!} f^{(k)}(0^+)\right)
\end{equation*}
exists. Then we define ${}^C L^\alpha$ by
\begin{equation}
\label{pot1}
{}^C L^\alpha f(t) = L^\alpha\left( f(t) - \sum_{k=0}^{b-1}\frac{t^{k}}{k!} f^{(k)}(0^+)\right),
\end{equation}
where $b = \lceil \alpha \rceil$.
\end{definition}
Concluding this Appendix, the operator ${}^C\left(t^{1-2H}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)^{2\nu}$ appearing in equation \eqref{ggbm} is obtained by specializing the coefficients in the general definitions given above.
|
\section{Introduction}
The theory of connections is a classical topic in differential geometry. It was initially developed to solve pure geometrical problems. It provides an extremely important tool to study geometrical structures on manifolds and, as such, has been applied with great sources in many different setting. For affine connections, a survey of the development of the theory can be found in \cite{ns} and references therein. In \cite{op}, Opozda classified locally homogeneous torsion-free affine connections on $2$-manifolds. Arias-Marco and Kowalski in \cite{ak} classified locally homogeneous connections with arbitrary torsion on $2$-manifolds. In \cite{gar}, Garc\'ia-Rio \textit{et al.} introduced the notion of the affine Osserman connections. Affine Osserman connections are well-understood in dimension two. For instance, in \cite{di} and \cite{gar}, the authors proved in a different way that an affine connection is Osserman if and only if its Ricci tensor is skew-symmetric. The situation is however more involved in higher dimensions where the skew-symmetry of the Ricci tensor is a necessary (but not a sufficient) condition for an affine connection to be Osserman.
A (pseudo-) Riemannian manifold $(M,g)$ is said to be \textit{Szab\'o } if the eigenvalues of the Szab\'o operator given by
$$
\mathcal{S} (X):Y \rightarrow (\nabla_X \mathcal{R})(Y,X)X
$$
are constant on the unit (pseudo-) sphere bundle \cite{gis}. The Szab\'o operator is a self-adjoint operator with $\mathcal{S}(X)X =0$. It plays an important role in the study of totally isotropic manifolds \cite{giz}. Szab\'o in \cite{sz1} used techniques from algebraic topology to show, in the Riemannian setting, that any such a metric is locally symmetric. He used this observation to give a simple proof that any two point homogeneous space is either flat or is a rank one symmetric space. Subsequently Gilkey and Stavrov \cite{gs} extended his results to show that any Szab\'o Lorentzian manifold has constant sectional curvature. However, for metrics of higher signature the situation is different. Indeed it was showed in \cite{giz} the existence of Szab\'o pseudo-Riemannian manifolds with metrics of signature $(p, q)$ with $p\geq 2$ and $q\geq 2$ which are not locally symmetric.
The aim of this paper is to extend the definition of (pseudo-) Riemannian Szab\'o manifold to the affine case by introducing a new concept called \textit{affine Szab\'o manifold}. We investigate the torsion-free affine connections to be Szab\'o. We shall call a connection with such a condition
an \textit{affine Szab\'o connection}.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{Prel}, we recall some basic definitions and geometric objects, namely, torsion, curvature and Ricci tensor on an affine manifold. In Section \ref{Affine}, we study the cyclic parallelism of the Ricci tensor for a particular case of affine connections in two and three dimensional affine manifolds. We establish geometric configurations of affine manifolds admitting a cyclic parallel Ricci tensor (Proposition \ref{RiccCylPA1} and \ref{RiccCylPA2}). We introduce in Section \ref{AffineMani} a new concept of affine Szab\'o manifold. We prove that, on a two-dimensional smooth affine manifold, the affine Szab\'o structure coincides with the cyclic parallelism of the Ricci tensor (Theorem \ref{main}). We end the section by giving some examples of affine Szab\'o connections in two and three dimensional affine manifolds. In section 5, a characterization of locally homogeneous affine Szab\'o surfaces is given. We investigate in section 6, the twisted Riemannian extension of an affine Szab\'o connection on a two-dimensional affine manifold $(M,\nabla)$. We show that the twisted Riemannian extension of an affine Szab\'o manifold is a pseudo-Riemannian nilpotent Szab\'o manifold of neutral signature and the degree of nilpotency of the Szab\'o operators depends on the direction of the unit vectors.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{Prel}
Let $M$ be a $n$-dimensional smooth manifold and $\nabla$ be an affine connection on $M$. Let us consider a system of coordinates $(u_1,u_2,\cdots, u_n)$ in a neighborhood $\mathcal{U}$ of a point $p$ in $M$. In $\mathcal{U}$, the connection is given by
\begin{equation}\label{CoefCon1}
\nabla_{\partial_i} \partial_j = f^{k}_{ij}\partial_k,
\end{equation}
where $\{\partial_i = \frac{\partial}{\partial u_{i}}\}_{1\le i\le n}$ is a basis of the tangent space $T_{p}M$ and the functions $f^{k}_{ij}(i,j,k=1,2,3,\cdots, n)$ are called the \textit{coefficients of the affine connection}. The pair $(M, \nabla)$ shall be called \textit{affine manifold}.
Next, we define a few tensors fields associated to a given affine connection $\nabla$. The \textit{torsion tensor field} $T^{\nabla}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
T^{\nabla} (X,Y) = \nabla_X Y - \nabla_Y X - [X,Y],
\end{equation}
for any vector fields $X$ and $Y$ on $M$. The components of the torsion tensor $T^{\nabla}$ in local coordinates are
\begin{equation}
T^{k}_{ij} = f^{k}_{ij} - f^{k}_{ji}.
\end{equation}
If the torsion tensor of a given affine connection $\nabla$ vanishes, we say that $\nabla$ is torsion-free.
The \textit{curvature tensor field} $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(X,Y)Z:=\nabla_X \nabla_Y Z -\nabla_Y \nabla_XZ -\nabla_{[X,Y]} Z,
\end{equation}
for any vector fields $X$, $Y$ and $Z$ on $M$. The components in local coordinates are
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(\partial_k,\partial_l)\partial_j = \sum_i R^{i}_{jkl} \partial_i.
\end{equation}
We shall assume that $\nabla$ is torsion-free. If $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla} = 0$ on $M$, we say that $\nabla$ is \textit{flat affine connection}. It is know that $\nabla$ is flat if and only if around point there exist a local coordinates system such that $f^{k}_{ij}=0$, for all $i,j$ and $k$.
We define the \textit{Ricci tensor} $Ric^{\nabla}$ by
\begin{equation}
Ric^{\nabla}(X, Y) = \mbox{trace}\{Z\mapsto \mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(Z,X)Y\}.
\end{equation}
The components in local coordinates are given by
\begin{equation}
Ric^{\nabla}(\partial_j,\partial_k) = \sum_i R^{i}_{kij}.
\end{equation}
It is known in Riemannian geometry that the Levi-Civita connection of a Riemannian metric has symmetric Ricci tensor, that is, $Ric(Y,Z) = Ric(Z,Y)$. But this property is not true for an arbitrary affine connection with torsion-free. In fact, the property is closely related to the concept of parallel volume element (see \cite{ns} for more details).
In $2$-dimensional manifold $M$, the curvature tensor $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$ and the Ricci tensor $Ric^{\nabla}$ are related by
\begin{equation}\label{CurRicc1}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}(X, Y)Z = Ric^{\nabla}(Y, Z)X - Ric^{\nabla}(X, Z)Y.
\end{equation}
The covariant derivative of the curvature tensor $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
(\nabla_{X}\mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(Y, Z)W = (\nabla_{X} Ric^{\nabla})(Z, W)Y - (\nabla_{X} Ric^{\nabla})(Y, W)Z,
\end{equation}
where the covariant derivative of the Ricci tensor $Ric^{\nabla}$ is defined as
\begin{align}\label{CoDerRicNa1}
(\nabla_{X} Ric^{\nabla})(Z, W) & = X(Ric^{\nabla}(Z, W)) - Ric^{\nabla}(\nabla_{X}Z, W)\nonumber\\
&- Ric^{\nabla}(Z,\nabla_{X} W).
\end{align}
For $X\in\Gamma(T_{p} M)$, we define the affine Szab\'o operator $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ with respect to $X$ by $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X): T_{p} M\longrightarrow T_{p} M$ such that
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)Y = (\nabla_{X}\mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(Y, X)X,
\end{equation}
for any vector field $Y$. The affine Szab\'o operator satisfies $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)X=0$ and $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(\beta X)= \beta^{3}\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$, for $\beta\in\mathbb{R}-\{0\}$ and $X\in T_{p} M$. If $Y= \partial_{m}$, for $m=1,2,\cdots,n$ and $X=\sum_{i}\alpha_{i}\partial_{i}$, one gets
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)\partial_{m} = \sum_{i,j,k=1}^{n} \alpha_{i}\alpha_{j}\alpha_{k}(\nabla_{i}\mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(\partial_{m}, \partial_{j})\partial_{k},
\end{equation}
where $\nabla_{i}=\nabla_{\partial_{i}}$.
Let $A= (a_{ij})$ be the $(n\times n)$-matrix associated with the affine Szab\'o operator $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$. Then its characteristic polynomial $P_{\lambda} [\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]$ is given by
\begin{equation}
P_{\lambda} [\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]= \lambda^{n}-\sigma_{1}\lambda^{n-1} + \sigma_{2}\lambda^{n-2}-\cdots + (-1)^{n}\sigma_{n},
\end{equation}
where the coefficients $\sigma_{1},\cdots,\sigma_{n}$ are given by
\begin{align}
\sigma_{1} & =\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_{ii}= trace\, A,\nonumber\\
\sigma_{2} & =\sum_{i<j}
\left|\begin{array}{cc}
a_{ii}& a_{ij}\\
a_{ji}& a_{jj}
\end{array}\right|,\nonumber\\
\sigma_{3} & = \sum_{i<j<k}
\left|\begin{array}{ccc}
a_{ii}& a_{ij}& a_{ik}\\
a_{ji}& a_{jj}& a_{jk}\\
a_{ki}& a_{kj}& a_{kk}
\end{array}\right|,\nonumber\\
{}&\;\;\vdots\nonumber\\
\sigma_{n}& =\det A. \nonumber
\end{align}
\section{Affine connections with cyclic parallel Ricci tensor}\label{Affine}
In this section we investigate affine connections whose Ricci tensor are cyclic parallel. Two cases of dimensions (two and three) of smooth manifolds will be considered with specific affine connections.
We start with the formal definition.
\begin{definition}\cite{ks} {\rm An affine manifold $(M, \nabla)$ is said to be an $L_{3}$-space if its Ricci tensor $Ric^{\nabla}$ is cyclic parallel, that is
\begin{equation}\label{RicciCycP1}
(\nabla_X Ric^{\nabla})(X,X) = 0,
\end{equation}
for any vector field $X$ tangent to $M$ or, equivalently, if
$$
\mathfrak{G}_{X, Y, Z}(\nabla_{X}Ric)(Y, Z)=0,
$$
for any vector fields $X$, $Y$, $Z$ tangent to $M$, where $\mathfrak{G}_{X, Y, Z}$ denotes the cyclic sum with respect to $X$, $Y$ and $Z$.
}
\end{definition}
Locally, the equation (\ref{RicciCycP1}) takes the form
\begin{equation}
(\nabla_{(i}Ric^{\nabla})_{jk)}=0,
\end{equation}
or written out without the symmetrizing brackets
\begin{equation}
(\nabla_{i}Ric^{\nabla})_{jk} + (\nabla_{j}Ric^{\nabla})_{ki} + (\nabla_{k}Ric^{\nabla})_{ij} =0.
\end{equation}
For $\displaystyle X=\sum_{i}\alpha_{i}\partial_{i}$, it is easy to show that
\begin{equation}\label{RicciCycP2}
(\nabla_X Ric^{\nabla})(X,X) = \sum_{i,j,k} \alpha_{i}\alpha_{j}\alpha_{k}(\nabla_{i} Ric^{\nabla})_{jk}.
\end{equation}
Now, we are going to present two cases of affine connections in which we investigate the cyclic parallelism of the Ricci tensor.
\textit{Case 1: }
Let $M$ be a two-dimensional smooth manifold and $\nabla$ be an affine torsion-free connection. By (\ref{CoefCon1}), we have
\begin{equation}\label{CoefCon2}
\nabla_{\partial_i} \partial_j = f^{k}_{ij}\partial_k, \;\;\mbox{for}\;\; i,j,k=1,2,
\end{equation}
where $f_{ij}^{k} = f_{ij}^{k}(u_1,u_2)$. The components of the curvature tensor $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$ are given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla} (\partial_1,\partial_2)\partial_1 = a \partial_1 + b \partial_2,\;\;
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla} (\partial_1,\partial_2)\partial_2 = c \partial_1 + d \partial_2,\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ are given by
\begin{align}\label{Smalabcd}
a &= \partial_1 f^{1}_{12} - \partial_2 f^{1}_{11} + f^{1}_{12}f^{2}_{12} -f^{2}_{11}f^{1}_{22},\nonumber\\
b &= \partial_1 f^{2}_{12} - \partial_2 f^{2}_{11} + f^{2}_{11}f^{1}_{12} + f^{2}_{12}f^{2}_{12}
- f^{1}_{11}f^{2}_{12} - f^{2}_{11}f^{2}_{22},\nonumber\\
c &= \partial_1 f^{1}_{22} - \partial_2 f^{1}_{12}
+ f^{1}_{11}f^{1}_{22} + f^{1}_{12}f^{2}_{22} -f^{1}_{12}f^{1}_{12} - f^{2}_{12}f^{1}_{22},\nonumber\\
d &= \partial_1 f^{2}_{22} - \partial_2 f^{2}_{12} + f^{2}_{11}f^{1}_{22} -f^{1}_{12}f^{2}_{12}.
\end{align}
From (\ref{CurRicc1}), the components of the Ricci tensor are given by
\begin{align}
& Ric^{\nabla} (\partial_1,\partial_1) = - b,\;\; Ric^{\nabla} (\partial_1,\partial_2)= -d,\nonumber\\
& Ric^{\nabla} (\partial_2,\partial_1)=a, \;\; Ric^{\nabla} (\partial_2,\partial_2) =c.
\end{align}
\begin{proposition}\label{RiccCylPA1}
The affine connection $\nabla$ defined in (\ref{CoefCon2}) satisfies (\ref{RicciCycP1}) if the functions $f^{k}_{ij}$, for $i, j, k=1,2$, satisfy the following partial differential equations:
\begin{align}
& \partial_1 b - 2bf^{1}_{11} - (d-a)f^{2}_{11} = 0,\nonumber\\
& \partial_2 c -2cf^{2}_{22} + (d-a)f^{1}_{22} = 0,\nonumber\\
& \partial_1 a - \partial_2 b - \partial_1 d + 4bf^{1}_{12} -2cf^{2}_{11} + (d-a)(f^{1}_{11} + 2 f^{2}_{12}) =0,\nonumber\\
&\partial_2 a + \partial_1 c - \partial_2 d +2bf^{1}_{22} -4cf^{2}_{12} + (d-a)(2f^{1}_{12} + f^{2}_{22}) =0.
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using (\ref{RicciCycP1}) and (\ref{RicciCycP2}), one obtains
\begin{eqnarray*}
0&=& \alpha^{3}_{1} (\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_1,\partial_1)
+ \alpha^{3}_{2} (\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_2,\partial_2)\\
&+& \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_{2} \Big[(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_1,\partial_2)
+ (\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_2,\partial_1)
+ (\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_1,\partial_1)\Big]\\
&+& \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{2} \Big[(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_2,\partial_2)
+ (\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_1,\partial_2)
+ (\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_2,\partial_1)\Big].
\end{eqnarray*}
From a straightforward calculation using (\ref{CoDerRicNa1}), the components of the covariant derivative of the Ricci tensor $Ric^{\nabla}$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_1,\partial_1)&=& -\partial_1 b
+ 2bf^{1}_{11} + f^{2}_{11}(d-a);\\
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_1,\partial_2)&=& -\partial_1 d
+ d(f^{1}_{11} + f^{2}_{12}) + bf^{1}_{12} - cf^{2}_{11};\\
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_2,\partial_1)&=& \partial_1 a
- a(f^{1}_{11} + f^{2}_{12}) + bf^{1}_{12} - cf^{2}_{11};\\
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_2,\partial_2)&=& \partial_1 c
+ (d-a)f^{1}_{12} -2cf^{2}_{12};\\
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_1,\partial_1)&=& -\partial_2 b
+ 2bf^{1}_{12} + f^{2}_{12}(d-a);\\
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_1,\partial_2)&=& -\partial_2 d
+ d(f^{1}_{12} + f^{2}_{22}) + bf^{1}_{22} - cf^{2}_{12};\\
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_2,\partial_1)&=& \partial_2 a
- a(f^{1}_{12} + f^{2}_{22}) + bf^{1}_{22} - cf^{2}_{12};\\
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_2,\partial_2)&=& \partial_2 c
+ (d-a)f^{2}_{22} -2cf^{2}_{22}.
\end{eqnarray*}
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\textit{Case 2:}
Let $M$ be a three-dimensional smooth manifold and $\nabla$ be an affine torsion-free connection. Suppose that the action of the affine connection $\nabla$ on the basis of the tangent space $\{\partial_{i}\}_{1\le i\le 3}$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{3DimNabla1}
\nabla_{\partial_{i}} \partial_{i }= f_{i} \partial_{i}, \;\;\mbox{for}\;\; i=1,2,3,
\end{equation}
where $f_{i} =f_{i}(u_1,u_2,u_3)$ are smooth functions. Then the non-zero components of the curvature tensor $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$ of the connection $\nabla$ defined in (\ref{3DimNabla1}) are given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{R}^{\nabla} (\partial_{i},\partial_{j})\partial_{i} = -\partial_{j} f_{i} \partial_{i} \;\;\mbox{and}\;\; \mathcal{R}^{\nabla} (\partial_{i},\partial_{j})\partial_{j} = \partial_{i} f_{j} \partial_{j},
\end{equation}
for $i\neq j, i, j=1,2,3$. The non-zero components of the Ricci tensor of the connection (\ref{3DimNabla1}) are given by
\begin{equation}
Ric^{\nabla} (\partial_{i},\partial_{j})=-\partial_{i}f_{j},\;\;\mbox{for}\;\;i\neq j, i, j=1,2,3.
\end{equation}
The non-zero components of the covariant derivative of the Ricci tensor are given by
\begin{align}
(\nabla_{\partial_{i}} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_{j},\partial_{k})&= -\partial_{i}\partial_{j}f_{k} ,\;\;\;
(\nabla_{\partial_{i}} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_{i},\partial_{j}) = -\partial_{i}^{2}f_{j} + f_{i}\partial_{i}f_{j},\nonumber\\
(\nabla_{\partial_{i}} Ric^{\nabla})(\partial_{j},\partial_{i})&= -\partial_{i}\partial_{j}f_{i} + f_{i}\partial_{j}f_{i},
\end{align}
for $i\neq j\neq k, i, j, k=1,2,3$. In this case, the relation (\ref{RicciCycP2}) is explicitly given by
\begin{align}
(\nabla_X Ric^{\nabla})(X,X) & = \alpha_{1}^{2}\alpha_{2}\{-\partial_{1}^{2}f_{2} + f_{1}\partial_{1} f_{2} - \partial_{1}\partial_{2} f_{1} + f_{1}\partial_{2} f_{1}\} \nonumber\\
&+\alpha_{1}^{2}\alpha_{3}\{ -\partial_{1}^{2}f_{3} + f_{1}\partial_{1} f_{3} - \partial_{1}\partial_{3} f_{1} + f_{1}\partial_{3} f_{1}\}\nonumber\\
&+\alpha_{1} \alpha_{2}^{2}\{ -\partial_{2}^{2}f_{1}-\partial_{2}\partial_{1}f_{2} + f_{2}\partial_{1} f_{2} + f_{2}\partial_{2} f_{1}\}\nonumber\\
&+\alpha_{1}\alpha_{3}^{2}\{ -\partial_{3}^{2}f_{1} + f_{3}\partial_{3} f_{1} - \partial_{3}\partial_{1} f_{3} + f_{3}\partial_{1} f_{3}\}\nonumber\\
&+\alpha_{2}^{2}\alpha_{3}\{ -\partial_{2}^{2}f_{3} + f_{2}\partial_{2} f_{3} - \partial_{2}\partial_{3} f_{2} + f_{2}\partial_{3} f_{2}\}\nonumber\\
&+\alpha_{2}\alpha_{3}^{2}\{ -\partial_{3}^{2}f_{2} + f_{3}\partial_{3} f_{2} - \partial_{3}\partial_{2} f_{3} + f_{3}\partial_{2} f_{3}\}\nonumber\\
&-2\alpha_{1}\alpha_{2}\alpha_{3}\{ \partial_{1}\partial_{2}f_{3}+\partial_{1}\partial_{3}f_{2}+\partial_{2}\partial_{3}f_{1} \},\nonumber
\end{align}
for $\displaystyle X=\sum_{i=1}^{3}\alpha_{i}\partial_{i}$. Therefore, we have the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{RiccCylPA2}
The affine connection $\nabla$ defined in (\ref{3DimNabla1}) satisfies (\ref{RicciCycP1}) if the functions $f_{i}$, for $i=1,2, 3$, satisfy the following partial differential equations:
\begin{align}
\partial_{(i}\partial_{j}f_{k)}=0,
\;\;\mbox{and} \;\; \partial_{i}^{2}f_{j}+\partial_{i}\partial_{j} f_{i} - f_{i}(\partial_{i} f_{j}+ \partial_{j} f_{i} )=0,
\end{align}
for $i\neq j\neq k, i, j, k=1,2,3$.
\end{proposition}
The manifolds with cyclic parallel Ricci tensor, known as $L_{3}$-spaces, are well-developed in Riemannian geometry (see \cite{ks} and \cite{pt}, and references therein). The cyclic parallelism of the Ricci tensor is sometimes called the ``\textit{First Ledger condition}'' \cite{pt}. In \cite{sz2}, for instance, the author proved that a smooth Riemannian manifold satisfying the first Ledger condition is real analytic. Tod in \cite{to} used the same condition to characterize the four-dimensional K\"ahler manifolds which are not Einstein. It has also enriched the D'Atri spaces (see \cite{ks} and \cite{pt}, for more details).
\section{The affine Szab\'o manifolds}\label{AffineMani}
In this section we adapt the definition of pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifold given by Fiedler and Gilkey in \cite{fg} to the affine case. We shall prove that, on a smooth affine surface, the affine Szab\'o condition is closely related to the cyclic parallelism of the Ricci tensor.
\begin{definition}{\rm
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a smooth affine manifold and $p\in M$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $(M,\nabla)$ is called affine Szab\'o at $p \in M$ if the affine Szab\'o operator $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ has the same characteristic polynomial for every vector field $X$ on $M$.
\item[(ii)] $(M,\nabla)$ is called affine Szab\'o if $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at each
$p\in M$.
\end{enumerate}
}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{TheorSZA1}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be an $n$-dimensional affine manifold and $p\in M$. Then $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at $p\in M$
if and only if the characteristic polynomial of the affine Szab\'o operator $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ is
$
P_{\lambda}(\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)) = \lambda^{n},
$
for every $X \in T_p M$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If the characteristic polynomial of the affine Szab\'o operator at $p$ is given by $P_{\lambda}(\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)) = \lambda^{n}$, then the affine manifold $(M,\nabla)$ is obviously affine Szab\'o.
Assume that $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o, then for $X\in T_p M$, the characteristic polynomial of the affine Szab\'o operator $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ is given by
$
P_{\lambda} [\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]= \lambda^{n}-\sigma_{1}\lambda^{n-1} + \sigma_{2}\lambda^{n-2}-\cdots + (-1)^{n}\sigma_{n}.
$
Then for $\beta\in \mathbb{R}$, $\beta\neq 0$, the characteristic polynomial of the affine Szab\'o operator
$\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(\beta X)$ is given by
$
P_{\lambda} [\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(\beta X)]= \lambda^{n}-\sigma_{1} \beta^{3}\lambda^{n-1} + \sigma_{2}\lambda^{n-2}-\cdots + (-1)^{n} \beta^{3n}\sigma_{n}.
$
Since $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o, that is $P_{\lambda} [\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)] =P_{\lambda} [\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(\beta X)]$, it follows that $\sigma_{1} = \cdots = \sigma_{n}=0$ which complete the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
If $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at $p\in M$, then the Ricci tensor of $(M,\nabla)$ is cyclic parallel.
\end{corollary}
Now, we give a complete description of affine Szab\'o surfaces. We shall prove the following result:
\begin{theorem}\label{main}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a two-dimensional smooth affine manifold. Then $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at $p\in M$ if and only
if the Ricci tensor of $(M,\nabla)$ is cyclic parallel at $p\in M$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o. Let $X= \alpha_i \partial_i, \, i=1,2$ be a vector on $M$, then, using the connection (\ref{CoefCon2}), the affine Szab\'o operator is given by
\begin{equation}
(\nabla_{X} \mathcal{R}^{\nabla}) (\partial_1,X)X = A \partial_1 + B \partial_2, \;\;
(\nabla_{X} \mathcal{R}^{\nabla}) (\partial_2,X)X = C \partial_1 + D \partial_2,\nonumber
\end{equation}
where the coefficients $A$, $B$, $C$ and $D$ are given by
\begin{align*}
A &= \alpha^{2}_{1} \alpha_2 [\partial_1 a - a (f^{1}_{11} + f^{2}_{12})
+ b f^{1}_{12} - cf^{2}_{11}]\\
&+ \alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{2} [\partial_2 a + \partial_1 c - a (f^{1}_{12} + f^{2}_{22})
+ (d-a)f_{12}^{1}+ bf^{1}_{22} -3cf^{2}_{12}]\\
&+ \alpha^{3}_{2} [\partial_2 c -2cf^{2}_{22} + (d-a)f^{1}_{22}], \\
B &= \alpha^{2}_{1} \alpha_2 [\partial_1 b -2bf^{1}_{11} - (d-a)f^{2}_{11}]\\
&+ \alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{2} [\partial_2 b + \partial_1 d - 3bf^{1}_{12} +cf^{2}_{11}
-(d-a)f^{2}_{12} - d(f_{11}^{1} + f_{12}^{2})]\\
&+ \alpha^{3}_{2}[\partial_2 d -bf^{1}_{22} + cf^{2}_{12} - d(f^{1}_{12}+f^{2}_{22})],
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
C &= \alpha^{3}_{1} [-\partial_1 a + a(f^{1}_{11} +f^{2}_{12}) -bf^{1}_{12}]\\
&+ \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_2 [-\partial_2 a -\partial_1 c + a (f^{1}_{12} +f^{2}_{22})
-bf^{1}_{22} +3cf^{2}_{12} -(d-a)f^{1}_{12}]\\
&+ \alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{2} [-\partial_2 c + 2cf^{2}_{22} - (d-a)f^{1}_{22}],\\
D &= \alpha^{3}_{1}[-\partial_1 b +2 bf^{1}_{11} + (d-a)f^{2}_{11}]\\
&+ \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_2 [-\partial_2 b - \partial_1 d + 3bf^{1}_{12} - cf^{2}_{11}
+ d(f^{1}_{11} + f^{2}_{12}) + (d-a)f^{2}_{12}]\\
&+ \alpha_1\alpha^{2}_{2} [-\partial_2 d + bf^{1}_{22} -cf^{2}_{12}
+ d(f^{1}_{12} + f^{2}_{22})].
\end{align*}
The matrix associated to $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla} (X)$ with respect to the basis
$\{\partial_1, \partial_2\}$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\mathcal{S}^{\nabla} (X)) =
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
A&B\\
C&D\\
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Its characteristic polynomial is given by
$
P_{\lambda} [\mathcal{S}^{\nabla} (X)]=\lambda^2 -\lambda(A+D) + (AD-BC).
$
Since $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o, by Theorem \ref{TheorSZA1}, $0$ is the only eigenvalue of the affine Szab\'o operator $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$. Therefore, $\det(\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X))= AD-BC=0$ and $trace(\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X))= A+D=0$. The latter implies that
\begin{align}
&\partial_2 c -2cf^{2}_{22} + (d-a)f^{1}_{22} = 0,\;\;\;
-\partial_1 b +2 bf^{1}_{11} + (d-a)f^{2}_{11} = 0,\nonumber\\
&\partial_1 a -\partial_2 b - \partial_1 d + 4bf^{1}_{12} - 2cf^{2}_{11}
+ (d-a)(f^{1}_{11} + 2f^{2}_{12}) = 0,\nonumber\\
&\partial_2 a + \partial_1 c -\partial_2 d + 2bf^{1}_{22} -4cf^{2}_{12}
+(d-a)(2f^{1}_{12} + f^{2}_{22}) = 0.\nonumber
\end{align}
The converse is obvious.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
Let $\nabla$ be the affine connection on $\mathbb{R}^2$ defined by
$\nabla_{\partial_1}\partial_1 = f^{1}_{11} \partial_1$, $\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_2 = 0$, $\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_2 = f^{2}_{22}\partial_2$. Then $\nabla$ is affine Szab\'o if and only if the functions $f^{1}_{11}=f^{1}_{11} (u_1,u_2) ,f^{2}_{22}= f^{2}_{22} (u_1,u_2)$ satisfy the following partial differential equations: $\partial_{1} a - \partial_{1}d + (d-a) f^{1}_{11} = 0$, $\partial_{2} a - \partial_{2}d + (d-a) f^{2}_{22} = 0$, where $a$ and $d$ are defined in (\ref{Smalabcd}).
\end{corollary}
To support this, we have the following example. Consider on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ the torsion-free connection $\nabla$ with the only non-zero coefficient functions given by
$$
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_1 = (u_{1}+u_{2})\partial_{1}\;\;\mbox{and}\;\;\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_2 = (u_{1}+u_{2}+1)\partial_{2}.
$$
It is easy to check that $(\mathbb{R}^{2}, \nabla)$ is an affine Szab\'o manifold.
\begin{corollary}
Let $\nabla$ be the affine connection on $\mathbb{R}^2$ defined by $\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_1 = 0$, $\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_2 = f^{1}_{12} \partial_1$, $\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_2 = f^{1}_{22}\partial_1$. Then $\nabla$ is affine Szab\'o if and only if the functions $f^{1}_{12}= f^{1}_{12} (u_1,u_2)$ and $f^{1}_{22}=f^{1}_{22} (u_1,u_2)$ satisfy the following partial differential equations: $\partial_{1} a = 0$, $\partial_{2} c -a f^{1}_{22} =0$, $\partial_{2} a + \partial_{1} c -2af^{1}_{12} = 0$, where $a$ and $c$ are defined in (\ref{Smalabcd}).
\end{corollary}
Let consider on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ the torsion-free connection $\nabla$ with the only non-zero coefficient functions given by
$
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_2 = u_{2}\partial_{1}\;\;\mbox{and}\;\;\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_2 = u_{1}(1+u_{2})\partial_{1}.
$
It is easy to check that $(\mathbb{R}^{2}, \nabla)$ is an affine Szab\'o manifold.
Now, we give an example of a family of affine Szab\'o connections on a $3$-dimensional manifold. Let us
consider the affine connection defined in (\ref{3DimNabla1}), i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\partial_{i}} \partial_{i }= f_{i} \partial_{i}, \;\;\mbox{for}\;\; i=1,2,3,\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $f_{i} =f_{i}(u_{1}, u_{2}, u_{3})$ are smooth functions. For $\displaystyle X=\sum_{i=1}^{3}\alpha_{i}\partial_{i}$, the affine Szab\'o operator is given by
$$
(\nabla_{X} \mathcal{R}^{\nabla}) (\partial_{i},X)X = \sum_{j=1}^{3} A_{ji}\partial_{j},
$$
where
\begin{align*}
A_{11} &= \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_2 (-\partial_1\partial_2 f_1 + f_1\partial_2 f_1)
+ \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_3 (-\partial_1\partial_3 f_1 + f_1\partial_3 f_1)\\
&+ \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{2} (-\partial^{2}_{2} f_1 + f_2\partial_2 f_1)
+ \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{3} (-\partial^{2}_{3} f_1 + f_3\partial_3 f_1)\\
&+ \alpha_1\alpha_2\alpha_3(-2\partial_2\partial_3 f_1),\\
A_{21} &= \alpha^{3}_{2}(\partial_2\partial_1 f_2 - f_2\partial_1 f_2)
+ \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{2}(\partial^{2}_{1} f_2 - f_1\partial_1 f_2)
+ \alpha^{2}_{2}\alpha_{3} (\partial_3\partial_1 f_2),\\
A_{31} &= \alpha^{3}_{3}(\partial_3\partial_1 f_3 - f_3\partial_1 f_3)
+ \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{3}(\partial^{2}_{1} f_3 - f_1\partial_1 f_3)
+ \alpha_{2}\alpha^{2}_{3} (\partial_2\partial_1 f_3),\\
A_{12} &= \alpha^{3}_{1}(\partial_1\partial_2 f_1 - f_1\partial_2 f_1)
+ \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_{2}(\partial^{2}_{2} f_1 - f_2\partial_2 f_1)
+ \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_{3} (\partial_3\partial_2 f_1),\\
A_{22} &= \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_2 (-\partial^{2}_{1} f_2 + f_1\partial_1 f_2)
+ \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{2} (-\partial_2\partial_1 f_2 + f_2\partial_1 f_2)\\
&+ \alpha^{2}_{2}\alpha_{3} (-\partial_{2}\partial_3 f_2 + f_2\partial_3 f_2)
+ \alpha_{2}\alpha^{2}_{3} (-\partial^{2}_{3} f_2 + f_3\partial_3 f_2)\\
&+ \alpha_1\alpha_2\alpha_3(-2\partial_1\partial_3 f_2), \\
A_{32} &= \alpha^{3}_{3}(\partial_3\partial_2 f_3 - f_3\partial_2 f_3)
+ \alpha_{2}\alpha^{2}_{3}(\partial^{2}_{2} f_3 - f_2\partial_2 f_3)
+ \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{3} (\partial_1\partial_2 f_3), \\
A_{13} &= \alpha^{3}_{1}(\partial_1\partial_3 f_1 - f_1\partial_3 f_1)
+ \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_{3}(\partial^{2}_{3} f_1 - f_3\partial_3 f_1)
+ \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_{2} (\partial_2\partial_3 f_1), \\
A_{23} &= \alpha^{3}_{2}(\partial_2\partial_3 f_2 - f_2\partial_3 f_2)
+ \alpha^{2}_{2}\alpha_{3}(\partial^{2}_{3} f_2 - f_3\partial_3 f_2)
+ \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{2} (\partial_1\partial_3 f_2),\\
A_{33} &= \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_3 (-\partial^{2}_{1} f_3 + f_1\partial_1 f_3)
+ \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{3} (-\partial_3\partial_1 f_3 + f_3\partial_1 f_3)\\
&+ \alpha^{2}_{2}\alpha_{3} (-\partial^{2}_{2} f_3 + f_2\partial_2 f_3)
+ \alpha_{2}\alpha^{2}_{3}(-\partial_{3}\partial_2 f_3 + f_3\partial_2 f_3)\\
&+ \alpha_1\alpha_2\alpha_3(-2\partial_1\partial_2 f_3).
\end{align*}
For specific functions $f_{i}$, we have the following.
\begin{theorem}
Let $M=\mathbb{R}^3$ and let $\nabla$ be the torsion-free connection, whose the non-zero coefficients of the connection are given by $ f_1 = \frac{1}{2}u_1u^{2}_{2}$, $f_2 =-\frac{1}{2}u^{2}_{1}u_2$ and $f_3 = u_3$. Then $(M,\nabla)$ is an affine Szab\'o manifold.
\end{theorem}
We have also the following family of examples of affine Szab\'o connections.
\begin{theorem}
Let us consider a torsion free connection on $\mathbb{R}^3$ given by the following: $\nabla_{\partial_i} \partial_k = \frac{1}{u_i}\partial_k$, $\nabla_{\partial_j} \partial_k = \frac{1}{u_j}\partial_k$, $\nabla_{\partial_i} \partial_j = \frac{u_k}{u_iu_j}\partial_k$,
with $i\neq j \neq k; i,j,k=1,2,3$ and $u_i\neq 0,u_j\neq 0, u_k\neq 0$. Then
$(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
It is easy to see that the curvature tensor of the affine connections is flat.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}{\rm
The following affine connections on $\mathbb{R}^3$ given by:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_2 = \frac{1}{u_2}\partial_1,\,
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_3 = \frac{1}{u_3}\partial_1,\,
\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_3 = \frac{u_1}{u_2u_3}\partial_1 $;
\item $\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_2 = \frac{1}{u_1}\partial_2,\,
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_3 = \frac{u_2}{u_1u_3}\partial_2,\,
\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_3 = \frac{1}{u_3}\partial_2$;
\item $\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_2 = \frac{u_3}{u_1u_2}\partial_3,\quad
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_3 = \frac{1}{u_1}\partial_3,\quad
\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_3 = \frac{1}{u_2}\partial_3 $;
\end{enumerate}
are affine Szab\'o.}
\end{example}
\section{A classification of locally homogeneous affine Szab\'o manifolds in dimension two}
Homogeneity is one of the fundamental notions in differential geometry. In this section we consider the homogeneity of manifolds with affine connections in dimension two. This homogeneity means that for each two points of a manifold there is an affine transformation which sends one point into another. We characterize locally homogeneous connections which are Szab\'o in a two dimensional smooth manifold. Note that Locally homogeneous Riemannian structures were first studied by Singer in \cite{si}.
A smooth connection $\nabla$ on $M$ is \textit{locally homogeneous} \cite{op} if and only if it admits, in neighborhoods of each point $p \in M$, at least two linearly independent affine Killing vectors fields. An affine Killing vector field $X$ is characterized by the equation:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{locallyhomogeneous}
[X,\nabla_Y Z] - \nabla_Y [X,Z] - \nabla_{[X,Y]} Z =0
\end{eqnarray}
for any arbitrary vectors fields $Y$ and $Z$ on $M$. Let us express the vector field $X$ on $M$ in the form
\begin{equation*}
X = F(u_1,u_2) \partial_1 + G(u_1,u_2) \partial_2.
\end{equation*}
Writing the formula (\ref{locallyhomogeneous}) in local coordinates, we find that any affine Killing vector field $X$ must satisfy six basics equations. We shall write these equations in the simplified notation:
\begin{align*}
\partial_{11} F + f^{1}_{11} \partial_1 F +\partial_1 f^{1}_{11} F - f^{2}_{11} \partial_2 F
+ \partial_2 f^{1}_{11} G + 2 f^{1}_{12} \partial_1 G &= 0,\\
\partial_{11} G + 2f^{2}_{11} \partial_1 F + (2f^{2}_{12} -f^{1}_{11}) \partial_1 G
-f^{2}_{11} \partial_2 G + \partial_1 f^{2}_{11} F + \partial_2 f^{2}_{11} G &= 0,\\
\partial_{12} F + (f^{1}_{11} - f^{2}_{12})\partial_2 F + f^{1}_{22} \partial_1 G
+ f^{1}_{12} \partial_2 G + \partial_1 f^{1}_{12} F + \partial_2 f^{1}_{12} G &= 0,\\
\partial_{12} G + f^{2}_{12} \partial_1 F + f^{2}_{11} \partial_2 F
+ (f^{2}_{22} -f^{2}_{11}) \partial_1 G +\partial_1 f^{2}_{12} F + \partial_2 f^{2}_{12} G &= 0,\\
\partial_{22} F - f^{1}_{22}\partial_1 F +(2f^{1}_{12} - f^{2}_{22})\partial_2 F
+ 2f^{1}_{22}\partial_2 G +\partial_1 f^{1}_{22} F + \partial_2 f^{1}_{22} G &= 0,\\
\partial_{22} G +2 f^{2}_{12}\partial_2 F - f^{1}_{22}\partial_1 G + f^{2}_{22})\partial_2 G
\partial_1 f^{2}_{22} F + \partial_2 f^{2}_{22} G &= 0.
\end{align*}
The following result is the first classification of torsion free homogeneous connections on two dimensional manifolds.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoremak}\cite{op}
Let $\nabla$ be a locally homogeneous torsion free affine connection on a two-dimensional manifold $M$. Then, in a
neighborhood $\mathcal{U}$ of each point $u\in M$, either $\nabla$ is the Levi-Civita connection of the
standard metric of the unit sphere or, there is a system $(u_1,u_2)$ of local coordinates and constants $a,b,c,d,e,f$
such that $\nabla$ is expressed in $\mathcal{U}$ by one of the following formulas:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Type $\mathcal{A}$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\nabla_{\partial_1}\partial_1 = a\partial_1 + b\partial_2,\;\;
\nabla_{\partial_1}\partial_2 = c\partial_1 + d\partial_2,\;\;
\nabla_{\partial_2}\partial_2 = e\partial_1 + f\partial_2.
\end{eqnarray*}
\item Type $\mathcal{B}$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\nabla_{\partial_1}\partial_1 = \frac{1}{u_1}(a\partial_1 + b\partial_2),\;\;
\nabla_{\partial_1}\partial_2 = \frac{1}{u_1}(c\partial_1 + d\partial_2),\;\;
\nabla_{\partial_2}\partial_2 = \frac{1}{u_1}(e\partial_1 + f\partial_2).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
Next, we characterize all affine connections given in Theorem \ref{theoremak} which are \textit{affine Szab\'o}.
\begin{theorem}\label{TheoTypeA}
The affine manifolds of type $\mathcal{A}$ are affine Szab\'o if and only if they have parallel Ricci tensor.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The components of the Ricci tensor are given by $ Ric(\partial_1,\partial_1) = (ad -d^2 +bf -bc)$, $ Ric(\partial_1,\partial_2) = (cd-be)$, $Ric(\partial_2,\partial_1) = (cd-be)$, $ Ric(\partial_2,\partial_2) = (ae -de +cf-c^2)$.
The Ricci tensor is symmetric. Then, the covariant derivatives of the Ricci tensor are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric)(\partial_1,\partial_1) &=& 2(abc +ad^2 -a^2d -abf +b^2e -bcd),\\
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric)(\partial_1,\partial_2) &=& 2(bc^2 +bde -acd -bcf),\\
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric)(\partial_2,\partial_2) &=& 2(bce -ade -cdf +d^2e),\\
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric)(\partial_1,\partial_1) &=& 2(bc^2 +bde -acd -bcf ),\\
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric)(\partial_1,\partial_2) &=& 2(bce -ade -cdf +d^2e),\\
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric)(\partial_2,\partial_2) &=& 2(be^2 +c^2f -cf^2 -aef -cde +def).
\end{eqnarray*}
From Theoreom \ref{main}, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{TheoTypeB}
The affine manifolds of type $\mathcal{B}$ are affine Szab\'o if and only if the coefficients $a,b,c,d,e$ and $f$ satisfy
\begin{align*}
2abc+3bc-d-2ad-a^2d-bcd+d^2+ad^2+b^2e &= 0,\\
2c+ac+4bc^2-2cd-3acd+3be+3bde+2bce &= 0,\\
3c^2+3c^2d+e-ae+3bce+2de-3ade+3d^2e &= 0,\\
-2c^3+ace-2cde+be^2 &= 0.
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The components of the Ricci tensor are given by
\begin{align*}
Ric(\partial_1,\partial_1) &= \frac{1}{u^{2}_{1}}[d+ d(a -d) +b(f -c)],\;\;
Ric(\partial_1,\partial_2) = \frac{1}{u^{2}_{1}} (f + cd - be),\\
Ric(\partial_2,\partial_1) &= \frac{1}{u^{2}_{1}} (-c + cd - be),\;\;
Ric(\partial_2,\partial_2) = \frac{1}{u^{2}_{1}}[-e + e(a -d) + c(f -c)],
\end{align*}
and it is symmetric if and only if $f=-c$ holds. So we set $f=-c$. Then, the covariant derivatives of the
Ricci tensor are given by
\begin{align*}
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric)(\partial_1,\partial_1) &= \frac{2}{u^{3}_{1}} (2abc+3bc-d-2ad-a^2d-bcd+d^2+ad^2+b^2e),\\
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric)(\partial_1,\partial_2) &= \frac{1}{u^{3}_{1}} (2c+ac+2bc^2-2cd-2acd+3be+2bde+2bce),\\
(\nabla_{\partial_1} Ric)(\partial_2,\partial_2) &= \frac{2}{u^{3}_{1}} (3c^2+c^2d+e-ae+bce+2de-ade+d^2e),\\
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric)(\partial_1,\partial_1) &= \frac{2}{u^{3}_{1}} (2bc^2-acd+bde),
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric)(\partial_1,\partial_2) &= \frac{2}{u^{3}_{1}} (c^2d+bce-ade+d^2e),\\
(\nabla_{\partial_2} Ric)(\partial_2,\partial_2) &= \frac{2}{u^{3}_{1}} (-2c^3+ace-2cde+be^2).
\end{align*}
A straightforward calculation using the Theorem \ref{main} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
As stated by Brozos \textit{et al.} in \cite{broz2}, the surfaces of Type $\mathcal{A}$ and Type $\mathcal{B}$ can have quite different geometric properties. For instance, the Ricci tensor of any Type $\mathcal{A}$ surface is symmetric while this property can fail for a Type $\mathcal{B}$ surface. Thus the geometry of a Type $\mathcal{B}$ surface is not as rigid as that of a Type $\mathcal{A}$ surface. This is closely related to the existence of non-flat affine Osserman structures (see \cite{gar} and many references therein). This difference in terms of geometric properties is also remarkable when those surfaces satisfy the Szab\'o condition (Theorem \ref{TheoTypeA} and \ref{TheoTypeB}).
In the paper \cite{broz1}, the authors determined the moduli space of Type $\mathcal{A}$ affine geometries. Depending on the signature it is either a smooth
2-dimensional surface or a smooth 2-dimensional surface with a single cusp point (signature (2, 0)). They also wrote down complete sets of invariants that determine the local isomorphism type depending on the rank of the Ricci tensor.
Clearly the condition that the Szab\'o operator is nilpotent is gauge invariant and therefore depends only on the Christoffel symbols modulo the action of the gauge group. This opens perspective studies in order to have more invariant formulation using recent classification results of Brozos-Vazquez \textit{et al.} (see \cite{broz1, broz2} for more details). Note that the classification of locally homogeneous affine connections in two dimension is a nontrivial problem. (see \cite{ak} and \cite{op} and the reference therein for more information).
\section{The twisted Riemannian extensions of an affine Szab\'o manifold}
Affine Szab\'o connections are of interest not only in affine geometry, but also in the study of pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o metrics since they provide some nice examples without Riemannian analogue by means of the Riemannian extensions and the twisted Riemannian extensions.
A pseudo-Riemannian manifold $(M,g)$ is said to be Szab\'o if the Szab\'o operators $(\nabla_X R)(\cdot,X)X$
has constant eigenvalues on the unit pseudo-sphere bundles $S^{\pm}(TM)$ (\cite{gis}). Any Szab\'o manifold is locally
symmetric in the Riemannian ~\cite{sz1} and the Lorentzian ~\cite{gs} setting but the higher signature case supports examples
with nilpotent Szabó operators (cf. ~\cite{gis} and the references therein). Next we will use the twisted
Riemannian contruction to exhibit a four-dimensional Szab\'o metric where the degree of nilpotency of the associated
Szab\'o operators changes at each point depending on the direction.
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be an affine manifold of dimension $n$. The \textit{Riemannian extension} is the pseudo-Riemannian metric
$g_{\nabla}$ on $T^* M$ of neutral signature $(n,n)$, which is given in local coordinates relative to the frame
$\{\partial_{u_1},\cdots,\partial_{u_n},\partial_{u_{1'}},\cdots,\partial_{u_{n'}}\}$ by
\begin{equation}
g_{\nabla} = 2du_i \circ du_{i'} - 2u_{k'}\Gamma^{k}_{ij}du_i \circ du_j
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma^{k}_{ij}$ give the Christoffel symbols of the affine connection $\nabla$. Riemannian extension were
originally defined by Patterson and Walker \cite{pw} and further investigated in relating pseudo-Riemannian properties
of $N$ with the affine structure of the base manifold $(M,\nabla)$. Moreover, Riemannian extension were also considered
in \cite{ks} in relation with $L_3$-spaces. One has:
\begin{theorem}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a two-dimensional smooth torsion-free affine manifold. Then the following assertions are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(M,\nabla)$ is an affine Szab\'o manifold.
\item The Riemannian extension $(T^*M,g_{\nabla})$ of $(M,\nabla)$ is a pseudo-Riemannian nilpotent Szab\'o manifold
of neutral signature.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We also have the following:
\begin{theorem}\cite{ks}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a smooth torsion-free affine manifold of dimension $n\geq 3$. Then the following
assertions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $(M,\nabla)$ is an affine Szab\'o manifold, then its Riemannian extension $(T^*M, g_{\nabla})$ is a pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifold.
\item If the Ricci tensor of $(M,\nabla)$ is symmetric and the Riemannian extension $(T^*M,g_{\nabla})$ of $(M,\nabla)$
is a pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifold, then $(M,\nabla)$ is an affine Szab\'o manifold.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
More generally, if $\Phi$ is a symmetric $(0,2)$-tensor field on $M$, then the \textit{twisted Riemannian extension}
$g_{\nabla,\Phi}$, is the metric of neutral signature on $T^*M$ given by
\begin{equation}
g_{\nabla,\Phi} =
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
\Phi_{ij}(\vec{u})-2u_{k'}\Gamma^{k}_{ij}&Id_n\\
Id_n&0\\
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation}
Thus in particular, if $\nabla$ is flat, the Szab\'o operators of $g_{\nabla,\Phi}$ are nilpotent and the couple $(N,g_{\nabla,\Phi})$ is a Szab\'o pseudo-Riemannian manifold (\cite{broz}). Here, we consider the twisted Riemannian of a not flat affine connection and we will prove the following result:
\begin{theorem}
Let $M=\mathbb{R}^2$ and let $\nabla$ be the torsion-fres connection, whose the non-zero Christoffel symbols are
given by $\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_1 = (u_{1}+u_{2})\partial_{1}$ and $\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_2 = (u_{1}+u_{2}+1)\partial_{2}$.
Let $\overline{g}:=g_{\nabla,\Phi}$ on $T^*M$. Then $\overline{g}$ is a Szab\'o metric of signature $(2,2)$. Moreover
the degree of nilpotency of the Szab\'o operators $(\nabla_X R)(\cdot,X)X$ depends on the direction $X$ at each point.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a $2$-dimensional affine manifold. The twisted Riemannian extension of the following connection
$
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_1 = (u_{1}+u_{2})\partial_{1}
$
and
$
\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_2 = (u_{1}+u_{2}+1)\partial_{2}
$
is the pseudo-Riemannian metric $\overline{g}$ on the cotangent bundle $T^* M$ of neutral signature $(2,2)$ defined by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\overline{g} &=& \Big[\Phi_{11}(u_1,u_2)-2(u_1+u_2)u_3\Big]du_1\otimes du_1
+ 2\Phi_{12}(u_1,u_2)du_1\otimes du_2\\
&+& 2du_1\otimes du_3 + \Big[\Phi_{22}(u_1,u_2)-2(u_1+u_2+1)u_4\Big]du_2\otimes du_2
+ 2du_2\otimes du_4.
\end{eqnarray*}
The Levi-Civita connection is determined by the Christoffel symbols as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\varGamma^{1}_{11} &=& u_1+u_2,\quad \varGamma^{2}_{22} = (u_1+u_2+1),\\
\varGamma^{3}_{13} &=& -(u_1+u_2),\quad \varGamma^{4}_{24} = -(u_1+u_2+1),\\
\varGamma^{3}_{11}&=& \frac{1}{2}\partial_1 \Phi_{11}(u_1,u_2) - (u_1+u_2)[\Phi_{11}(u_1,u_2)-2(u_1+u_2)u_3]-u_3,\\
\varGamma^{4}_{11} &=& \partial_1 \Phi_{12}(u_1,u_2) -\frac{1}{2}\partial_2 \Phi_{11}(u_1,u_2) -(u_1+u_2)\Phi_{12}(u_1,u_2)+u_3,\\
\varGamma^{3}_{12} &=& \frac{1}{2}\partial_2 \Phi_{11}(u_1,u_2) -u_3,\quad
\varGamma^{4}_{12} = \frac{1}{2}\partial_1 \Phi_{22}(u_1,u_2) -u_4,\\
\varGamma^{3}_{22} &=& \partial_2 \Phi_{12}(u_1,u_2) -\frac{1}{2}\partial_1 \Phi_{22}(u_1,u_2)-(u_1+u_2+1)\Phi_{12}(u_1,u_2)+u_4,\\
\varGamma^{4}_{22}&=& \frac{1}{2}\partial_2\Phi_{22}(u_1,u_2)-(u_1+u_2+1)[\Phi_{22}(u_1,u_2)-2(u_1+u_2+1)u_4]-u_4.
\end{eqnarray*}
A straightforward calculation from the Christoffel symbols shows that the non zero components curvature tensor are given by
\begin{align*}
R(\partial_1,\partial_2)\partial_1 &= -\partial_1 + \Big[\Phi_{11}
-2(u_1+u_2)u_3 \Big]\partial_3\\
&+ \Big[\frac{1}{2}\partial^{2}_{1}\Phi_{22} -\partial_1\partial_2 \Phi_{12} +\frac{1}{2}\partial^{2}_{2}\Phi_{11}
+\Phi_{12}\\
&+ (u_1+u_2+1)\Big(\partial_1\Phi_{12}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_2\Phi_{11}\Big)\\
&+ (u_1+u_2)\Big(\partial_2\Phi_{12}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_1\Phi_{22}\Big)-(u_1+u_2)(u_1+u_2+1)\Phi_{12}\\
&+ (u_1+u_2+1)u_3+(u_1+u_2)u_4\Big]\partial_4,
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
R(\partial_1,\partial_2)\partial_2 &= \partial_2 -\Big[\frac{1}{2}\partial^{2}_{1}\Phi_{22}-\partial_1\partial_2 \Phi_{12}
+\frac{1}{2}\partial^{2}_{2}\Phi_{11}+ \Phi_{12}\\
&+ (u_1+u_2+1)\Big(\partial_1\Phi_{12}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_2\Phi_{11}\Big)\\
&+ (u_1+u_2)\Big(\partial_2\Phi_{12}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_1\Phi_{22}\Big)-(u_1+u_2)(u_1+u_2+1)\Phi_{12}\\
&+ (u_1+u_2+1)u_3+(u_1+u_2)u_4\Big]\partial_3\\
&- \Big[\Phi_{22}-2(u_1+u_2+1)u_4\Big]\partial_4,\\
R(\partial_1,\partial_2)\partial_3 &= \partial_3, \;\;
R(\partial_1,\partial_2)\partial_4 =-\partial_4, \;\;
R(\partial_1,\partial_3)\partial_1 =-\partial_4, \;\;
R(\partial_1,\partial_3)\partial_2 = \partial_3.
\end{align*}
Let $X=\sum_{i=1}^{4}\alpha_i\partial_i$ be a non-null vector, where $\{\partial_i\}$ denotes the coordinates basis. The associated Szab\'o operator $(\nabla_X R)(\cdot,X)X$ can be expressed with respect to the coordinates basis $\{\partial_i\}$
as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{S}(X)=
\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
a_{11}&a_{12}&0&0\\
a_{21}&a_{22}&0&0\\
a_{31}&a_{32}&a_{33}&0\\
a_{41}&a_{42}&a_{43}&0\\
\end{array}
\right),
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{align*}
a_{11} &= f_1(u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4),\, a_{21} = f_2(u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4),\,a_{31} = f_3(u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4);\\
a_{41} &= f_4(u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4),\, a_{21} = f_1(u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4),\,a_{22} = f_2(u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4);\\
a_{32} &= f_3(u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4),\, a_{42} = f_4(u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4);\\
a_{33} &= [\alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_2(u_1+u_2) + \alpha_{1}\alpha^{2}_{2}(u_1+u_2+1);\\
a_{43} &= -[\alpha^{3}_{1}(u_1+u_2) + \alpha^{2}_{1}\alpha_2(u_1+u_2+1).
\end{align*}
For the particular choice of the unit vectors $X_1=\partial_1 + \partial_3$ and $X_2=\partial_2+\partial_4$, respectively, it is easy to shows that $\mathcal{S}(X_1)$ is three-step nilpotent while $\mathcal{S}(X_2)$ is two-step nilpotent.
\end{proof}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The first author would like to thank the University of KwaZulu-Natal for financial support. The authors would like to thank Professor P. Gilkey (University of Oregon, USA) for reading the manuscript and for his valuable comments. They also thank the referee for his/her valuable suggestions and comments.
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Sparse domination}
Sparse domination has been introduced by Lerner \cite{MR3085756} in order to simplify the proof of Hyt\"onen's $A_{2}$ theorem (see \cite{MR3204859} for a comprehensive history of this result).
A new approach to sparse domination via weak type endpoint estimates has been recently discovered by Lacey \cite[Theorem 4.2]{arXiv:1501.05818}, quantitatively refined by Hytönen, Roncal, and Tapiola \cite[Theorem 2.4]{arXiv:1510.05789}, and streamlined by Lerner \cite{arXiv:1512.07247}.
Our first result is an abstract implementation of Lacey's argument that can be applied as a black box in a number of situations, for instance to multilinear operators (recovering the sparse domination result in \cite{arXiv:1512.02400}), to intrinsic square functions (see \cite{arXiv:1605.02936}, where the second author uses Theorem~\ref{thm:sparse-domination} to extend some results in \cite{arXiv:1505.00195}), and also to variational truncations of singular integrals that will be the second topic of this article.
We will use the following version of the nontangential maximal function.
Let $(X,\rho,\mu)$ be a space of homogeneous type (see Section~\ref{sec:prelim} for definitions) and let $F$ be a function on the set
\[
\mathcal{X} := \{(x,s,t)\in X\times (0,\infty)\times (0,\infty) : s\leq t\}.
\]
We define the non-tangentional maximal operator (of aperture $a\geq 0$) localized to a set $Q\subset X$ by
\[
(\mathcal{N}_{a,Q} F)(x) := 1_{Q}(x) \sup_{y\in X,\rho(x,y)<as<at\leq \mathrm{dist}(y,X\setminus Q)} F(y,s,t).
\]
We will omit $Q$ from the notation if $Q=X$ and we will also omit $a$ if $a=1$.
Now we state our version of Lacey's sparse domination principle.
The notions of adjacent systems of dyadic cubes and sparse collections are recalled in Section~\ref{sec:prelim}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:sparse-domination}
For every space of homogeneous type $(X,\rho,\mu)$ and every choice of adjacent systems of dyadic cubes $\mathcal{D}^{\alpha}$ there exist $\epsilon,\eta>0$ such that the following holds.
Let $F:\mathcal{X}\to [0,\infty]$ be a function that is monotonic in the sense that
\[
s\leq s'\leq t'\leq t \implies F(x,s',t')\leq F(x,s,t)
\]
and subadditive in the sense that
\[
s\leq s'\leq t \implies F(x,s,t)\leq F(x,s,s')+F(x,s',t).
\]
Suppose that for every dyadic cube $Q$ there exists $c_{Q}\geq 0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:local-weak(1,1)-bound}
\mu\{\mathcal{N}_{Q}F > c_{Q}\} \leq \epsilon \mu(Q).
\end{equation}
Then there exist $\eta$-sparse collections $\mathcal{S}^{\alpha,k_{0}} \subset \mathcal{D}^{\alpha}$ of cubes such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sparse-domination}
\mathcal{N} F \leq \liminf_{k_{0}\to -\infty} \sum_{\alpha} \sum_{Q\in\mathcal{S}^{\alpha,k_{0}}} 1_{Q} c_{Q}
\end{equation}
holds pointwise almost everywhere.
\end{theorem}
One situation in which Theorem~\ref{thm:sparse-domination} does not apply as a black box is that of commutators of (multi)linear operators with BMO functions, and we provide the necessary modifications to the argument in Section~\ref{sec:commutator}, where a multilinear extension of \cite[Theorem 1.1]{arXiv:1604.01334} is proved.
\subsection{Variational truncations of singular integrals}
In this part of the article we return to the space $X=\mathbb{R}^{d}$ with the Euclidean distance and the Lebesgue measure.
Let $K$ be an $\omega$-Calder\'on--Zygmund (CZ) kernel (see Section~\ref{sec:prelim} for definitions) and consider the corresponding truncation operator given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Top}
\mathcal{T} f(x,s,t) := \int_{s<|x-y|<t} K(x,y) f(y) \mathrm{d} y.
\end{equation}
For $1\leq r<\infty$ we define the homogeneous%
\footnote{The dot in the notation ``$\dot{V}^{r}$'' is not standard and is motivated by the embeddings $\dot{B}_{r}^{1/r,1} \to \dot{V}^{r} \to \dot{B}_{r}^{1/r,\infty}$ between the spaces of bounded homogeneous variation and homogeneous Besov spaces \cite{MR0380389}.}
variation operator, acting on functions on $\mathcal{X}$, by
\[
(\hVop F)(x,s,t) := \sup_{s\leq t_{1}<\dots <t_{J} \leq t} \big( \sum_{j=1}^{J-1} |F(x,t_{j},t_{j+1})|^{r} \big)^{1/r},
\]
and analogously for $r=\infty$ with the $\ell^{\infty}$ norm in place of the $\ell^{r}$ norm.
It is known that, if the kernel $K$ is of convolution type, i.e.\ $K(x,y)=k(x-y)$, satisfies the cancellation condition
\[
\int_{\partial B(0,t)} k(x) \mathrm{d} x = 0,
\qquad t>0,
\]
and satisfies one of the following additional conditions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{lem:VT-unweighted:homogeneous} the kernel $k$ is homogeneous of degree $-d$, that is, $k(tx)=t^{-d}k(x)$ for $t>0$, or
\item\label{lem:VT-unweighted:smooth} the kernel $k$ satisfies the smoothness condition $|k'(y)| \lesssim |y|^{-d-1}$,
\end{enumerate}
then, for $r>2$, the operator $\mathcal{N}_{0} \circ \hVop \circ \mathcal{T}$ is bounded on $L^{p}(\mathbb{R}^{d})$ and has weak type (1,1).
The strong type bounds in the case \ref{lem:VT-unweighted:homogeneous} have been proved in \cite[Theorem A]{MR1953540} (see also \cite{MR2434308} and \cite{arXiv:1508.03872}) and in the case \ref{lem:VT-unweighted:smooth} in \cite[Theorem A.1]{arXiv:1512.07523}.
In both cases the $L^{p}$ bounds imply the weak type $(1,1)$ bound by \cite[Theorem B]{MR1953540} (note that the assumption (1.8) in that article follows from the Dini condition).
Our second main result is that these bounds remain true with $\mathcal{N}_{0}$ replaced by $\mathcal{N}_{a}$, $a>0$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:nontangentional-variation}
Let $K$ be an $\omega$-CZ kernel on $\mathbb{R}^{d}$, $r>2$, and assume that $\mathcal{N}_{0} \circ \hVop \circ \mathcal{T}$ has weak type (1,1).
Then also $\mathcal{N}_{a} \circ \hVop \circ \mathcal{T}$ has weak type (1,1) for every $a>0$.
\end{theorem}
The novelty of this result are the sharp truncations in \eqref{eq:Top}.
An analogous result with $1_{(s,t)}$ replaced by appropriately scaled smooth truncations is implicitly contained in \cite{MR3065022}.
The appearance of cones with positive aperture in Theorem~\ref{thm:nontangentional-variation} allows us to apply Theorem~\ref{thm:sparse-domination} to variational truncations of singular integrals.
Indeed, the localized operator $\mathcal{N}_{Q}\circ\hVop\circ\mathcal{T}$ is dominated by the global operator $\mathcal{N}\circ\hVop\circ\mathcal{T}$, and therefore has weak type (1,1) uniformly in $Q$.
On the other hand, the localized operator depends only on the values of $f$ on $Q$, and therefore \eqref{eq:local-weak(1,1)-bound} is satisfied for the function $F=\hVop\mathcal{T} f$ with $c_{Q}=\frac{C}{\epsilon} |Q|^{-1} \int_{Q} |f|$.
Therefore, $\mathcal{N} \circ \hVop \circ \mathcal{T} f$ can be estimated by sparse operators of the form \eqref{eq:sparse-operator}.
Sparse operators are known to satisfy very good weighted estimates, the currently best results can be found in \cite{arXiv:1509.00273} ($L^{p}$ bounds with $p>1$) and \cite{MR3455749} (the weak type (1,1) endpoint).
Consequently, we obtain sharp weighted estimates for the variationally truncated operators $\mathcal{N} \circ \hVop \circ \mathcal{T}$, unifying the previous results for sharp truncations with unspecified dependence on the characteristic of the weight \cite{MR3283159,arXiv:1511.05129} and for smooth truncations with sharp dependence on the characteristic of the weight \cite{MR3065022}.
\section{Notation and preliminaries}
\label{sec:prelim}
\subsection{Spaces of homogeneous type}
A \emph{quasi-metric} on a set $X$ is a function $\rho : X\times X\to [0,\infty)$ such that $\rho(x,y)=0 \iff x=y$ that is symmetric and satisfies the quasi-triangle inequality
\[
\rho(x,y) \leq A_{0} (\rho(x,z) + \rho(z,y))
\quad\text{for all}\quad
x,y,z\in X
\]
with some $A_{0}<\infty$ independent of $x,y,z$.
A measure $\mu$ on a quasi-metric space $(X,\rho)$ is called \emph{doubling} if there exists $A_{1}<\infty$ such that
\[
\mu(B(x,2r)) \leq A_{1} \mu(B(x,r))
\quad\text{for all}\quad
x\in X,r>0,
\]
where $B(x,r)=\{y\in X : \rho(x,y)<r\}$ are the quasimetric balls of radius $r$.
These balls need not be open, but can be made open upon passing to an equivalent quasi-metric \cite{MR546295}.
A tuple $(X,\rho,\mu)$ consisting of a set $X$, a quasi-metric $\rho$, and a doubling measure $\mu$ is called a \emph{space of homogeneous type}.
We will frequently denote the measure of a set $Q$ by $|Q|=\mu(Q)$ and the average of a function $f$ over $Q$ by $\mean{f}=|Q|^{-1} \int_{Q} f \mathrm{d}\mu$.
\subsection{Adjacent systems of dyadic cubes}
Filtrations on spaces of homogeneous type that closely resemble dyadic filtrations on $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ have been first constructed by Christ \cite{MR1096400} and are now commonly known as \emph{Christ cubes}.
For our purposes we do not need the small boundary property enjoyed by the Christ cubes, but we do need adjacent systems of cubes that have covering properties similar to those of shifted dyadic cubes in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$.
Such systems have been constructed in \cite{MR2901199}.
\begin{definition}
Let $(X,\mu)$ be a measure space.
A \emph{system of dyadic sets} $\mathcal{D}$ consists of a sequence $(\mathcal{D}_{k})_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}$ of collections of measurable subsets of $X$ such that for all $l\leq k$, $l,k\in\mathbb{Z}$
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{cc:cover} $\mu(X\setminus\cup_{Q\in\mathcal{D}_{k}}Q)=0$.
\item\label{cc:nested} For each $Q\in\mathcal{D}_{k}$ and $Q'\in\mathcal{D}_{l}$ either $Q\subseteq Q'$ or $Q\cap Q'=\emptyset$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
By an abuse of notation the sets $Q$ remember their generation $k(Q)$ (the \emph{unique} number such that $Q\in\mathcal{D}_{k(Q)}$), even though it is allowed that the same $Q$ (viewed as a set) may occur in different generations $\mathcal{D}_{k}$.
The relation $Q'\subseteq Q$ includes the inequality $k(Q')\geq k(Q)$ and the relation $Q'=Q$ includes $k(Q')=k(Q)$.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:cc}
Let $(X,\rho,\mu)$ be a quasi-metric measure space and assume that the measure $\mu$ has full support.
A \emph{system of dyadic cubes} is a system of dyadic sets $\mathcal{D}$ such that for some $0<\delta<1$, $0<c_{1} \leq C_{1}<\infty$ and all $k\in\mathbb{Z}$ and $Q=Q_{\alpha}^{k}\in\mathcal{D}_{k}$ there exists $z=z(Q)=z_{\alpha}^{k}\in X$ such that $B(z,a_{0}\delta^{k}) \subseteq Q \subseteq B(z,C_{1}\delta^{k})$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Let $(X,\rho,\mu)$ be a quasi-metric measure space and assume that the measure $\mu$ has full support.
Systems of dyadic cubes $\mathcal{D}^{\alpha}$, $\alpha\in A$, are said to be \emph{adjacent} if there exists $C_{3}<\infty$ such that for every $z\in X$ and $r>0$ there exist $\alpha\in A$, $k\in\mathbb{Z}$, and $Q\in\mathcal{D}^{\alpha}_{k}$ such that $B(z,r) \subset Q \subset B(z,C_{3}r)$.
\end{definition}
It is known that in every space of homogeneous type there exists a finite collection of adjacent systems systems of dyadic cubes \cite[Theorem 4.1]{MR2901199}.
\begin{example}
Let $X=\mathbb{R}^{d}$ with the Euclidean distance and the Lebesgue measure.
For each $\alpha\in\{0,1,2\}^{d}$ the corresponding \emph{shifted system of dyadic cubes} is given by
\[
\mathcal{D}^{\alpha} = \{ 2^{-k}([0,1)^{d} + m + (-1)^{k}\frac13 \alpha), k\in\mathbb{Z}, m\in\mathbb{Z}^{d}\}.
\]
Then the systems $\mathcal{D}^{\alpha}$, $\alpha\in\{0,1,2\}^{d}$, are adjacent.
In fact, on $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ one can construct $d+1$ shifted systems of dyadic cubes that are adjacent \cite{MR1993970}.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
Let $(X,\mu)$ be a measure space and let $\mathcal{D}$ be a system of dyadic sets.
Define a metric on $X$ by
\[
\rho(x,x') := \inf\{ 2^{-k} : \exists Q\in\mathcal{D}_{k} : x,x'\in Q\}.
\]
Then the system $\mathcal{D}$ is a system of dyadic cubes with respect to this metric, and this system is adjacent.
For instance, the standard dyadic cubes in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ are an adjacent system of dyadic cubes with respect to the dyadic metric.
This does not preclude one from considering CZ operators on $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ with respect to the Euclidean metric and allows one to recover Lerner's version \cite{arXiv:1512.07247} of the pointwise sparse domination theorem from Theorem~\ref{thm:sparse-domination}.
\end{example}
\subsection{Sparse and Carleson collections}
Let $\mathcal{D}$ be a system of dyadic sets on a measure space $(X,\mu)$.
A collection $\mathcal{S}\subset\mathcal{D}$ is called
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{$\eta$-sparse} if there exist pairwise disjoint subsets $E(Q)\subset Q\in\mathcal{S}$ with $|E(Q)| \geq \eta |Q|$ and
\item \emph{$\Lambda$-Carleson} if one has $\sum_{Q'\subset Q, Q'\in\mathcal{S}} \mu(Q') \leq \Lambda \mu(Q)$ for all $Q\in\mathcal{D}$.
\end{enumerate}
It is known that a collection is $\eta$-sparse if and only if it is $1/\eta$-Carleson \cite[\textsection 6.1]{arXiv:1508.05639}.
The corresponding \emph{sparse operator} is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sparse-operator}
A_{\mathcal{S}}f = \sum_{Q\in\mathcal{S}} 1_{Q} \<f\>_{Q},
\quad\text{where}\quad
\<f\>_{Q} = |Q|^{-1} \int_{Q} f.
\end{equation}
\subsection{$\omega$-Calder\'on--Zygmund kernels}
An $\omega$-Calder\'on--Zygmund (CZ) kernel is a function $K:\mathbb{R}^{d}\times \mathbb{R}^{d} \setminus (\mathrm{diagonal}) \to \mathbb{C}$ that satisfies the size estimate
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:size}
|K(x,y)| \leq \frac{C_{K}}{|x-y|^{d}}
\end{equation}
and the smoothness estimate
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:smoothness}
|K(x,y)-K(x',y)| + |K(y,x)-K(y,x')| \leq \omega\big( \frac{|x-x'|}{|x-y|} \big) \frac{1}{|x-y|^{d}}
\end{equation}
for $|x-y|>2|x-x'|>0$ with some \emph{modulus of continuity} $\omega :[0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ (that is, a subadditive function: $\omega(t+s)\leq \omega(t)+\omega(s)$ for all $s,t\geq 0$) that satisfies the \emph{Dini condition}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Dini}
\|\omega\|_{\mathrm{Dini}} := \int_{0}^{1} \omega(t) \frac{\mathrm{d} t}{t} < \infty.
\end{equation}
\section{Uncentered variational estimates}
\label{sec:no-weights}
Consider the averaging operator
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Aop}
\mathcal{A} f(x,s,t) := A_{t}f(x)-A_{s}f(x),
\quad
A_{t}f(x) := \fint_{|x-y|<t} f(x+y) \mathrm{d} y.
\end{equation}
It satisfies the following uncentered variational estimates.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:VA-unweighted}
Let $r>2$ and $a\geq 0$.
Then $\mathcal{N}_{a}\circ \hVop\circ\mathcal{A}$ is bounded on $L^{p}(\mathbb{R}^{d})$, $1<p<\infty$, and has weak type $(1,1)$.
\end{lemma}
Variational estimates for averaging operators go back to \cite[Section 3]{MR1019960}.
The only new aspect of Lemma~\ref{lem:VA-unweighted} is that the variations are maximized over a conical region when $a>0$.
This is easy to achieve using the uncentered square function from \cite{arxiv:1409.7120}.
\begin{proof}[Sketch of proof]
The $L^{p}$, $1<p<\infty$, bound for the dyadic version of this operator is a direct consequence of L\'epingle's inequality for martingales.
The real version can be compared with the dyadic version using the uncentered square function from \cite[Theorem 1.4]{arxiv:1409.7120}.
Finally, the weak type $(1,1)$ bound follows by \cite[Proposition 5.1]{arxiv:1409.7120}.
Note that the results cited from \cite{arxiv:1409.7120} continue to hold with $3\mathcal{Q}_{k}$ replaced by $C\mathcal{Q}_{k}$ in the definitions of $\tilde S_{k}$ and $\tilde R_{k}$ for an arbitrary $C$; in our case we can take e.g.\ $C=100(a+1)$.
Alternatively, note that $\mathcal{N}_{a}$ can be seen as the usual nontangential maximal operator of aperture $a$ applied to the function $(x,s) \mapsto \sup_{t>s} F(x,s,t)$.
Hence the operator $\mathcal{N}_{a}\circ\hVop\circ\mathcal{A}$ has weak type $(1,1)$/strong type $(p,p)$ for all $a>0$ provided that this holds for some $a>0$, see e.g.\ \cite[\textsection II.2.5.1]{MR1232192}.
\end{proof}
The next lemma compares variational truncations of $\omega$-CZ kernels at nearby points.
The case $r=\infty$ of this lemma appeared in \cite[Lemma 2.3]{arXiv:1510.05789}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:semicontinuity}
Let $r>1$, $x,x'\in\mathbb{R}^{d}$, $0<\epsilon\leq \delta\leq\infty$, and suppose $|x-x'|\leq\epsilon/2$.
Let also $K$ be an $\omega$-CZ kernel.
Then
\begin{multline*}
|\hVop\mathcal{T} f(x,\epsilon,\delta)-\hVop\mathcal{T} f(x',\epsilon,\delta)|
\lesssim_{d}
(\|\omega\|_{\mathrm{Dini}}+r' C_{K}) \sup_{\epsilon\leq t\leq \delta} A_{t}|f|(x)\\
+
C_{K} (\hVop\mathcal{A} |f|(x,\epsilon,\delta)+\hVop\mathcal{A} |f|(x',\epsilon,\delta))
\end{multline*}
\end{lemma}
Theorem~\ref{thm:nontangentional-variation} is an immediate consequence of Lemma~\ref{lem:semicontinuity}, Lemma~\ref{lem:VA-unweighted}, and the Hardy--Littlewood maximal inequality.
\begin{proof}
By the triangle inequality on $\ell^{r}$ the left-hand side of the conclusion is bounded by
\[
\sup_{\epsilon\leq t_{1}<\dots<t_{J} \leq\delta} \Big( \sum_{j=1}^{J-1} \big| \int_{t_{j}<|x-y|<t_{j+1}} K(x,y) f(y) - \int_{t_{j}<|x'-y|<t_{j+1}} K(x',y) f(y) \big|^{r} \Big)^{1/r}.
\]
For a fixed sequence $t_{1}<\dots<t_{J}$ we estimate this by
\begin{multline*}
\Big( \sum_{j=1}^{J-1} |\int_{t_{j}<|x-y|<t_{j+1}} (K(x,y)-K(x',y)) f(y)|^{r} \Big)^{1/r}\\
+
\Big( \sum_{j=1}^{J-1} |(\int_{t_{j}<|x-y|<t_{j+1}} - \int_{t_{j}<|x'-y|<t_{j+1}}) K(x',y)f(y)|^{r} \Big)^{1/r}
=: I + II.
\end{multline*}
In the first term we estimate the $\ell^{r}$ norm by the $\ell^{1}$ norm and proceed as in \cite[Lemma 2.3]{arXiv:1510.05789}:
\begin{align*}
I
&\leq
\sum_{j=1}^{J-1} \int_{t_{j}<|x-y|<t_{j+1}} |K(x,y)-K(x',y)| |f(y)|\\
&\leq
\int_{\epsilon<|x-y|<\delta} \omega\big(\frac{|x-x'|}{|x-y|}\big) \frac{|f(y)|}{|x-y|^{d}}\\
&\leq
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
\omega\big(\frac{\epsilon/2}{2^{k}\epsilon}\big) \int_{2^{k}\epsilon<|x-y|<\min(2^{k+1}\epsilon,\delta)} \frac{|f(y)|}{|x-y|^{d}}\\
&\lesssim_{d}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \omega(2^{-k-1}) \sup_{\epsilon<t<\delta} A_{t}|f|(x)\\
&\lesssim
\|\omega\|_{\mathrm{Dini}} \sup_{\epsilon<t<\delta} A_{t}|f|(x).
\end{align*}
In order to estimate the second term we use an idea from \cite{arXiv:1511.05129}.
If $t_{j+1}-t_{j}\leq 2|x-x'|$, then we estimate
\[
|1_{t_{j}<|x-y|<t_{j+1}} - 1_{t_{j}<|x'-y|<t_{j+1}}|
\leq
1_{t_{j}<|x-y|<t_{j+1}} + 1_{t_{j}<|x'-y|<t_{j+1}}.
\]
Otherwise we estimate
\begin{multline*}
|1_{t_{j}<|x-y|<t_{j+1}} - 1_{t_{j}<|x'-y|<t_{j+1}}|\\
\leq
|1_{t_{j}<|x-y|} - 1_{t_{j}<|x'-y|}|
+
|1_{|x-y|<t_{j+1}} - 1_{|x'-y|<t_{j+1}}|\\
\leq
1_{t_{j}<|x-y|<t_{j}+|x-x'|}
+
1_{t_{j}<|x'-y|<t_{j}+|x-x'|}\\
+
1_{t_{j+1}-|x-x'|<|x-y|<t_{j+1}}
+
1_{t_{j+1}-|x-x'|<|x'-y|<t_{j+1}}.
\end{multline*}
Thus we may estimate $II$ by a sum of two terms of the form
\[
\Big( \sum_{j=1}^{J'-1} ( \int_{s_{j}<|x_{0}-y|<s_{j+1}} |K(x',y)| |f(y)| )^{r} \Big)^{1/r},
\]
where $x_{0}=x,x'$ and the sequence $\epsilon\leq s_{1}<\dots<s_{J'}\leq \delta$ has bounded differences: $|s_{j+1}-s_{j}|\leq 2|x-x'|$.
Using the hypothesis that $|x-x'|<\epsilon/2$ and the kernel estimate we can bound the above by a dimensional constant times
\[
C_{K} \Big( \sum_{j=1}^{J'-1} ( s_{j+1}^{-d} \int_{s_{j}<|x_{0}-y|<s_{j+1}} |f(y)| )^{r} \Big)^{1/r}.
\]
The above $\ell^{r}$ norm can be written as
\begin{multline*}
\Big( \sum_{j=1}^{J'-1} \Big( s_{j+1}^{-d} \big(\int_{|x_{0}-y|<s_{j+1}} |f(y)| - \int_{|x_{0}-y|<s_{j}} |f(y)| \big) \Big)^{r} \Big)^{1/r}\\
\leq
\Big( \sum_{j=1}^{J'-1} \big( s_{j+1}^{-d} \clapint{|x_{0}-y|<s_{j+1}} |f(y)| - s_{j}^{-d} \clapint{|x_{0}-y|<s_{j}} |f(y)|) \big)^{r} \Big)^{1/r}
+
\Big( \sum_{j=1}^{J'-1} ( (s_{j}^{-d} - s_{j+1}^{-d}) \clapint{|x_{0}-y|<s_{j}} |f(y)| )^{r} \Big)^{1/r}\\
\lesssim_{d}
\hV{A_{s}|f|(x_{0})}{\epsilon<s<\delta}
+
\sup_{\epsilon<s<\delta}A_{s}|f|(x_{0})
\Big( \sum_{j=1}^{J'-1} ( (s_{j}^{-d} - s_{j+1}^{-d})/s_{j}^{-d} )^{r} \Big)^{1/r}.
\end{multline*}
It remains to obtain a uniform bound on the last bracket.
By homogeneity we may assume $1<s_{1}<s_{2}<\dots$ and $s_{j+1}-s_{j}\leq 1$.
Then
\begin{multline*}
\Big( \sum_{j} ( (s_{j}^{-d} - s_{j+1}^{-d})/s_{j}^{-d} )^{r} \Big)^{1/r}
=
\Big( \sum_{j} (1 - (s_{j}/s_{j+1})^{d})^{r} \Big)^{1/r}\\
\leq
d \Big( \sum_{j} (1 - s_{j}/s_{j+1})^{r} \Big)^{1/r}
=
d \Big( \sum_{n\in\mathbb{N}} \sum_{s_{j}\in [n,n+1)} (\frac{s_{j+1} - s_{j}}{s_{j+1}})^{r} \Big)^{1/r}\\
\leq
d \Big( \sum_{n\in\mathbb{N}} (\sum_{s_{j}\in [n,n+1)} \frac{s_{j+1} - s_{j}}{n})^{r} \Big)^{1/r}
\leq
d \Big( \sum_{n\in\mathbb{N}} (\frac{2}{n})^{r} \Big)^{1/r}
\lesssim
\frac{d}{r-1}.
\qedhere
\end{multline*}
\end{proof}
The proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:semicontinuity} in fact shows that the homogeneous $r$-variation in its conclusion can be restricted to the ``short variation'' that can be controlled (for $r\geq 2$) by the uncentered square function in \cite[Theorem 1.4]{arxiv:1409.7120}.
Thus the application of L\'epingle's inequality (through the use of Lemma~\ref{lem:VA-unweighted}) to estimate the error term in the above proof is not strictly necessary (but helps us to avoid additional notation).
\section{Sparse domination}
\label{sec:sparse}
The main ingredient in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sparse-domination} is the cube selection rule in Lacey's recursion lemma \cite[Lemma 4.7]{arXiv:1501.05818} and its quantitative refinement \cite[Lemma 2.8]{arXiv:1510.05789}.
It can be formulated in terms of the localized non-tangentional maximal operator as follows.
Let $F$ be a subadditive monotonic function on $\mathcal{X}$.
Let $Q_{0}\in\mathcal{D}_{0}$ be a dyadic cube $\lambda : Q_{0}\to [0,\infty]$ any function defined on $Q_{0}$.
Let
\[
\sigma(y):=\inf \{ \tau>0 : F(y,\tau,\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q_{0})) \leq \lambda(y) \},
\quad y\in Q_{0},
\]
and let
\[
Y := \{y\in Q_{0}: \sigma(y)>0\}.
\]
For each $y\in Y$ choose a dyadic cube $Q_{y} \subset Q_{0}$ that contains $B(y,2\sigma(y))$ and has side length $\lesssim\sigma(y)$ (such a cube exists by definition of adjacent systems).
Let $\mathcal{Q}=\mathcal{Q}_{\lambda}(F,Q_{0})$ be the collection of the maximal cubes among the $Q_{y}$'s.
Then for every $y\in Y$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:hV-outside-exceptional}
F(y,\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q),\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q_{0})) \leq \lambda(y)
\end{equation}
for some $Q\in\mathcal{Q}$, since this holds with $Q$ replaced by $Q_{y}$ (indeed, if the left-hand side is non-zero, then $\sigma(y)<\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q_{0})$ with strict inequality, so that by construction $\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q)>\sigma(y)$ holds also with strict inequality).
In particular, by subadditivity of $F$ we obtain
\[
\mathcal{N}_{0,Q_{0}}F
\leq
1_{Q_{0}}(\lambda + \sup_{Q\in\mathcal{Q}} \mathcal{N}_{0,Q}F).
\]
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:recursion}
Suppose that the function $\lambda(x)$ identically equals a constant $\lambda$.
Then the collection $\mathcal{Q}=\mathcal{Q}_{\lambda}(F,Q_{0})$ of dyadic cubes $Q\subset Q_{0}$ constructed above satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{lem:recursion:sparse}
\sum_{Q\in \mathcal{Q}} |Q| \lesssim |\{ \mathcal{N}_{Q_{0}} F > \lambda \}|
\end{equation}
and for every subadditive function $\tilde F \leq F$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{lem:recursion:domination}
\mathcal{N}_{Q_{0}} \tilde F
\leq
1_{Q_{0}} (\lambda + \sup_{Q\in\mathcal{Q}} \mathcal{N}_{Q}\tilde F).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We write the left-hand side of \eqref{lem:recursion:sparse} as
\[
\sum_{\alpha} \sum_{Q\in\mathcal{Q}\cap\mathcal{D}^{\alpha}} |Q|
\]
and fix $\alpha$.
Since the cubes in $\mathcal{Q}\cap\mathcal{D}^{\alpha}$ are disjoint and each of them contains $B(y,\sigma(y))$ for some $y\in Y$ and has side length $\lesssim \sigma(y)$, the inner sum is bounded by a constant (depending on the doubling constant) times the measure of
\[
\bigcup_{y\in Y} \{ x : |x-y|<\sigma(y)\}
\subset
\{ x\in Q_{0} : \mathcal{N}_{Q_{0}}F(x) > \lambda\}.
\]
It remains to prove \eqref{lem:recursion:domination}.
If $\mathcal{N}_{Q_{0}}\tilde F(x)>\lambda$, then
\begin{multline*}
\mathcal{N}_{Q_{0}}\tilde F(x)
=
\sup_{y\in Y} \tilde F(y,|x-y|,\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q_{0}))\\
\leq
\sup_{y\in Y} \inf_{Q\in\mathcal{Q}}
\Big( \tilde F(y,\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q),\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q_{0}))
+
\tilde F(y,|x-y|,\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q)) \Big)\\
\leq
\lambda + \sup_{y\in Y} \sup_{Q\in\mathcal{Q}} \tilde F(y,|x-y|,\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q))
\end{multline*}
by subadditivity of $\tilde F$, the assumption $\tilde F\leq F$, and \eqref{eq:hV-outside-exceptional}.
The last summand can be non-zero only if $|x-y|<\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q)$, so that $x\in Q$, so it can be estimated by $\mathcal{N}_{Q}\tilde F(x)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sparse-domination}]
For a cube $Q$ denote by $\mathcal{Q}(Q)$ the family provided by Lemma~\ref{lem:recursion} applied $Q$ with $\lambda=c_{Q}$, so that $|Q|^{-1}\sum_{Q'\in\mathcal{Q}(Q)}|Q'| \leq C_{\eqref{lem:recursion:sparse}}\epsilon$.
Therefore, in view of the doubling hypothesis, $n(Q')>n(Q)$ for all $Q'\in\mathcal{Q}(Q)$ provided that $\epsilon$ is small enough.
Following the proof of \cite[Theorem 4.2]{arXiv:1501.05818}, initialize $\mathcal{P}_{k_{0}} := \cup_{\alpha} \mathcal{D}^{\alpha}_{k_{0}}$ and define inductively
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{P}_{k}^{*} &:= \mathcal{P}_{k} \cap \cup_{\alpha} \mathcal{D}^{\alpha}_{k},\\
\mathcal{P}_{k+1} &:= \text{maximal cubes in } (\mathcal{P}_{k}\setminus\mathcal{P}_{k}^{*}) \cup \bigcup_{P\in\mathcal{P}_{k}^{*}} \mathcal{Q}(P).
\end{align*}
The sparse collections in the conclusion of the theorem will be given by
\[
\mathcal{S}^{\alpha} := \mathcal{S} \cap \mathcal{D}^{\alpha},
\quad
\mathcal{S} := \cup_{k\geq k_{0}}\mathcal{P}_{k}^{*}.
\]
Let us first verify the Carleson property for the collections $\mathcal{S}^{\alpha}$.
We call the cubes $Q\in\mathcal{Q}(P)$, $P\in\mathcal{P}_{k}^{*}$, the \emph{$\mathcal{Q}$-children} of $P$.
Note that a cube can have many $\mathcal{Q}$-parents.
We claim that all $\mathcal{Q}$-descendants of any cube $P$ are contained in a ball $B(z(P),C\delta^{k(P)})$, where $C$ is a constant that depends only on the quasimetric constant and $\delta$.
Indeed, if $(z_{0},z_{1},\dots)$ is a sequence of points with $\rho(z_{n},z_{n+1}) \leq C \delta^{n}$, then $\rho(z_{2^{m}n},z_{2^{m}(n+1)}) \leq A_{0}^{m} C \sigma^{n}$ with $\sigma=\delta^{2^{m}}$.
Choosing $m$ so large that $\sigma A_{0}<1$, we can estimate
\begin{multline*}
\rho(z_{0},z_{2^{m}n})
\leq
A_{0}(\rho(z_{2^{m}0},z_{2^{m}1})+A_{0}(\rho(z_{2^{m}1},z_{2^{m}2})+\dots)))\\
\leq
A_{0}^{m} C \sum_{l=0}^{\infty} (A_{0}\sigma)^{l}
\leq
\frac{A_{0}^{m}}{1-A_{0}\sigma} C,
\end{multline*}
and the claim follows.
Now let $Q,Q' \in \mathcal{S}^{\alpha}$ with $Q'\subsetneq Q$, so that in particular $k(Q')>k(Q)$.
Then by construction $Q'\not\in\mathcal{P}_{k(Q)}$.
On the other hand, since $Q'\in\mathcal{P}_{k(Q')}$, it must have a $\mathcal{Q}$-ancestor $P$ in $\mathcal{P}_{k(Q)}$, and since by the above argument $Q'$ is contained in a ball of radius $C\delta^{k(P)}$ with center in $P$, the cube $P$ must in turn be contained in $B(z(Q),C\delta^{k(Q)})$ for some larger constant $C$.
Since the elements of $\mathcal{P}_{k(Q)}\cap\mathcal{D}^{\alpha}$ are maximal and therefore disjoint, the family $\mathcal{P}_{k(Q)}$ has bounded overlap, and by the doubling property of our measure space it follows that the total measure of all possible ancestors in $\mathcal{P}_{k(Q)}$ is bounded by a multiple of $|Q|$.
Moreover, if $\epsilon < 1/C_{\eqref{lem:recursion:sparse}}$, then the total mass of all $\mathcal{Q}$-descendants of each $P$ is bounded by a constant times the measure of $P$.
This completes the verification of the Carleson condition.
It remains to show \eqref{eq:sparse-domination}.
Consider the family of truncations of the function $F$ given by $F_{\tau}(x,t,s) := F(x,\max(t,\tau),\max(s,\tau))$.
By induction on $K\geq k_{0}$ we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sparse-domination:induction}
\max_{Q_{0}\in\mathcal{P}_{k_{0}}}\mathcal{N}_{Q_{0}} F_{\tau}
\leq
\sum_{k=k_{0}}^{K-1}\sum_{Q\in\mathcal{P}_{k}^{*}} c_{Q} 1_{Q}
+
\max_{Q\in\mathcal{P}_{K}} \mathcal{N}_{Q} F_{\tau}
\end{equation}
for each $\tau>0$.
Indeed, the base case $K=k_{0}$ holds trivially, and in the inductive step we can apply \eqref{lem:recursion:domination} and obtain
\begin{multline*}
\max_{Q\in\mathcal{P}_{K}} \mathcal{N}_{Q} F_\tau
=
\max \Big\{ \max_{Q\in\mathcal{P}_{K}\setminus \mathcal{P}_{K}^{*}} \mathcal{N}_{Q} F_\tau,
\max_{Q\in\mathcal{P}_{K}^{*}} \mathcal{N}_{Q} F_\tau \Big\}\\
\leq
\max \Big\{ \max_{Q\in\mathcal{P}_{K}\setminus \mathcal{P}_{K}^{*}} \mathcal{N}_{Q} F_\tau,
\max_{Q\in\mathcal{P}_{K}^{*}} (c_{Q} 1_{Q} + \max_{Q'\in\mathcal{Q}(Q)} \mathcal{N}_{Q'} F_\tau) \Big\}\\
\leq
\max_{Q\in\mathcal{P}_{K+1}} \mathcal{N}_{Q} F_\tau
+ \sum_{Q\in\mathcal{P}_{K}^{*}} c_{Q} 1_{Q}.
\end{multline*}
The second summand on the right-hand side of \eqref{eq:sparse-domination:induction} vanishes identically for each fixed $\tau>0$ and $K$ that are so large that $\delta^{K}\ll \tau$.
Thus we have obtained
\[
\max_{Q_{0}\in\mathcal{P}_{k_{0}}}\mathcal{N}_{Q_{0}} F_{\tau} \leq \sum_{\alpha} \sum_{Q\in\mathcal{S}^{\alpha}} 1_{Q} c_{Q},
\]
and the left-hand side converges to $\mathcal{N} F$ pointwise as $\tau\to 0$ and $k_{0}\to-\infty$.
\end{proof}
\section{Commutators of BMO functions and CZ operators}
\label{sec:commutator}
In this section we prove a sparse domination theorem for iterated commutators of BMO functions with multilinear operators that extends \cite[Theorem 1.1]{arXiv:1604.01334}.
An $m$-linear operator $\mathcal{T}$ taking an $m$-tuple $\vec f = (f_{1},\dots,f_{m})$ of functions defined on $X$ to a function defined on $\mathcal{X}$ is called \emph{local} if $\mathcal{T}(\vec f)(x,s,t)$ depends only on the restrictions of the functions $f_{j}$ to the ball $B(x,t)$.
The main case of interest are truncations of multilinear CZ operators.
Let $B$ be an index set and $\jmath:B\times \{0,1\} \to \{0,\dots,m\}$.
For a tuple of functions $\vec b=(b_{\beta})_{\beta\in B}$, $j\in\{0,\dots,m\}$, and an index $a\in\{0,1\}^{B}$ let $b_{a,j}:=\prod_{\beta : \jmath(\beta,a(\beta))=j} (-1)^{a(\beta)} b_{\beta}$.
The (iterated) $\jmath$-commutator of $\vec b$ with an $m$-linear operator $\mathcal{T}$ is defined by
\[
[\vec b,\mathcal{T}]_{\jmath}(\vec f)(x,s,t) :=
\sum_{a\in \{0,1\}^{B}} b_{a,0}(x)
\mathcal{T}(\widevec{f b_{a}})(x,s,t),
\]
where $\widevec{f b_{a}}$ is the vector $(f_{1}b_{a,1},\dots,f_{m}b_{a,m})$.
Multilinear operators of this type have been studied in \cite{MR2483720}.
The next result extends \cite[Theorem 1.1]{arXiv:1604.01334}.
Note that it holds for spaces of homogeneous type; this allows one to recover a number of results in that setting, see e.g.\ \cite{arXiv:1401.2061}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:bmo-czo-commutator}
For every space of homogeneous type $(X,\rho,\mu)$ and every choice of adjacent systems of dyadic cubes $\mathcal{D}^{\alpha}$ there exists $0<\eta<1$ such that the following holds.
Let $1\leq r\leq\infty$ and let $\mathcal{T}$ be an $m$-linear local operator such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bmo-czo:endpoint-hypothesis}
C_{\mathcal{T}} := \|\mathcal{N} \circ \hVop \circ \mathcal{T}\|_{L^{1}\times\dots\times L^{1}\to L^{1/m,\infty}} < \infty.
\end{equation}
Let $B,\jmath,\vec b$ be as above and let $c_{\beta,Q}$ for $\beta\in B$ and $Q\in\cup_{\alpha}\mathcal{D}^{\alpha}$ be arbitrary numbers.
Let also $Q_{0}$ be an initial dyadic cube and $f_{1},\dots,f_{m}\in L^{\infty}(Q_{0})$.
Then there exist $\eta$-sparse collections $\mathcal{S}^{\alpha,k_{0}} \subset \mathcal{D}^{\alpha}$ such that we have
\[
\mathcal{N}_{0} \hVop{} [\vec b,\mathcal{T}]_{\jmath} \vec f
\lesssim
C_{\mathcal{T}} \liminf_{k_{0}\to-\infty} \sum_{\alpha} \sum_{Q\in\mathcal{S}^{\alpha,k_{0}}} \{ \vec b, \vec f \}_{\jmath,Q}
\]
pointwise almost everywhere, where
\[
\{ \vec b, \vec f \}_{\jmath,Q}(x) := 1_{Q}(x) \sum_{a\in\{0,1\}^{B}} |b_{a,0,Q}(x)| \prod_{j=1}^{m} \mean{| b_{a,j,Q} f_{j}|}
\]
and
\[
b_{a,j,Q}:=\prod_{\beta : \jmath(\beta,a(\beta))=j} (-1)^{a(\beta)} (b_{\beta}-c_{\beta,Q}).
\]
\end{theorem}
In absence of commutators ($B=\emptyset$) this follows directly from Theorem~\ref{thm:sparse-domination}, and in fact the centered operator $\mathcal{N}_{0}$ can be replaced by the uncentered operator $\mathcal{N}$ in the conclusion.
In presence of commutators the most interesting choice of constants is of course $c_{\beta,Q} = \mean{b_{\beta}}$.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:bmo-czo-commutator}]
The only difference from Theorem~\ref{thm:sparse-domination} is that we need a suitable substitute for \eqref{lem:recursion:sparse} when
\[
F
=
\hVop{} [\vec b,\mathcal{T}]_{\jmath}\vec f
\]
and
\[
\lambda(x) = \epsilon^{-1} C_B \{ \vec b, \vec f \}_{Q_{0}}(x).
\]
Note that, by multilinearity of $\mathcal{T}$, the function $F$ does not change upon replacing $b_{\beta}$ by $b_{\beta}-c_{\beta,Q_{0}}$.
For each $y\in Y$ we have
\[
\lambda(y)
<
F(y,\frac12 \sigma(y),\mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q_{0})).
\]
By the triangle inequality for the $\ell^{r}$ norm this implies
\[
\epsilon^{-1} C_B |b_{a,0,Q_{0}}(y)| \prod_{j=1}^{m} \mean[Q_{0}]{|b_{a,j,Q_{0}} f_{j}|}
<
|b_{a,0,Q_{0}}(y)| \hVop \mathcal{T}( \widevec{f b_{a,Q_{0}}} )(y,\frac12 \sigma(y), \mathrm{dist}(y,\complement Q_{0}))
\]
for some $a\in\{0,1\}^{B}$.
Since this inequality is strict, the factor $|b_{a,0,Q_{0}}(y)|$ cannot be zero and can be canceled.
It follows that
\[
\bigcup_{y\in Y} B(y,\sigma_{y}/4)
\subset
\bigcup_{a \in \{0,1\}^{B}}
\Big\{ \hVop \mathcal{T}(\widevec{fb_{a,Q_{0}}})
>
\epsilon^{-1} C_B \prod_{j=1}^{m} \mean[Q_{0}]{|b_{a,j,Q_{0}} f_{j}|} \Big\},
\]
and the measures of the latter sets are bounded by $\epsilon^{1/m}|Q_{0}|$ by definition of $C_B$ and locality of $\mathcal{T}$.
This provides the estimate $\sum_{Q\in\mathcal{Q}} |Q| \lesssim \epsilon^{1/m}|Q_{0}|$.
\end{proof}
The above domination theorem requires as an input an endpoint weak type estimate \eqref{eq:bmo-czo:endpoint-hypothesis} for $\mathcal{N}\circ\Vop\circ\mathcal{T}$.
In the multilinear case such bounds are known only for $r=\infty$ (that is, for maximal truncations) and can be found in \cite{arXiv:1512.02400} (where they are stated for $X=\mathbb{R}^{d}$).
More precisely, the weak type estimate for $\mathcal{N}_{0}\circ\Vop[\infty]\circ\mathcal{T}$ is proved in \cite[\textsection 6]{arXiv:1512.02400} and the weak type estimate for $\mathcal{N}\circ\Vop[\infty]\circ\mathcal{T}$ is effectively proved in \cite[\textsection 3.1]{arXiv:1512.02400}.
The main difference from the linear case is the need to use the multilinear maximal function from \cite[Theorem 3.3]{MR2483720}.
In the linear case one can obtain the hypothesis \eqref{eq:bmo-czo:endpoint-hypothesis} with $2<r<\infty$ for a certain class of CZ operators from Theorem~\ref{thm:nontangentional-variation}.
Using the results of \cite[\textsection 4]{arXiv:1604.01334} this implies weighted estimates for variational truncations of commutators of CZ operators with BMO functions.
In fact, even unweighted estimates for variational truncations of such commutators seem to be new.
\printbibliography
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
The classical Ptolemy theorem is a relation between the four sides and two diagonals of a cyclic quadrilateral. In \cite[10.9.2]{Ber09} it is formulated as Ptolemy inequality:
\begin{thm}
Let $ABCD$ be a quadrilateral. Then
\[
AB \cdot CD + AD \cdot BC \ge AC \cdot BD
\]
and inequality holds as equality if and only if the points $A$, $B$, $C$ and $D$ lie on a circle or on a line.
\end{thm}
Based on this fact we define Ptolemy constant, which can be used to measure roundness of plane curves.
Let $J \subset \overline{\mathbb{R}^2}$ be a Jordan curve. For points $a,b,c,d \in J$ in this order we define
\[
p(a,b,c,d) = \frac{|a-b||c-d|+|a-d||b-c|}{|a-c||b-d|}.
\]
Let $D \subset \overline{\mathbb{R}^2}$ be a domain, whose $\partial D$ is a Jordan curve. We define the \emph{Ptolemy constant} as
\begin{equation}\label{ptolemys constant}
P(D) = \sup_{a,b,c,d \in \partial D} p(a,b,c,d),
\end{equation}
where point $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ occur in this order when traversing the Jordan curve in positive direction. For generalisation of the Ptolemy constant to normed spaces see \cite{PinReiSha01,Zuo12}. The Ptolemy theorem has also been considered in the spherical and the hyperbolic geometries, see \cite{Val70,Val70B}.
One motivation for our study of the Ptolemy constant dates back to a result due to L.V. Ahlfors \cite{Ahl63} later reformulated by S. Rickman \cite{Ric66} as follows:
\begin{thm}
A Jordan curve $J \subset \overline{\mathbb{C}}$ is a quasicircle iff $\sup p(a,b,c,d)$ exists and is finite for ordered points $a,b,c,d \in J$.
\end{thm}
As far as we know, explicit formulas for the Ptolemy constant for specific plane domains have not been studied in the literature before the unpublished licentiate thesis of P. Seittenranta \cite{Sei96} in 1996.
In this article we study the Ptolemy constant and try to find a connection between the Ptolemy constant and the uniformity constant, which we introduce next.
Let $G \subsetneq {\mathbb{R}^n} $ be a domain. We define the \emph{quasihyperbolic length} of a rectifiable curve $\gamma \subset G$ by
\[
\ell_k(\gamma) = \int_\gamma \frac{|dx|}{d_G(x)},
\]
where $d_G(x) = d(x,\partial G)$. For $x,y \in G$ we define the \emph{quasihyperbolic distance} (also called the \emph{quasihyperbolic metric}) by
\[
k_G(x,y) = \inf \ell_k (\gamma),
\]
where the infimum is taken over all rectifiable curves joining $x$ and $y$ in $G$.
For $x,y \in G$ we define the \emph{distance ratio metric} by
\[
j_G(x,y) = \log \left( 1+\frac{|x-y|}{\min \{ d_G(x),d_G(y) \}} \right).
\]
We call the domain $G$ \emph{uniform}, if there exists a constant $A$ such that
\[
k_G(x,y) \le A j_G(x,y)
\]
for all $x,y \in G$. The \emph{uniformity constant} is defined by
\[
A_G = \inf \{ A \ge 1 \colon k_G(x,y) \le A j_G(x,y) \textrm{ for all } x,y \in G \}.
\]
One of the leading ideas behind our research was to establish a connection between the Ptolemy constant and the uniformity constant. These constants satisfy equality $A_G = 1 + P(G)$ in the unit ball $ {\mathbb{B}^n} $, the upper half space $ {\mathbb{H}^n} $ and the angular domain $S_\alpha$ for $\alpha \in (0,\pi]$. Based on our study it is clear that equality is not true in all domains, but we could not find a clear connection between the two quantities. However, we can pose the following conjecture: for any domain $D \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ whose boundary $\partial G$ is a Jordan curve, we have $A_G \ge 1+ P(G)$.
Note that when considering the Ptolemy constant it is essential to consider only domains whose boundary is a Jordan curve. If for example the boundary curve is not closed, it is easy to see that there is no connection between the Ptolemy constant and the uniformity constant, see Example \ref{example:no connection}.
One of the main results in P. Seittenranta's thesis \cite{Sei96} is the following theorem:
\begin{thm}\label{main1}
For a triangle $T$ with smallest angle $\alpha$
\[
P(T) = \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}} \ge 2.
\]
\end{thm}
We continue this study and find a new proof for Theorem \ref{main1}. This article is based on \cite{Har12} and our main results are the following theorems. The first three results consider the Ptolemy constant and next three results consider the uniformity constant.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:doubleangluardomain}
Let $\alpha,\beta \in (0,\pi)$ with $\alpha+\beta \ge \pi$ and $S_{\alpha,\beta}$ the double angular domain (see \eqref{eqn:double angular domain}). Then
\[
P(S_{\alpha,\beta}) = \frac{1}{\sin \frac{ \min \{ \alpha,\beta,\alpha+\beta-\pi \} }{2}}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:P(G) for parallelogram}
Let $G$ be a parallelogram with smallest inner angle $\alpha \in (0,\tfrac{\pi}{2}]$ and sides $r$ and $s$. Then
\[
\frac{1}{2} \left( A + \frac{1}{A} \right) \le P(G) \le A = \frac{\sqrt{r^2+2rs\cos \alpha+ s^2}}{\min\{ r,s \} \sin \alpha}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:P(G) for ellipse}
Let $E$ be an ellipse with semiaxis $a$ and $b$. Then
\[
\frac{1}{2} \left( \frac{a}{b}+\frac{b}{a} \right) \le P(E) \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{b \pi}{2a}} \le \frac{2}{\pi} \left( \frac{a}{b}+\frac{b}{a} \right).
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}\label{UC in triangle}
If $T$ is a triangle with angle $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ such that $\alpha \le \beta \le \gamma$. Then
\[
A_T \ge \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}} + \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\beta}{2}}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:A for convex polygon}
Let $G$ be a convex polygon with smallest inner angle $\alpha \in (0,\pi)$. Then
\[
A_G \ge 1+\frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:UC for ellipse}
Let $E \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be an ellipse and let the ratio of the major and the minor axes be $c \ge 1$. Then
\[
\max \left\{ 2,\frac{2 \sqrt{c^2-1} \arcsin \sqrt{1-\frac{1}{c^2}}}{\log (2c^2-1)} \right\} \le A_E \le 2 c^4.
\]
\end{thm}
\section{Preliminary results}
For $\alpha \in (0,2\pi)$ we denote angular domain by
\[
S_\alpha = \{ r e^{it} \colon r>0, \, t \in (0,\alpha) \}.
\]
and for $\alpha,\beta \in (0,\pi)$ with $\alpha+\beta \ge \pi$ we denote double angular domain by
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:double angular domain}
S_{\alpha,\beta} = S_\alpha \cap \{ 1+r e^{it} \colon r>0, \, t \in (\pi-\beta,\pi) \}.
\end{equation}
The following proposition gives the circumcenter of a triangle in complex number notation. It must be well known, but due to lack of a good reference at hand, it is proved below. A similar type of result is given in \cite[p. 85]{AndAnd06}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:circumcenter}
Let $a,b,c \in \mathbb{C}$ be vertices of a triangle $T$. The circumcenter of $T$ is
\[
\frac{(b-c)|a|^2+(c-a)|b|^2+(a-b)|c|^2}{(b-c)\bar{a}+(c-a)\bar{b}+(a-b)\bar{c}}.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The circumcenter is the intersection of perpendicular bisectors of line segments $[a,b]$ and $[b,c]$. Thus we have $(a+b)/2+i(b-a)s=(b+c)/2+i(c-b)t$ and $(\overline{a}+\overline{b})/2+i(\overline{b}-\overline{a})s=(\overline{b}+\overline{c})/2+i(\overline{c}-\overline{b})t$ which give
\[
s=\frac{i}{2} \frac{\overline{a}(b-c)+\overline{b}(a-c)+\overline{c}(2c-a-b)}{\overline{a}(b-c)+\overline{b}(c-a)+\overline{c}(a-b)}
\]
and the circumcenter is
\[
\frac{a+b}{2}+i(b-a)s = \frac{(b-c)|a|^2+(c-a)|b|^2+(a-b)|c|^2}{(b-c)\bar{a}+(c-a)\bar{b}+(a-b)\bar{c}}. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
We now introduce auxiliary results, which we use to prove the main theorems.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:circle_outer_angle}
Let $a, b, c, d \in \mathbb{C}$ be distinct points forming a convex polygon $abcd$ and $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$ and $\delta$ be the angles of the polygon, respectively. Then the outer angle between circles $\mathcal{C}_{A} = \mathcal{C}(a,b,d)$ and $\mathcal{C}_{C} = \mathcal{C}(b,c,d)$ is equal to $\min \{ \alpha+\gamma,\beta+\delta \}$. Also the outer angle between circles $\mathcal{C}_{B} = \mathcal{C}(a,b,c)$ and $\mathcal{C}_{D} = \mathcal{C}(c,d,a)$ is equal to $\min \{ \alpha+\gamma,\beta+\delta \}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\alpha + \gamma \le \beta + \delta$. Now $\alpha + \gamma \le \pi \le \beta + \delta$ and if $\alpha + \gamma = \pi = \beta + \delta$, then the assertion follows.
We assume $\alpha + \gamma < \beta + \delta$. Now $\mathcal{C}_{A}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{C}$ intersect at points $b$ and $d$. Because $\alpha + \gamma < \pi$, the circular arcs corresponding the angles $\alpha$ and $\gamma$ are subarcs of a semicircle, see Figure \ref{fig:outer_angle}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{ymp_ulkokulma.pdf}
\caption{Left: Circles $\mathcal{C}_{A} = \mathcal{C}(a,b,d)$ and $\mathcal{C}_{C} = \mathcal{C}(b,c,d)$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:circle_outer_angle}. Right: Circles $\mathcal{C}_{B} = \mathcal{C}(a,b,c)$ ja $\mathcal{C}_{D} = \mathcal{C}(c,d,a)$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:circle_outer_angle}.\label{fig:outer_angle}}
\end{figure}
The angle between circle $\mathcal{C}_{A}$ and line $\ell (b, d)$ is $\alpha$, and the angle between circle $\mathcal{C}_{C}$ and line $\ell (b, d)$ is $\gamma$. Thus the outer angle between circles $\mathcal{C}_{A}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{C}$ is $\alpha + \gamma$.
The situation for circles $\mathcal{C}_{B}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{D}$ is represented in Figure \ref{fig:outer_angle}. Similar computation as above gives that the angle between circles $\mathcal{C}_{B}$ and $\mathcal{C}$ is $2\pi - (\beta + \delta) = \alpha + \gamma$.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:convex_polygon_Stheta}
Let $a, b, c, d \in \mathbb{C}$ be distinct points forming a convex polygon $abcd$ and $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, $\delta$ be the angles of the polygon, respectively. Then there exists a M\"obius transformation $m$ that maps the points $a, b, c, d$ in the same order to the curve $S_\theta$ with
\[
\theta = \min \{ \alpha + \gamma , \beta + \delta \} \hspace*{2ex} \in (0, \pi].
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We may assume $\alpha + \gamma \leq \pi \leq \beta + \delta = 2\pi - (\alpha + \gamma)$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:circle_outer_angle} the angle between circles $\mathcal{C}_{B} = \mathcal{C}(a,b,c)$ and $\mathcal{C}_{D} = \mathcal{C}(c,d,a)$ is $\alpha + \gamma = 2\pi - (\beta + \delta)$. Thus we know that there exists a M\"obius transformation $m$ with $m(a)=0$, $m(b)=1$ and $m(c)=\infty$, and which maps the points $a, b, c, d$ in the same order to the curve $S_\theta$ $J_{\alpha + \gamma}$. Both circles $\mathcal{C}_{B}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{D}$ are mapped to a line and the interior of $\mathcal{C}_{B}$ is mapped to the upper half space, see Figure \ref{fig:convex_polygon_Stheta}.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[!ht]\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{abcd_yl3_new.pdf}
\caption{The mapping $m$ in Theorem~\ref{thm:convex_polygon_Stheta}. \label{fig:convex_polygon_Stheta}}
\end{figure}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:simplequadrilateral}
Let $(a,b,c,d)$ be a simple quadrilateral with inner angles $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, $\delta$. There exists a M\"obius mapping $m$, which maps the points $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ in this order to the curve $S_\theta$ for
\[
\theta = \min \{ \alpha+\gamma,\beta+\delta \} \in (0,\pi].
\]
Especially, $p(a,b,c,d) \le P(S_\theta)$ and mapping $m$ can be chosen so that $m(a)=0$, $m(b)=1$, $m(c)=\infty$ and $m(d)=t e^{i\theta}$, $t>0$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If $(a,b,c,d)$ is convex, then the assertion follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:convex_polygon_Stheta}.
If $(a,b,c,d)$ is not convex, then we may assume that $\alpha + \gamma \leq \pi \leq \beta + \delta$ and $\beta > \pi$. We show that there exists a domain $D$ such that the points $a,b,c,d$ are in the same order in $\partial D$ and $\partial D$ consists of two circular arcs with angle $\alpha+\gamma$. Now $m$ can be found as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:convex_polygon_Stheta}.
Let $\mathcal{C}_{B} = \mathcal{C}(a,b,c)$ and $\mathcal{C}_{D} = \mathcal{C}(c,d,a)$. We choose $D$ so that $\partial D \subset \mathcal{C}_{B} \cup \mathcal{C}_{D}$ and $a,b,c,d \in \partial D$, see Figure~\ref{fig:ymp_konk_kulma}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{ymp_konk_kulma.pdf}
\caption{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:simplequadrilateral}. Thick line represents angle $\pi - \delta$ and double line angle $\beta - \pi$. \label{fig:ymp_konk_kulma}}
\end{figure}
Now $\measuredangle(a,b,c) = 2\pi-\beta$ and thus $\measuredangle(c,a,d) = \pi-(2\pi-\beta) = \beta-\pi$. Similarly, $\measuredangle(a,d,c) = \delta$ and the angle between $\mathcal{C}_{D}$ and line $\ell (a,c)$ is $\pi-\delta$. The angle between $\mathcal{C}_{B}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{D}$ is now
\[
(\pi - \delta) - (\beta - \pi) = 2\pi - (\beta + \delta) = \alpha + \gamma
\]
and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:quadrilateral}
Let $(a,b,c,d)$ be a simple quadrilateral with opposite angles $\alpha$ and $\gamma$. There exists a M\"obius mapping $m$ such that $(m(a),m(b),m(c),m(d))$ is a parallelogram with $(\alpha+\gamma)/2$. Especially
\[
p(a,b,c,d) = p(m(a),m(b),m(c),m(d)).
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thm:simplequadrilateral} we can map a simple quadrilateral $abcd$ by a M\"obius transformation $m_1$ to $S_\theta$ in a way that $m_1(a)=0$, $m_1(b)=1$, $m_1(c)=\infty$ and $m_1(d)=te^{i\theta}$, where $t>0$ and $\theta=(\alpha+\gamma)/2$. Similarly there is a M\"obius transformation $m_2$ which takes the quadrilateral $m(a)m(b)m(c)m(d)$ to $S_{\theta}$ with $m_2(m(a))=0$, $m_2(m(b))=1$, $m_2(m(c))=\infty$ and $m_1(m(d))=se^{i\theta}$.
Let us consider parallelogram $m(a)=0$, $m(b)=r$, $m(c)=r+ue^{i\theta/2}$ and $m(d)=ue^{i\theta/2}$ for $r,u>0$. Since cross ratio is invariant under M\"obius transformation we obtain
\[
[m(a),m(b),m(c),m(d)] = 1-\left( \frac{u}{r} \right)^2 e^{i\theta} \quad \textrm{and} \quad [0,1,\infty,s e^{i\theta}] = 1-s e^{i\theta}.
\]
Choosing $s=u/r >0$ we obtain $m=m_2^{-1} \circ m_1$ and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:visualanglemetricH2}
Let $x,y \in \mathbb{H}^2$ and $z \in \overline{\mathbb{R}}$. Then $|\measuredangle (x,z,y)|$ obtains its largest value when the circle through points $x$, $y$ and $z$ touches the real axis, and smallest value when $z$ is the intersection point of the real axis and the line through the points $x$ and $y$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The largest value follows from \cite[section 3.3]{KleLinVuoWan14} and the smallest value is clear as then $|\measuredangle (x,z,y)|=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:kompleksilukutulos}
If $x > 0$, $y > 0$ and $c \in (0,1)$, then
\[
\arg (x+icy) > c \cdot \arg (x+iy).
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The claim is equivalent to
\[
\frac{\arctan \left( c\cdot y/x \right)}{c\cdot y/x} \; > \; \frac{\arctan y/x}{y/x}
\]
and we prove this inequality by showing that the function $f(t) = (\arctan t)/t$ is strictly decreasing and $f(t) \to 1$ as $t \to 0$.
By differentiation we obtain
\[
f'(t) = \frac{t-(1+t^2)\arctan t}{(1+t^2)t^2} = \frac{g(t)}{(1+t^2)t^2},
\]
where function $g'(t) = -2t\arctan t$ is negative for $t>0$.
The limit $f(t) \to 1$ as $t \to 0$ is obtained by l'Hôpital's rule.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
Let $E$ be the domain enclosed by the ellipse $\partial E = \{ (x_0,y_0) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \colon (x_0/a)^2+(y_0/b)^2 = 1 \}$ and $b \le a$. If $z=(t,0) \in E$ and $|t|\le a-b^2/a$, then
\[
d(z,\partial E) = b \sqrt{1-\frac{t^2}{a^2-b^2}}
\]
and the closest points to $z$ in $\partial E$ are
\[
\left( \frac{t}{1-b^2/a^2} , \pm b\sqrt{ \left( \frac{at}{a^2-b^2} \right)^2 -1 } \right).
\]
If $z=(t,0) \in E$ and $a-b^2/a < |t| < a$, then $d(z,\partial E) = a-|t|$ and the closest point to $z$ in $\partial E$ is $(at/|t|,0)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By differentiation $(x_0/a)^2+(y_0/b)^2 = 1$ gives $2x/a^2+2yy'/b^2=0$, which implies $y'=-xb^2/(ya^2)$. The normal of the tangent of $\partial E$ at point $(x_0,y_0)$ is
\[
y-y_0=\frac{y_0a^2}{x_0 b^2}(x-x_0)
\]
and since $|x|<a$ the normal at $(x_0,y_0)$ intersects the real axis at $(x_0(1-b^2/a^2),0)$.
The maximal disk $B^2(z,r)$ contained in $E$ intersects $\partial E$ at $(x_0,y_0)$, where $x_0=t/(1-b^2/a^2))$, whenever $|t|/(1-b^2/a^2) \le a$, which is equivalent to $|t|\le a-b^2/a$. The first part of the assertion follows, because now
\[
y_0 = \pm b\sqrt{ \left( \frac{at}{a^2-b^2} \right)^2 -1 }
\]
and
\[
d(z,\partial E) = \sqrt{(t-x_0)^2+y_0^2} = b \sqrt{1-\frac{t^2}{a^2-b^2}}.
\]
Let us next consider the case $a-b^2/a < |t| < a$. The curvature of $\partial E$ at $(\pm a,0)$ is $b^2/a$. If $a-b^2/a < |t| < a$, then $a-|t| < b^2/a$ and thus the maximal disk $B^2(z,r)$ contained in $E$ intersects $\partial E$ at $(\pm a,0)$. Now the assertion follows easily.
\end{proof}
The following lemma is from \cite{Bec78}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:xcotxArvio}
For $x \in (0, \pi / 2]$
\[
x \cot x \geq 1 - \frac{4x^2}{\pi^2}.
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\cite[Exercise 3.17]{Vuo88}\label{lem:Vuo88 lemma}
Let $f \colon {\mathbb{R}^n} \to {\mathbb{R}^n} $ be an $L$-bilipschitz, that is
\[
\frac{|x-y|}{L} \le |f(x)-f(y)| \le L |x-y|
\]
for all $x,y \in {\mathbb{R}^n} $. If $G \subset {\mathbb{R}^n} $ is uniform, then
$f(G)$ is uniform and $A_{f(G)} \le L^4 A_{G}$.
\end{lem}
\section{Angular domain and triangle}
We begin by considering the angular domain. We prove first the result in the special case that one of the points in the supremum of \eqref{ptolemys constant} is origin. Since $p$ is invariant under M\"obius transformations it makes no difference which one of the point we choose to be origin and thus we let $b=0$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:sector1}
For $\alpha \in (0,\pi]$
\[
\sup_{t>0,\, d>0,\, c\in(0,d)} p(t e^{i\alpha},0,c,d) \ge \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $a=ce^{i \alpha}$, $c \in (0,1)$ and $d=1$. Now
\[
p(c e^{i\alpha},0,c,1) = \frac{|c-1|+|ce^{i\alpha}-1|}{|e^{i\alpha}-1|}
\]
and since $|ce^{i\alpha}-1| > |c-1|$ and $|e^{i\alpha}-1| = 2 \sin \frac{\alpha}{2}$ we obtain
\[
p(c e^{i\alpha},0,c,1) > \frac{2|c-1|}{e^{i\alpha}-1} = \frac{1-c}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
We choose $c=\varepsilon \sin \frac{\alpha}{2}$ for $\varepsilon >0$ and then
\[
\sup_{t>0,\, d>0,\, c\in(0,d)} p(t e^{i\alpha},0,c,d) = \sup_{c >0} p(c e^{i\alpha},0,c,1) \ge \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}-\varepsilon.
\]
The assertion follows as we let $\varepsilon \to 0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Note that Lemma \ref{lem:sector1} includes also the case $d=\infty$ as $p$ is invariant under M\"obius transformations.
\end{rem}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:sector2}
For $\alpha \in (0,\pi]$ and $t,c > 0$ we have $p(t e^{i \alpha},0,c,\infty) \le 1/\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By the law of cosines we obtain
\[
p(te^{i\alpha},0,c,\infty) = \frac{t+c}{te^{i\alpha}-c} = \frac{t+c}{\sqrt{t^2+c^2-2tc \cos \alpha}} =:g(t).
\]
We easily obtain
\[
g'(t) = (c-t)\frac{c(1+\cos \alpha)}{(t^2+c^2-2tc \cos \alpha)^{3/2}}
\]
and thus the function $g$ obtains its maximum at $t=c$ and
\[
p(te^{i\alpha},0,c,\infty) \le g(c) = \frac{2}{|e^{i\alpha}-1|} = \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:sectorb=0}
For $\alpha \in (0,\pi]$
\[
\max \left\{ \sup_{t>0,\, d>0,\, c\in(0,d)} p(t e^{i\alpha},0,c,d) , \sup_{t>0,\, c>0} p(t e^{i\alpha},0,c,\infty) \right\} = \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Lemmas \ref{lem:sector1} and \ref{lem:sector2} we need to show that
\[
\sup_{t>0,\, d>0,\, c\in(0,d)} p(t e^{i\alpha},0,c,d) \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
Let us denote $a=t e^{i\alpha}$ and consider a M\"obius transformation $m$ that fixes origin, maps $c$ onto positive real line and $d$ to $\infty$. Now by Lemma \ref{lem:sector2}
\[
p(m(a),0,m(c),m(d)) \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\measuredangle(m(a),0,m(c))}{2}} \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\measuredangle(a,0,c)}{2}} = \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}},
\]
where the second inequality follows from the facts that $\measuredangle(m(a),0,m(c)) > \measuredangle(a,0,c)$ and the function $f(x)=1/\sin \tfrac{\alpha}{2}$ is decreasing on $(0,\pi]$.
\end{proof}
Next we consider the case where one of the points in the supremum of \eqref{ptolemys constant} is on one of the sides of the angular domain and the three other points are on the other side.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:sector1and3}
Let $\alpha \in (0,\pi]$ and $a,b,c,d \in \partial S_\alpha$ be such points that one of them is on one side of $S_\alpha$ and the other three are on the other side. Then
\[
p(a,b,c,d) \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
We may assume that the points $b$, $c$ and $d$ are on the positive real axis and $b < c < d$. Denote $\beta = \measuredangle(a,b,c)$. Now $\beta \ge \alpha$ and points $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ are on the boundary of an angluar domain with angle $\beta$. By Theorem \ref{thm:sectorb=0} we have
\[
p(a,b,c,d) \le 1/\sin \tfrac{\beta}{2} \le 1/\sin \tfrac{\alpha}{2},
\]
where the second inequality follows as the function $f(x)=1/\sin \tfrac{\alpha}{2}$ is decreasing on $(0,\pi]$.
\end{proof}
Next we consider the angular domain in the case when there are exactly two points on each sides of the domain.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:sector2and2}
Let $\alpha \in (0,\pi]$ and $a,b,c,d \in \partial S_\alpha$ be such points that two of them is on one side of $S_\alpha$ and the other two are on the other side. Then
\[
p(a,b,c,d) \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We may assume $|b| \le |c|$. Let the circle through points $b$, $c$ and $d$ be $C$. Denote the intersection of the real axis and the tangent of $C$ at the point $b$ by $u$.
We prove first that the angle $\gamma = \measuredangle(a,b,u) > \alpha$. By Proposition \ref{prop:circumcenter} the circumcenter of $C$ is
\[
k = b-\frac{(d-b)(c-b)}{b-\overline{b}}.
\]
By a straigthforward computation we obtain
\[
u = b+\frac{(d-b)(c-b)}{c+d-(b-\overline{b})} = \frac{cd-|b|^2}{c+d-2 \Re b}
\]
and
\[
\Re u - \Re b = \frac{\Re(d-b)\Re(c-b)-\Im(b)^2}{\Re(c+b)+\Re(d-b)} < \Re(c-b)
\]
implying $u<c$. On the other hand, $|b| \le c<d$ implies $u>0$ and thus $0<u<c$. If we denote $\beta = \measuredangle(0,u,b)$, then $\pi-(\alpha+\beta) = \pi-\gamma$ and thus $\gamma = \alpha+\beta \in (\alpha,\pi]$.
If $a$ is contained inside $C$ then the points $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ can be mapped with a M\"obius transformation to an angular domain with angle $\gamma$ and angular point at $b$. By Theorem \ref{thm:sectorb=0} we obtain $p(a,b,c,d) = 1/\sin \tfrac{\gamma}{2} \le 1/\sin \tfrac{\alpha}{2}$.
If $a$ is not contained inside $C$ then we consider circle $C'$ through points $c$, $d$ and $a$. The line through origin and $a$ intersects $C'$ at $a$ and $b'$. Since $b$ is inside $C'$ we have $|b'| \le |b| \le c$. We denote the angle between the line through origin and $a$, and the tangent of $C'$ at $a$ by $\gamma'$. Similarly as we obtained $\gamma > \alpha$, we now have $\gamma' > \alpha$ and by a M\"obius transformation and Theorem \ref{thm:sectorb=0} as above we collect $p(a,b,c,d) = 1/\sin \tfrac{\gamma}{2} \le 1/\sin \tfrac{\alpha}{2}$.
\end{proof}
Finally we can combine the results to obtain the Ptolemy constant in angular domain.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:angulardomain}
For $\alpha \in (0,\pi]$
\[
P(S_\alpha) = \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The assertion follows from Theorem \ref{thm:sectorb=0}, Corollary \ref{cor:sector1and3} and Theorem~\ref{thm:sector2and2}.
\end{proof}
The result for the angular domain can easily be generalized for double angular domains.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:doubleangluardomain}]
Boundary $\partial S_{\alpha,\beta}$ consists of a line segment $s$ and two half-lines $t$ and $u$. Let us denote the angular domain that contains $s$ and $t$ on its boundary by $S_\alpha$, the angular domain that contains $s$ and $u$ on its boundary by $S_\beta$ and the angular domain that contains $t$ and $u$ on its boundary by $S_\gamma$. Note that here $\gamma = \alpha+\beta-\pi$ and for each angular domain $S_j$, the subindex $j$ describes the size of the angle.
By considering domains $S_\alpha$ and $S_\beta$ it is clear that by Theorem \ref{thm:angulardomain}
\[
P(S_{\alpha,\beta}) \ge \frac{1}{\sin \frac{ \min \{ \alpha,\beta \} }{2}}.
\]
If we map the angular point of $S_\gamma$ to $\infty$ with a M\"obius transformation $m$, then $S_{\alpha,\beta}$ maps to a bounded domain with boundary consisting two line segments and a circular arc. As the angle between the line segments is $\gamma$ we obtain
\[
P(S_{\alpha,\beta}) \ge \frac{1}{\sin \frac{ \gamma }{2}}.
\]
Let us prove that
\[
P(S_{\alpha,\beta}) \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{ \min \{ \alpha,\beta,\alpha+\beta-\pi \} }{2}}.
\]
If $s$, $t$ or $u$ does not contain any of the points $a$, $b$, $c$ or $d$, then the points are contained on the boundary of $S_\alpha$, $S_\beta$ or $S_\gamma$ and the assertion follows from Theorem \ref{thm:angulardomain}. Now each of $s$, $t$ and $u$ contains at least one point and if we consider the angular domain $S_{\gamma'}$ that contains all of the points $a$, $b$, $c$ or $d$ on its boundary, we see that $\gamma' \ge \gamma$. Again the assertion follows from Theorem \ref{thm:angulardomain}
\end{proof}
We finally extend the theory to triangles by the following lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:kolmio_ympyra}
Let $T$ be a triangle with angles $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$ and $a,b,c,d \in \partial T$. Then the points $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ can be mapped in same order with a M\"obius transformation to $\partial S_\theta$, where $\theta \ge \min \{ \alpha,\beta,\gamma \}$ and $\theta \le \pi$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ be on $\partial T$. If the points lie on two sides of the triangle then the assertion follows from Theorem \ref{thm:doubleangluardomain}. Thus we assume that at least one of the points $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ is on each side of the triangle.
We may assume the triangle $T$ to have vertices 0, 1 and $A$. We denote the angles $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ as in Figure \ref{fig:kolmio-ymp} and we may assume that $b,c \in [0,1]$ and $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ are located counterclockwise.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{kolmio_ymp.pdf}
\caption{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:kolmio_ympyra}.}\label{fig:kolmio-ymp}
\end{figure}
Now the circle through $a$, $0$ and $1$ contains $d$ or the circle through $0$, $1$ and $d$ contains $a$. We may assume that the circle $C$ through $0$, $1$ and $d$ encircles $a$ as the other case is symmetric.
We denote ${s} = (0,A) \cap \partial C$ and note that $a \in (0,s]$. Since $A$ is outside $C$ we have $\alpha' = \measuredangle(0,s,1) > \alpha$. Denote the angle between $C$ and $[0,A]$ at $s$ by $\alpha''$ and the angle between $C$ and $[0,1]$ at $1$ by $\gamma'$. Now $\alpha''=\alpha'+\beta > \alpha$ and $\gamma' > \gamma$. By a M\"obius transformation that takes $(0,1,s)$ to $(\infty,0,1)$ the points $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ are mapped in this order to $\partial S_{\gamma',\alpha''}$ and the assertion follows from Theorem \ref{thm:doubleangluardomain}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{main1}]
Let $a,b,c,d \in \partial T$. By Lemma \ref{lem:kolmio_ympyra} we can map $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ in this order by a M\"obius transformation to $\partial S_\theta$, where $\theta = \min \{ \alpha,\beta,\alpha+\beta-\pi \}$, and the assertion follows from Theorem \ref{thm:angulardomain}.
\end{proof}
\section{Other domains}
We consider the Ptolemy constant for quadrilaterals, ellipses and convex plane domains. We begin with quadrilaterals.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:convexquadrilateral}
Let $(a,b,c,d)$ be a convex quadrilateral with two opposite angles $\alpha$ and $\gamma$. Then
\[
p(a,b,c,d) \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha+\gamma}{2}}.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
If we denote the two other angles of $(a,b,c,d)$ by $\beta$ and $\delta$, then
\[
\sin\frac{\beta+\delta}{2} = \sin \frac{\alpha+\gamma}{2}
\]
and the assertion follows from Theorems \ref{thm:angulardomain} and \ref{thm:quadrilateral}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:convexquadrilateral}
Let $(x,a,b,y)$ be a convex quadrilateral and $z$ be a point on the polyline $xaby$. Then the angle $\gamma = \measuredangle(yzx)$ obtains its smallest value at $z=a$ or $z=b$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let us first assume that $z \in [a,b]$. Denote the line through points $a$ and $b$ by $\ell(a,b)$, and the line through points $x$ and $y$ by $\ell(x,y)$. Denote the intersection of $\ell(a,b)$ and $\ell(x,y)$ by $k$. Since $(x,a,b,y)$ is convex $k \notin [x,y]$. By Lemma \ref{lem:visualanglemetricH2}, $\gamma$ obtains its minimal value at $k$ and it is clear that $\gamma$ increases as $z$ is moved further away from $k$ along the line $\ell(a,b)$, see Figure \ref{fig:kmax_knelik}. Thus the assertion follows.
If $z \in [a,x]$ or $z \in [b,y]$ the assertion is clear, see Figure \ref{fig:kmax_knelik}.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{kmax_knelik.pdf}
\caption{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:convexquadrilateral}. The cases $z \in [a,b]$ (on left) and $z \in [b,y]$ (on right).}
\label{fig:kmax_knelik}
\end{figure}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:convexpolygon}
Let $(x,a_1,a_2,\dots ,a_n,y)$, $n \ge 1$, be a convex polygon and $z$ be a point on the polyline $x a_1 a_2\cdots a_ny$. Then the angle $\gamma = \measuredangle(yzx)$ obtains its smallest value at $z=a_i$ for some $i \in \{ 1,2,\dots ,n \}$.
\end{cor}
Our next two results give lower and uppers for the Ptolemy constant in a parallelogram.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:parallellogram_lower}
Let $G$ be a parallelogram with smallest angle $\alpha$ and sides $r$ and $s$. Then
\[
P(G) \ge \max \left\{ \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}} , \sqrt{1+ \left( \frac{\max \{ r,s \} }{2 \min \{ r,s \} \sin \alpha} \right)^2 }, \frac{1}{2} \left( f(r,s,\alpha) + \frac{1}{f(r,s,\alpha)} \right) \right\},
\]
where
\[
f(r,s,\alpha) = \frac{\sqrt{ r^2+2rs \cos \alpha + s^2 }}{\min \{r,s\} \sin \alpha}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thm:angulardomain} it is clear that
\[
P(G) \ge \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
We may assume $r \ge s$. Let $A$, $B$, $C$ and $D$ be the vertices of $G$ and let $a,b,c,d \in \partial G$.
We prove first that
\[
P(G) \ge \frac{1}{2} \left( f(r,s,\alpha) + \frac{1}{f(r,s,\alpha)} \right).
\]
Since $r \ge s$, we have $(r+s\cos \alpha)/2 \ge s \cos \alpha$. We choose $b=B$, $d=D$ and points $a$ and $c$ in a way that they divide the whole length of $G$, that is $r+s \cos \alpha$, into half (see left-hand side of Figure \ref{fig:ksuunnikas}).
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ksuunnikas.pdf}
\caption{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:parallellogram_lower}.}\label{fig:ksuunnikas}
\end{figure}
Now $|a-d|=|b-c|=(r+s \cos \alpha)/2$, $|a-c|=s \sin \alpha$,
$|a-b|=|c-d|=\sqrt{s^2 \sin^2 \alpha +|a-d|^2}$ and $|b-d|=\sqrt{r^2+s^2+2rs\cos\alpha}$. Now
\begin{eqnarray*}
p(a,b,c,d) & = & \frac{1}{2}\frac{(r^2+2rs\cos\alpha+s^2\cos^2\alpha)+2s^2\sin^2\alpha}{s \sqrt{r^2+s^2+2rs\cos\alpha} \sin\alpha}\\
& = & \frac{1}{2} \left( f(r,s,\alpha) + \frac{1}{f(r,s,\alpha)} \right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Finally, we show that
\[
P(G) \ge \sqrt{1+ \left( \frac{r}{2 r \sin \alpha} \right)^2 }.
\]
If $r < 2s \cos \alpha$, then
\[
\sqrt{1+\left( \frac{r}{2s \sin \alpha} \right)^2} < \sqrt{\frac{1}{1+\tan^2 \alpha}}=\frac{1}{\sin \alpha}
\]
and thus
\[
P(G) > \frac{1}{2} \frac{\sqrt{r^2+2rs \cos \alpha+s^2}}{s \sin \alpha} > \frac{1}{2} \frac{\sqrt{3r^2+s^2}}{s \sin \alpha} \ge \frac{1}{\sin \alpha} > \sqrt{1+\left( \frac{r}{2s \sin \alpha} \right)^2}.
\]
We assume $r \ge 2s \cos \alpha$. We choose $b=A$, $c=(A+B)/2$, $d=C$ and $a$ is the intersection point of the side $[A,D]$ and the perpendicular bisector of $[B,C]$ (see right-hand side of Figure \ref{fig:ksuunnikas}). Now
\[
p(a,b,c,d) = \sqrt{1+ \left( \frac{r}{2 r \sin \alpha} \right)^2 }
\]
and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:Pforparallelogram}
Let $G$ be a parallelogram with smallest angle $\omega$ and sides $r$ and $s$. Then
\[
P(G) \le \frac{\sqrt{ r^2+2rs \cos \omega + s^2 }}{\min \{r,s\} \sin \omega}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We may assume $s \le r$. Let $a,b,c,d \in \partial G$ be points in this order. We denote the inner angles of the parallelogram $(a,b,c,d)$ by $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$ and $\delta$, respectively. We may assume $\alpha + \gamma \ge \pi$.
If $a$ and $c$ lie on the same side of $G$ so does $b$ and $d$, because $\beta + \delta\le \pi$. In this case $p(a,b,c,d)=1$.
Let us assume that $a$ and $c$ lie on adjacent sides of $G$. Now $\beta+\delta \ge \omega$ and by Proposition \ref{prop:convexquadrilateral}
\begin{eqnarray*}
p(a,b,c,d) & \le & \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\beta+\delta}{2}} \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\omega}{2}} = \frac{2 \cos \frac{\omega}{2}}{\sin \omega} \\
& \le & \frac{\sqrt{2+2\cos \omega}}{\sin \omega} \le \frac{\sqrt{ r^2+2rs \cos \omega + s^2 }}{\min \{r,s\} \sin \omega}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Let us finally assume that $a$ and $c$ lie on opposite sides of $G$. By Corollary \ref{cor:convexpolygon} we may assume that $b$ and $d$ are vertices of $G$. As above we know by Proposition \ref{prop:convexquadrilateral} that
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:convexpolygon}
p(a,b,c,d) \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\beta+\delta}{2}}.
\end{equation}
If $b$ and $d$ are opposite vertices then $\beta, \delta \ge \theta$, where $\theta$ is the angle between the diagonal and a side of $G$. We may assume that $\theta$ is the smaller of the two possible angles. Now $(\beta+\gamma)/2 \ge \theta$ implying
\[
\sin \frac{\beta+\delta}{2} \ge \sin \theta = \frac{s \sin \omega}{\sqrt{(r+s \cos \omega)^2+s^2 \sin^2 \omega}} = \frac{s \sin \omega}{\sqrt{r^2+2 r s \cos \omega+ s^2}}
\]
and the assertion follows from \eqref{eqn:convexpolygon}.
If $b$ and $d$ are adjacent vertices, then we may assume that $c \in [b,d]$. By Lemma \ref{lem:visualanglemetricH2} the largest possible value for $p(a,b,c,d)$ is attained for $a$, which is on the perpendicular bisector $p$ of points $b$ and $d$. Even if $p$ does not intersect the side of $G$ that is opposite to $[b,d]$, we can still use the estimate
\[
\sin \frac{\beta+\delta}{2} \ge \frac{s \sin \omega}{\sqrt{\left( \frac{r}{2} \right)^2 +s^2 \sin^2 \omega}} \ge \frac{s \sin \omega}{\sqrt{r^2+s^2}} \ge \frac{s \sin \omega}{\sqrt{r^2+2 r s \cos \omega+ s^2}}
\]
and the assertion follows from \eqref{eqn:convexpolygon}.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{suunnikas_yla.pdf}
\caption{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:Pforparallelogram}. The points $a$ and $c$ are on the opposite sides. The points $b$ and $d$ are on opposite vertices (on left) and on adjacent vertices (on right).}
\label{fig:suunnikas_yla}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:P(G) for parallelogram}]
Follows from Theorems \ref{thm:parallellogram_lower} and \ref{thm:Pforparallelogram}.
\end{proof}
We collect two corollaries as special cases of Theorem \ref{thm:P(G) for parallelogram}.
\begin{cor}
If $G$ is a rhombus (a parallelogram with r=s) with smallest angle $\alpha \in (0,\tfrac{\pi}{2}]$, then
\[
P(G) = \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thm:Pforparallelogram}
\[
P(G) \le \frac{\sqrt{2+2 \cos \alpha}}{\sin \alpha} = \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}
\]
and by Theorem \ref{thm:parallellogram_lower}
\[
P(G) \ge \max \left\{ \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}} , \sqrt{1+ \left( \frac{1}{2 \sin \alpha} \right)^2 }, \frac{1}{2} \left( \sin \frac{\alpha}{2} + \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}} \right) \right\},
\]
so the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
If $R$ is a rectangle with sides $r$ and $s$, then
\[
\max \left\{ \sqrt{2},\sqrt{1+\frac{\max \{ r,s \}^2 }{4 \min \{ r,s \}^2 }} \right\} \le P(R) \le \sqrt{1+\frac{\max \{ r,s \}^2 }{\min \{ r,s \}^2 }}.
\]
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Follows from Theorems \ref{thm:parallellogram_lower} and \ref{thm:Pforparallelogram}.
\end{proof}
Our final goal in the study of the Ptolemy constant is ellipse. First we introduce a more general result for convex domains, and then we consider ellipses.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:convexcurve}
Let $J$ be a convex curve with parametrisation $\gamma \colon [0,1] \to \mathbb{C}$. If $\alpha = |{ \rm ang}\, \gamma(0)-{ \rm ang}\, \gamma(1)| < \pi$, then
\[
P(J) \le \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\pi-\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The angle between the tangents of $J$ at the points $\gamma(0)$ and $\gamma(1)$ is at least $\pi-\alpha$, see Figure \ref{fig:konv_kaari}.
Let $a,b,c,d \in [0,1]$ be such that $a<b<c<d$. Let $k$ be the intersection of the tangents of $J$ at points $\gamma(a)$ and $\gamma(d)$ and $\beta$ the angle between the tangents. Now $\beta \ge \pi-\alpha$. Let us denote the angle between lines through points $\gamma(a)$, $\gamma(b)$ and $\gamma(d),k$ by $\delta \ge \beta$. Finally, we denote the angle between lines through points $\gamma(a)$, $\gamma(b)$ and $\gamma(c),\gamma(d)$ by $\varphi$. Now $\varphi \ge \delta \ge \pi-\alpha$ and the assertion follows from Theorem \ref{thm:angulardomain}.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{konv_kaari.pdf}
\caption{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:convexcurve}.}
\label{fig:konv_kaari}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:P(G) for ellipse}]
If $a=b$, the claim is clear. We assume $b<a$ and that the semiaxes lie on the real and the imaginary axes. Now
\[
p(a,bi,-a,-bi) = \frac{2 \cdot (\sqrt{a^2+b^2})^2}{2a \cdot 2b} = \frac{1}{2} \left( \frac{a}{b} + \frac{b}{a} \right) \le P(E).
\]
For the upper bound of $P(E)$ we consider scaling $E$ to circle $C$ with center at origin and radius $b$. The scaling is horizontal with scaling factor $c=b/a$. Four points on $C$ form a convex quadrilateral and we denote the angles by $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$ and $\delta$. Now $\alpha + \gamma = \pi = \beta + \delta$.
Each angle has two sides and when scaling $E$ to $C$ the angle $\eta$ between a side and a horizontal line changes. Lemma~\ref{lem:kompleksilukutulos} gives a lower bound for the change of $\eta$. In the case when the scaling causes maximal decrease in $\alpha+\gamma$, we obtain for new scaled angles $\alpha'$ and $\beta'$ that $\alpha' + \beta' \in (c\pi,\pi]$. Now the upper bound for $P(E)$ follows from Theorems~\ref{thm:simplequadrilateral} and \ref{thm:angulardomain}.
To prove the last inequality we show that for $c \in (0,1]$,
\[
\frac{1}{ \sin \left( c \cdot \pi / 2 \right) } \; < \;
\frac{4}{\pi} \cdot \frac{1}{2} \left( c + \frac{1}{c} \right),
\]
which is equivalent to $f(c) < 4/\pi$ for
\[
f(c) \; = \; \frac{1}{ \sin ( c \pi / 2 ) } \; / \; \frac{1}{2} \left( c + \frac{1}{c} \right) \; = \; \frac{2}{\sin ( c \pi / 2 ) \cdot (c + 1/c) }.
\]
Now
\[
f'(c) = \frac{-2}{(1+c^2)^2 \sin ( c \pi / 2 ) } \cdot \left( (1+c^2) \cdot (c \pi /2) \cot (c \pi /2) - (1-c^2) \right)
\]
and by Lemma~\ref{lem:xcotxArvio} $(c \pi /2) \cot (c \pi /2) \geq (1-c^2)$ implying
\begin{equation}\label{equ_ellipFunk}
f'(c) \leq \frac{-2}{(1+c^2)^2 \sin ( c \pi / 2 ) } \cdot (1 - c^2) ( 1 + c^2 - 1 ) \leq 0.
\end{equation}
Since
\[
\lim\limits_{c \rightarrow 0+} f(x) \; = \; \lim\limits_{c \rightarrow 0+} \frac{4}{\pi} \cdot {\left( (c^2 + 1) \sin ( c \pi / 2 ) / ( c \pi / 2 ) \right)}^{-1} \; = \; \frac{4}{\pi},
\]
the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Uniformity}
In this section we derive new estimates for the uniformity constant. To consider the uniformity constant we often need to estimate the quasihyperbolic distance, because explicit formula for it is known for very few simple domains. One of these is the complement of the origin. Martin and Osgood proved \cite[p. 38]{MarOsg86} that for all $x,y \in {\mathbb{R}^n} \setminus \{ 0 \}$
\begin{equation}\label{martin-osgood formula}
k_{ {\mathbb{R}^n} \setminus \{ 0 \}}(x,y) = \sqrt{\measuredangle(x,0,y)^2+\left( \log \frac{|x|}{|y|} \right)^2 },
\end{equation}
where $\measuredangle(x,0,y)$ is the angle between line segments $[0,x]$ and $[0,y]$.
In the following example we consider the uniformity constant of a circular arc. We show that in this case there is no connection between the Ptolemy constant and the uniformity constant.
\begin{example}\label{example:no connection}
Let us consider domain $D$ in $\mathbb{C}$, whose boundary consists of an arc of the unit circle. Then $P(D) = 1$ and $A_D$ depends on the length of the $\partial D$ and $A_D$ increases as the length of $\partial D$ increases. For $a \in (0,\pi/2)$ we define
\[
\partial D = \{ z \in \mathbb{C} \colon z=e^{i t}, \, t \in [a,2\pi] \}.
\]
We derive a lower bound $l=l(a)$ for $A_D$ in terms of $a$ and show that $l(a) \to \infty$ as $a \to 0$.
We fix points $x,y \in D$ to be $x=0$ and $y=2$. Now $d_D(x)=d_D(y)=1$ and $j(x,y) = \log 3$.
Denote $z=e^{i ta}$ and $u=(1+z)/2$. We estimate
\[
k_D(x,y) \ge k_D(x,[z,1])+k_D([z,1],[1,\infty)),
\]
where $k_D(x,[z,1])$ denotes the quasihyperbolic distance from point $x$ to line segment $[z,1]$ and $k_D([z,1],[1,\infty))$ denotes the quasihyperbolic distance from line segment $[z,1]$ to the set $[1,\infty) = \{ (t,0) \in \mathbb{C} \colon t \ge 1 \}$. By \cite[Remark, 4.26]{Kle08} and \cite[Lemma 2.2]{KleHar15} we can calculate
\begin{eqnarray*}
k_D(x,[z,1]) = k_G(x,u) & = & \log \frac{2 \left( |u-x|+\sqrt{\frac{|z-1|^2}{4}+|u-x|^2} \right)}{|1-z|}\\
& = & \log \frac{1+\cos \frac{a}{2}}{\sin \frac{a}{2}},
\end{eqnarray*}
since $|u-x| = |u| = \cos (a/2)$ and $|1-z| = 2 \sin (a/2)$. By \eqref{martin-osgood formula}
\begin{eqnarray*}
k_D([z,1],[1,\infty)) & \ge & k_{\mathbb{C} \setminus \{ 1 \}}(u,y) = \sqrt{\measuredangle(u,1,y)^2+\left( \log \frac{|u-1|}{|y-1|} \right)^2 }\\
& \ge & \measuredangle(u,1,y) = \frac{\pi}{2}+\frac{a}{2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Putting the estimates together we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
A_D \ge \frac{k_D(x,y)}{j_D(x,y)} \ge \frac{\log \frac{1+\cos \frac{a}{2}}{\sin \frac{a}{2}}+\frac{\pi}{2}+\frac{a}{2}}{\log 3} \to \infty
\end{eqnarray*}
as $a \to 0$.
\end{example}
We introduce the following exact result for the angular domain and build up results to obtain a lower bound for the uniformity constant for convex polygons.
H. Lindén proved \cite{Lin05} that for $\alpha \in (0,\pi]$,
\[
A_{S_\alpha} = 1+ \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\begin{thm}\label{thm:domain with an angle}
Let $\alpha \in (0,\pi)$ and $G \subset S_\alpha$ be a domain such that for some $r>0$
\[
G \cap B^2(r) = S_\alpha \cap B^2(r).
\]
Then $A_G \ge A_{S_\alpha}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Since $S_\alpha$ is uniform, for any $\varepsilon > 0$ there exists points $x_0, y_0 \in S_\alpha$ such that
\[
k_{S_\alpha}(x_0, y_0) \geq (A_{S_\alpha} - \varepsilon) j_{S_\alpha}(x_0, y_0).
\]
Let us denote $R = 2 \cdot \max \{ |x_0|, |y_0| \}$. Now points $x_0$ and $y_0$ are contained in $S_\alpha \cap \mathbb{B}(0, R)$ and thus points $r/R \cdot x_0$ and $r/R \cdot y_0$ are contained in $G \cap \mathbb{B}(0,r)$. We denote that
\begin{eqnarray*}
j_G(r/R \cdot x_0, r/R \cdot y_0) & = & \log \left( 1+\frac{|\frac{r}{R}x_0-\frac{r}{R}y_0|}{\min \{ d_{S_\alpha}(\frac{r}{R}x_0),d_{S_\alpha}(\frac{r}{R}y_0) \}} \right)\\
& = & \log \left( 1+\frac{|x_0-y_0|}{\min \{ d_{S_\alpha}(x_0),d_{S_\alpha}(y_0) \}} \right)\\
& = & j_{S_\alpha}(x_0, y_0).
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{figure}[!ht]\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{kulmaSkaalaus.pdf}
\caption{Points $x_0$ and $y_0$ in $S_\alpha$ and their images under mapping $z \mapsto (r/R)z$.\label{kuva_kulmaSkaalaus}}
\end{figure}
Next we show that
\[
k_G(r/R \cdot x_0, r/R \cdot y_0) \geq k_{S_\alpha}(x_0, y_0).
\]
For any point $z \in G$ or equivalently $(R/r)z \in (R/r)G \subseteq S_\alpha$ we have
\[
d(\partial G, z)
\; = \;
r/R \cdot d(\partial ((R/r)G), (R/r)z)
\; \leq \;
r/R \cdot d(\partial S_\alpha ,(R/r)z).
\]
Let $\gamma \subset G$ be a rectifiable path joining $r/R \cdot x_0$ and $r/R \cdot y_0$. Now
\[
k_G(r/R \cdot x_0, r/R \cdot y_0)
\; = \;
\inf\limits_{\gamma \subset G} \int\limits_\gamma \frac{|dz|}{d(\partial G, z)}
\; \geq \;
\inf\limits_{\gamma \subset G} \int\limits_\gamma \frac{|dz|}{r/R \cdot d(\partial S_\alpha ,(R/r)z)}.
\]
and further
\begin{eqnarray*}
k_G(r/R \cdot x_0, r/R \cdot y_0) & \geq & \inf\limits_{\gamma \subset G} \int\limits_\gamma \frac{|dz|}{r/R \cdot d(\partial S_\alpha ,(R/r)z)}\\
& = & \inf\limits_{\Gamma \subset (R/r)G} \; \int\limits_{\Gamma} \frac{|dw|}{ d(\partial S_\alpha ,w)}\\
& \geq &\inf\limits_{\Gamma' \subset S_\alpha} \; \int\limits_{\Gamma'} \frac{|dw|}{ d(\partial S_\alpha ,w)}\\
& = & k_{S_\alpha}(x_0, y_0),
\end{eqnarray*}
because paths $\Gamma' \subset S_\alpha$ (joining $x_0$ and $y_0$) covers all the paths $\Gamma \subset (R/r)G$.
By putting all together we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
k_G(r/R \cdot x_0, r/R \cdot y_0) & \geq & k_{S_\alpha}(x_0, y_0)\\
& \geq & (A_{S_\alpha} - \varepsilon) j_{S_\alpha}(x_0, y_0)\\
& = & (A_{S_\alpha} - \varepsilon) j_G(r/R \cdot x_0, r/R \cdot y_0)
\end{eqnarray*}
and the assertion follows as we let $\varepsilon \to 0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:A for convex polygon}]
For each vertex of the polygon $G$ we may use Theorem \ref{thm:domain with an angle} for the inner angle $\alpha_m$. Since $G$ is convex $\alpha_m \in (0,\pi]$. Now $A_G \ge \max_m A_{S_{\alpha_m}}$ and the maximum is obtained for the smallest angle $\alpha_m$.
\end{proof}
Our next goal is to find a lower bound for the uniformity constant in triangle. To obtain it we estimate the quasihyperbolic distance in angular domain and the uniformity constant in cut angular domain $S_\alpha \cap B^2(r)$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:qh estimate in angluar domain}
Let $\alpha \in (0,\pi]$ and $x,y \in S_\alpha$ with $|y| \le |x|$. Then
\[
k_{S_\alpha}(x,y) \ge \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}} \ln \frac{|x|}{|y|}.
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We denote $z(t) = r(t) e^{i\theta(t)}$ and thus $|dz| \geq |dr|$. Since $d(\partial S_{\alpha}, z) \leq r \sin(\alpha/2)$ we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
k_{S_{\alpha}}(x,y) & = & \inf\limits_{\gamma} \int\limits_{\gamma} \frac{|dz|}{d(\partial S_{\alpha}, z)} \; \geq \; \int\limits_{|x|}^{|y|} \frac{|dr|}{r \sin(\alpha/2)}\\
& \geq & \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}} \, \left| \, \int\limits_{|x|}^{|y|} \frac{dr}{r} \, \right| \; = \; \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}} \log \frac{|y|}{|x|}
\end{eqnarray*}
and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}
Let $\alpha \in (0,\pi)$ and $G \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be a domain such that for some $r>0$
\[
G \cap B^2(r) = S_\alpha \cap B^2(r).
\]
Then $A_G \ge A_{S_\alpha}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The assertion can be proved in a similar way as Theorem \ref{thm:domain with an angle}.
We choose $r$, $x_0$ and $y_0$ as in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:domain with an angle}. For $R \ge 2 \max \{ |x_0|,|y_0| \}$ we obtain
\[
j_G \left( (r/R) x_0, (r/R) y_0 \right) = j_{S_\alpha} (x_0,y_0).
\]
We estimate next the quasihyperbolic distance between $x_0$ and $y_0$. We denote $c = \frac12 A_{S_\alpha} j_{S_\alpha} (x_0,y_0)$ and set
\[
R \ge 2 \max \{ |x_0|,|y_0| \} e^{c \sin (\alpha / 2)}
\]
or equivalently
\[
\frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}} \log \frac{\frac{1}{2}R}{\max \{ |x_0|,|y_0| \}} \ge c.
\]
Let $\gamma \subset G$ be a curve joining points $(r/R) x_0$ and $(r/R) y_0$. We denote $(R/r)G$ by $G'$ and the curve $(R/r)\gamma$ by $\gamma'$. Note that $\gamma'$ joins the points $x_0$ and $y_0$.
If $\gamma' \subset B^2 (R/2)$, then for each $z \in \gamma'$ we have
\[
d(\partial G',z) = d(\partial S_\alpha,z)
\]
and thus
\[
k_G((r/R)x_0,(r/R)y_0) = k_{S_\alpha}((r/R x_0),(r/R)y_0).
\]
Now the proof continues as in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:domain with an angle}.
If $\gamma' \not \subset B^2 (R/2)$, then $\gamma'$ goes from $S^1 (\max \{ |x_0|,|y_0| \}$ to $S^1 (R/2)$ and back at least once. Since for every $z \in B^2(R/2)$, we have $D(\partial G',z) = d(\partial S_\alpha,z)$, Lemma \ref{lem:qh estimate in angluar domain} gives
\begin{eqnarray*}
k_{G'}(x_0,y_0) & \ge & 2 \frac{1}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}\log \frac{\frac12 R}{\max \{ |x_0|,|y_0| \}} > 2c\\
& = & A_{S_\alpha} j_{S_\alpha}(x_0,y_0) = A_{S_\alpha} j_{S_\alpha}((r/R)x_0,(r/R)y_0)
\end{eqnarray*}
and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
We estimate the uniformity constant in rhombi and obtain an estimate for rectangles as a special case.
\begin{thm}\label{thm: UC for rhombus}
If $G$ is a rhombus with smallest angle $\alpha$, then
\[
A_G \ge \frac{2}{\sin \frac{\alpha}{2}}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We may choose $G$ so that its vertices are $1$, $ti$, $-1$ and $-ti$ for $t \in(0,1)$. Let $x=(s,0)$ for $s \in [0,1)$ implying $d_G(x) = (1-|x|)\sin(\alpha/2)$. The quasihyperbolic geodesic from $x$ to $-x$ is the line segment $[-x,x]$ and thus
\[
k_G(-x,x) = 2\int_0^{|x|} \frac{du}{(1-u)\sin \tfrac\alpha2} = \frac{-2 \log (1-|x|)}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2}.
\]
For the distance ratio metric we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
j_G(-x,x) & = & \log \left( 1+\frac{2|x|}{(1-|x|)\sin \tfrac\alpha2} \right)\\
& = & \log \left( \sin \tfrac\alpha2+(2-\sin \tfrac\alpha2)|x| \right) - \log \left( (1-|x|)\sin \tfrac\alpha2 \right).
\end{eqnarray*}
We denote $u=|x|$ and $C=\sin \tfrac\alpha2$. The l'H\^{o}pital rule gives
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{k_G(-x,x)}{j_G(-x,x)} & \ge & \lim_{u \to 1} \frac{k_G(-x,x)}{j_G(-x,x)}\\
& = & \lim_{u \to 1} \frac{2}{C(1-u)} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac{2-C}{C+u(2-C)} + \frac{C}{C(1-u)}}\\
& = & \lim_{u \to 1} \frac{2}{C} \cdot \frac{C+u(2-C)}{(2-C)(1-u)+C+u(2-C)} = \frac{2}{C}
\end{eqnarray*}
and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{UC for rectangular}
For rectangle $R$ with sides of length $a$ and $b\le a$ the uniformity constant is
\[
A_R \ge 2 \sqrt{2} \left( \frac{b}{a} \right)^4.
\]
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
For a square $S$, Theorem \ref{thm: UC for rhombus} gives unformity constant $2\sqrt{2}$. We consider mapping $f(x,y)=(ax,by)$. Now $f$ is $(a/b)$-bilipschitz and $f(S) = R$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:Vuo88 lemma} we obtain $2\sqrt{2} = A_S \le L^4 A_R = (a/b)^4$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Corollary \ref{UC for rectangular} improves the lower bound introduced in \cite[5.44]{Lin05}.
\end{rem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{UC in triangle}]
The medial axis of $T$ consists of subarcs of the bisectors of the triangle $T$ and it divides $T$ into three subtriangles $T_\alpha$, $T_\beta$ and $T_\gamma$. For each $m \in \{ \alpha,\beta,\gamma \}$ the triangle $T_m$ is opposite to the angle $m$. Let us choose points $x$ and $y$ from the medial axis of $T$ so that $x$ lies on the bisector of $\alpha$ and $y$ lies on the bisector of $\beta$, see Figure \ref{fig:geodesic in T}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{unifKolmioEka.pdf}
\caption{A curve $\Gamma$ joining $x$ and $y$ in $T$. If a part of $\Gamma$ goes outside the lower subtriangle, it can be replaced by a part of medial axis.}\label{fig:geodesic in T}
\end{figure}
The quasihyperbolic geodesic $\Gamma$ from $x$ to $y$ has to be contained in $T_\gamma$, because otherwise we could shorten the quasihyperbolic length of $\Gamma$ by replacing the part that is outside $T_\gamma$ by a part of the medial axis, see Figure \ref{fig:geodesic in T}.
For $m \in \{ \alpha,\beta \}$ we denote the line segment that is a part of medial axis and starts from angle $m$ by $l_m$. We can see that if $\Gamma$ leaves from one side of $T_\gamma$, let say $l_\alpha$, it cannot come back to it, as otherwise the part could be replaced again with a line segment that is a subarc of $l_\alpha$. Thus we now that $\Gamma$ consists of three parts: $\Gamma_1$ is in $l_\alpha$, $\Gamma_2$ is in the interior of $T_\gamma$ and $\Gamma_3$ is in $l_\beta$. Here $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_3$ may consists only from a single point. Note also that $\Gamma_2$ is determined by only one side of $T$ and thus it is a circular arc, because in half-plane quasihyperbolic geodesics agree with hyperbolic geodesics.
Let us fix two vertices of $T$: the vertex at angle $\alpha$ is 0 and the vertex at angle $\beta$ is 1, see Figure \ref{QH geodesin in T2}. By \cite{Mar85} quasihyperbolic geodesics are smooth curves and we can observe that the radius of $\Gamma_2$ is
\[
r = \frac{\sin \tfrac\alpha2 \sin \tfrac\beta2 }{\sin \tfrac\alpha2 + \sin \tfrac\beta2}.
\]
\begin{figure}[!ht]\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{unifKolmioToka.pdf}
\caption{The quasihyperbolic geodesic $\Gamma$ joining $x$ and $y$ consists of three parts.}\label{QH geodesin in T2}
\end{figure}
We denote $\{ x_1 \} = \Gamma_1 \cap \Gamma_2$ and $\{ y_1 \} = \Gamma_2 \cap \Gamma_3$. Now $|x_1| = r/\tan \tfrac\alpha2$, $|y_1-1| = r/\tan \tfrac\beta2$ and
\begin{eqnarray*}
k_T(x,x_1) & = & \int_{|x|}^{|x_1|} \frac{dt}{t \sin \tfrac\alpha2} = \frac{\log |x_1|-\log |x|}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2} = \frac{\log r-\log (\tan \tfrac\alpha2)-\log |x|}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2},\\
k_T(y,y_1) & = & \frac{\log r-\log (\tan \tfrac\beta2)-\log |y-1|}{\sin \tfrac\beta2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Next we add a new condition for the points $x$ and $y$. We want that neither $\Gamma_1$ nor $\Gamma_3$ consist of a single point and thus we require that $|x| = |y-1| = \varepsilon$ for small enough $\varepsilon$.
No
\[
k_T(x,y) > k_T(x,x_1) + k_T(y_1,y) = C + \left( \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2} + \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\beta2} \right) (-\log |x|),
\]
where
\[
C = \frac{\log r-\log (\tan \tfrac\alpha2)}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2} + \frac{\log r-\log (\tan \tfrac\beta2)}{\sin \tfrac\beta2}
\]
does not depend on $|x|$.
Denote $y' \in l_\beta$ be the point with $d( x , \partial T) = d( y' , \partial T)$. By assumption $\beta < \pi/2$ and thus
\[
|x-y| \le |x-y'| = 1-|x| \frac{\sin \tfrac{\alpha+\beta}{2}}{\sin \tfrac\beta2} = 1-D |x|,
\]
where $D$ is a constant not depending on $|x|$. Since $|x| = |y-1|$ and $\alpha \le \beta$ we have $d(x, \partial T) \le d(y, \partial T)$ and
\begin{eqnarray*}
j_T(x,y) & \le & \log \left( 1+\frac{1-D |x|}{|x|\sin \tfrac\alpha2} \right) \le \log \left( 1+\frac{1}{|x|\sin \tfrac\alpha2} \right)\\
& \le & \log \left( \left( 1+\frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2} \right) \frac{1}{|x|} \right) = E-\log |x|,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $E$ does not depend on $|x|$.
Putting the estimates together give us
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{k_T(x,y)}{j_T(x,y)} & \ge & \frac{C + \Big( \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2} + \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\beta2} \Big) (-\log |x|)}{E-\log |x|}\\
& \ge & \lim_{|x| \to 0} \frac{C + \Big( \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2} + \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\beta2} \Big) (-\log |x|)}{E-\log |x|} = \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2} + \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\beta2}
\end{eqnarray*}
and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Theorem \ref{UC in triangle} gives a lower bound for the uniformity constant of a triangle $T$. An upper bound
\[
A_T \le \frac{1}{\cos \tfrac\gamma2} \left( 2+ \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\alpha2} + \frac{1}{\sin \tfrac\beta2} \right)
\]
is given \cite[5.38]{Lin05}.
\end{rem}
Next we prove a lower bound for the uniformity constant in an ellipse and in the complement of the unit ball.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:UC for ellipse}]
We denote the major axis of $E$ by $a$ and the minor axis by $b$. Now $c=a/b$.
Let us prove first the upper bound. We choose $G=\mathbb{B}^2$ and $f(x,y)=(ax,by)$. Now $f$ is $c$-bilipschitz and $f(\mathbb{B}^2) = E$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:Vuo88 lemma} we have $A_E \le c^4 A_{\mathbb{B}^2} = 2c^4$.
We prove next the lower bound. We consider points $x,y \in E \cap \mathbb{R}$ and choose $-a < x < y < a$. By symmetry and convexity of $E$ it is clear that the quasihyperbolic geodesic from $x$ to $y$ in $E$ is the line segment $[x,y]$. By choosing $x = b^2/a-a$ and $y = a-b^2/a$ gives
\[
k_E(x,y) = 2 \int_0^{a-b^2/a}\frac{dt}{b\sqrt{1-t^2/(a^2-b^2)}} = 2 \frac{\sqrt{a^2-b^2}}{b} \arcsin \frac{\sqrt{a^2-b^2}}{a}
\]
and $j_E(x,y) = \log(2(a/b)^2-1)$ implying
\[
A_E \ge \frac{2 \sqrt{c^2-1} \arcsin \sqrt{1-\frac{1}{c^2}}}{\log (2c^2-1)}.
\]
Let $x=si$ and $y=-si$ for $s \in (0,b)$. Now
\[
k_E(x,y) = 2 \int_0^s \frac{dt}{b-t} = 2(\log b-\log(b-s))
\]
and
\[
j_E(x,y) = \log \left( 1+\frac{2s}{b-s} \right) =\log(b+s)-\log(b-s).
\]
Because
\[
A_E \ge \lim_{s \to b} \frac{k_E(x,y)}{j_E(x,y)} = \lim_{s \to b} \frac{2/(b-s)}{1/(b+s)+1/(b-s)} =2,
\]
the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}
Domain $G= {\mathbb{R}^n} \setminus \overline{ {\mathbb{B}^n} }$ is uniform and
\[
\frac{\pi}{\log 3} \le A_G \le \frac{4\pi}{\log 3}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We prove first the lower bound. Let $x \in G$ and choose $y=-x$. Now by \eqref{martin-osgood formula}
\[
\frac{k_G(x,y)}{j_G(x,y)} \ge \frac{k_{ {\mathbb{R}^n} \setminus \{ 0 \}}(x,y)}{j_G(x,y)} = \frac{\pi}{\log \left( 1+\frac{2|x|}{|x|-1} \right)} \ge \lim_{|x| \to \infty} \frac{\pi}{\log \left( 1+\frac{2|x|}{|x|-1} \right)} = \frac{\pi}{\log 3}
\]
and thus $A_G \ge \pi / ( \log 3 )$.
Next we consider the upper bound. We use the following 4 results:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] The domain $ {\mathbb{B}^n} \setminus \{ 0 \}$ is uniform with $A_{ {\mathbb{B}^n} \setminus \{ 0 \}}=\tfrac{\pi}{\log 3}$. \cite[Theorem 1.9]{Lin05}
\item[(ii)] For any open set $G \subset {\mathbb{R}^n} $ and for all $x,y \in G$ we have
\[
j_G(x,y) \le \delta_G(x,y) \le 2 j_G(x,y),
\]
where $\delta_G$ is the Seittenranta metric in $G$. \cite[Theorem 3.4]{Sei99}
\item[(iii)] For any domain $G \subset {\mathbb{R}^n} $ and for all $x,y \in G$ we have
\[
k_G(x,y) \le \rho_G(x,y) \le 2 k_G(x,y),
\]
where $\rho_G$ is the Ferrand metric in $G$. \cite{Fer88}
\item[(iv)] Metrics $\delta_G$ and $\rho_G$ are M\"obius invariant.
\end{enumerate}
Let us fix points $x,y \in G$. We denote M\"obius mapping $f(z) = 1/z$ and observe that $f(G) = {\mathbb{B}^n} \setminus \{ 0 \}$. By (ii) and (iii) we have
\[
\frac{k_G(x,y)}{j_G(x,y)} \le 2 \frac{\rho_G(x,y)}{\delta_G(x,y)} \quad \textrm{and} \quad \frac{\rho_{f(G)}(f(x),f(y))}{\delta_{f(G)}(f(x),f(y))} \le 2 \frac{k_{f(G)}(f(x),f(y))}{j_{f(G)}(f(x),f(y))}.
\]
These inequalities together with (i) and (iv) give
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{k_G(x,y)}{j_G(x,y)} & \le & 2 \frac{\rho_G(x,y)}{\delta_G(x,y)} = 2 \frac{\rho_{f(G)}(f(x),f(y))}{\delta_{f(G)}(f(x),f(y))} \le 4 \frac{k_{f(G)}(f(x),f(y))}{j_{f(G)}(f(x),f(y))}\\
& \le & A_{f(G)} = \frac{4\pi}{\log 3}
\end{eqnarray*}
and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
Our final uniformity constant estimate considers twice punctured space and it is not in any connection with the Ptolemy constant as the boundary of the domain is clearly not a Jordan curve.
\begin{thm}\label{thm: UC for twice punctured plane}
For $G = \mathbb{R}^2 \setminus \{ -e_1,e_1 \}$ we have
\[
A_G \ge \frac{2 \,\textnormal{arsinh}\, \beta}{\log \left( 1+\frac{2\beta}{\sqrt{1+\beta^2}} \right)} \approx 3.5131,
\]
where $\beta \approx 3.1841$ is the solution of $\,\textnormal{arsinh}\, t+\arctan t = \pi$ for $t>0$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We consider $k_G(t e_2,-t e_2)$ for $t>0$ and $G = \mathbb{R}^2 \setminus \{ -e_1,e_1 \}$. By \cite{MarOsg86} and \cite{Vai09} we know the geodesics joining any two points in $G$. For small $t$ the geodesic segment between $x=t e_2$ and $-x$ is the line segment $[x,-x]$ and for large $t$ there exists more than one geodesic segments joining $x$ and $-x$. In this case the geodesics are circular arcs with center at $-e_1$ or $e_1$. There is also a value of $t$ such that geodesics joining $x$ and $-x$ are circular arcs and the line segment $[-x,x]$. We show that this limiting value of $t$ is $\beta$.
We find formula for quasihyperbolic length of line segment $[x,-x]$. By definition
\[
\ell_{k_G} ([t e_2,-t e_2]) = 2 \ell_{k_G} ([0,t e_2]) = 2 \int_0^t \frac{dz}{\sqrt{1+z^2}} = 2 \,\textnormal{arsinh}\, t.
\]
Next we find formula for the quasihyperbolic length for the longer circular arc $C(x,-x)$ with center $e_1$ and joining $x$ and $-x$. By definition
\[
\ell_{k_G} (C(x,-x)) = 2\pi- \measuredangle (x,e_1,-x) = 2(\pi -\arctan t).
\]
Now it is clear that
\begin{eqnarray*}
k_G(x,-x) & = & \ell_{k_G} ([x,-x]) \wedge \ell_{k_G} (C(x,-x))\\
& = & 2 \min \{ \,\textnormal{arsinh}\, t,\pi -\arctan t \}
\end{eqnarray*}
and $\,\textnormal{arsinh}\, t = (\pi -\arctan t)$ is equivalent to $t=\beta$.
We next show that the solution $\beta$ is unique. Consider the function $f(t) = \,\textnormal{arsinh}\, t - (\pi -\arctan t)$. Since $f'(x) = (1+\sqrt{1+t^2})/(1+t^2) > 0$ the function $f(t)$ is strictly increasing and hence $\beta$ is a unique solution. Since the functions $\,\textnormal{arsinh}\, t$ and $\pi -\arctan t$ are strictly monotone, it is clear that $k_G(x,-x)$ obtains its maximum at $\beta$.
By definition
\[
j_G(x,-x) = \log \left( 1+ \frac{2t}{\sqrt{1+t^2}} \right)
\]
and thus
\[
\sup_{y,z \in G} \frac{k_G(y,z)}{j_G(y,z)} \ge \frac{k_G(\beta e_1,-\beta e_1)}{j_G(\beta e_1,-\beta e_1)} = \frac{2 \,\textnormal{arsinh}\, \beta}{\log \left( 1+\frac{2\beta}{\sqrt{1+\beta^2}} \right)}
\]
and the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\textbf{Acknowledgements.} The authors thank M. Vuorinen for the introduction to the topic and the useful comments on the manuscript.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $M$ be an $n$-dimensional manifold with a torsion free affine connection and let $T^* M$ be the cotangent bundle.
In \cite{PattersonWalker}, Patterson and Walker introduced the notion of \textit{Riemann extensions} and showed how a
pseudo-Riemannian metric can be given to the $2n$-dimensional cotangent bundle of an $n$-dimensional manifold with given
non-Riemannian structure. They shows that Riemann extension provides a solution of the general problem of embedding a
manifold $M$ carrying a given structure in a manifold $N$ carrying another structure, the embedding being carried out in
such a way that the structure on $N$ induces in a natural way the given structure on $M$. The Riemann extension can be
constructed with the help of the coefficients of the affine connection.
The Riemann extensions which are pseudo-Riemannian metrics of neutral neutral signature shown its importance in relation to the Osserman manifolds \cite{gar}, Walker manifolds \cite{broz} and non-Lorentzian geometry. In \cite{broz}, the authors generalize the usual Riemannian extensions to the so-called \textit{twisted Riemannian extensions}. The latter is also called \textit{deformed Riemannian extension} (see \cite{GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo} for more details). In \cite{broz,GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo}, the authors studied the spectral geometry of the Jacobi operator and skew-symmetric curvature operator both on $M$ and on $T^{*}M$. The results on these operators are detailed, for instance, in \cite[Theorem 2.15]{GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo}.
In this paper, we shall consider some of the geometric aspects of twisted Riemannian extensions and we will investigate the spectral geometry of the Szab\'o operator on $M$ and on $T^*M$. Note that the Szab\'o operator has not been deeply studied like the Jacobi and skew-symmetric curvature operators.
Our paper is organized as follows. In the section \ref{prel}, we recall some basic definitions and results on the classical Riemannian extension and the twisted Riemannian extension developed in the books \cite{broz,GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo}. Finally in section \ref{Szabo}, we investigates the spectral geometry of the Szab\'o operator on $M$ and on $T^*M$, and we construct two examples of pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o metrics of signature $(3,3)$, using the classical and twisted Riemannian extensions, whose Szab\'o operators are nilpotent.
Throughout this paper, all manifolds, tensors fields and connections are always assumed to be differentiable of class $\mathcal{C}^{\infty}$.
\section{Twisted Riemannian extension}\label{prel}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be an $n$-dimensional affine manifold and $T^* M$ be its cotangent bundle and let
$\pi: T^* M \rightarrow M$ be the natural projection defined by $\pi(p,\omega)=p\in M$ and $(p,\omega)\in T^*M$.
A system of local coordinates $(U,u_i), i=1,\cdots,n$ around $p\in M$ induces a system of local
coordinates $(\pi^{-1}(U), u_i, u_{i'}=\omega_i), i'=n+i=n+1,\cdots,2n$ around $(p,\omega) \in T^*M$,
where $u_{i'}=\omega_i$ are components of covectors $\omega$ in each cotangent space $T^{*}_{p} M$,
$p\in U$ with respect to the natural coframe $\{du^i\}$. If we use the notation $\partial_i =\frac{\partial}{\partial u_i}$
and $\partial_{i'}=\frac{\partial}{\partial \omega_i}, i=i,\cdots,n$ then at each point $(p,\omega)\in T^* M$,
its follows that
$$
\{(\partial_1)_{(p,\omega)},\cdots,(\partial_n)_{(p,\omega)},(\partial_{1'})_{(p,\omega)},\cdots,
(\partial_{n'})_{(p,\omega)} \},
$$
is a basis for the tangent space $(T^* M)_{(p,\omega)}$.
For each vector field $X$ on $M$, define a function $\iota X: T^{*}M\longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$ by
$$
\iota X(p,\omega) = \omega(X_{p}).
$$
This function is locally expressed by,
$$
\iota X (u_i,u_{i'})= u_{i'} X^i,
$$
for all $X=X^{i}\partial_{i}$. Vector fields on $T^*M$ are characterized by their actions on functions $\iota X$. The complete lift $X^C$ of a vector
field $X$ on $M$ to $T^*M$ is characterized by the identity
$$
X^C (\iota Z) = \iota [X,Z], \quad \mbox{for all}\quad Z\in \Gamma(TM).
$$
Moreover, since a $(0,s)$-tensor field on $M$ is characterized by its evaluation on complete lifts of vector
fields on $M$, for each tensor field $T$ of type $(1,1)$ on $M$, we define a $1$-form $\iota T$ on $T^*M$ which is
characterized by the identity
$$
\iota T(X^C) = \iota (TX).
$$
For more details on the geometry of cotangent bundle, we refer to the book of Yano and Ishihara \cite{yano}.
Let $\nabla$ be a torsion free affine connection on an $n$-dimensional affine manifold $M$. The \textit{Riemannian extension} $g_{\nabla}$ is the pseudo-Riemannian metric on $N$ of neutral signature
$(n,n)$ characterized by the identity \cite{broz,GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo}
$$
g_{\nabla}(X^C,Y^C) = -\iota (\nabla_X Y + \nabla_Y X).
$$
In the locally induced coordinates $(u_i,u_{i'})$ on $\pi^{-1}(U)\subset T^* M$, the
Riemannian extension is expressed by
\begin{eqnarray}
g_{\nabla}=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-2u_{k'}\Gamma^{k}_{ij}&\delta^{j}_{i}\\
\delta^{j}_{i}&0
\end{array}
\right),
\end{eqnarray}
with respect to $\{\partial_1,\cdots,\partial_n,\partial_{1'},\cdots,\partial_{n'}\} (i,j,k=1,\cdots,n;k'=k+n)$, where
$\Gamma^{k}_{ij}$ are the Christoffel symbols of the torsion free affine connection $\nabla$ with respect to $(U,u_i)$ on $M$.
Some properties of the affine connection $\nabla$ can be investigated by means of the corresponding properties of the
Riemannian extension $g_{\nabla}$. For instance, $(M,\nabla)$ is locally symmetric if and only if $(T^*M, g_{\nabla})$
is locally symmetric \cite{GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo}. Furthermore $(M,\nabla)$ is projectively flat if and only if $(T^*M, g_{\nabla})$ is locally
conformally flat (see \cite{calvino2} for more details and references therein).
Let $\phi$ be a symmetric $(0,2)$-tensor field on $M$. The \textit{twisted Riemannian extension} is the neutral signature metric on $T^*M$ given by \cite{broz, GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo}
\begin{eqnarray}
g_{(\nabla,\phi)}=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\phi_{ij}(u)-2u_{k'}\Gamma^{k}_{ij}&\delta^{j}_{i}\\
\delta^{j}_{i}&0
\end{array}
\right),
\end{eqnarray}
with respect to $\{\partial_1,\cdots,\partial_n,\partial_{1'},\cdots,\partial_{n'}\}, (i,j,k=1,\cdots,n;k'=k+n)$,
where $\Gamma^{k}_{ij}$ are the Christoffel symbols of the torsion free affine connection $\nabla$ with respect to $(U,u_i)$.
As an example of twisted Riemannian extension metrics, we have the Walker metrics. The latter is detailed as follows. We say that a neutral signature pseudo-Riemannian metric $g$ of a $2n$-dimensional manifold is a \textit{Walker metric} if, locally, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
g=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
B&I_n\\
I_n&0
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, in particular, if the coefficients of the matrix $B$ are polynomial functions of order at most $1$ in the $u_{i'}$ variables, then $g$ is locally a
twisted Riemannian extension; a twisted Riemannian extension is locally a Riemannian extension if $B$ vanishes on
the zero-section. In these two instances, the linear terms in the $u_{i'}$ variables give the connection $1$-form of a
torsion-free connection on the base manifold.\\
The non-zero Christoffel symbols $\widetilde{\Gamma}_{\alpha \beta}^{\gamma}$ of the Levi-Civita connection of the twisted Riemannian extension
$g_{(\nabla,\phi)}$ are given by:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widetilde{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij} &=& \Gamma^{k}_{ij}, \quad \widetilde{\Gamma}^{k'}_{i'j} = -\Gamma^{i}_{jk}\quad
\widetilde{\Gamma}^{k'}_{ij'} = -\Gamma^{j}_{ik},\\
\widetilde{\Gamma}^{k'}_{ij} &=& \sum_r u_{r'} (\partial_k \Gamma^{r}_{ij} - \partial_i \Gamma^{r}_{jk}
-\partial_j \Gamma^{r}_{ik} + 2 \sum_l \Gamma^{r}_{kl}\Gamma^{l}_{ij} )\\
&\quad & + \frac{1}{2}(\partial_i \phi_{jk}+\partial_j \phi_{ik}-\partial_k \phi_{ij})
- \sum_l \phi_{kl}\Gamma^{l}_{ij},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $(i,j,k,l,r=1,\cdots,n)$ and $(i'=i+n,j'=j+n,k'=k+n,r'=r+n)$.
The non-zero components of the curvature tensor of $(T^*M,g_{(\nabla,\phi)})$ up to the usual symmetries are
given as follows: we omit $\widetilde{R}_{kji}^{h'}$, as it plays no role in our considerations.
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{R}_{kji}^{h}= R_{kji}^{h}, \;\; \widetilde{R}_{kji}^{h'},\;\;\widetilde{R}_{kji'}^{h'}=-R_{kjh}^{i},\;\; \widetilde{R}_{k'ji}^{h'} = R_{hij}^{k},
\end{equation*}
where $R_{kji}^{h}$ are the components of the curvature tensor of $(M,\nabla)$.\\
Twisted Riemannian extensions have nilpotent Ricci operator and hence, they are Einstein if and only if they are Ricci flat \cite{GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo}. They can be used to construct non-flat Ricci flat pseudo-Riemannian manifolds.
The classical and twisted Riemannian extensions provide a link between the affine geometry of $(M,\nabla)$ and the neutral signature metric
on $T^*M$. Some properties of the affine connection $\nabla$ can be investigated by means of the corresponding properties of the classical and twisted Riemannian extensions. For more details and information about classical Riemannian extensions and twisted Riemannian extensions, see \cite{broz,calvino1,calvino2,GarciaGilkeyNikcevicLorenzo,gar} and references therein.
\section{Szab\'o metrics on the cotangent bundle}\label{Szabo}
In this section, we recall some basic definitions and results on affine Szab\'o manifolds \cite{dm}. Using the classical and twisted Riemannian extensions, we exhibit some examples of pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o metrics of signature $(3,3)$, which are not locally symmetric.
\subsection{The affine Szab\'o manifolds}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be an $n$-dimensional smooth affine manifold, where $\nabla$ is a torsion-free affine connection on $M$. Let $\mathcal{R}^{\nabla}$
be the associated curvature operator of $\nabla$. We define the \textit{affine Szab\'o operator}
$\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X):T_p M\rightarrow T_p M$ with respect to a vector $X\in T_p M$ by
$$
\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X) Y := (\nabla_X \mathcal{R}^{\nabla})(Y,X)X.
$$
\begin{definition}\cite{dm} {\rm
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a smooth affine manifold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(M,\nabla)$ is called \textit{affine Szab\'o at $p\in M$} if the affine Szab\'o operator $S^{\nabla}(X)$ has the
same characteristic polynomial for every vector field $X$ on $M$.
\item Also, $(M,\nabla)$ is called \textit{affine Szab\'o} if $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at each point $p\in M$.
\end{enumerate}
}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\cite{dm}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be an $n$-dimensional affine manifold and $p\in M$. Then $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at $p\in M$ if and only if the characteristic polynomial of the affine Szab\'o operator $S^{\nabla}(X)$ is $ P_{\lambda}(\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X))=\lambda^{n}$, for every $X\in T_{p}M$.
\end{theorem}
This theorem leads to the following consequences which are proven in \cite{dm}.
\begin{corollary}\cite{dm}
$(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o if the affine Szab\'o operators are nilpotent, i.e., $0$ is the eigenvalue of $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ on the tangent bundle $T M$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{corollary}\cite{dm}
If $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o at $p\in M$, then the Ricci tensor is cyclic parallel.
\end{corollary}
Affine Szab\'o connections are well-understood in $2$-dimension, due to the fact that an affine connection is Szab\'o if and only if its Ricci tensor is cyclic parallel \cite{dm}. The situation is however more complicated in higher dimensions where the cyclic parallelism is a necessary but not sufficient condition for
an affine connection to be Szab\'o.
According to Kowalski and Sekizawa \cite{KowalskiSekizawa}, an affine manifold $(M,\nabla)$ is said to be an $L_3$-space if its Ricci tensor is cyclic parallel. Then, we have:
\begin{theorem}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a two-dimensional smooth torsion free affine manifold. Then, the following statements are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(M,\nabla)$ is an affine Szab\'o manifold.
\item $(M,\nabla)$ is a $L_3$-space.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
In higher dimensions, it is not hard to see that there exist $L_3$-spaces which are not affine Szab\'o manifolds.
Next, we have an example of a real smooth manifold of three dimensional in which the equivalence between Szab\'o and $L_{3}$ conditions holds. Let $M$ be a $3$-dimensional smooth manifold and $\nabla$ a torsion-free connection. We choose a fixed coordinates neighborhood $\mathcal{U}(u_1,u_2,u_3) \subset M$.
\begin{proposition}\label{p1}
Let $M$ be a $3$-dimensional manifold with torsion free connection given by
\begin{equation}\label{e1}
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_1 = f_1 \partial_2,\;\;
\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_2 = f_2 \partial_2,\;\;
\nabla_{\partial_3} \partial_3 = f_3 \partial_2.
\end{equation}
where $f_{i}= f_{i}(u_1,u_2,u_3)$, for $i=1,2,3$. Then $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o if and only if the Ricci tensor of the affine connection (\ref{e1}) is cyclic parallel.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We denote the functions $f_1 (u_1,u_2,u_3), f_2 (u_1,u_2,u_3)$ and $f_1 (u_1,u_2,u_3)$ by $f_1,f_2$ and $f_3$
respectively, if there is no risk of confusion. The Ricci tensor of the affine connection (\ref{e1}) expressed
in the coordinates $(u_1,u_2,u_3)$ takes the form
\begin{align}\label{e2}
Ric^{\nabla} (\partial_1,\partial_1) &= \partial_2 f_1 + f_1f_2,\quad
Ric^{\nabla} (\partial_1,\partial_2) = -\partial_1 f_2,\\
Ric^{\nabla} (\partial_3,\partial_2) &= -\partial_3 f_2,\quad
Ric^{\nabla} (\partial_3,\partial_3) = \partial_2 f_3 + f_2f_3.
\end{align}
It is know that the Ricci tensor of any affine Szab\'o is cyclic parallel \cite{dm}, it follows from the expressions in
(\ref{e2}) that we have the following necessary condition for the affine connection (\ref{e1}) to be Szab\'o
\begin{align*}
&\partial_1\partial_3 f_2 = 0,\\
&\partial_1\partial_2 f_2 -f_2\partial_1 f_2 =0,\\
&\partial_3\partial_2 f_2 -f_2\partial_3 f_2 =0,\\
& \partial_1\partial_2 f_1 +2f_1\partial_1f_2 +f_2\partial_1f_1 =0,\\
&\partial_2\partial_3 f_3 +2f_3\partial_3f_2 +f_2\partial_3f_3 =0,\\
&\partial_2\partial_3 f_1 +2f_1\partial_3f_2 +f_2\partial_3f_1 =0,\\
& \partial_2\partial_1 f_3 +2f_3\partial_1f_2 +f_2\partial_1f_3 =0,\\
& \partial^{2}_{2}f_1 +f_1\partial_2f_2 +f_2\partial_2f_1 -\partial^{2}_{1}f_2 =0,\\
& \partial^{2}_{2}f_3 +f_3\partial_2f_2 +f_2\partial_2f_3 -\partial^{2}_{3}f_2 =0.
\end{align*}
Now, for each vector $X=\sum_{i=1}^{3} \alpha_i \partial_i$, a straightforward calculation shows that the associated affine
Szab\'o operator is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e3}
(\mathcal{S}^{\nabla} (X)) =
\left(
\begin{array}{lll}
0&0&0\\
a&0&c\\
0&0&0\\
\end{array}
\right),
\end{eqnarray}
with $a$ and $c$ are partial differential equations of $f_1,f_2$ and $f_3$. It follows from the matrix associated to
$\mathcal{S}^{\nabla} (X)$, that its characteristic polynomial as written as follows:
$
P_{\lambda} [\mathcal{R}^{\nabla} (X)] = \lambda^3.
$
It follows that a affine connection given by (\ref{e1}) is affine Szab\'o if its Ricci tensor is cyclic parallel.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}\label{Exampl1}{\rm
The following connection on $\mathbb{R}^3$ defined by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e4}
\nabla_{\partial_1} \partial_1 = u_1 u_3 \partial_2, \quad
\nabla_{\partial_2} \partial_2 = 0, \quad
\nabla_{\partial_3} \partial_3 = (u_1 + u_3) \partial_2
\end{eqnarray}
is a non-flat affine Szab\'o connection.}
\end{example}
\subsection{Szab\'o pseudo-Riemannian manifolds}
Let $(M,g)$ be a pseudo Riemannian manifold. The Szab\'o operator $$\mathcal{S}(X):Y\mapsto (\nabla_X R)(Y,X)X$$ is a symmetric operator with $\mathcal{S}(X)X=0$. It plays an important role in the study of totally isotropic manifols. Since $\mathcal{S}(\alpha X)=\alpha^3 \mathcal{S}(X)$, the natural domains of definition
for the Szab\'o operator are the pseudo-sphere bundles
$$
S^{\pm}(M,g) =\{X\in TM, g(X,X)=\pm 1\}.
$$
One says that $(M,g)$ is Szab\'o if the eigenvalues of $\mathcal{S}(X)$ are constant on the pseudo-spheres of unit timelike and spacelike vectors. The eigenvalue zero plays a distinguished role. One says that $(M,g)$ is nilpotent Szab\'o if $Spec(\mathcal{S}(X))=\{0\}$ for all $X$. If $(M,g)$ is nilpotent Szab\'o of order $1$, then $(M,g)$ is a local symmetric space (see \cite{fiedler} for more details).
Szab\'o in \cite{Szabo} used techniques from algebraic topology to show, in the Riemannian setting, that any such a metric
is locally symmetric. He used this observation to prove that any two point homogeneous space
is either flat or is a rank one symmetric space. Subsequently Gilkey and Stravrov \cite{GilkeyStravrov}
extended this result to show that any Szab\'o Lorentzian manifold has constant sectional curvature.
However, for metrics of higher signature the situation is different. Indeed it was showed in \cite{GilkeyIvanovaZhang}
the existence of Szab\'o pseudo-Riemannian manifolds endowed with metrics of signature $(p,q)$
with $p\geq 2$ and $q\geq 2$ which are not locally symmetric .
Next, we use the classical and twisted Riemannian extensions to construct some pseudo-Riemannian metrics on $\mathbb{R}^6$ which are nilpotent Szab\'o of order $\ge 2$.
\subsection{Riemannian extensions of an affine Szab\'o connection.}
We start with the following result.
\begin{theorem}
Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a smooth torsion-free affine manifold. Then the following statements are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o.
\item[(ii)] The Riemannian extension $(T^*M,g_{\nabla})$ of $(M,\nabla)$ is a pseudo Riemannian Szab\'o manifold.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\tilde{X}=\alpha_i \partial_i + \alpha_{i'}\partial_{i'}$ be a vector field on $T^* M$.
Then the matrix of the Szab\'o operator $\tilde{S}(\tilde{X})$ with respect to the basis $\{\partial_i,\partial_{i'}\}$ is of the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X}) = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)&0\\
*& {}^t\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)
\end{array}
\right).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ is the matrix of the affine Szab\'o operator on $M$ relative
to the basis $\{\partial_i\}$. Note that the characteristic polynomial $P_{\lambda}[\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})]$ of $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})$
and $P_{\lambda}[\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]$ of $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ are related by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{SzaboMatrix}
P_{\lambda}[\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})]=P_{\lambda}[\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]\cdot P_{\lambda}[{}^t\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)].
\end{eqnarray}
Now, if the affine manifold $(M,\nabla)$ is assumed to be affine Szab\'o, then $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$ has zero eigenvalues for each
vector field $X$ on $M$. Therefore, it follows from (\ref{SzaboMatrix}) that the eigenvalues of $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})$ vanish
for every vector field $\tilde{X}$ on $T^* M$. Thus $(T^*M, g_{\nabla})$ is pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifold.\\
Conversely, assume that $(T^*M, g_{\nabla})$ is an pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifold. If $X=\alpha_i \partial_i$ is an arbitrary
vector field on $M$ then $\tilde{X}=\alpha_i \partial_i + \frac{1}{2\alpha_i}\partial_{i'}$ is an unit vector field at every point of
the zero section on $T^* M$. Then from (\ref{SzaboMatrix}), we see that, the characteristic polynomial
$P_{\lambda}[\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})]$ of $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})$ is the square of the characteristic polynomial
$P_{\lambda}[\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]$ of $\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)$. Since for every unit vector field $\tilde{X}$ on $T^* M$ the
characteristic polynomial $P_{\lambda}[\tilde{\mathcal{S}}(\tilde{X})]$ should be the same, it follows that for every vector field
$X$ on $M$ the characteristic polynomial $P_{\lambda}[\mathcal{S}^{\nabla}(X)]$ is the same. Hence $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o.
\end{proof}
As an example, we have the following. Let $(M,\nabla)$ be a $3$-dimensional affine manifold. Let $(u_1,u_2,u_3)$ be local coordinates on $M$. We write
$\nabla_{\partial_i} \partial_j = \sum_k \Gamma_{ij}^{k}\partial_k$ for $i,j,k=1,2,3$ to define the coefficients of affine connection $\nabla$. If $\omega \in T^* M$, we write $\omega=u_4du_1 + u_5du_2 + u_6du_3$ to define the dual fiber coordinates $(u_4,u_5,u_6)$, and thereby obtain canonical local coordinates $(u_1,u_2,u_3,u_4,u_5,u_6)$ on $T^* M$.
The Riemannian extension is the metric of neutral signature $(3,3)$ on the cotangent bundle $T^* M$ locally given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
g_{\nabla}(\partial_1,\partial_4)&=& g_{\nabla}(\partial_2,\partial_5)=g_{\nabla}(\partial_3,\partial_6)=1,\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_1,\partial_1)&=& -2u_4\Gamma_{11}^{1}-2u_5\Gamma_{11}^{2}-2u_6\Gamma_{11}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_1,\partial_2)&=& -2u_4\Gamma_{12}^{1}-2u_5\Gamma_{12}^{2}-2u_6\Gamma_{12}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_1,\partial_3)&=& -2u_4\Gamma_{13}^{1}-2u_5\Gamma_{13}^{2}-2u_6\Gamma_{13}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_2,\partial_2)&=& -2u_4\Gamma_{22}^{1}-2u_5\Gamma_{22}^{2}-2u_6\Gamma_{22}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_2,\partial_3)&=& -2u_4\Gamma_{23}^{1}-2u_5\Gamma_{23}^{2}-2u_6\Gamma_{23}^{3},\\
g_{\nabla}(\partial_3,\partial_3)&=& -2u_4\Gamma_{33}^{1}-2u_5\Gamma_{33}^{2}-2u_6\Gamma_{33}^{3}.
\end{eqnarray*}
From Example \ref{Exampl1}, the Riemannian extension of the affine connection defined in (\ref{e4}) is the pseudo-Riemannian metric given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{metric1}
g&=& 2 du_1\otimes du_4 + 2 du_2\otimes du_5 + 2du_3\otimes du_6 \nonumber\\
&\quad & -2(u_1u_3u_5)du_1\otimes du_1 -2(u_1 + u_3)u_5du_3\otimes du_3.
\end{eqnarray}
This metric leads to the following result.
\begin{proposition}
The metric in (\ref{metric1}) is Szab\'o of signature $(3,3)$ with zero eigenvalues. Moreover,
it is not locally symmetric.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The non-vanishing components of the curvature tensor of $(\mathbb{R}^6,g_{\nabla})$ are given by
$R(\partial_1, \partial_3 )\partial_1 = - u_1\partial_2$, $R(\partial_1, \partial_3 )\partial_3 = \partial_2$, $R(\partial_1,\partial_3)\partial_5 = u_1\partial_4 - \partial_6$, $R(\partial_1, \partial_5 )\partial_1 = - u_1 \partial_6$, $R(\partial_1, \partial_5 )\partial_3 = u_1 \partial_4$, $R(\partial_3, \partial_5)\partial_1 = \partial_6$, $ R(\partial_3, \partial_5 )\partial_3 = - \partial_4$.
Let $\displaystyle X = \sum_{i=1}^{6}\alpha_i\partial_i$ be a non-zero vector on $\mathbb{R}^6$. Then the matrix associated with the Szab\'o operator $\mathcal{S} (X) := (\nabla_X \mathcal{R})(\cdot,X)X$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
(\mathcal{S} (X)) =
\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0&0&0&0&0&0\\
-1&0&1&0&0&0\\
0&0&0&0&0&0\\
2&0&-1&0&-1&0\\
0&0&0&0&0&0\\
-1&0&1&0&1&0
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation*}
Hence the characteristic polynomial of the Szab\'o operators is $P_{\lambda}(S(X))=\lambda^6$. Since one of the components of $\nabla R$,
$
(\nabla_{\partial_1} R)(\partial_1,\partial_3,\partial_5,\partial_1) =1
$
is non-zero, the metric in (\ref{metric1}) is not locally symmetric. The proof is completed.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Twisted Riemannian extensions of an affine Szab\'o connection}
In this subsection, we study the twisted Riemannian extensions which is a generalization of classical Riemannian extensions. We have following result.
\begin{theorem}
Let $(T^*M,g_{\nabla,\phi})$ be the cotangent bundle of an affine manifold $(M,\nabla)$ equipped with the
twisted Riemannian extension.
Then $(T^*M,g_{(\nabla,\phi)})$ is a pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o manifold if and
only $(M,\nabla)$ is affine Szab\'o for any symmetric $(0,2)$-tensor field $\phi$.
\end{theorem}
As an example we have the following.
\begin{example}{\rm
Let us consider the twisted Riemannian extensions of the affine connection $\nabla$ given in Example \ref{Exampl1}. This is given by
\begin{align}\label{metric2}
g&= 2du_1\otimes du_4 + 2du_2\otimes du_5 + 2du_3\otimes du_6 + 2\phi_{12}du_1\otimes du_2 \nonumber\\
&+ 2\phi_{13}du_1\otimes du_3+ 2\phi_{23}du_2\otimes du_3 +(\phi_{11} -2u_1u_3u_5)du_1\otimes du_1\nonumber\\
& +\phi_{22}du_2\otimes du_2 +[\phi_{33}-2(u_1 + u_3)u_5]du_3\otimes du_3,
\end{align}
where $(u_1,u_2,\cdots,u_6)$ are coordinates in $\mathbb{R}^6$.
The non-zero Christoffel symbols are as follows:
\begin{align}
\Gamma^{2}_{11} &= -\Gamma^{4}_{15}= u_{1}u_{3}, \;\;
\Gamma^{4}_{11} = \frac{1}{2}\partial_{1}\phi_{11}-u_{3}u_{5}-u_{1}u_{3}\phi_{12},\nonumber\\
\Gamma^{5}_{11} &= \partial_{1}\phi_{12}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{2}\phi_{11}-u_{1}u_{3}\phi_{22},\;\;
\Gamma^{6}_{11} = \partial_{1}\phi_{13}+u_{5}u_{1}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{3}\phi_{11}-u_{1}u_{3}\phi_{22},\nonumber\\
\Gamma^{4}_{12} &= \frac{1}{2}\partial_{2}\phi_{11},\;\;
\Gamma^{5}_{12} = \frac{1}{2}\partial_{1}\phi_{22},\;\;
\Gamma^{6}_{12} = \frac{1}{2}\{\partial_{2}\phi_{13}+\partial_{1}\phi_{23}-\partial_{3}\phi_{12}\},\nonumber\\
\Gamma^{4}_{13} &= -u_{5}u_{1} + \frac{1}{2}\partial_{3}\phi_{11},\;\;
\Gamma^{5}_{13} = \frac{1}{2}\{\partial_{3}\phi_{12}+\partial_{1}\phi_{32}-\partial_{2}\phi_{13}\},\nonumber\\
\Gamma^{6}_{13} &= -u_{5}+\frac{1}{2}\partial_{1}\phi_{33},\;\;
\Gamma^{4}_{22} = \partial_{2}\phi_{21}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{1}\phi_{22},\;\;
\Gamma^{5}_{22} = \frac{1}{2}\partial_{2}\phi_{22},\nonumber \\
\Gamma^{6}_{22} &= \partial_{2}\phi_{23}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{3}\phi_{22},
\Gamma^{4}_{23} = \frac{1}{2}\{\partial_{3}\phi_{21}+\partial_{2}\phi_{31}-\partial_{1}\phi_{23}\},\nonumber
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\Gamma^{5}_{23}& = \frac{1}{2}\partial_3 \phi_{22},\;\;
\Gamma^{6}_{23} = \frac{1}{2}\partial_{2}\phi_{33}, \;\;
\Gamma^{2}_{33} = -\Gamma^{6}_{35} = (u_{1}+u_{3}),\nonumber\\
\Gamma^{4}_{33}& = \partial_{3}\phi_{31}+u_{5}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{1}\phi_{33}-(u_{1}+u_{3})\phi_{12},\nonumber\\
\Gamma^{5}_{33} &= \partial_{3}\phi_{32}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{2}\phi_{33}-(u_{1}+u_{3})\phi_{22},\;\;
\Gamma^{5}_{33} = -u_{5} + \partial_{3}\phi_{33} - (u_{1} + u_{3})\phi_{32}.\nonumber
\end{align}
For $\displaystyle X=\sum_{i=1}^{6}\alpha_i\partial_i$, by a straightforward calculation the characteristic polynomial associated with the Szab\'o operator is $P_{\lambda}[S(X)]=\lambda^6$. So, $(M,g_{\nabla,\phi})$ is a pseudo-Riemannian Szab\'o metric of signature $(3,3)$ with zero eigenvalue.}
\end{example}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors would like to thank the referee for his/her valuable suggestions and comments that helped them improve the paper.
|
\section{Abstract}
To generate a hypothesis about the effects of anonymity on user participation in online communities, comments on Youtube were analysed for effects of the change from allowing pseudonyms to Google+ with its real name policy. Small differences were detected, leading to the hypothesis that the option to remain anonymous leads to a less active environment for getting feedback, with less polite and less rude comments on the expense of neutral ones.
\keywords{Anonymity, Online Participation, Youtube.}
\category{H.5.3}{Group and Organization Interfaces}{Web-based interaction}
\category{H.1.2}{User/Machine Systems}{Human factors}.
\section{Introduction}
Shall people be anonymous on the internet? What effect has being anonymous in a group? While working on the concept for AAL TOPIC\footnote{\url{http://www.topic-aal.eu/}}, an online platform for social support among informal caregivers, the issue of allowing anonymous comments in the discussions or in general on the platform arose. It was evoked in particular by informal caregivers taking care of a person suffering from the Alzheimer's Disease, since this disease is related to behavioural disorders that can lead to embarrassing situations for the caregivers (and the patient). If the goal is to have a healthy community that engages in experience sharing and helping each other, would it be better to ask users to use their civil identity or do they gather confidence by being anonymous or pseudonymous? Or is it better to allow both situations, depending on the type of discussions?
With theories and literature implying different outcomes (\cite{anonIntergroup}, \cite{SidePortraits}), it became clear that this question is not answered easily. We decided to look at comments in Youtube, especially because on Nov. 2013, Google integrated Youtube's comment system into Google+. Before the change, users were free to chose a name, but after the change, users were forced to use their full civil identity (later, pseudonyms were allowed, but the character of the platform changed) \footnote{Causing several Youtubers to forbid comments, see \url{http://goo.gl/wkkbBy}}. Thus, we can find videos with comments made by users with pseudonym only, and newer videos where commenters often use their full name, while being connected by Google+ to their friends and identity.
This situation gives us the option to compare:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Comments from before and after the change.
\item Comments from before the change by users with and without a Google+ account now.
\end{enumerate}
This is a first step in a bigger effort to analyse the impact of anonymity and to find recommendations for community builders. The hypotheses generated here are planned to be tested in other studies and in an experiment as part of the TOPIC project. In the following section, we present the related work. Afterwards we show a simplified model built from the literature, describing the relation between anonymity and participation. The section after describes the data gathering and the findings while following the model. Limitations are mentioned and a conclusion is made.
\section{Related Work}
Research work on the effect of anonymity already exists. A fundamental theory is the Deindividuation Theory, describing how a member in a group looses his self-awareness, thus loosing his social conscience \cite{anonIntergroup}, which leads to less polite discussions. A second theory, the social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE), regards anonymous group behaviour more positive. It suggests that members try to do what is good for the group, because members identify with the norms of the group \cite{SidePortraits}, with anonymity helping that process. The user has a better user experience by feeling more connected.
An important practical work is described by Kilner et al in \cite{CoPAnonymity}. An online forum for soldiers gradually changed its account model from anonymity with pseudonyms to full civil identity. Kilner et al. analysed the different stages and found that removing anonymity options led to fewer antisocial comments and fewer comments in total. This work heavily influenced our analysis in selecting possible hypotheses.
In the area of Behavioral Science, experiments (like \cite{anonymityDisinhibition}) tried to find effects of anonymity. Research on the link between politeness, civility and anonymity from a political angle (\cite{santana2012civility}) exists as well.
There is also a lot of literature describing factors influencing participation. Anonymity is there seldom a main focus, but it gets mentioned. An example for that is a main thread in the literature: The \textbf{Common Identity and Bond Theory} being used by Kraut et al as described in \cite{commonBond}. The theory sees two types of connection between the members of a community - Identity and Bond - influenced by different factors, \emph{Social Categorization}, \emph{Interdependence} and \emph{Intergroup Comparisons} for Identity and \emph{Social Interaction}, \emph{Personal Information} and \emph{Personal Attraction through Similarity} for Bond. Some of them can be linked to anonymity, SIDE theory does that explicitly with \emph{Personal Attraction through Similarity}, as described in the introduction.
\section{Model}
As we are interested in the influence of anonymity on online participation for social support and community building, we developed a model of what influences participation. We started with Kraut's use of the Common Identity and Common Bond model, and other related work. Then, factors influenced by anonymity were collected. We ended with a model showing which factors that might influence participation are influenced by anonymity. But many factors were hard to apply on a textual corpus. We then simplified the model, keeping only the factors for which we were able to find markers we can measure in text (see \ref{fig:model}).
This model illustrates that a big part of the literature is assuming that anonymity influences politeness (\cite{offensiveInternet}). Politeness was found to influence participation; For instance \cite{bbcNegative} showed that impolite comments provoke other comments. Anonymity is indirectly connected with Intergroup Comparisons and Social Interaction via Social Presence; \cite{socialPresence} describe that factors linked to Common Bond and Common Identity profit from Social Presence, with \cite{anonPresence} showing that anonymity influences Social Presence.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{gfx/Anonymity-Participation-Model_simple.tex}}
\caption{simplified model showing the interaction of anonymity and participation}
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure}
\section{Data Collection}
24 videos were identified that had several comments and were related to informal caregivers or Alzheimer. The average publishing date of the comments was Monday, December 6, 2010. The 3773 comments were downloaded with Youtubes API (using modified scripts of the TubeKit parser\footnote{\url{http://tubekit.org/}}), as well as the profile information of the 3087 users, revealing whether the account was linked with Google+ or not. Youtubes API does not show when users linked their Youtube-Account to Google+, we can only see which commenters are still not using Google+. However, it is complicated to use Youtube while logged in without going through the Google+ boarding. Consequently, no comment made after the change to Google+ was from a user without Google+. The other way around existed, there were comments from people having only a Google+ account and no Youtube profile, but all were discarded for being formal sharing announcements.
The comments were then analysed for markers that showed:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Politeness}. To measure those factors in text we searched for markers that show how polite a message is. After dismissing some models as too complicated to use manually (\cite{politenessMarkers}) or not accessible enough (\cite{computationalPoliteness}), it was decided to use an algorithmical approach (Bayes' algorithm).
\item \textbf{Intergroup Comparisons}. We searched for the words "we/us/our/them", that grammatically show that a group of people is mentioned. In the model, the use of intergroup comparisons is influenced by anonymity through \textbf{social awareness}.
\item \textbf{Personal Interaction}. We looked at the reply count given by Youtubes API. In the model, this is influenced by anonymity through \textbf{social awareness}. The amount of replies made has to be fetched from the comment data by searching for the @-character, this metric worked only before the change to Google+.
\end{enumerate}
The use of the Bayes' algorithm was thereby the most complicated step. 300 comments were marked manually as either polite, neutral or rude. Then the algorithm classified all remaining comments. The classification of 100 comments was used to calculate an estimated accuracy. The accuracy of the used algorithm was 80\%.
\section{Findings}
\subsection{The change}\label{sc:change}
Comparing comments from before and after the change, there is a difference.
\subsubsection{Politeness}
After the change, we find slightly more polite and rude comments, significant by a \(\chi^2\)-test with \(p < 0.01\).
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | c | c | c | }
\hline
& Polite & Neutral & Rude \\
\hline
Before & 133 (3\%) & 2838 (92\%)& 155 (5\%) \\
After & 32 (5\%) & 534 (84\%) & 81 (11\%)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\subsubsection{Intergroup Comparisons}
Most of the comments did not contain intergroup comparisons (we/us/our/them). After the change, the average use of those words was slightly higher, but a t-test showed the increase to be not significant.
\begin{table}
\caption{Amount of Comparisons}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{| l | c | c | c | c |}
\hline
\hline
Group & mean & sd & median & n \\
\hline
Before & 0.1628 & 0.5885 & 0 & 3126 \\
After & 0.2365 & 1.3417 & 0 & 647 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:comparisonsChange}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Social Interaction}
There are two different metrics for social interaction in the data: replies made and replies gotten. The Youtube API only shows the amount of replies gotten. The difference when looking at the effect of the change is big, and significant by t-test with \(p < 0.01\) . After the change, with an average of 0.5 it seems like every second comment was answered, though the median of 0 shows this to be false. Instead some comments got many replies, while many other still got none.
\begin{table}
\caption{Change of replies}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{| l | c | c | c | c |}
\hline
\hline
Group & mean & sd & median & n \\
\hline
Before & 0.0067 & 0.1171 & 0 & 3126 \\
After & 0.4791 & 2.3598 & 0 & 647 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:repliesChange}
\end{table}
\subsection{Pseudonymous vs Google+ Users before the change}
We just saw that the change in the environment had an influence on the comments. But that does not prove that the change in the degree of anonymity is the cause of that change, as other factors changed as well. A difference in the comments between users who adopted Google+ and those who did not would be a clearer signal, but the difference was small.
\subsubsection{Politeness}
There was no difference in the politeness rating, confirmed by a \(\chi^2\)-test resulting in \(p = 0.8424\).
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | c | c | c | }
\hline
& Polite & Neutral & Rude \\
\hline
G+ & 96 (4\%) & 2058 (91\%) & 112 (5\%) \\
pseudonym & 36 (4\%) & 730 (91\%) & 36 (4\%) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\subsubsection{Intergroup Comparisons}
Intergroup Comparisons made were also on the same level.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | c | c | }
\hline
& Comments With Comparisons \\
\hline
G+ & 253 (10\%) \\
pseudonym & 83 (10\%) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\subsubsection{Social Interaction}
The only visible difference is here. According to the API, no pseudonymous user got any reply. They made however the same relative amount of replies. The lack of responses could explain why the users stopped being active (see \cite{feedbackWiki}). This observation could be a bug in the API, but is not totally unlikely given low amount of replies. Comments were often directed at the creator of the video, not at other commenters. Sadly the identification whether a comment was a reply or not was not reliable. That data is not coming from the API but from searching for an "@" sign, a praxis used before the change to reference another user.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | c | c | }
\hline
& Avg Replies Gotten & Avg of being a Reply \\
\hline
G+ & 0.01 & 0.085 \\
pseudonym & 0 & 0.081 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\section{Limitations}
It is possible that the markers that were measured are influenced by other factors, and that anonymity did not play a significant role. Youtube changed its interface, the spam control and the ranking of comments, from a timeline system showing the newest comments first to an opaque ranking system. External cultural factors could also influence the comments. Thus a different selection of videos could show other results. Another limitation is the bayes algorithm used to qualify politeness. The initial supervised learning process depends on the researcher entering the input. The observed 80\% accuracy is subject to the same limitation, as the algorithmic politeness rating was compared with the subjective correct rating.
\section{Conclusion and Further work}
Given the limitations of this study, the results are rather hypotheses for further work. There are two: (1) When commenters are anonymous, it leads to less polite and less rude comments. (2) When commenters are anonymous, it leads to less interaction.
The first hypothesis is especially surprising, as it stands in contrast to what was found by Kilner et al in \cite{CoPAnonymity}. It is further interesting to see that there was no difference observed between the commenters using Google+ now and those who chose to stay pseudonymous, or to abandon Youtube after the change, apart from the reply count. The expectation when looking at that data was to see a difference caused by a different mentality of those accepting Google+ and those who did not. Further research is needed to work around the limitations of this analysis. A new study will look at a truly mixed environment, where anonymous members and those showing their civil identity are members at the same time (Wikipedia.org for instance). Another study will look at environments that use different identity models but are related, like discussion boards for similar topics (for example 4chans /g/ and Hacker News).
\section{Acknowledgments}
This work has been supported by European Union, ANR and national solidarity fund for autonomy through AAL program (project AALI 2012-TOPIC).
\balance
\bibliographystyle{acm-sigchi}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
This research addresses the problem of representing the semantics of text documents in multi-lingual comparable corpora. We present a new approach to this problem, based on neural embeddings, and test it on the task of clustering texts into meaningful classes depending on their topics. The setting is unsupervised, meaning that one either does not have enough annotated data to train a supervised classifier or does not want to be limited with a pre-defined set of classes. There is a lot of sufficiently good approaches to this problem in the case of mono-lingual text collections, but the presence of multiple languages introduces complications.
When a text collection contains documents in several languages, it becomes impractical to simply represent the documents as vectors of words occurring in them ("bag-of-words"), as the words surface forms are different, even in closely-related languages. Thus, one has to invent means to cross the inter-lingual gap and bring all documents to some sort of shared representation, without losing information about their topics or categories.
Of course, one obvious way to solve this problem is to translate all documents into one language, and then apply any clustering algorithm. However, this requires either buying human/machine translation services (which can be expensive if you deal with large text collection) or training own statistical machine translation model (which as a rule requires big parallel corpus). This is the reason to search for other solutions.
In this paper, a novel way of reducing the problem of cross-lingual document representation to a monolingual setting is proposed. Essentially, we train Continuous Bag-of-Words models \cite{Mikolov_representation:2013} on large comparable monolingual corpora for two languages our dataset consists of. This provides us with vector representations of words, allowing to measure their semantic similarity. Then, a linear transformation matrix from vectors of language \textit{A} to vectors of language \textit{B} is learned, using a small bilingual dictionary as training data. This matrix is then employed to `project' word and document representations from semantic space of language \textit{A} to semantic space of language \textit{B}. It allows not only quite accurate `translation' of words, but also of document `\textit{semantic fingerprints}' (dense representations of document semantics, calculated as an average of the trained distributional vectors for all the words in document).
This approach is evaluated in a setting, where the input is a collection of documents in several languages and some number of topics to which these documents belong (we also have large monolingual corpora to train distributional models on). For each document, we are given its language, but not its topic. The task is to cluster this collection so that documents belonging to one topic were clustered together, independent of their language. Note that we are interested in clustering the collection as a whole, not each language separately (which is trivial).
Our evaluation data consists of comparable corpora of Russian and Ukrainian academic texts. On this material, we show that the `\textit{translated semantic fingerprints}' method represents documents in different languages precisely enough to allow almost exact clustering according to document topics, with only 5\% of incorrect assignments. It significantly outperforms both naive bag-of-words baseline and the not-so-naive method of `orthographic translation' based on Damerau-Levenshtein distance, even enriched with dictionary mappings. At the same time, it does not require large parallel corpora or a ready-made statistical machine translation model.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. In Section \ref{sec:related} we describe the foundations of our approach and the related work. Section \ref{sec:data} introduces the employed corpora and the story behind them. Section \ref{sec:matrix} is dedicated to learning the transformation matrix, and Section \ref{sec:experiment} describes our experimental setting and evaluation results. We discuss the findings in Section \ref{sec:disc} and conclude in Section \ref{sec:conclusion}, also suggesting directions for future work.
\section{Related Work}\label{sec:related}
Clustering multi-lingual documents has received much attention in natural language processing. Among approaches not using some form of machine translation, one can mention \cite{mathieu2004multilingual}, who essentially employ a bilingual dictionary to bring some words in the documents to a language-independent form and then to perform clustering. In the section \ref{sec:experiment} we show that our approach based on neural embeddings significantly outperforms their reported results.
\cite{wolf2014joint} proposed training joint multi-lingual neural embedding models. Theoretically, this can be used to achieve our aim of language-independent semantic representations for documents. Unfortunately, it demands a large word-aligned parallel corpus. This is not the case with the more recent \textit{Trans-gram} approach introduced in \cite{coulmance2016trans}, also able to learn multi-lingual models. However, it still needs sentence-aligned corpora to train on (in the size of millions of paired sentences). Large parallel corpora (whether word- or sentence-aligned) are often a scarce resource, especially in the case of under-represented languages.
The approach described in this paper takes as an input only comparable monolingual corpora and bilingual dictionaries in the size of several thousand word pairs. Such resources are much easier to find and evaluate. We employ the idea of learning a linear transformation matrix to map or project word embeddings from the semantic space of one language to that of another. This idea was first proposed in \cite{mikolov2013translation}, who applied it to lexical translation between English, Spanish, Czech and Vietnamese. We extend it from continuous representations of single words or collocations to `\textit{semantic fingerprints}' of documents as a whole.
\section{Academic texts as Comparable Corpora}\label{sec:data}
The Russian and Ukrainian languages are mainly spoken in Russian Federation and the Ukraine and belong to the East-Slavic group of the Indo-European language family. They share many common morphosyntactic features: both are SVO languages with free word order and rich morphology, both use the Cyrillic alphabet and share many common cognates.
Both Russia and the Ukraine have common academic tradition that makes it easier to collect corpora, which are comparable in terms of both genre and strictly defined academic fields. We work with such a corpus of Russian and Ukrainian academic texts, initially collected for the purposes of cross-lingual plagiarism detection. This data is available online through a number of library services, but unfortunately cannot be republished due to copyright limitations.
The Ukrainian subcorpus contains about 60 thousand extended summaries (Russian and Ukrainian \foreignlanguage{russian}{`автореферат'}, `\textit{avtoreferat}') of theses submitted between 1998 and 2011. The Russian subcorpus is smaller in the number of documents (about 16 thousand, approximately the same time period), but the documents are full texts of theses, thus the total volume of the Russian subcorpus is notably larger: 830 million tokens versus 250 million tokens in the Ukrainian one. Generally, the texts belong to one genre that can be defined as post-Soviet expository academic prose, submitted for academic degree award process.
The documents were converted to plain text files from MS Word format in the case of the Ukrainian subcorpus and mainly from OCRed PDF files in the case of the Russian subcorpus. Because of this, the Russian documents often suffer from OCR artifacts, such as words split with line breaks, incorrectly recognized characters and so on. However, it does not influence the resulting model much, as we show below.
Both Ukrainian and Russian documents come with meta data allowing to separate them into academic fields, with economics, medicine and law being most frequent topics for the Ukrainian data and economics, history and pedagogy dominating the Russian data.
For evaluation, 3 topics were used, distant enough from each other and abundantly presented in both subcorpora: economics, law and history. We randomly selected 100 texts in each language for each topic. As an average length of Russian texts is significantly higher (them being full theses), we cropped them, leaving only the first 5 thousand words, to mimic the size of the Ukrainian summaries. These 600 documents in 3 classes are used as a test set (see Section \ref{sec:experiment} for the description of the conducted experiments).
The corpora (including test set) were PoS-tagged\footnote{We used \textit{Mystem} \cite{Segalovich:2003} for Russian and \textit{Ugtag} \cite{kotsyba2009ugtag} for Ukrainian.}. Each word was replaced with its lemma followed by a PoS-tag (`\foreignlanguage{russian}{диссертация\_S}', `\foreignlanguage{russian}{диссертацiя\_N}'). Functional parts of speech (conjunctions, pronouns, prepositions, etc.) and numerals were removed from the texts.
\section{Learning to Translate: Ukrainian-to-Russian transformations}\label{sec:matrix}
As already stated, our main proposal is using neural embedding models to `project' documents in one language into the semantic space of another language. For this, we first trained a Continuous Bag-of-Words (CBOW) and a Continuous SkipGram model \cite{Mikolov_representation:2013} for each of our monolingual subcorpora. The models were trained with identical hyperparameters: vector size of 300 components\footnote{\cite{mikolov2013translation} suggest to use larger vector size for the source language model; however, we leave it for the future work.}, symmetric window of 2 words, negative sampling with 10 samples, 5 iterations over the corpus, no down-sampling. The only language-dependent difference was that for the Ukrainian model we ignored words with the corpus frequency less than 10 and for the Russian model this threshold was set to 15 (as the Russian corpus is 3 times larger). All in all, the final Ukrainian model recognizes 429 215 words and the Russian one 271 720 words. Training was performed using CBOW and SkipGram implementation in \textit{Gensim} library \cite{Rehurek2010gensim}.
After the models were trained, we followed the path outlined in \cite{mikolov2013translation} to learn a linear transformation matrix from Ukrainian to Russian. First, we extracted all noun pairs from Russian-Ukrainian bilingual dictionary \cite{ganich1990}, with the constraint that their frequency in our corpora was above the already mentioned thresholds 15 and 10 for Russian and Ukrainian words correspondingly. That made it a list of about 5 thousand pairs of nouns being translations of each other.
For all these words, their vectors were found in the models corresponding to the words' languages. It provided us with a matrix of 5 thousand of 300-dimensional Ukrainian vectors and the matrix of corresponding 5 thousand of 300-dimensional Russian vectors. This data served as a training set to learn an optimal transformation matrix. The latter is actually a 300x301 matrix of coefficients, such that when the initial Ukrainian matrix is multiplied by this transformation matrix, the result is maximally close to the corresponding Russian matrix. This transformation matrix has 301 (not 300) columns, because we add one component equal to 1 to each vector, as a bias term.
Producing the transformation matrix is a linear regression problem: the input is 301 components of Ukrainian vectors (including the bias term) and the output is 300 components of Russian vectors. As we need 300 values as an output, there are actually 300 linear regression problems and that's why the resulting matrix size is 300x301 (301 weights for each of 300 components).
There are two main ways to solve a linear regression problem: one can either learn the optimal weights in an iterative way using some variant of gradient descent, or one can solve it numerically without iteration, using normal equation. For English and Spanish, \cite{mikolov2013translation} used stochastic gradient descent. However, normal equation is actually less error-prone and is guaranteed to find the global optimum. Its only disadvantage is that it becomes very computationally expensive when the number of features is large (thousands and more). However, in our case the number of features is only 301, so computational complexity is not an issue.
Thus, we use normal equation to find the optimal transformation matrix. The algebraic solution to each of 300 normal equations (one for each vector component $i$) is shown in the Equation \ref{eq:normal}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:normal}
\boldsymbol\beta_i = (\textbf{X}^\intercal* \textbf{X})^{-1} * \textbf{X}^\intercal * y_i
\end{equation}
where $\textbf{X}$ is the matrix of 5 thousand Ukrainian word vectors (input), $y_i$ is the vector of the $i$th components of 5 thousand corresponding Russian words (correct predictions), and $\boldsymbol\beta_i$ is our aim: the vector of 301 optimal coefficients which transform the Ukrainian vectors into the $i$th component of the Russian vectors.
After solving such normal equations for all the 300 components $i$, we have the 300x301 linear transformation matrix which fits the data best.
This matrix basically maps the Ukrainian vectors into the Russian ones. It is based on the assumption that the relations between semantic concepts in different languages are in fact very similar (\textit{students} are close to \textit{teachers}, while \textit{pirates} are close to \textit{corsairs}, and so on). In continuous distributional models which strive to represent these semantic spaces, mutual `geometrical' relations between vectors representing particular words are also similar across models (if they are trained on comparable corpora), but the exact vectors for words denoting one and the same notion are different. This is because the models themselves are stochastic and the particular values of vectors (unlike their positions in relation to each other) depend a lot on technical factors, including the random seed used to initialize vectors prior to training. In order to migrate from a model \textbf{A} to another model \textbf{B}, one has to `rotate and scale' \textbf{A} vectors in a uniform linear way. To learn the optimal transformation matrix means to find out the exact directions of rotating and scaling, which minimize prediction errors.
Linguistically speaking, once we learned the transformation matrix, we can predict what a Russian vector would most probably be, given a Ukrainian one. This essentially means we are able to `translate' Ukrainian words into Russian, by calculating the word in the Russian model with the vector closest to the predicted one.
We had to choose between CBOW or Continuous SkipGram models to use when learning the transformation matrix. Also, there was a question of whether to employ regularized or standard normal equations. Regularization is an attempt to avoid over-fitting by trying to somehow decrease the values of learned weights. The regularized normal equation is shown in \ref{eq:normalreg}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:normalreg}
\boldsymbol\beta_i = (\textbf{X}^\intercal* \textbf{X} + \lambda * L)^{-1} * \textbf{X}^\intercal * y_i
\end{equation}
Comparing to \ref{eq:normal}, it adds the term $\lambda * L$, where $L$ is the identity matrix of the size equal to the number of features, with 0 at the top left cell, and $\lambda$ is a real number used to tune the influence of regularization term (if $\lambda = 0$, there is no regularization).
To test all the possible combinations of parameters, we divided the bilingual dictionary into 4500 noun pairs used as a training set and 500 noun pairs used as a test set. We then learned transformation matrices on the training set using both training algorithms (CBOW and SkipGram) and several values of regularization $\lambda$ from 0 to 5, with a step of 0.5. The resulting matrices were applied to the Ukrainian vectors from the test set and the corresponding Russian `translations' were calculated. The ratio of correct `translations' (matches) was used as an evaluation measure. It came out that regularization only worsened the results for both algorithms, so in the Table \ref{tab:matrix} we report the results without regularization.
For reference, we also report the accuracy of `quazi-translation' via Damerau-Levenshtein edit distance \cite{Damerau:1964}, as a sort of a baseline. As already stated, the two languages share many cognates, and a lot of Ukrainian words can be orthographically transformed into their Russian translations (and vice versa) by one or two character replacements. Thus, we extracted 50,000 most frequent nouns from our Russian corpora; then for each Ukrainian noun in the bilingual dictionary we found the closest Russian noun (or 5 closest nouns for @5 metric) by edit distance and calculated how often it turned out to be the correct translation. As the Table \ref{tab:matrix} shows, notwithstanding the orthographic similarity of the two languages, CBOW consistently outperforms this approach even on the test set. On the training set, its superiority is even more obvious.
\begin{table}
\caption{Translation accuracy}\label{tab:matrix}
\begin{tabular}{lcc|cc|l}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{\textbf{CBOW}} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{\textbf{SkipGram}} & \parbox[c]{2px}{\textbf{Edit} \\\textbf{distance}}\\
& Training&Test&Training&Test&\\
\midrule
\textbf{@1} & 0.648 & \textbf{0.57}& 0.545&0.374&0.549\\
\textbf{@5} & 0.764 & \textbf{0.658} & 0.644 &0.486&0.619 \\
\midrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
As for comparison between learning algorithms for matrix translation, CBOW-based transformation matrix is again the winner, with 57\% matches on the test set and 65\% matches on the training set, beating SkipGram in both. Note that in the context of this task, SkipGram models seem to have problems with actually learning the optimal transformation matrix for unseen data: on the test set they perform even worse than the edit distance approach.
CBOW is also consistently better if we consider cases when the correct word is among 5 nearest neighbors of the predicted vector to be matches as well (accuracy @5). This is an important metrics, because quite often the `translation' is not exactly the corresponding word from the dictionary, but still a very semantically similar one, while the dictionary translation is the second or the third by its cosine similarity to the predicted vector. It means that in fact the `semantic translation' is successful, as the concept is correct. For example, our algorithm translates the Ukrainian noun `\foreignlanguage{russian}{гетьман}' \textit{hetman} into Russian `\foreignlanguage{russian}{царь}' \textit{tzar}, while the correct translation `\foreignlanguage{russian}{гетман}' is the second nearest neighbor.
Notwithstanding the fact that the transformation matrix was trained exclusively on nouns, it correctly `translates' adjectives and verbs as well (we did not experiment with other parts of speech though). However, it tends to `substantivize' them: for example, the Ukrainian verb `\foreignlanguage{russian}{розробити}' \textit{to develop} is transformed into a Russian vector, which is closer to the noun `\foreignlanguage{russian}{разработка}' \textit{development} than to the corresponding verb.
Thus, at least main parts of speech seem to share a common Ukrainian-to-Russian projection matrix, supporting the view that semantic spaces for different languages are in comparatively simple linear relations to each other. In the following clustering experiments we employed CBOW-based transformation matrix and consequently CBOW models for Russian and Ukrainian.
We also applied the same transformation matrix to the document-level `semantic fingerprints'. These fingerprints are simple average vectors of all words that the document contains. Thus, if our models have vector size 300, the resulting fingerprints are 300-dimensional vectors as well. These vectors can be transformed with the same matrix. As we show in the Section \ref{sec:experiment}, the cross-lingual linear relations hold not only for words, but for these semantic fingerprints as well.
\section{Experiment Design and Evaluation}\label{sec:experiment}
We evaluate the cross-lingual representations described above on the task of clustering a set of documents. Recall that our test set consists of randomly selected 600 documents, equally divided between the topics of economics, law and history, and Russian and Ukrainian languages. Thus, we have 100 Ukrainian law texts, 100 Russian law texts, etc. The average length of the texts is 4000 word tokens.
We aim to find such a representation for documents which would reveal their topical structure independent of the language. It can be tested by clustering the whole collection in an unsupervised way into 3 clusters (in our setting, the number of topics is a given parameter), and finding out to what extent these clusters correspond to the topical classes: law, economics and history. This correspondence can be calculated by mapping the resulting clusters into topics judging by where the majority of documents belonging to this or that topic were assigned. For example, if more than 100 history documents were assigned to the cluster 0, we map this cluster to the history topic, etc. Then, the ratio of incorrect assignments is calculated, as percentage from the total number of documents. This is our primary evaluation measure. All the clustering experiments below are performed using a well-established \textit{K-means} algorithm \cite{hartigan1975clustering} with Euclidean distances. We intentionally employ the most basic clustering algorithm to make the difference of the underlying representations more visible.
The lemmatized documents were represented as bags-of-words. To reduce the dimensionality of such representations and to filter out unimportant noise words, some sort of feature selection is often used. We employed the most basic variant of it: frequency threshold, where the words are ranked by their frequencies in the whole document collection, and only top $x$ are then used in constructing vector representations. We empirically chose $x=500$, as several values from 100 to 1000 which we tried (with the step of 100) resulted in worse performance, independent of the approaches tested. Note that the sets of 500 most frequent words were selected for each topic separately, to avoid the situation when some topics are under-represented, because words related to them are not frequent. Then the union of these sets was used as the final vocabulary (resulting in vectors of about 800...900 dimensions, depending on the particular method used). Initially, binary vectors were constructed (a word is either present in the document or not), but we also tested count vectors, which store words' per-document frequencies; see below.
In order to make sure that the topical division is indeed manifested in the documents, we first clustered Ukrainian and Russian corpora separately, using the binary bag-of-words representations described above. This gave only 4.7\% incorrect assignments for the Ukrainian texts and 34.7\% incorrect assignments for the Russian part of the test set. Thus, for Ukrainian the division is almost perfect, while for Russian it is manifested less clearly (it seems that economics and law are consistently mixed up), but still the overwhelming majority of documents is clustered according to the topics. It means that the test set does contain information to correctly cluster the documents on a mono-lingual level, and it makes sense to try to achieve comparable (or at least not much worse) results in the cross-lingual experiments. Note that one can't simply cluster the documents in Russian and in Ukrainian separately to achieve our aim: even if the clusterings are ideal, there will be no way to map the Russian clusters to the Ukrainian ones, or vice versa.
So, the next step was to cluster all documents together, independent of their languages, using the techniques described in the Section \ref{sec:matrix}. The results are shown in the Table \ref{tab:evaluation}.
We used two simple baseline approaches. The first one is dubbed `\textbf{naive}': we cluster all the texts' bag-of-words representations as is, with no special preprocessing (only the PoS tags are unified across languages). Transformation from texts to bags-of-words resulted in 885-dimensional document vectors. This baseline approach exploits the intuition that in closely-related languages such as Russian and the Ukrainian there are many words which share both spelling and meaning. This is true, but this fact does not help \textit{K-means} to correctly cluster the collection into topical classes: 50.17\% of the documents are assigned an incorrect cluster, much more than in any of our mono-lingual experiments. Employing count vectors instead of binary ones lowers error rate only down to 50\%. Using \textit{tf-idf} weighting \cite{sparck1972} did not significantly change the results neither for this nor for other baselines.
Looking into particular cluster assignments reveals that \textit{K-means} clusters all the Ukrainian documents into one group, and then partitions Russian texts into two clusters roughly corresponding to history and everything else. This is quite expected: the Ukrainian alphabet contains several frequent characters missing in Russian (\foreignlanguage{russian}{`ґ, є, і, ї'}), while the Russian-specific characters (\foreignlanguage{russian}{`ё, ъ, ы, э'}) are much rarer. Consequently, the Ukrainian documents contain a lot of Ukrainian words specific only to them, while Russian words (or their identically spelled Ukrainian counterparts) are used throughout the whole collection. Anyhow, `\textbf{naive}' approach can't adequately represent the topical structure of the test set.
\begin{table}
\caption{Clustering correspondence to document topics}\label{tab:evaluation}
\begin{tabular}{lc}
\toprule
\textbf{Method}&\parbox[c]{80px}{\textbf{Incorrect assignments, \%}} \\ \midrule
\multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Mono-lingual}} \\
Ukrainian & 4.7 \\
Russian & 34.7 \\
\midrule
\multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Cross-lingual}} \\
Naive Binary & 50.17\\
Naive Count & 50.00 \\
\midrule
Edit distance translation Binary & 50.50 \\
Edit distance translation Count & 50.50 \\
\midrule
Dictionary/Edit distance Binary & 50.33 \\
Dictionary/Edit distance Count & 49.83 \\
\midrule
Matrix translation Binary & 36.33 \\
Matrix translation Count & 36.17 \\
\midrule
Semantic fingerprints on word types & 35.33 \\
Semantic fingerprints on word tokens & \textbf{5.50} \\
\midrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The second baseline employs quazi-translation of Ukrainian words into Russian using the already described approach with Damerau-Levenshtein edit distance \cite{Damerau:1964}. We replaced all words in the Ukrainian texts with the Russian words closest to them by edit distance. Only nouns, adjectives, verbs and abbreviations were replaced; replacements were selected only among the same part of speech as the original word, and in case of ties, target word with the highest frequency in Russian corpus was selected. Then the same bag-of-words representation (now 834-dimensional) was fed to the clustering algorithm. Though for many words `\textbf{edit distance translation}' works quite well, it did not help in clustering multilingual test set. Whether with binary or count vectors, \textit{K-means} still grouped all the Ukrainian documents into one cluster, resulting in 50.5\% of incorrect assignments. The possible reason is that there are still many incorrect `Levenshtein translations' resulting in target entities which are correct Russian words, but never appear in Russian documents from our test set. This gives \textit{K-means} the ground to separate the Ukrainian texts from all the other documents.
Then we experimented with translating Ukrainian words into Russian using the learned transformation matrix (\textbf{matrix translation}). For each Ukrainian word, we multiplied its vector in the Ukrainian model by the matrix and found the Russian word nearest to the resulting vector. Then the Ukrainian words were replaced with these `translations' and the same bag-of-words document representations were constructed (resulting in 845-dimensional vectors). As a result, the \textit{K-means} clustering moved substantially towards the intended topical grouping: only 36.33\% of the documents were assigned incorrect clusters, and using count vectors made it 36.17\%. In fact, the clustering algorithm correctly separated all history documents into one cluster independent of the language, while still mixing things up with law and economics (as we know, they are a bit more difficult to separate even in a monolingual setting). Thus, this document representation seems to be clearly superior to the baseline \textbf{naive} or \textbf{edit distance} approaches. It results in the documents grouping which is almost as efficient as mono-lingual clustering of Russian texts, but is still not on a par with Ukrainian mono-lingual clustering.
Note that these improvements cannot be explained by the sheer fact of employing a bilingual dictionary. We tried to use the same dictionary directly: that is, for the Ukrainian texts in the test set, replace all the words with their dictionary Russian translation. The remaining out-of-vocabulary words were `translated' with the Dameral-Levenshtein distance approach. The results are reported in the Table \ref{tab:evaluation} as \textbf{dictionary/edit distance} method. They are a bit better than the ones of the raw edit distance, but still far from the performance of the \textbf{matrix translation} method. It means that the algorithm itself is the cause of improvements.
Finally, the best results were received by employing the `\textbf{semantic fingerprint}' approach. Recall that this fingerprint is an average vector of all words in the document. Consequently, each document is represented with a 300-dimensional vector, supposedly reflecting its `meaning'.
The average vector can be calculated either on vectors of \textbf{word types} or of \textbf{word tokens} (thus taking into account individual frequencies of words in the document). These two variants roughly correspond to \textbf{binary} and \textbf{count} variants of the previous methods, but we intentionally dub them in another way to emphasize that these representations are radically different from bags-of-words. In this case we abstract away from particular words, and instead use some generalized `semantic components', hopefully similar across languages.
We computed such fingerprints for all the documents in the test set, and for the Ukrainian documents we then multiplied the fingerprints by the transformation matrix, thus `projecting' them into Russian semantic space. The resulting 300-dimensional representations are already numerical and can be directly fed into a clustering algorithm, without any bag-of-words preprocessing.
As a result, even rough semantic fingerprints calculated on word types (on \textbf{sets} of words in the documents) show clustering accuracy 1\% better than the \textbf{matrix translation} approach. But as soon as semantic fingerprints are computed using word tokens (\textbf{lists} of words), the ratio of incorrect assignments drops drastically down to 5.5\%. This result is very close to the quality of the mono-lingual Ukrainian clustering and is much better than that of the mono-lingual Russian clustering. It means that semantic fingerprints approach performs almost as good in the cross-lingual setting as traditional approaches in the mono-lingual one. Additionally, the fact that it outperformed the Russian mono-lingual clustering might mean that using dense vector representations for documents allowed to overcome the problems with separating economics and law texts in Russian, which seemed intractable for the bag-of-words approach.
To be more precise, into their respective clusters were grouped 196 of 200 economics documents (this corresponds to approximately 0.95 precision and 0.98 recall), 195 of 200 history documents (0.92 precision, 0.98 recall) and 176 of 200 law documents (0.97 precision, 0.88 recall), all independent of their languages. Total average F1 measure is about 0.95, which significantly outperforms the multilingual clustering performance reported in \cite{mathieu2004multilingual}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{baseline_7.png}
\caption{Naive baseline clustering}\label{fig:baseline}
\end{figure}
Figures \ref{fig:baseline}, \ref{fig:matrix} and \ref{fig:fingerprint} illustrate clustering mechanics for the methods described above. We employed \textit{t-SNE} dimensionality reduction technique \cite{Maaten:2008} to project high-dimensional representations\footnote{300 dimensions for semantic fingerprints, 885 and 845 for naive baseline and matrix translation correspondingly.} of the test set documents into 2-dimensional plots. Colors reflect document language (blue for Ukrainian and white for Russian), while marker types stand for document topic (circles for law, squares for history and pentagons for economics). Note that these projections inevitably lose a lot of information as compared to initial high-dimensional data, and should be considered as only approximate visualizations.
It is clearly visible that with \textbf{naive baseline} representations in the Figure \ref{fig:baseline} there are almost no links between different-language documents belonging to one topic. The dataset is clearly separated into Russian and Ukrainian clusters, and topics can be seen inside languages, but there is hardly a way to group documents into language-independent topical clusters. This is the reason for \textit{K-means} failing to achieve our aim with the baseline approach. On the other hand, with \textbf{matrix translation} representations (Figure \ref{fig:matrix}), language-independent topics already emerge, but still with much noise. Language boundaries are eroded, especially with economics documents.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{translation_9.png}
\caption{Matrix translation clustering}\label{fig:matrix}
\end{figure}
Finally, with \textbf{semantic fingerprints} representations in the Figure \ref{fig:fingerprint} the structure of the test set is manifested in full. There are six well-defined clusters corresponding to topics and languages and a clear spatial structure, which allows \textit{K-means} to easily group documents into 3 larger topical clusters without losing the ability to tell a Russian document from a Ukrainian one. Note how the Ukrainian topical clusters seem to share a common linear relation to the Russian ones, reminding about linear relations between different languages' vector spaces.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{hash_9.png}
\caption{Semantic fingerprints clustering}\label{fig:fingerprint}
\end{figure}
Thus, we were able to correctly cluster multilingual documents according to their topics without any proper `translation' and without even considering word spelling. This means that, first, semantic fingerprints are precise enough to reveal topical differences between documents, and second, that this holds even after linear transformation of such fingerprints into another language semantic space.
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:disc}
We tested `transformed' semantic representations of the documents on the clustering task, but theoretically they can be used for any problems which demand semantic-aware cross-lingual representations, including classification and visualization. Also, the number of involved languages is not limited in any way. The proposed method is relatively simple and straightforward to implement: one needs only comparable monolingual corpora to train CBOW models on them (using any of the available off-the-shelf toolkits) and a small bilingual dictionary for each language pair to train linear transformation matrices. After that, all the words and documents in the corpora can be transformed into a unified language-independent semantic representation.
It is interesting that in our experiments semantic fingerprints' performance was better than direct `translation' of words using the same transformation matrix. It reveals an important advantage of such generalized representations: they do not depend on particular words. In the case of the bag-of-words approach, a small mistake in matrix translation can lead to replacement of a Ukrainian word with a Russian counterpart, which is semantically similar, but not exactly the one used to denote this concept in the Russian part of this text collection. As a result, this word becomes useless in representing documents cross-linguistically. On the other hand, with the semantic fingerprints approach, an `approximate transformation' is enough, as it will still be close to the corresponding words from Russian texts in the vector space.
This also explains the accuracy boost this approach gets from considering word tokens instead of word types. Of course, one reason is that vectors for frequent (arguably more topical) words become more important in determining the final average value, but this is also the case for bag-of-words approaches. The difference is that with the latter (including `matrix translation' method), frequencies of words from the same semantic field are interpreted as independent features. As a result, for example, $n$ words of frequency $z$ related to history topic will not be more important than other random $n$ words of the same frequency. At the same time, with `semantic fingerprints', topically connected words collectively increase or decrease expression of the corresponding semantic component or components: they are more important in determining the resulting fingerprint, than random noise words, even if they are frequent. This leads to better discrimination between documents of different topics.
It is also important that `semantic fingerprinting' is significantly faster than `matrix translation', as we eliminate the necessity to look for the most similar neighbors of the predicted vector. This operation can be computationally expensive, especially on models with large vocabulary.
Note that one can apply the described method not only to proper cross-lingual translations, but also to problems like `projecting' texts in one style or genre into another. In fact the method is applicable to any situation, where there are two comparable sets of texts consisting of items, for which there theoretically exist pairwise links; one knows only a small part of these links, but would like to compare texts independent of the corpus they belong to. In these cases, semantic fingerprints method can be of use.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}\label{sec:conclusion}
Thus, we described an approach to build language-independent semantic representations of documents in multi-lingual comparable corpora. It was tested on a rather small task of clustering Ukrainian and Russian academic texts into 3 topics. However, the results seem very promising to us and we plan to continue working on the proposed method. The models trained on our corpora, the linear transformation matrix, the evaluation dataset we used and Python code to work with this data are available online\footnote{\url{https://cloud.mail.ru/public/Eune/tN7ssqtWj}}.
The initial motivation behind this work was to develop a system for automatic plagiarism detection for two closely related languages. A crucial component of this system is a preprocessing part, which is able to cluster texts according to their topics. We believe that this component eventually will make it possible to compare `semantic fingerprints' of the documents in order to determine possible plagiarized texts and to perform their further analysis.
One obvious disadvantage of the proposed method is the necessity to know in advance the desired number of clusters (topics in the text collection). We plan to experiment with approaches to determining the optimal number of clusters automatically. It poses serious problems in multi-lingual settings, as the algorithms will be biased to language-based clustering, not taking into account topical division. Thus, ways should be invented to cope with this bias especially when the number of topics is much higher than 3 (used in this research).
Another direction of future work is to compare our approach and bag-of-words representations after proper machine translation. The results are not obvious: on the one hand, MT directly casts texts into another language and that should be a difficult baseline to beat. On the other hand, as explained in Section \ref{sec:disc}, dense document representations like semantic fingerprints can possibly be more flexible in grasping document contents than words-based representations.
Finally, we plan to test the proposed method with other language pairs, especially typologically distant languages. Experiments in \cite{mikolov2013translation} suggest that as long as the languages possess the meaningful notion of lexical co-occurrence, genetic or typologic distances between them should not matter. However, this is still to be tested and proved.
\section{Acknowledgments}\label{sec:acknowledgements}
We are grateful to the voluntary \textit{Dissernet} community for providing us with the data, support, and inspiration to start this work.
\section{Bibliographical References}
\label{main:ref}
\bibliographystyle{lrec2016}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:NCL}
Besides actually playing games, it is of great interest to know how
hard these games are in the sense of computational complexity,
see~\citeaby{Kendall}. The games are usually generalized
to allow for parameters that control board size, number of cards, etc.
In order to study the structural complexity of games, \citeaby{Hearn2006} and \citeaby{Hearn2009} advocate the use of the constraint logic framework.
It consists of a collection of abstract graph games. The games are played on a so-called \emph{constraint graph}. A constraint graph is a weighted directed graph, where each edge has a weight in $\{1,2\}$. The \emph{inflow} of a vertex is defined to be the sum of all weights of the edges that are directed inward. A configuration (i.e., direction of the edges) of a constraint graph is legal if and only if for each vertex it holds that the inflow is at least its minimum inflow, usually 2. A move of a player is typically the reversal of one of the edges; players are only allowed to do moves that result in a legal configuration.
A notable feature of the constraint logic framework is the fact that constraint graphs can be reduced to equivalent planar versions. Many real-life games are played on a 2-dimensional board. In previous game complexity results (e.g.,~\citeaby{Culberson1999,Flake2002}) crossover gadgets are necessary to overcome the limitations of such a 2-dimensional game board. Crossover gadgets are in general complex and hard to construct. The generic crossover gadget for constraint logic, as presented in Figure~\ref{fig:crossover} below, removes the need to devise a specific crossover gadget for every single game.
Various games based on constraint graphs are defined in~\citeaby{Hearn2009}. These are categorized based on the number of players and whether there is a bound on the number of moves. We will describe two of those: \emph{Bounded Non-deterministic Constraint Logic} and \emph{Bounded Two-Player Constraint Logic}. In particular we will also pay attention to acyclic versions and planarity issues.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.
First we explain the different types of graph games. Next we apply these to the games Klondike, Mahjong Solitaire, Nonogram and Dou Shou Qi.
\subsection{Bounded Non-deterministic Constraint Logic}
\label{sec:BoundedNCL}
Bounded Non-deterministic Constraint Logic (Bounded NCL) is a
one-player game (i.e., a puzzle), played on a constraint graph. A move
is defined to be the reversal of one of the edges, resulting in a
legal configuration, i.e., meeting the inflow condition of the vertices.
Each edge may be reversed at most once. This puts an upper bound on the number of moves in this game, i.e., the number of edges in the graph. One of the edges is defined to be the \emph{target edge}; the player wins if and only if (s)he is able to reverse the target edge.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\subfigure[AND]{
\begin{tikzpicture}[y=-1cm,scale=0.8]
\draw [blue_edge] (0, -2) -- (0, 0);
\draw [red_edge] (0, 0) -- (210:2cm);
\draw [red_edge] (0, 0) -- (330:2cm);
\fill [black!20] (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\draw (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{fig:NCLAND}}
\subfigure[OR]{
\begin{tikzpicture}[y=-1cm,scale=0.8]
\draw [blue_edge] (0, -2) -- (0, 0);
\draw [blue_edge] (0, 0) -- (210:2cm);
\draw [blue_edge] (0, 0) -- (330:2cm);
\fill [black!20] (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\draw (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{fig:NCLOR}}
\subfigure[FANOUT]{
\begin{tikzpicture}[y=-1cm,scale=0.8]
\draw [blue_edge] (0, 0) -- (0, 2);
\draw [red_edge_rev] (0, 0) -- (30:2cm);
\draw [red_edge_rev] (0, 0) -- (150:2cm);
\fill [black!20] (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\draw (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{fig:NCLFANOUT}}
\subfigure[CHOICE]{
\begin{tikzpicture}[y=-1cm,scale=0.8]
\draw [red_edge] (0, 0) -- (0, 2);
\draw [red_edge_rev] (0, 0) -- (30:2cm);
\draw [red_edge_rev] (0, 0) -- (150:2cm);
\fill [black!20] (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\draw (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{fig:NCLCHOICE}}
\subfigure[VARIABLE]{
\begin{tikzpicture}[y=-1cm,scale=0.8]
\draw [blue_edge] (0, -2) -- (0, 0);
\draw [blue_edge] (0, 2) -- (0,0);
\fill [black!20] (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\draw (0, 0) circle (.2cm);
\node[left] at (1.2,-1) {$W$};
\node[left] at (1.2,1) {$B$};
\node[left] at (-1,-1) {\ };
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{fig:2CLVARIABLE}}
\caption[Basic vertices]{Basic vertices, based on Figure~5.2 and Figure~6.2 from~\citeaby{Hearn2006}. Edges with a weight of $2$ use thick lines and have double arrows; edges with a weight of $1$ use thin lines and have a single arrow. Usually these edges are referred to as ``blue'' and ``red'', respectively.}
\label{fig:thegadgets}
\end{figure}
Theorem~5.1 and Theorem~5.2 from \citeaby{Hearn2009} show (using a reduction from the Boolean satisfiability problem) that the game is NP-complete, even when the initial constraint graph only consists of AND, OR, FANOUT and CHOICE vertices as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:thegadgets}.
\subsection{Bounded Two-Player Constraint Logic}
\label{sec:Bounded2CL}
Bounded Two-Player Constraint Logic (Bounded 2CL) is a two-player perfect-information game played on a constraint graph, and a partitioning of the edges in disjoint sets $B$ and $W$. The players alternate turns. The white player reverses edges in $W$; the black player reverses edges in $B$. For both players it holds that their move has to result in a legal configuration. Each edge may only be reversed once, which (as in Bounded NCL) puts an upper bound on the number of moves in the game. One of the edges in $W$ is defined to be the target edge. The white player wins if (s)he is able to reverse this edge; if a player is unable to move, (s)he loses the game.
Theorem 6.2 from \citeaby{Hearn2009} shows that the game is PSPACE-complete, even when the constraint graph only consists of the five vertices as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:thegadgets}, where the edges from AND, OR, FANOUT and CHOICE vertices are all in the set $W$.
Note that the black player can only play bottom edges in VARIABLE
gadgets. In order to avoid clear loss for black an ample amount of
additional black edges is supplied.
\subsection{Acyclic graphs and crossover gadgets}
\label{sec:crossover}
In order to planarize constraint graphs, the construction shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:crossoverFull} can be used. A pair of crossing edges
can be replaced by this gadget. To obtain basic vertices as in
Figure~\ref{fig:thegadgets}, each vertex with four red edges can be
replaced by the so-called half-crossover gadget, which is shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:crossoverHalf}. Additionally, we need to perform
red-blue edge conversions, see~\citeaby{Hearn2006}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\subfigure[Crossover]{
\begin{tikzpicture}[y=-1cm]
\node [above] at (0.5, 2) {$C$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (0, 2) -- (1, 2);
\node [above] at (3.5, 2) {$E$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (3, 2) -- (4, 2);
\node [left] at (3.5, 0.5) {$A$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (3.5, 1) -- (3.5, 0);
\node [left] at (3.5, 3.5) {$B$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (3.5, 3) -- (3.5, 4);
\node [above] at (6.5, 2) {$D$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (6, 2) -- (7, 2);
\node [left] at (1.5, 1.5) {$K$};
\draw [red_unedge] (1, 2) -- (2, 1);
\node [left] at (1.5, 2.5) {$L$};
\draw [red_unedge] (1, 2) -- (2, 3);
\node [left] at (2, 2) {$H$};
\draw [red_unedge] (2, 1) -- (2, 3);
\node [left] at (2.5, 1.5) {$I$};
\draw [red_unedge] (2, 1) -- (3, 2);
\node [left] at (2.5, 2.5) {$J$};
\draw [red_unedge] (2, 3) -- (3, 2);
\node [above] at (2.5, 1) {$F$};
\draw [red_unedge] (2, 1) -- (3.5, 1);
\node [above] at (3, 3) {$G$};
\draw [red_unedge] (2, 3) -- (3.5, 3);
\node [above] at (4.5, 1) {$M$};
\draw [red_unedge] (3.5, 1) -- (5, 1);
\node [above] at (4, 3) {$N$};
\draw [red_unedge] (3.5, 3) -- (5, 3);
\node [left] at (4.5, 1.5) {$P$};
\draw [red_unedge] (4, 2) -- (5, 1);
\node [right] at (4.5, 2.5) {$Q$};
\draw [red_unedge] (4, 2) -- (5, 3);
\node [right] at (5, 2) {$O$};
\draw [red_unedge] (5, 1) -- (5, 3);
\node [right] at (5.5, 1.5) {$R$};
\draw [red_unedge] (5, 1) -- (6, 2);
\node [right] at (5.5, 2.5) {$S$};
\draw [red_unedge] (5, 3) -- (6, 2);
\draw [fill=black!20] (1, 2) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (2, 1) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (2, 3) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (3, 2) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (3.5, 1) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (3.5, 3) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (4, 2) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (5, 1) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (5, 3) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (6, 2) circle (.1cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{fig:crossoverFull}}
\subfigure[Half-crossover]{
\begin{tikzpicture}[y=-1cm]
\node [above] at (0.5, 2) {$c$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (0, 2) -- (1, 2);
\node [above] at (2.5, 1) {$e$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (2, 1) -- (3.5, 1);
\node [above] at (4.5, 1) {$j$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (3.5, 1) -- (5, 1);
\node [left] at (3.5, 0.5) {$a$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (3.5, 1) -- (3.5, 0);
\node [above] at (2.5, 3) {$f$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (2, 3) -- (3.5, 3);
\node [above] at (4.5, 3) {$k$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (3.5, 3) -- (5, 3);
\node [left] at (3.5, 3.5) {$b$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (3.5, 3) -- (3.5, 4);
\node [above] at (6.5, 2) {$d$};
\draw [blue_unedge] (6, 2) -- (7, 2);
\node [left] at (1.5, 1.5) {$h$};
\draw [red_unedge] (1, 2) -- (2, 1);
\node [left] at (1.5, 2.5) {$i$};
\draw [red_unedge] (1, 2) -- (2, 3);
\node [left] at (2, 2) {$g$};
\draw [red_unedge] (2, 1) -- (2, 3);
\node [right] at (5.5, 1.5) {$n$};
\draw [red_unedge] (6, 2) -- (5, 1);
\node [right] at (5.5, 2.5) {$o$};
\draw [red_unedge] (6, 2) -- (5, 3);
\node [left] at (5, 2) {$m$};
\draw [red_unedge] (5, 1) -- (5, 3);
\draw [fill=black!20] (1, 2) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (2, 1) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (2, 3) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (3.5, 1) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (3.5, 3) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (5, 1) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (5, 3) circle (.1cm);
\draw [fill=black!20] (6, 2) circle (.1cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\label{fig:crossoverHalf}}
\caption[Planar crossover gadgets]{Planar crossover gadgets, as presented in~\citeaby{Hearn2009}.}
\label{fig:crossover}
\end{figure}
Edges $A$ and $B$ are called the \emph{vertical external edges}. Edges $C$ and $D$ are called the \emph{horizontal external edges}.
It can be verified that each vertical external edge can point outward if and only if the other vertical external edge points inward. A similar property holds for the horizontal external edges. The action of reversing both vertical external edges is called \emph{vertical propagation}; the action of reversing both horizontal external edges is called \emph{horizontal propagation}. For example, when the edges $A$ and $B$ are pointing up, and the edges $C$ and $D$ are pointing left, the direction of all other edges follows from the inflow constraints. A sequence of, e.g., $(A, F, H, G, M, O, N, B)$ would then perform a vertical propagation; a sequence of, e.g., $(C, K, I, L, J, E, P, R, Q, S, D)$ would perform a horizontal propagation.
Although this gadget indeed simulates all the behavior of the games introduced in,
e.g.,~\citeaby{Hearn2005} (where the same edge can be reversed multiple times)
this is not the case for the constraint graphs used in Bounded NCL and Bounded 2CL.
After performing a vertical propagation, due to the restriction that each edge may
be reversed at most once, the gadget is in such a state that it is impossible to
perform horizontal propagation, and vice versa.
Although the construction in Figure~\ref{fig:crossoverFull} is valid,
after integrating the construction of Figure~\ref{fig:crossoverHalf}
for all the vertices with four red edges
(in order to restrict ourselves to the gadgets in Figure~\ref{fig:thegadgets})
it becomes clear that this is no longer the case.
After, e.g., edges $F$ and $H$ (corresponding to $a$ and $b$, respectively)
are reversed, it can be verified that due to the internal state of the half-crossover,
edges $K$ and $I$ (corresponding to $c$ and $d$, respectively) cannot be reversed
anymore. The only way to perform both a horizontal and vertical propagation over the
same crossover gadget is when both a horizontal external edge and vertical external
edge can be reversed inward at the same moment: a typical example of a \emph{race condition}.
An extensive analysis of the properties of the crossover and half-crossover gadgets as well as red-blue edge converters can be found in~\citeaby{Hearn2006} and~\citeaby{Rijn2012}.
It is clear that not all constraint graphs can be reduced to a planar equivalent using solely the gadgets presented in Figure~\ref{fig:crossover}. In some configurations, in particular in (initially) cyclic graphs, it is impossible to obey the additional constraint imposed by the crossover gadget that the propagation of both directions has to happen at the same moment. However, for acyclic graphs, this is never a problem. Edges can be topologically sorted, and reversed in this order. The complexity proofs of both Bounded NCL and Bounded 2CL (see~\citeaby{Hearn2009}) use graphs corresponding to logical formulas, which indeed require only acyclic graphs; hence Planar Bounded NCL is NP-complete and Planar Bounded 2CL is PSPACE-complete.
Note that all graphs under consideration are acyclic in their initial configuration.
Theorem 5.4 from~\citeaby{Hearn2009} states that the related problem Constraint Graph Satisfiability is also NP-complete:
does a given planar constraint graph, using only (initially undirected) AND and OR vertices, have a legal configuration? Note
that this strictly speaking is not a game in the above sense: we only
ask for a legal ``final'' configuration, not the sequence of moves that can
be used to obtain it.
\section{Klondike}
\label{sec:klondike}
\emph{Klondike}, also known as Patience or Solitaire, is a well-known card game, popularized by Microsoft Windows. The normal version of the game is played with a standard French card deck, without jokers. \citeaby{Yan2004}
have given a formal definition of the game and provided an algorithm that plays Klondike games with a high success rate;
in their version of the game, often referred to as thoughtful Solitaire, the identity of all cards is known from the beginning.
Several other approaches have been proposed to deal with Klondike, see, e.g., \citeaby{Bjarnason1} and \citeaby{Bjarnason2}.
\citeaby{Longpre2009} have shown, amongst other complexity results, that Klondike is NP-complete even when played with two red suits and one black suit: red diamonds ($\diamondsuit$), red hearts ($\heartsuit$) and black spades ($\spadesuit$). We will give a formal definition of the necessary subset of Klondike and confirm the NP-completeness of Klondike by a reduction from Acyclic Bounded NCL, using an argument improved upon the one from~\citeaby{Rijn2012}.
\subsection{Definition}
Generalized Klondike is played with a card deck containing $m$ suits, each suit containing $n$ cards ranked from $1$ to $n$. A card with rank $1$ is also referred to as an \emph{Ace}; a card with rank $n$ is also referred to as a \emph{King}. The functions $\mathit{rank}(c)$ and $\mathit{suit}(c)$ return the rank and the suit of card $c$, respectively. Each suit is colored either red or black. The function $\mathit{color}(s)$ returns the color of suit $s$.
A Klondike game consists of $m$ \emph{suit stacks}, one or more \emph{build stacks}, a \emph{pile stack} and a \emph{talon}. In the sequel we do not need pile stack and talon, so these will be omitted from the description. A stack is defined to be an ordered list of cards. A \emph{configuration} describes for each card in which stack it is and on which position. For every card in a build stack it also describes whether the card is \emph{face-up} or \emph{face-down}. The subset of cards that are face-up on a certain build stack constitute a \emph{card block}, and will always consist of topmost cards. In an initial configuration all cards are face-down in the build stacks (that can be of different lengths), and the suit stacks are empty.
We will define the notion of \emph{acceptance}, which determines which moves the player can make. Each suit stack that is empty can only accept an Ace. Every suit stack that is not empty, containing card $t$ on top, accepts card $c$ if and only if $\mathit{suit}(c) = \mathit{suit}(t)$, and $\mathit{rank}(c) = \mathit{rank}(t) + 1$. Therefore, suit stacks accept cards of the same suit in ascending order. Each card block that is not empty, containing card $t$ on top, accepts card $c$ if and only if $\mathit{color}(\mathit{suit}(t))\neq\mathit{color}(\mathit{suit}(c))$ and $\mathit{rank}(c)=\mathit{rank}(t) - 1$. Therefore, build stacks accept cards in descending order, of alternating colors. We will not employ the usual property that an empty
build stack (only) accepts a King.
On each turn, the player can play cards in the following manner:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If all cards on a build stack are face-down, the card on top can be turned face-up, thereby creating a singleton card block.
\item A whole card block $p$ can be moved to the top of another card block $q$, provided that $q$ accepts the card at the bottom of $p$. (In some versions of the game a partial card block can also be moved in this manner.)
\item The top card $c$ of a card block can be moved to a suit stack, provided that the suit stack accepts $c$.
\end{enumerate}
The goal is to move all cards to the suit stacks, and when this is achieved the player has won.
\subsection{NP-completeness}
In order to prove NP-completeness, we will show that every Acyclic Bounded NCL graph can be transformed to a Klondike configuration, in such a way that the Klondike game can be won if and only if the target edge of the Acyclic Bounded NCL graph can be flipped.
So we study the corresponding decision problem \textsc{Klondike}: given a Klondike configuration, can the player win?
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\subfigure[AND gadget\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ]{
\input{images/gadgets_klondike//and.tex}
\label{fig:patienceAnd}}
\hspace{2mm}
\subfigure[OR gadget\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ]{
\input{images/gadgets_klondike//or.tex}
\label{fig:patienceOr}}
\subfigure[FANOUT gadget\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ]{
\input{images/gadgets_klondike/fanout.tex}
\label{fig:patienceFanout}}
\hspace{2mm}
\subfigure[CHOICE gadget\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ]{
\input{images/gadgets_klondike//choice.tex}
\label{fig:patienceChoice}}
\caption[Klondike gadgets]{Klondike gadgets. Note that $\spadesuit5$ in the AND gadget is also a lock card.}
\label{fig:patienceGadgets}
\end{figure}
We will use the four gadgets from Figure~\ref{fig:patienceGadgets}. The gadgets consist of one, two or three build stacks, with all cards initially face-down. Each gadget gets a range of unique ranks assigned to it; for simplicity, in the figure we use the range 5--8 for all gadgets.
A \emph{lock card} represents the tail of an edge adjacent to the corresponding NCL vertex; a lock icon is displayed on these cards. A \emph{key card} represents the head of an edge adjacent to the corresponding NCL vertex; a key icon is displayed on these cards. The rank of each key card is within the range of another gadget. The suit and rank of a key card is chosen such that once turned face-up, it accepts a lock card of the gadget from which the corresponding NCL edge is pointing (locks must be moved to their keys). The gadgets are constructed in such a way that the key card can be turned face-up if and only if the corresponding NCL edge can be flipped. Note that in the AND gadget $\spadesuit5$ is also a lock card (without having a lock image).
For each lock card $\ell$ it is easy to see which card should be turned face-up in order to move it. If $\mathit{color}(\mathit{rank}(\ell))$ is red, this card is $\spadesuit(\mathit{rank}(\ell) + 1)$, and otherwise it is $\heartsuit(\mathit{rank}(\ell) + 1)$ (the card $\diamondsuit(\mathit{rank}(\ell) + 1)$ will be only made available during the end play, or in the case of the OR gadget is positioned deeper within the gadget). These cards serve as key cards in other gadgets.
Now we note that the four gadgets indeed act as intended.
For instance, consider the OR gadget. In order to turn the key card face-up,
either the lock card $\spadesuit6$ (followed by $\diamondsuit5$) must be moved to
its corresponding key card $\heartsuit7$, or the lock card $\heartsuit6$ (followed by $\spadesuit5$) must be moved to
its corresponding key card $\spadesuit7$ after which $\spadesuit6$ and $\diamondsuit5$ can
be moved to $\diamondsuit7$. If both key cards are available, both sequences can be played.
The AND gadget has a fixed order to free the key card, which is sufficient for our purpose.
Now we have:
\begin{theorem}
\textsc{Klondike} is NP-complete.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Reduction from Acyclic Bounded NCL. Given a constraint graph made of AND, OR, FANOUT and CHOICE vertices, we construct a corresponding Klondike configuration using the gadgets shown in Figure~\ref{fig:patienceGadgets}.
Note that planarity is not an issue both here and for Mahjong.
We need a way to ensure that the player can move all cards to the suit stacks if and only if the key card corresponding to the target edge can be turned face-up. To this end,
all cards not used in the gadgets are positioned in one big build stack (ordered by rank and within each rank in $\diamondsuit \heartsuit \spadesuit$ order, with the three Aces at the top and ending with the three Kings at the bottom), protected by a lock card
representing the target edge. Once this card is moved, all these other cards become available
and allow all cards from all gadgets to be moved to the suit stacks.
Now the fact that the original NCL graph is acyclic is used. Indeed, the gadgets can be numbered,
using a topological sort of the corresponding nodes, and we can take care that for every
gadget the key cards used have higher rank than the cards in the gadgets.
This ensures a proper order for this part of the process.
In fact, even (partially) unplayed gadgets can be ``discarded'', using
the inductive assumption that all cards of lower ranks have already been moved to the suit stacks.
Note that,
if for the OR gadget $\heartsuit5$ were used instead of $\diamondsuit5$, this property would not hold.
For creating the Klondike configuration, the number of cards and stacks we need are both bounded by a linear function of the number of vertices in the corresponding NCL graph. In a winning sequence there are exactly $mn$ moves of type 1, and $mn$ moves of type 3.
As for the type 2 moves, there are at most $mn$ of them: every card block is moved once (when focussing on its bottom card), maybe to a suit stack. Therefore Klondike is in NP, since any potential solution can be verified in polynomial time. \hfill$\Box$
\end{proof}
\section{Mahjong Solitaire}\label{sec:mahjong}
\emph{Mahjong Solitaire}, also known as Shanghai Solitaire, is a one
player puzzle game mainly played on the computer in which the player
is presented with a randomly arranged stack of tiles. The goal is to remove
all tiles in matching pairs of two. \citeaby{Condon1997} have given a
formal definition of this game, and have shown that a version of this
game with imperfect information is PSPACE-complete.
\citeaby{Eppstein2012} has stated a proof that a version of this game
with perfect information is NP-complete. In the paper
by~\citeaby{Bondt2012} Mahjong is proven to be NP-complete by a
reduction from 3-SAT. We will give a formal definition of this game
and validate the latter result by a reduction from Acyclic Bounded
NCL.
\subsection{Definition}
The game uses Mahjong tiles, that are divided into $m$ disjoint
\emph{tile sets} ${\cal{T}}_p$ of $|{\cal{T}}_p| = s_p$ matching tiles,
where $s_p$ is an even number ($p = 1,2,\ldots,m$). We define the set
of all tiles to be ${\cal{T}} = \bigcup_{p} {\cal{T}}_p$.
Two tiles $a$ and $b$ \emph{match}, if and only if for some $p$ it holds
that $a,b \in {\cal{T}}_p$. Below we say that elements of the same
tile set have the same color. We generalize the standard game simply by
assuming that there is an arbitrarily large, finite number of tiles.
A \emph{configuration} $C$ is a set of positions $(i, j, k)$, where
each of $i,j,k$ is a non-negative integer, satisfying the following
constraints:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $(i,j,k) \in C$ and $(i,j',k) \in C$ where $j < j'$, then for every $j''$ in the range
[$j,j'$], $(i,j'',k) \in C$;
\item If $(i,j,k) \in C$ where $k > 0$ then $(i,j,k-1) \in C$.
\end{enumerate}
This captures the fact that tiles are arranged in three
dimensions. Tiles can be stacked on top of each other; all tiles with
common $k$ are at the same height. All tiles with a common $i$~index,
form a \emph{cross section}. Tiles at the same height, with common
$i$~index, form a \emph{row}. The first condition ensures that there
cannot be gaps in a row; the second, that a tile at height $k > 0$
must have a tile underneath it (in fact, at position $(i,j,k-1$)).
With respect to a given configuration, a position $(i,j,k)$ is
\emph{hidden} if in the configuration also a position $(i,j,k+1)$
exists; the other positions are called \emph{visible}. An
\emph{arrangement} consists of a set of tiles ${\cal{T}}$, a
configuration $C$ of size~$|{\cal{T}}|$, and a bijective function $f$ from
the positions of $C$ to ${{\cal{T}}}$. Here
$f(i,j,k)$ denotes the tile at position $(i,j,k)$. If the function $f$ maps
position $(i,j,k)$ to tile $t$ we say $\mathit{pos}(t) = (i,j,k)$. The
elements of ${{\cal{T}}}$ will be mapped to the elements of $C$ in
such a way, that every combination is possible. With
respect to a given arrangement, we say a position $(i,j,k)$ is
\emph{available} if it is not hidden, and either position
$(i,j-1,k) \notin C$ or position $(i,j+1,k) \notin C$ or both, i.e.,
we can only take tiles that are at one of the ends of a row, and that have no tiles on top of it. An
arrangement is called empty if ${\cal{T}}$ is empty.
In order to avoid misunderstandings, all tiles can be seen from the beginning:
the player has perfect information.
A legal move consists of the removal of two matching tiles $a,b$ that
are both available. Formally, ${\cal{T}'} = {\cal{T}} - \{a,b\}$ and
$C' = C - \{\mathit{pos}(a),\mathit{pos}(b)\}$. The game is won if a
series of moves results in the empty arrangement.
\subsection{NP-completeness}
In order to prove NP-completeness, we will show that every Acyclic
Bounded NCL graph can be transformed to a Mahjong configuration, in
such a way that the Mahjong game can be won if and only if the target
edge of the Acyclic Bounded NCL graph can be flipped.
We study the decision problem \textsc{Mahjong Solitaire}: given a
Mahjong configuration, can the player win?
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[AND gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_mahjong/and.tex}
\label{fig:mahjongAnd}}
\subfigure[OR gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_mahjong/or.tex}
\label{fig:mahjongOr}}
\subfigure[FANOUT gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_mahjong/fanout.tex}
\label{fig:mahjongFanout}}
\subfigure[CHOICE gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_mahjong/choice.tex}
\label{fig:mahjongChoice}}
\caption{Mahjong gadgets as a cross section of a configuration.}
\label{fig:mahjongGadgets}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We will use the gadgets in Figure~\ref{fig:mahjongGadgets}. The
gadgets consist of one cross section containing between two and five tile stacks, with different numbers
representing different tile sets.
Every gadget has a unique range of
numbers.
Again, for simplicity, in the figure we use the range 1--7 for all gadgets.
A \emph{lock tile} represents the tail
of an edge adjacent to the corresponding NCL vertex; a lock
icon is displayed on these tiles. A \emph{key tile} represents the
head of an edge which is adjacent to the corresponding NCL
vertex; a key icon is displayed on these tiles.
Corresponding key and lock tiles from different gadgets share the
same number, for obvious reasons.
When a key tile is available, it can be removed together with a lock
tile from one of the other gadgets. The target edge in the
corresponding NCL graph is always represented by a key tile.
When this target edge is available this will initiate the end game,
which is always winning for the player as we will show further on.
The four gadgets in Figure~\ref{fig:mahjongGadgets} have their intended
behavior. For instance, consider the CHOICE gadget. To free either one
of the key tiles the lock tile has to be removed. Now, the actual
choice has to be made: the newly freed ``3-tile'' must be used to
remove either the leftmost or rightmost ``3-tile''. After removing both
``4-tiles'' precisely one of the key tiles is available.
Note that the gadgets resemble those for Klondike; in fact, the AND gadget can also be modeled to look
even more like its counterpart.
Now we have:
\begin{theorem}
\textsc{Mahjong Solitaire} is NP-complete.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Reduction from Acyclic Bounded NCL. Given a constraint graph made of
AND, OR, FANOUT and CHOICE vertices, we construct a corresponding
Mahjong configuration using the gadgets shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:mahjongGadgets}.
In order to have a way of clearing all remaining tiles after the target
tile is removed, we supply a victory gadget consisting of one linear
row of tiles with two ``5-tiles'' for every CHOICE gadget.
The victory
gadget itself is protected in a similar way as the FANOUT gadget: a pair
of matching tiles is placed at both sides, and a tile matching the target
tile is placed on the left one of these. This ensures that none of the tiles
in the victory gadget can be used before the tiles representing the target
edge are removed.
Again, we will use the fact that the original NCL graph is acyclic by
numbering the gadgets using the topological sort of the corresponding
vertices. This ordering defines the proper order for this process allowing
partially unplayed (CHOICE) gadgets to be removed by using the tiles from the
victory gadget, that are placed in this same order. Note that from this
acyclicity it follows that when the player is able to remove all
CHOICE gadgets, all other (partially) unplayed gadgets can also be removed.
Both the number of tiles and the number of tile sets we need to use is
linearly bounded by the number of vertices used in the corresponding
Acyclic Bounded NCL graph. Therefore Mahjong Solitaire is in NP, since
any potential solution can be verified in polynomial time. \hfill$\Box$
\end{proof}
\section{Nonogram}
\label{sec:nonograms}
A \emph{Nonogram}, also referred to as a Japanese puzzle, is a logic
puzzle which can be considered as an image reconstruction problem.
The player is presented a rectangular grid; for each row and column
a description consisting of one or more integers is provided,
representing the numbers of consecutive cells that need to be black.
If the player can color a subset of cells in such a way that it is
consistent with the description of all rows and columns, (s)he has
solved the puzzle and won the game. An example of a Nonogram and its
solution is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:NonogramExample}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\subfigure[$6\times6$ Nonogram]{
\input{images/misc/swan_empty.tex}
\label{fig:NonogramExampleEmpty}}
\subfigure[Solved Nonogram]{
\input{images/misc/swan_solved.tex}
\label{fig:NonogramExampleSolved}}
\caption[Nonogram instance]{An example Nonogram~\subref{fig:NonogramExampleEmpty} and its unique solution~\subref{fig:NonogramExampleSolved}, taken from~\citeaby{Batenburg2012}.}
\label{fig:NonogramExample}
\end{figure}
\citeaby{Batenburg2012} have given a formal definition of
Nonograms and provided an algorithm for solving many Nonograms
in polynomial time. In~\citeaby{Nagao1996} it is proven that the
Another Solution Problem for Nonograms is NP-complete, and more in
particular that the question whether a given puzzle has~a~solution~is
NP-complete. We will also give a formal definition of Nonograms and
show that the latter decision problem is~NP-complete, by reduction
from Constraint Graph Satisfiability.
\subsection{Definition}
A Nonogram is a puzzle in which the player is presented an $m \times n$ grid of \emph{cells}, consisting of $m$ rows and $n$ columns.
The state of a cell is either $\mathit{white}=0$ or $\mathit{black}=1$. Initially, all cells are $\mathit{white}$.
A \emph{line} is defined to be either a row or a column
For each line a description $d$ is provided, $d$ being an ordered series of integers $(d_1, d_2, \ldots, d_{k})$.
The description is adhered to, if there are exactly $k$ \emph{black segments} in the line, where each successive black segment $s$ is of size $d_s$ ($s = 1,2,\ldots,k$). A black segment is defined to be a group of consecutive cells in the line, such that all cells within the interval are $\mathit{black}$, and both cells adjacent to the interval, if any, are $\mathit{white}$.
Now the puzzle is solved if the player can make a subset of the cells black,
in such a way that all descriptions are adhered to. The corresponding decision problem
\textsc{Nonogram} asks if a given Nonogram can be solved.
For more information on Nonograms, the reader is referred to~\citeaby{Batenburg2012} and the references therein.
\subsection{NP-completeness}
We will show that solving Nonograms is NP-complete, by reduction from Constraint Graph Satisfiability (\citeaby{Hearn2009}), only using two initially undirected gadgets: AND and OR.
The global layout of the construction will be as in Figure~\ref{fig:NonogramGlobalLayout}. There will be several groups of $D$ adjacent columns (or rows) where the description consists of a single element, i.e., $m$ (or $n$), such that the pattern of Figure~\ref{fig:NonogramGlobalLayout} is maintained. We call these lines the \emph{separation lines}. Between each group of separation lines, there are $G$ other lines. In the case of Figure~\ref{fig:NonogramGlobalLayout}, $D = 5$ and $G = 7$.
The descriptions and the width of the delimiters will not interfere with those of the
single elements in between.
As a result of this construction we can specify disjoint \emph{subnonograms} between the separation lines.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\input{images/gadgets_nonogram/global.tex}
\caption[Global layout for Nonogram reduction]{Global layout.}
\label{fig:NonogramGlobalLayout}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\input{images/misc/nonogram_signals.tex}
\label{fig:NonogramSignalSol1}}
\subfigure[]{
\input{images/misc/nonogram_signals_sol2.tex}
\label{fig:NonogramSignalSol2}}
\caption[Nonogram with two solutions]{The two solutions of a Nonogram featuring two subnonograms horizontally separated by $3$ separation lines.}
\label{fig:NonogramSignal}
\end{figure}
It is also possible to send a signal between two orthogonal adjacent subnonograms by slightly adjusting delimiters between them. This is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:NonogramSignal}. The figure shows two subnonograms separated by $D = 3$ separation lines; one subnonogram between cells $(1,1)$ and $(4,4)$, inclusive, and one subnonogram between cells $(1,8)$ and $(4,11)$, inclusive. If we were to decide that $(3,4)$ should be $\mathit{black}$, this would explicitly mean that cell $(3,8)$ cannot be $\mathit{black}$. (Note that this would also explicitly mean that $(2,8)$ is $\mathit{black}$, and $(2,4)$ is not $\mathit{black}$.) The opposite is also true. We will use this property to construct gadgets within a subnonogram, and propagate signals between them. This way we can embed a constraint graph on a Nonogram grid.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\input{images/gadgets_nonogram/gadgetOverall.tex}
\caption[Template for Nonogram gadgets]{Template for Nonogram gadgets. Squares that are black are black in all instances; squares with a dot are white in all instances.}
\label{fig:nonogramGadgetOverall}
\end{figure}
In Figure~\ref{fig:nonogramGadgetOverall} a template of the gadgets is shown. From the description of every gadget follows immediately that the black cells must be $\mathit{black}$ and the dotted cells must be $\mathit{white}$. The state of the other cells is dependent on the type and state of the gadget.
The gadgets are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:NonogramGadgets} and have $G = 7$. As it does not influence the functionality, on each side these are surrounded by only one separation line. (In the large construction we will use $D = 5$, with obvious adaptations of the descriptions.) These are already $\mathit{black}$. If a cell corresponding to an edge is $\mathit{white}$, this means that the edge is pointing away from the vertex, and vice versa.
Besides AND and OR gadgets, we also provide two gadgets needed for wiring.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\subfigure[AND gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_nonogram/redblue.tex}
\label{fig:NonogramAND}}
\subfigure[OR gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_nonogram/allblue.tex}
\label{fig:NonogramOR}}
\subfigure[Wire, turn]{
\input{images/gadgets_nonogram/bend.tex}
\label{fig:NonogramTURN}}
\subfigure[Wire, straight]{
\input{images/gadgets_nonogram/straight.tex}
\label{fig:NonogramSTRAIGHT}}
\caption[Nonogram gadgets]{Nonogram gadgets. }
\label{fig:NonogramGadgets}
\end{figure}
The three cells marked with ${\sf a}$, ${\sf b}$ and ${\sf c}$ correspond with the edges; for
the (initially undirected) AND gadget ${\sf a}$ and ${\sf b}$ correspond with the ``red'' ones.
Given the values for the cells corresponding to the edges, the gadgets are within the so-called ``simple'' Nonogram class, and can be easily solved. For a definition and solving algorithm of the ``simple'' nonograms, the reader is referred to~\citeaby{Batenburg2012}.
In any case, the solutions can be easily verified.
They are uniquely characterized
by $\sf{ (a,b,c) } \in \{(0,0,1),(1,0,1),(0,1,1),(1,1,0),(1,1,1)\}$ (AND gadget) and
$\sf{ (a,b,c) } \in \{(1,0,0),(0,1,0),(0,0,1),(1,0,1),(0,1,1),(1,1,0),(1,1,1)\}$ (OR gadget),
implying that the gadgets indeed perform as desired.
If $\sf{ (a,b,c) } = (1,0,1)$, the OR gadget has two solutions,
making use of a so-called switching component.
Now we have:
\begin{theorem}
\textsc{Nonogram} is NP-complete.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We can simulate a planar constraint graph with only AND and OR nodes
on a Nonogram grid using the global layout of Figure~\ref{fig:NonogramGlobalLayout} and the two top gadgets shown in Figure~\ref{fig:NonogramGadgets}.
The two bottom gadgets from Figure~\ref{fig:NonogramGadgets} can be used for wires, in a straight line or as a corner.
Now the arrows can be inserted in a legal way if and only if the resulting Nonogram can be solved.
\citeaby{Battista1994} have proven that a graph with maximal degree 3 can always be stored in a square grid of width $v$, where $v$ is the number of vertices contained by the graph. This ensures that the number of rows and columns used in our reduction is bounded linearly by the number of vertices in the corresponding NCL graph.
\textsc{Nonogram} is clearly in NP, as any potential solution can be verified in polynomial time.\hfill$\Box$
\end{proof}
\section{Dou Shou Qi}\label{sec:doushouqi}
\emph{Dou Shou Qi} (meaning: ``Game of Fighting
Animals''), as described by~\citeaby{Pritchard2007}, is a Chinese board game. In the Western world it is often
called Jungle, The Jungle Game, Jungle Chess, or Animal Chess.
Dou Shou Qi is a two-player abstract strategy game and it contains
some elements from Chess and Stratego as well as some other chess-like
Chinese games (e.g., Banqi). Its origins are not entirely clear, but
it seems that it evolved rather recently (around the 1900s).
It has been suggested by some that the game often ends in a draw,
but preliminary results from~\citeaby{Rijn2013} show a remarkably low
percentage of draws.
The game Dou Shou Qi is not extensively studied in literature.
In~\citeaby{Burnett2010}, a definition of the game is given and an attempt is made
to characterize certain local properties of subproblems that occur
when analyzing the game. These so-called loosely coupled subproblems
can be analyzed separately in contrast to analyzing the problem as a
whole, resulting in a possible speed-up in the overall analysis. A
first complexity result has been obtained by~\citeaby{Rijn2013}.
Dou Shou Qi is proven PSPACE-hard by reduction from logic circuits.
Here, we will prove Dou Shou Qi to be PSPACE-hard by reduction from
Planar Bounded 2CL based on the reduction given by~\citeaby{Rijn2012}.
We cannot prove Dou Shou Qi to be PSPACE-complete; as an unbounded
two-player game it is probably not in PSPACE.
Dou Shou Qi is clearly in EXPTIME --- like Chess.
\subsection{Definition}
Dou Shou Qi is played on a rectangular board consisting of
$9\times 7$~squares, see Figure~\ref{fig:doushouqi_board}. There are
several different kinds of squares. The \emph{dens} (D), one for each
player, are located in the center of the first and last row and are
protected on all sides by \emph{traps} (T). Furthermore, there are two
bodies of water (W), while the remaining squares are ordinary land
squares.
Each players has eight different pieces representing different
animals with a respective \emph{strength}, according to which they can
\emph{capture} some of the opponent's pieces. Pieces can only capture
a piece of equal or lower strength, with the exception of the weakest
piece which is able to capture the strongest piece. The strength of
the animals from weak to strong is: 1~rat, 2~cat, 3~wolf, 4~dog,
5~panther, 6~tiger, 7~lion, 8~elephant. The initial placement of the
pieces is fixed, see Figure~\ref{fig:doushouqi_board}. Players
alternate turns with white moving first. Each turn a piece must be
moved either one square horizontally or vertically. Pieces are
forbidden to enter their own den and are usually blocked by water. The
rat is the only piece able to move through the water where it is also
capable of capturing, i.e., the enemy rat, but it is forbidden to
capture an elephant while attacking from the water. Lions and tigers
are able to leap over water either horizontally or vertically, but
they are blocked by any rat on the intermediate water squares.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\input{images/gadgets_jungle/board56.tex}
\caption[Dou Shou Qi game board]{A schematic Dou Shou Qi game board
showing the initial position.}
\label{fig:doushouqi_board}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Pieces can be trapped by the traps surrounding the opponent's den:
their strength is effectively reduced to zero, meaning that they can
be captured by any enemy piece. The objective of the game is to place
a piece in the opponents den or to eliminate all of the opponent's
pieces. A stalemate position is declared a draw.
\subsection{PSPACE-hardness}
The Bounded 2CL graph will be simulated on a $m \times n$~board, where
both players have $k$ pieces. Whether a natural generalization of the
game would imply that the $k$ pieces all have a strength from the
interval~$[1,8]$ or a distinct strength from the interval~$[1,k]$ is
open for discussion. In our reduction all pieces have a strength from
the interval~$[2,5]$, excluding all pieces with special capabilities.
The original game board contains several properties, i.e., clustered
water squares, narrow paths between the water, traps surrounding the
dens, which are symmetrical and highly regular. Which of these
properties should be preserved on a generalized game board is open for
debate, however in our reduction we took the liberty of using water
squares and traps freely in the gadgets.
We will show a complexity proof for the decision problem
\textsc{Dou Shou Qi}: given a Dou Shou Qi position, does the player on
turn have a forced win?
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[AND gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_jungle/and35.tex}
\label{fig:doushouqi_and}}
\subfigure[OR gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_jungle/or35.tex}
\label{fig:doushouqi_or}}
\subfigure[FANOUT gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_jungle/fanout42.tex}
\label{fig:doushouqi_fanout}}
\subfigure[CHOICE gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_jungle/choice35.tex}
\label{fig:doushouqi_coice}}
\subfigure[VARIABLE gadget]{
\input{images/gadgets_jungle/variable35.tex}
\label{fig:doushouqi_variable}}
\caption{Dou Shou Qi gadgets.}
\label{fig:doushouqi_gadgets}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We will reduce from Planar Bounded 2CL. The main gadgets are shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:doushouqi_gadgets}.
The reversal of an edge in the original Bounded 2CL graph will be
modeled as the movement of a white dog (strength~4) into another
gadget. The VARIABLE vertex (in its initial state) can
be reversed by the current player. The same is true for
the VARIABLE gadget. Since both pieces are of the same
strength, the current player can capture the piece of the
other player, and move its piece through to the next gadget.
There are some additional issues that need to be addressed.
First, white dogs that enter a gadget should not be allowed
to go back into the previous gadget. Next, white dogs in
a FANOUT gadget should not be allowed to move through the same
exit twice. Finally, black pieces in a VARIABLE gadget should
not be allowed to leave
the gadget through the exit corresponding to the white edge in
the graph game.
In order to prevent this behavior, we have created some additional
support gadgets, that will be attached to the inputs and outputs of the
gadgets. These are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:doushouqi_support}.
The construction shown in Figure~\ref{fig:doushouqi_black} is
called a \emph{black edge protector}. The white player can move a dog
from bottom to top, but not the other way around. When a white dog
enters the construction, the black piece will retreat behind either
the left trap or the right trap, and the white dog can pass.
When passed, the black piece moves back to its original position.
The white piece cannot move back, it would be captured when
entering the traps. The construction shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:doushouqi_white} is a \emph{white edge protector},
it allows only white pieces to pass. Black pieces can be captured
upon entering a trap. Note that these constraints do not apply when
the opposing player attacks from both sides. We will show further
on how to deal with this.
The construction in Figure~\ref{fig:doushouqi_outflow} is an outflow
protector, with the left entrance square as input and the right entrance
square as output. It ensures that upon arrival of either one or two
white pieces, only one can pass.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[Black edge protector]{
\input{images/gadgets_jungle/black-edge-protector49.tex}
\label{fig:doushouqi_black}}
\subfigure[White edge protector]{
\hspace{0.1cm}
\input{images/gadgets_jungle/white-edge-protector35.tex}
\label{fig:doushouqi_white}}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\subfigure[Outflow protector]{
\input{images/gadgets_jungle/outflow-protector35.tex}
\label{fig:doushouqi_outflow}}
\caption[Dou Shou Qi support constructions]{Constructions used to support gadgets.}
\label{fig:doushouqi_support}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
A chain of two white edge protectors, one black edge protector
and another two white edge protectors is called a
\emph{one-way channel}.
First, it ensures that no black piece can move through it. It
will be captured upon entering a white edge protector. After
a capture, the white cat can resume its position, preventing black
pieces from passing, regardless of their number. Because it is always
adjacent to another white edge protector, even an attack from both
sides is useless. Next, it ensures that all black pieces within
are unable to move out of the construction they started in, by
the same argument. Finally, linking several one-way channels to
each other ensures that white pieces can move through it in only
one direction. White pieces that move in the opposite direction
will be stopped at the black edge protector. Indeed, when having
a piece at both the input and the output, the white player can
enable its piece at the output to move back through this gadget.
However,
in order to pass a number of subsequent black edge protectors, the
white player needs an equal number of white dogs at the input to
ensure such a passing. There can never be more than two white pieces
at the input of a one-way channel, thus linking three one-way
channels together prevents white pieces from moving into the forbidden
direction.
A gadget protector is a chain of three one-way channels, one outflow
protector and another three one-way channels. The gadget protector
is attached to every entrance of the gadgets shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:doushouqi_gadgets}, ensuring that these
facilitate exactly the same behavior as their equivalents in the
graph game.
Now we have:
\begin{theorem}
\textsc{Dou Shou Qi} is PSPACE-hard.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Reduction from Bounded 2CL. Given a planar constraint graph made of AND, OR,
FANOUT, CHOICE and VARIABLE vertices, we construct a corresponding Dou
Shou Qi game board where the white player has a forced win if and only
if (s)he has a forced win on the original Bounded 2CL graph; otherwise
the black player has a forced win. Note that there are no draws in
Bounded 2CL, neither are there in the reduction by optimal play.
The target edge will be represented by a gadget containing a black den,
and it will have a black edge protector
(Figure~\ref{fig:doushouqi_black}) in front of it, preventing other
pieces than the white dogs from entering it. The white player can move a
piece into this gadget if and
only if (s)he can set the corresponding Bounded 2CL graph to true.
The black player is given a piece that can move straight to the
white den. This will take him so many moves, that if the
corresponding Bounded 2CL graph can be set to true, by the time (s)he
reaches it the white player has already won the game. \hfill$\Box$
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusions}
We reduced Acyclic Bounded NCL to \textsc{Klondike} and \textsc{Mahjong Solitaire} and (planar) Constraint Graph Satisfiability to \textsc{Nonogram},
proving them to be NP-complete. By using the acyclic property to our advantage,
we were able to keep the reductions elegant and easy to understand.
For games that require to return to an ``empty'' configuration (like
Klondike and Mahjong Solitaire) acyclicity is even technically essential.
We acknowledge the NCL framework to be well-suited for reductions for games, but
it is not without drawbacks. Often the primary gadgets are relatively
easy to construct, while the construction of victory gadgets is sometimes less trivial.
Finally, we reduced Planar Bounded 2CL to the game of Dou Shou Qi proving it to by PSPACE-hard.
The generic planarization of the NCL graphs and 2CL graphs is very useful for reductions
to games played on a 2-dimensional board. As an unbounded two-player
game Dou Shou Qi is expected to be EXPTIME-complete in the classification by~\citeaby{Hearn2009}.
It is an open problem to construct the Dou Shou Qi gadgets for the
special vertices, e.g., multiplayer AND, that build the relevant 2CL graph.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees,
in particular for the suggested simplification regarding the Nonogram problem.
|
\section{Acknowledgements}
\label{S:-1}
This short note is the result of a brief conversation between the authors and Joel Nothman. We came across a potential problem, he gave a sketch of a fix, and we worked out the details of a solution.
\section{Calculating Bigram Frequecies}
\label{S:0}
A common task in natural language processing is to find the most frequently occurring word pairs in a text(s) in the expectation that these pairs will shed some light on the main ideas of the text, or offer insight into the structure of the language. One might be interested in pairings of adjacent words, but in some cases one is also interested in pairs of words in some small neighborhood. The neighborhood is usually refered to as a window, and to illustrate the concept consider the following text and bigram set:
\begin{framed}
\noindent Text: ``I like kitties and doggies''
\newline Window: 2
\newline Bigrams: \{(I like), (like kitties), (kitties and), (and doggies)\}
\end{framed}
and this one:
\begin{framed}
\noindent Text: ``I like kitties and doggies''
\newline Window: 4
\newline Bigrams: \{(I like), (I kitties), (I and), (like kitties), (like and), (like doggies), (kitties and), (kitties doggies), (and doggies)\}.
\end{framed}
\section{The Popular Approximation}
\label{S:1}
Bigram frequencies are often calculated using the approximation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1}
freq(*, word) = freq(word, *) = freq(word)
\end{equation}
In a much cited paper, Church and Hanks~\cite{Church:1990} use `$=$' in place of `$\approx$' because the approximation is so good. Indeed, this approximation will only cause errors for the very few words which occur near the beginning or the end of the text. Take for example the text appearing above - the bigram (doggies, *) does not occur once, but the approximation says it does.
An efficient method for computing the contingency matrix for a bigram (word1, word2) is suggested by the approximation. Store $freq(w1, w2)$ for all bigrams $(w1, w2)$ and the frequencies of all words. Then,
\begin{itemize}
\item$freq(word1, word2)$ is known, \item$freq(\sim word1, word2) \approx freq(word2)$ - $freq(word1, word2)$,
\item $freq(word1, \sim word2) \approx freq(word1)$ - $freq(word1, word2)$,
\item and $freq(\sim word1, \sim word2)$ is easily computed.
\end{itemize}
The statistical importance of miscalculations due to this method diminishes as our text grows larger and larger. Interest is growing in the analysis of small texts, however, and a means of computing bigrams for this type of corpus must be employed. This approximation is implemented in popular NLP libraries and can be seen in many tutorials across the internet. People who use this code, or write their own software, must know when it is appropriate.
\section{An Alternative Method}
\label{S:2}
We propose an alternative. As before, store the frequencies of words and the frequencies of bigrams, but this time store two additional maps called \textbf{too\_far\_left} and \textbf{too\_far\_right}, of the form \{word : list of offending indices of word\}. The offending indices are those that are either too far to the left or too far to the right for approximation~(\ref{eq:1}) to hold. All four of these structures are built during the construction of a bigram finder, and do not cripple performance when computing statistical measures since maps are queried in $O(1)$ time.
As an example of the contents of the new maps, in ``Dogs are better than cats", \textbf{too\_far\_left[`dog'] = [0]} for all windows. In ``eight mice eat eight cheese sticks'' with window 5, \textbf{too\_far\_left[`eight'] = [0,3]}.
For ease of computation the indices stored in \textbf{too\_far\_right} are transformed before storage using:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2}
\widehat{idx} = length - idx - 1 = g(idx)
\end{equation}
where $length$ is the length of the small piece of text being analyzed. Then, \textbf{too\_far\_right[`cats'] = [$g(4)= idx$] = [$0 = \widehat{idx}$]}.
Now, to compute the exact number of occurrences of a bigram we do the computation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3}
freq(*, word) = (w-1)*wordfd[word] - \sum\limits_{i=1}^{N}(w-tfl[word][i] - 1)
\end{equation}
where $w$ is the window size being searched for bigrams, $wfd$ is a frequency distribution of all words in the corpus, $tfl$ is the map \textbf{too\_far\_left} and $N$ is the number of occurrences of the $word$ in a position too far left.The computation of $freq(word, *)$ can now be performed in the same way by simply substituting $tfl$ with $tfr$ thanks to transformation $g$, which reverses the indexing.
\nocite{*}
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
With the power grid increasingly working close to its operation limit, inter-area oscillation becomes ever more lightly damped, which easily results in instability~\cite{venkatasubramanian2004analysis}. Local decentralized controllers, such as power system stabilizers (PSSs), are designed to suppress local oscillations. They may interact in an adverse way, if not carefully tuned, that aggravates inter-area oscillations. Motivated by the advancement in the Wide-Area Measurement System (WAMS) technology, recent research efforts have been focusing on wide-area control (WAC) problems~\cite{chakrabortty2013introduction,kamwa2001wide,chaudhuri2004wide}. The goal of WAC is to achieve better closed-loop performance, such as inter-area oscillation damping, by the use of remote measurement signals via the Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs) installed across the grid.
One important class of literature on WAC is concerned with optimal control design under certain performance metric. The main control objective is inter-area oscillation damping, for which various metrics have been proposed. In the design of supplementary damping controller (SDC) using Linear Parameter Varying (LPV) model~\cite{liu2006lpv}, the metric is given by the signal amplification from disturbance to output. To design FACTS (Flexible AC
Transmission Systems)-based control facilitated by an aggregate model~\cite{chakrabortty2012wide}, the metric is defined on the closed-loop transient response of inter-area oscillation modes. A mixed $H_2/H_{\infty}$ output feedback control design is studied in~\cite{zhang2008design} where the metric is concerned with geometric measures of modal controllability/observability. Another control objective is voltage stability. For the automatic scheduling and coordination of voltage control devices~\cite{vu1996improved,zobian1996steady,tomsovic2005designing}, the metric is composed of several terms regarding switching cost, penalty on voltage violations and penalty on circular VAR flow. Typically, the controllers are designed for a fixed structure, that is to say, the communication network has a pre-specified structure. There has been a recent interest in incorporating communication structure into the design. Due to the fact that most optimal control formulations result in controllers without any sparsity pattern and require centralized implementation, a sparsity-promoting optimal control scheme is proposed in~\cite{dorfler2014sparsity} where the $\ell_1$ regularization term in the objective accounts for the structural design.
Another body of literature is concerned with delays and failures arising in the communication network of WAMS. To deal with network delays, a predictor-based $\mathcal{H}_{\infty}$ control design strategy is discussed in~\cite{chaudhuri2004wide} to account for a delayed arrival of feedback signals. Furthermore, an arbitration approach is proposed in~\cite{soudbakhsh2015delay} to exploit the flexibility of communication network so that the designed controllers are in sync with network delays, making the closed-loop system delay-aware, rather than just delay-tolerant. To counteract the impact of communication failures on the closed-loop system, a framework proposed in~\cite{zhang2014wide} utilizes a hierarchical set of wide-area measurements for feedback and employs channel switching based on mathematical morphology identification.
Existing works on WAC resilience mostly focus on communication delays or failures. There has been limited discussion on resilience under adversaries. Due to the increasing threat on cyber security~\cite{mo2012cyber,teixeira2015secure}, remote signal transmission via communication channels is prone to cyber attacks. As WAC relies heavily on the availability of remote signals, the integrity of communication network plays a crucial role in the closed-loop performance. In this paper, we consider the adversary has disruptive resources~\cite{teixeira2015secure} that can result in unavailability of the signals transmitted over communication channels. Such an attack model is commonly referred to as Denial of Service (DoS) attack~\cite{amin2009safe}. To launch a DoS attack, the adversary can jam the communication channels, compromise devices and prevent them from sending data, attack the routing protocols, flood network traffic, among others. Our goal is to develop a framework to analyze and quantify resilience under DoS attacks. In particular, we aim to design effective ways to determine whether a given wide-area controller is resilient, and how resilient it is under certain attack strategy. To achieve this, we use network-reduced linearized power system model under linear feedback control. Such a model is widely used in the literature on WAC problems~\cite{liu2006lpv,tomsovic2005designing,chakrabortty2012wide,zima2005design,zhang2008design}. We first define resilience in terms of closed-loop spectral abscissa (the largest real part of eigenvalues) under the worst possible attack strategy. The direct computation of such a resilience metric is challenging, especially in large-scale network due to its combinatorial nature. We then propose an equivalent optimization-based formulation and a convex relaxation approach to facilitate the computation. On the theoretic side, we derive a condition under which the relaxation is exact. On the practical side, we develop an efficient algorithm for the relaxed problem with guaranteed convergence. The algorithm not only provides resilience criterion but also reveals structural vulnerabilities. These results contribute new perspectives to WAC with an emphasis on resilience under DoS communication attacks. They also allow us to systematically analyze resilience properties of a given wide-area controller.
\section{Problem Formulation}
\label{sec:prob}
In this paper, we consider a network-reduced power system model commonly used in the literature~\cite{nabavi2015distributed,soudbakhsh2015delay,liu2006lpv,tomsovic2005designing,chakrabortty2012wide,zima2005design,zhang2008design}. The overall power system is represented by an interconnected dynamical system defined on a graph $\mathcal G=(\mathcal N,\mathcal E)$, where $\mathcal N\triangleq\{1,\cdots,N\}$ denotes the set of buses and $\mathcal E$ denotes the set of transmissions lines between buses. Let $x_i(t)\in\mathbb R^{n_i}$ be the state variables associated with bus $i$. Depending on the level of details used in the generator model, $x_i$ can represent generator phase angle, frequency, quadrature-axis internal emf, state variables of Power System Stabilizer (PSS) or other local controllers. Typically, local dynamics and local controllers can be described by linear systems subject to nonlinear coupling terms due to power exchange with neighboring buses. The overall system can be written is the following form:
\begin{align*}
\dot{x}_i=A_{ii}x_i+c_i+\sum_{(i,j)\in\mathcal E,j\neq i}h(x_i,x_j),
\end{align*}
where $A_{ii}\in\mathbb R^{n_i\times n_i}$ is the system matrix that has incorporated local controls, $c_i$ is a constant term regarding mechanical power input and $h(x_i,x_j)$ is a nonlinear function representing the power flow between buses $i$ and $j$. By linearization at a stationary operating point, we arrive at a distributed control system of the following form:
\begin{align}
\dot{x}_i=A_{ii}x_i+\sum_{j\in\mathcal N,j\neq i} A_{ij}x_j+B_iu_i,\quad i\in\mathcal N, \label{eq:subsysi}
\end{align}
where with slight abuse of notation, $x_i$ represents the deviation of state variables from the nominal operating point, $A_{ij}$ captures the linearized coupling between buses $i$ and $j$ ($A_{ij}=0$ if there is no coupling), and $B_iu_i$ is an introduced wide-area control action that reacts to deviations from the nominal operating point based on both local and remote state information. We consider wide-area control $u_i$ to be composed of local component $u_{i,loc}$ that depends on local state information and wide-area component $u_{i,wac}$ that depends on remote state information in the following form:
\begin{align}
u_i=u_{i,loc}+u_{i,wac}=K_{ii}x_i+\sum_{j\in\mathcal N,j\neq i} K_{ij}x_j, \label{eq:control}
\end{align}
where $K_{ij}\in\mathbb R^{m_i\times n_j},i,j\in\mathcal N$ are feedback gains. The local component $u_{i,loc}$ is an additional correction on top of local controllers, which can be set to zero if there is no such correction. Note that the sparsity pattern of feedback gains captures the structure of communication network. Define $n\triangleq \sum_{i=1}^N n_i,m\triangleq \sum_{i=1}^N m_i$. Let $x=[x_1^T,\cdots,x_N^T]^T\in\mathbb R^n$ and $u=[u_1^T,\cdots,u_N^T]^T\in\mathbb R^m$. The overall system can be described by
\begin{align}
\dot{x}(t)=(A+BK)x(t), \label{eq:cl}
\end{align}
where $A=[A_{ij}]_{1\le i,j\le N}\in\mathbb R^{n\times n}, B=\diag\{B_j\}_{1\le j\le N}\in\mathbb R^{n\times m}, K=[K_{ij}]_{1\le i,j\le N}\in\mathbb R^{m\times n}$ are in block form.
Wide-area control is prone to cyber attacks due to its dependence on remote measurement signals that can be compromised by a malicious adversary. In this paper, we consider DoS attacks~\cite{amin2009safe} that can result in unavailability of the signals transmitted over the attacked channels. We describe an {\em attack strategy} by $\alpha\in\{0,1\}^{N\times N}$ where entry $\alpha_{ij}=1$ means the channel from subsystem $j$ to $i$ is intact whereas $\alpha_{ij}=0$ means it is under attack. By assumption, $\alpha_{ii}=1,\forall i\in\mathcal N$. The set of all possible attack strategies is called {\em (pure) attack space} and is defined as $\mathcal A_0\triangleq\{\alpha\in\{0,1\}^{N\times N}:\alpha_{ii}=1,i\in\mathcal N\}$. The consequence of DoS attack is modeled by infinite delay of feedback signals.
We assume that an attack strategy $\alpha$ impacts the wide-area control in the following way:
\begin{align*}
u_i=K_{ii}x_i+\sum_{j\in\mathcal N,j\neq i} \alpha_{ij}K_{ij}x_j.
\end{align*}
This corresponds to the case where the controller will ignore the component $K_{ij}x_j$ if the measurement signal of $x_j$ does not arrive within a certain time period. Such a reaction scheme is natural and commonly used in the literature~\cite{soudbakhsh2015delay}.
Now we can write the post-attack closed-loop system under attack strategy $\alpha\in\mathcal A_0$ as
\begin{align}
\dot{x}=(A+BK\circ \alpha)x, \label{eq:clatkalpha}
\end{align}
where $K\circ \alpha\triangleq [K_{ij}\alpha_{ij}]_{1\le i,j\le N}$ denotes the elementwise multiplication between entries of $\alpha$ (scalar) and subblocks of $K$ (matrix). Define $A(\alpha)\triangleq A+B K\circ\alpha$. To write the elementwise multiplication $\circ$ as a matrix multiplication, we consider the following transformation:
\begin{align*}
&\tilde{K}=\diag\{\tilde{K}_{[j]}\}_{1\le j\le N}\in\mathbb R^{n\times nN},\text{ where}\\
&\tilde{K}_{[j]}=\begin{bmatrix}[c|c|c|c]K_{j1} & K_{j2} & \cdots & K_{jN}\end{bmatrix}_{n_j\times n},\\
&\tilde{\alpha}=\begin{bmatrix}[c|c|c|c]\tilde{\alpha}_{[1]} & \tilde{\alpha}_{[2]} & \cdots & \tilde{\alpha}_{[N]}\end{bmatrix}^T\in\mathbb R^{nN\times n}, \text{ where} \\
&\tilde{\alpha}_{[k]}=\diag\{\alpha_{kj}\mathbf I_{n_j}\}_{1\le j\le N}\in\mathbb R^{n\times n}.
\end{align*}
Then, $K\circ\alpha=\tilde{K}\tilde{\alpha}$. Furthermore, $\tilde{\alpha}$ can be written as the linear combination of a collection of constant matrices $\{M_{ij}\in\mathbb R^{Nn\times n}:1\le i,j\le N\}$ with entries of $\alpha$ as linear coefficients, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
&\tilde{\alpha}=\sum_{1\le i,j\le N} \alpha_{ij}M_{ij}, \text{ where} \\
&M_{ij}(p,q)=\left\{ \begin{array}{rr}
1, & \text{if } p-q=(i-1)n+\sum_{k=1}^{j-1}n_k,\\ & \text{and } q\in\{1,2,\cdots,n_j\} \\ 0, & \text{otherwise}
\end{array} \right..
\end{align*}
Now, the closed-loop system matrix $A(\alpha)$ can be written in the following form that is affine in entries of $\alpha$.
\begin{align}
&A(\alpha)\triangleq A+BK\circ \alpha=A+\sum_{1\le i,j\le N} B\tilde{K}M_{ij}\alpha_{ij}. \label{eq:Aalpha}
\end{align}
We consider a wide-area controller to be resilient if it can survive all possible (pure) attack strategies on the communication channel.
\begin{defn}
A controller $K$ is called {\em resilient} if system~(\ref{eq:clatkalpha}) is stable for all $\alpha\in\mathcal A_0$. Conversely, it is called {\em not resilient} if there exists an $\alpha\in\mathcal A_0$ under which system~(\ref{eq:clatkalpha}) is unstable.
\label{def:resilient}
\end{defn}
In what follows, we will analyze and quantify the resilience notion given in Definition~\ref{def:resilient}. The first problem to address is under what condition the resilience of a given controller is guaranteed. We aim to derive conditions in terms of optimization problems whose structure can facilitate the analysis. A further problem is concerned with the degree of resilience. We want to define a resilience index as a normalized factor to quantify how resilient a given controller is to certain attack strategies. For the practical aspect, the goal is to develop an efficient algorithm to check the proposed resilience conditions as well as identify structural vulnerabilities.
\section{A Motivating Example}
\label{sec:ex}
WAC makes use of state information from remote buses to improve the closed-loop performance under local decentralized controllers. One may naturally think that a loss of part of remote measurement signals will only gracefully degrade closed-loop performance without causing instabilities. However, such an intuition is unfortunately not true in general. In fact, a wide-area controller can become destabilizing under a loss of a small subset of communication links. We now use a simple hypothetical example to illustrate this fact.
Consider a networked system in the form~(\ref{eq:cl}) with $N=3$ subsystems and each of which has two states and two control inputs. For simplicity, we assume there is no physical coupling among the three subsystems. Assume that $A_{11}=A_{22}=\frac{1}{2}E_2, A_{33}=E_1$, $B_1=B_2=B_2=\mathbf I_2$, $2K_{11}=-K_{13}=K_{21}=-\frac{1}{2}K_{23}=-K_{31}=K_{33}=E_1$, $K_{12}=2K_{22}=K_{32}=E_2$, where
\begin{align*}
E_1=\begin{bmatrix}
-3&-1\\
12&2
\end{bmatrix}\text{ and }
E_2=\begin{bmatrix}
-3&1\\
-12&2
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{align*}
Let $A_c$ and $A_d$ be the closed-loop system matrices under controller $K$ and its full distributed realization, respectively.
\begin{align*}
&A_c\triangleq (A+BK)=\begin{bmatrix} E_1 & E_2 & -E_1\\mathcal E_1 & E_2 & -2E_1 \\ -E_1 & E_2 & 2E_1 \end{bmatrix},\\
&A_d\triangleq A+BK\circ \mathbf I_6=\begin{bmatrix} E_1 & 0 & 0\\0 & E_2 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 2E_1 \end{bmatrix}.
\end{align*}
It is easy to check that both $A_c$ and $A_d$ are stable. Now consider the attack strategy $\alpha$ that targets at the communication channel from subsystem 3 to 2, i.e. $\alpha_{23}=0$. The post-attack closed-loop system matrix is
\begin{align*}
A_a\triangleq A+BK\circ\alpha=\begin{bmatrix} E_1 & E_2 & -E_1\\mathcal E_1 & E_2 & 0 \\ -E_1 & E_2 & 2E_1 \end{bmatrix}.
\end{align*}
As $A_a$ has eigenvalues $5.1596,0.6968,-0.8631,-1.3561 \pm 6.5185i,-6.2811$, two of which are on the right half of the plane, the system is no longer stable. We can see that controller $K$ is vulnerable under the attack on the communication channel $3\to 2$.
\section{Resilience Analysis and Quantification}
In this section, we develop a Lyapunov-based framework to analyze and quantify resilience under DoS communication attacks as formulated in Section~\ref{sec:prob}.
\subsection{Resilience Conditions}
\label{sec:cond}
A system is stable if and only if all its eigenvalues have negative real part, and conversely it is unstable if and only if at least one of its eigenvalues has positive real part. Given a square matrix, we call the maximum among the real part of its eigenvalues the {\em spectral abscissa}. One direct approach for resilience condition is to first seek for the attack strategy that results in the largest spectral abscissa of closed-loop system matrix and then determine the sign of the largest spectral abscissa. For the case where it is negative, the system remains stable under all attack strategies; while for the case where it is positive, there exists at least one attack strategy that drives the system unstable. The direct formulation of resilience condition takes the following form:
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P0}\quad \gamma^*_0\triangleq\max_{\alpha\in\mathcal A_0}\quad & \Real(\lambda_{\max} (A(\alpha)))
\end{align*}
If $\gamma^*_0<0$, then wide-area controller $K$ can survive all possible attacks on the communication channels, otherwise it inherits structural vulnerabilities. The optimization problem $\mathbf{P0}$ exhibits several main challenges: i) It is an unsymmetric eigenvalue problem for which the spectral theorem does not apply and thus $\lambda_{\max}$ does not have an explicit expression. ii) The objective is essentially nonconvex due to the maximization of the largest real part of eigenvalues. Typically, eigenvalue optimization problems are formulated as the minimization of the largest eigenvalue or the maximization of the smallest eigenvalue, both of which are convex. However, this is not the case for $\mathbf{P0}$. iii) The decision variable is binary and not continuous, making the problem combinatorial in nature. To address the above challenges, we next reformulate the problem via Lyapunov stability theory.
\subsubsection{A Lyapunov Formulation}
Recall that the post-attack system~(\ref{eq:clatkalpha}) is stable if and only if it admits a quadratic Lyapunov function $V(x)=x^TPx$ for some $P\succeq 0$. The condition can be written in the form of SDP: There exists a $P_0\succeq 0$ such that
\begin{align}
A(\alpha)^TP_0+P_0A(\alpha)\prec 0. \label{eq:lyastab}
\end{align}
Conversely, the post-attack system~(\ref{eq:clatkalpha}) is unstable if and only if for all $P\succeq 0$, we can find a unit directional vector $x_P\in\{z:\|z\|=1\}$, where the subscript emphasizes the dependence of the vector on $P$, such that
\begin{align}
x_P^T(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))x_P\ge 0. \label{eq:lyaunstab}
\end{align}
Inspired by the above Lyapunov characterization, we consider the following formulation:
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{Lya0}\quad \gamma^*_{L0}\triangleq \max_{\alpha\in\mathcal A_0}\min_{P\succeq 0}\quad\lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))
\end{align*}
\begin{thm}[Sufficient and Necessary Condition]
A controller $K$ is resilient {\em if and only if} $\gamma^*_{L0}=-\infty$, and is not resilient {\em if and only if} $\gamma^*_{L0}\ge 0$.
\label{thm:Lya0}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We partition the pure attack space into two disjoint sets, i.e. $\mathcal A_0=\mathcal A_0^s\sqcup\mathcal A_0^u$, where $\mathcal A_0^s$ is the set of stabilizing attack strategies and $\mathcal A_0^u$ is the set of destabilizing attack strategies. Let $\alpha^s\in\mathcal A_0^s$. Then, system~(\ref{eq:clatkalpha}) under $\alpha^s$ is stable, that is to say there exists $P(\alpha^s)\succeq 0$ dependent on $\alpha^s$ such that $A(\alpha^s)^TP(\alpha^s)+P(\alpha^s)A(\alpha^s)\prec 0$. Then,
\begin{align*}
&\min_{P\succeq 0} \lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha^s)^TP+PA(\alpha^s))\le \\
&\lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha^s)^TcP(\alpha^s)+cP(\alpha^s)A(\alpha^s))\to-\infty \text{ as } c\to\infty.
\end{align*}
Let $\alpha^u\in\mathcal A_0^u$. Then, system~(\ref{eq:clatkalpha}) under $\alpha^u$ is not asymptotically stable, which implies that for all $P\succeq 0$, there exists a unit directional vector $x_P\in\{z:\|z\|=1\}$ dependent on $P$ such that $x_P^T (A(\alpha^u)^TP+PA(\alpha^u)) x_P\ge 0$. Then,
\begin{align*}
&\lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha^u)^TP+PA(\alpha^u))\\
=&\max_{\|x\|=1}x^T(A(\alpha^u)^TP+PA(\alpha^u))x\\
\ge& x_P^T (A(\alpha^u)^TP+PA(\alpha^u)) x_P\ge 0,\quad\forall P\succeq 0.
\end{align*}
Thus, $\min_{P\succeq 0}\lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha^u)^TP+PA(\alpha^u))\ge 0$.
Now, we want to show the statement for the ``resilient'' part. $(\Rightarrow)$: Assume $K$ is resilient. By Definition~\ref{def:resilient}, all the attack strategies are stabilizing, i.e. $\mathcal A_0=\mathcal A_0^s$. Thus,
\begin{align*}
\gamma_{L0}^*&=\max_{\alpha\in\mathcal A_0^s}\min_{P\succeq 0} \lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))\\&=\max_{\alpha\in\mathcal A_0^s}-\infty=-\infty.
\end{align*}
$(\Leftarrow)$: On the other hand, if $\gamma_{L0}^*=-\infty$, then for all $\alpha\in\mathcal A_0$, $\min_{P\succeq 0} \lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))=-\infty$, i.e. $\alpha\in\mathcal A_0^s$. Now $\mathcal A_0=\mathcal A_0^s$ and thus $K$ is resilient.
Next, we want to show the statement for the ``not resilient'' part. $(\Rightarrow)$: Assume $K$ is not resilient. By Definition~\ref{def:resilient}, $\mathcal A_0^u\neq\emptyset$. Let $\alpha^u\in\mathcal A_0^u$ be a destabilizing attack strategy. Then,
\begin{align*}
\gamma_{L0}^*=&\max_{\alpha\in\mathcal A_0}\min_{P\succeq 0} \lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))\\
\ge&\min_{P\succeq 0} \lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha^u)^TP+PA(\alpha^u))\ge 0.
\end{align*}
$(\Leftarrow)$: On the other hand, if $\gamma_{L0}^*\ge 0$, then there exists an $\alpha^u\in\mathcal A_0$ such that $\min_{P\succeq 0} \lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha^u)^TP+PA(\alpha^u))\ge 0$. In other words, there exists a destabilizing attack strategy and thus $K$ is not resilient.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{A Lyapunov Relaxation}
The optimal value of $\mathbf{Lya0}$ provides an equivalent characterization of resilience as proved in Theorem~\ref{thm:Lya0}. However, the development of efficient algorithm for $\mathbf{Lya0}$ is highly nontrivial due to its binary decision variables and unbounded optimal value. For the practical use, we now consider a relaxation of $\mathbf{Lya0}$ by embedding the binary variables into closed interval $[0,1]$ and upper bounding the largest eigenvalue of positive semidefinite (P.S.D.) variable. Let $\mathcal A\triangleq\{\alpha\in[0,1]^{N\times N}:\alpha_{ii}=1,i=1,\cdots,N\}$ and $\P\triangleq\{P\in\S^n:0\preceq P\preceq \lambda_P I\}$ for some fixed $\lambda_P>0$.
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{LyaP}\quad \gamma^*_{LP}\triangleq \max_{\alpha\in\mathcal A}\min_{P\in\P}\quad \lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))
\end{align*}
By relaxing the feasible set for the min and constraining the one for the max, $\mathbf{LyaP}$ provides a surrogate certificate to $\mathbf{Lya0}$, which leads to a sufficient condition for resilience.
\begin{thm} A controller $K$ is resilient if $\gamma^*_{LP}<0$. Conversely, it is not resilient only if $\gamma^*_{LP}\ge 0$.
\label{thm:LyaPsuff}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Since $\P\subset \{P\succeq 0\}$ and minimization over smaller set gives larger optimal value,
\begin{align*}
g(\alpha)\triangleq&\min_{P\in\P}\lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))\\
\ge& \min_{P\succeq 0}\lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))\triangleq g_0(\alpha).
\end{align*}
Furthermore, $\mathcal A\supset\mathcal A_0$ and maximization over larger set gives larger optimal value,
\begin{align}
\gamma^*_{LP}=\max_{\alpha\in\mathcal A}g(\alpha)\ge \max_{\alpha\in\mathcal A_0}g(\alpha)\ge \max_{\alpha\in\mathcal A_0}g_0(\alpha)=\gamma^*_{L0}. \label{eq:lpl0}
\end{align}
For the ``if'' part, assume $\gamma^*_{LP}<0$. By relation~(\ref{eq:lpl0}), $\gamma^*_{L0}<0$. It then follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:Lya0} that $K$ is resilient. For the ``only if'' part, assume $K$ is not resilient. By Theorem~\ref{thm:Lya0}, $\gamma^*_{L0}\ge 0$. Then, $\gamma^*_{LP}\ge 0$ by relation~(\ref{eq:lpl0}).
\end{proof}
Recall that for a symmetric matrix $M\in\S$, the largest eigenvalue of $M$ can be written as $\lambda_{\max}(M)=\min\{t: M\preceq tI\}$. Since the inner problem of $\mathbf{LyaP}$ is the minimization of the largest eigenvalue, it can be equivalently formulated in the form of SDP program. Let $g:\mathcal A\to\mathbb R$ be the optimal value of the inner minimization (over $P$) of $\mathbf{LyaP}$ defined as
\begin{align}
g(\alpha)\triangleq \min_{P\in \P}\lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha)). \label{eq:g}
\end{align}
Then for any fixed $\alpha\in\mathcal A$, $g(\alpha)$ is the optimal value of the following SDP:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}
g(\alpha)=\min\quad &t \\
\st\quad &A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha) \preceq tI \\
&P\in\P
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:sdp}
\end{align}
Consider the following optimization problem.
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{LyaD}\quad \gamma^*_{LD}\triangleq \min_{\alpha\in\mathcal A} \quad &t\\
\st\quad &A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha) \preceq tI \\
& P\in\P
\end{align*}
Note that the first constraint in $\mathbf{LyaD}$ is a Bilinear Matrix Inequality (BMI) in decision variables $P,\alpha$ and $t$. Next, we will show that the dual problem $\mathbf{LyaD}$ is equivalent to the primal problem $\mathbf{LyaP}$.
\begin{thm}
$\gamma^*_{LD}=\gamma^*_{LP}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $\alpha_P^*$ be the optima of $\mathbf{LyaP}$. Then, $\gamma^*_{LP}=g(\alpha_P^*)$, for which there exists $P_P^*\in\P$ such that $A(\alpha_P^*)^TP_P^*+P_P^*A(\alpha_P^*)\preceq \gamma^*_{LP}I$. For the ``$\le$'' part, it follows from the triple $(\alpha_P^*,P_P^*,\gamma^*_{LP})$ being a feasible solution of $\mathbf{LyaD}$. For the ``$\ge$'' part, consider the BMI constraint of $\mathbf{LyaD}$. For $\alpha_P^*\in\mathcal A$, there exists $P\in\P$ such that $A(\alpha_P^*)^TP+PA(\alpha_P^*)\preceq\gamma^*_{LD}I$. By the equivalent characterization of $g(\alpha)$ given in SDP~(\ref{eq:sdp}), $g(\alpha^*_P)\le \gamma^*_{LD}$ and thus $\gamma^*_{LD}\ge\gamma^*_{LP}$.
\end{proof}
To take one step further, a natural question to ask is when the relaxed problem $\mathbf{LyaP}$ is ``exact'' in terms of resilience. In other words, whether there are cases for which solving $\mathbf{LyaP}$ results in {\em sufficient and necessary} condition. The answer is yes under some assumption. We first define {\em Lyapunov space} $\P_{\alpha}\subseteq\P$ for each pure attack strategy $\alpha\in\mathcal A_0$ as
\begin{align}
\P_{\alpha}\triangleq \{P\in\P: A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha)\preceq 0, P\neq 0\}. \label{eq:lyaspace}
\end{align}
To ensure the exactness of the relaxed problem $\mathbf{LyaP}$, we require the intersection of Lyapunov spaces of any two pure attack strategies to be nonempty.
\begin{assump}
For any $\alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\mathcal A_0$, $\P_{\alpha_1}\cap\P_{\alpha_2}\neq\emptyset$.
\label{assump:sign}
\end{assump}
The above assumption ensures the sign preserving property of the function $g$ defined in~(\ref{eq:g}) in the sense that if $g$ is strictly negative on the vertex set $\mathcal A_0$, it is strictly negative on the convex hull of $\mathcal A_0$, i.e. the relaxed attack space $\mathcal A$. On the other hand, if $g$ fails to be strictly negative on $\mathcal A$, it fails to be strictly negative on $\mathcal A_0$.
\begin{lem}
Under Assumption~\ref{assump:sign}, if $g(\alpha)<0,\forall \alpha\in\mathcal A_0$, then $g(\alpha)<0,\forall \alpha\in\mathcal A$; and conversely, if $\exists\alpha\in\mathcal A$ s.t. $g(\alpha)\ge 0$, then $\exists\alpha_0\in\mathcal A_0$ s.t. $g(\alpha_0)\ge 0$.
\label{lem:sign}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since $\mathcal A$ is a polytope with vertex set $\mathcal A_0$, it is enough to show the claim that for any $\alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\mathcal A_0,\theta\in[0,1]$, there exists $\kappa_1,\kappa_2>0$ such that
\begin{align*}
g(\theta\alpha_1+(1-\theta)\alpha_2)\le\kappa_1g(\alpha_1)+\kappa_2g(\alpha_2).
\end{align*}
Assume that the claim holds. Consider $\alpha_{\theta}\in\mathcal A$ where $\alpha_{\theta}=\sum_{\alpha_k\in\mathcal A_0}\theta_k\alpha_k$ for some $\theta_k\in[0,1], \sum_k\theta_k=1$. If $g(\alpha_k)<0,\forall\alpha_k\in\mathcal A_0$, then $g(\alpha_{\theta})<0$. On the other hand, if $g(\alpha_{\theta})\ge 0$, then $g(\alpha_k)\ge 0$ for some $\alpha_k\in\mathcal A_0$. Now we are left to show the claim.
For the ease of notation, let $f(\alpha,P)\triangleq \lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))$ in the rest of the proof. Let $\alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\mathcal A_0,\theta\in[0,1],P_k=\argmin_{P\in\P} f(\alpha_k,P),k=1,2$. Consider $\alpha_{\theta}=\theta\alpha_1+(1-\theta)\alpha_2$. Recall that $A(\alpha)$ defined in~(\ref{eq:Aalpha}) is affine in $\alpha$. Then, $A(\alpha_{\theta})=\theta A(\alpha_1)+(1-\theta)A(\alpha_2)$. By the convexity of $\lambda_{\max}(\cdot):\S^n\to\mathbb R$,
\begin{align*}
f(\alpha_{\theta},P)\le \theta f(\alpha_1,P)+(1-\theta)f(\alpha_2,P)\triangleq h_{\theta}(P).
\end{align*}
By assumption, $\P_{\alpha_1}\cap\P_{\alpha_2}\neq\emptyset$. Let $P_0\in\P_{\alpha_1}\cap\P_{\alpha_2}$. Since the Lyapunov space~(\ref{eq:lyaspace}) is defined by Linear Matrix Inequality (LMI), the sets $\P_{\alpha_k},k=1,2$ are convex and so is their intersection $\P_{\alpha_1}\cap\P_{\alpha_2}$. Then, $\exists t_1\in(0,1)$ s.t. $P_1'=t_1P_1+(1-t_1)P_0\in\P_{\alpha_2}$. Similarly, $\exists t_2\in(0,1)$ s.t. $P_2'=t_2P_2+(1-t_2)P_0\in\P_{\alpha_1}$. As $P_0\in\P_{\alpha_1}$, we have $f(\alpha_1,P_0)\le 0$. By the convexity of $f(\alpha,P)$ in $P$ for any fixed $\alpha$, $f(\alpha_1,P_1')\le t_1f(\alpha_1,P_1)+(1-t_1)f(\alpha_1,P_0)\le t_1f(\alpha_1,P_1)$. Similarly, $f(\alpha_2,P_2')\le t_2f(\alpha_2,P_2)$. Notice that the function $h_{\theta}:\P\to\mathbb R$ parameterized by $\theta\in[0,1]$ is the sum of two convex functions and thus is also convex. Consider $P=\beta P_1'+(1-\beta)P_2'$ for some $\beta\in[0,1]$. Then,
\begin{multline*}
h_{\theta}(P)\le\theta\beta f(\alpha_1,P_1')+\theta(1-\beta)f(\alpha_1,P_2')+\\(1-\theta)\beta f(\alpha_2,P_1')+(1-\theta)(1-\beta)f(\alpha_2,P_2').
\end{multline*}
Since $P_1'\in\P_{\alpha_2}, P_2'\in\P_{\alpha_1}$ by construction, $f(\alpha_1,P_2')\le 0$ and $f(\alpha_2,P_1')\le 0$. We prove the claim that $g(\alpha_{\theta})\le \kappa_1g(\alpha_1)+\kappa_2g(\alpha_2)$ where $\kappa_1=\theta\beta t_1$ and $\kappa_2=(1-\theta)(1-\beta)t_2$.
\end{proof}
With Lemma~\ref{lem:sign}, it is easy to obtain the following sufficient and necessary condition.
\begin{thm}[Sufficient and Necessary Condition II]
Under Assumption~\ref{assump:sign}, a controller $K$ is resilient {\em if and only if} $\gamma^*_{LP}<0$, and it is not resilient {\em if and only if} $\gamma^*_{LP}\ge 0$.
\label{thm:sign}
\end{thm}
\subsection{Resilience Index}
\label{sec:idx}
The conditions derived in Section~\ref{sec:cond} allow us to determine whether a given wide-area controller is resilient to all possible attack strategies. A natural additional question is how resilient the controller is to certain attack strategies. This calls for a proper definition of a normalized index to quantify the degree of resilience. Denoted by $r_K:\mathcal A_0\to[0,1]$ the resilience index of controller $K$ on the pure attack space. We consider $r_K$ to be normalized with respect to the nominal condition. In particular, $r_K$ needs to satisfy the following two conditions: i) It takes value 1 under the nominal condition when $K$ is intact, i.e. $r_K(\mathbf{1}_{N\times N})=1$; ii) It takes value 0 under destabilizing attack strategies, i.e. $r_k(\alpha)=0$ for all $\alpha\in\mathcal A_0$ under which system~(\ref{eq:clatkalpha}) is unstable.
Recall that $g:\mathcal A\to\mathbb R$ defined in~(\ref{eq:g}) is the optimal value of the inner minimization (over $P$) of the relaxed problem $\mathbf{LyaP}$. In fact, the mapping $g$ defines a performance metric for stability in the sense that for any $\alpha\in\mathcal A$, $g(\alpha)$ is the fastest decreasing rate a Lyapunov function candidate could achieve along the trajectory of $A(\alpha)$. This naturally leads to a definition of resilience index satisfying the above two conditions. Guaranteed by the design objective, the system under the nominal condition has better stability performance than the one under attack. Since the nominal condition corresponds to $\alpha=\mathbf{1}_{N\times N}$, we have i) $g(\mathbf{1}_{N\times N})\le g(\alpha),\forall\alpha\in\mathcal A_0$. On the other hand, we know from the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:Lya0} that ii) $g(\alpha)\ge 0$ for any destabilizing $\alpha\in\mathcal A_0$. Based on i) and ii), we define resilience index $r_K:\mathcal A_0\to[0,1]$ of controller $K$ on the pure attack space $\mathcal A_0$ as follows.
\begin{align}
r_K(\alpha)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
0 & \text{if } g(\alpha)\ge 0\\
g(\alpha)/g(\mathbf{1}_{N\times N}) & \text{if } g(\alpha)<0
\end{array}
\right. \label{eq:index}
\end{align}
The definition in~(\ref{eq:index}) captures stability degradation of controller $K$ under different attack strategies. It is easy to see that the smaller the index $r_K(\alpha)$ is, the less resilient controller $K$ is to attack strategy $\alpha$, or in other words, the more disruption $\alpha$ will incur on $K$. For the two boundary cases, if $r_K(\alpha)=0$, controller $K$ can be destabilized by $\alpha$, while if $r_K(\alpha)=1$, $\alpha$ has no effect on controller $K$.
\section{A Path-Following Primal-Dual Algorithm}
\label{sec:algorithm}
The goal of this section is to solve the relaxed problem $\mathbf{LyaP}$. Notice that $\mathbf{LyaP}$ takes scalar continuous decision variables $\alpha_{ij},i\neq j$ and P.S.D. matrix variable $P$. By the definition of $g$ given in~(\ref{eq:g}), $\mathbf{LyaP}$ is actually the maximization of $g$ on the polytope $\mathcal A$. A natural attempt is to apply gradient ascent algorithm. The key step of gradient-based algorithm is to compute the subgradient of the objective, that is $\partial g$ for the case here. Let $f_{\alpha}(x,P)\triangleq x^T(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))x$.
\begin{align}
g(\alpha)=\min_{P\in \P} \max_{\|x\|=1} f_{\alpha}(x,P). \label{eq:minmax}
\end{align}
Notice that i) $x\mapsto f_{\alpha}(x,P)$ is concave and continuous for each $P$ and ii) $P\mapsto f_{\alpha}(x,P)$ is convex (actually affine) for each $x$. By the general minimax theorem, the min and the max in~(\ref{eq:minmax}) can be swapped, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
g(\alpha)&=\max_{\|x\|=1} \min_{P\in \P} f_{\alpha}(x,P)=\max_{\|x\|=1} g_x(\alpha),\text{ where} \\
g_x(\alpha)&\triangleq \min_{P\in \P} x^T(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))x
\end{align*}
Observe that $g$ is the pointwise supremum of $g_x$ and $g_x(\alpha)$ is convex in $\alpha$ (actually affine) for each $x$. By the weak rule for pointwise supremum, a subgradient of $g$ at $\alpha$ is any element in $\partial g_{x^*(\alpha)}(\alpha)$ where $x^*(\alpha)=\argmax_{\|x\|=1} g_x(\alpha)$. Now, let's focus on computing the subgradient of $g_{x^*}$. Let $P^*(\alpha)=\argmin_{P\in \P}\lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha))$, which depends only on $\alpha$, not on $x$. Let $X^*=x^*x^{*T}$. Then,
\begin{align*}
g_{x^*}(\alpha)&=2\tr(P^*A(\alpha)X^*)\\&=2\tr(X^*P^*(A+\sum_{1\le i,j\le N} B\tilde{K}M_{ij}\alpha_{ij})).
\end{align*}
Since $g_{x^*}$ is affine in $\alpha$, the subgradient of $g_{x^*}$ coincides with the gradient taking the following form:
\begin{align*}
\partial_{ij} g_{x^*}(\alpha)=\nabla_{ij} g_{x^*}(\alpha)=2\tr(X^*P^*B\tilde{K}M_{ij}).
\end{align*}
We are now ready to introduce the primal-dual gradient ascent algorithm.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Primal-dual gradient ascent algorithm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Inputs {System matrices: $A,B,K$}
\Initialize {$\alpha_{k-1}\leftarrow 1^{N\times N}$, step size $s$, tolerance $\epsilon$, $\gamma_k=-\infty,\gamma_{k-1}=0$}
\While {$\gamma_k<0$ or $\gamma_k-\gamma_{k-1}>\epsilon$}
\State $P_k\leftarrow$ optimality of $\mathbf{LyaD}$ with $\alpha=\alpha_{k-1}$ \Comment{Update dual variable $P$: SDP with LMI constraints}
\State $x_k\leftarrow$ eigenvector associated with the largest eigenvalue of $A(\alpha_{k-1})^TP_k+P_kA(\alpha_{k-1})$, $X_k\leftarrow x_kx_k^T$
\State $\eta_{ij}\leftarrow \tr(X_kP_kB\tilde{K}M_{ij}),\eta\leftarrow \eta/\|\eta\|_F$ \Comment{Compute gradient $\nabla g(\alpha_{k-1})$}
\State $\alpha_k\leftarrow\alpha_{k-1}+s\eta$ \Comment{Update primal variable $\alpha$: gradient ascent}
\State $\alpha_k\leftarrow\Pi_{\mathcal A}(\alpha_k)$ \Comment{Project $\alpha_k$ onto relaxed attack set}
\State $\gamma_{k-1}\leftarrow\gamma_k,\gamma_k\leftarrow x_k^T(A(\alpha_k)^TP_k+P_kA(\alpha_k))x_k$ \Comment{Compute objective}
\State $\alpha_{k-1}\leftarrow\alpha_k$
\EndWhile
\Outputs {optimality $\gamma_k,\alpha_k$}
\end{algorithmic}
\label{algo:pd}
\end{algorithm}
Let $\{\gamma_k\}_{k\in\mathbb N}$ be the sequence of optimal value and $\{\alpha_k\}_{k\in\mathbb N}$ be the sequence of optima returned by Algorithm~\ref{algo:pd}.
\begin{thm}
A controller $K$ is resilient if $\gamma_k\uparrow\gamma^*<0$. Conversely, it is not resilient only if $\gamma_k\uparrow 0$.
\label{thm:cvgce}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Given $\alpha_{k-1}$, $P_k$ is the optima of $\mathbf{LyaD}$ for $\alpha=\alpha_{k-1}$ s.t. $P_k=P^*(\alpha_{k-1})$, where
\begin{align*}
P^*(\alpha)=\argmin_{P\in\P}\lambda_{\max}(A(\alpha)^TP+PA(\alpha)).
\end{align*}
Now given $\alpha_{k-1}$ and $P_k$, $x_k$ is the eigenvector associated with the largest eigenvalue of $A(\alpha_{k-1})^TP_k+P_kA(\alpha_{k-1})$.
\begin{align*}
x_k=\argmax_{\|x\|=1}x^T(A(\alpha_{k-1})^TP_k+P_kA(\alpha_{k-1}))x.
\end{align*}
To evaluate the subgradient of $g$, we define a collection of functions $g_x:\mathcal A\to\mathbb R$ parameterized by $x\in\{z:\|z\|=1\}$.
\begin{align*}
g_x(\alpha;P^*(\alpha))\triangleq x^T(A(\alpha)^TP^*(\alpha)+P^*(\alpha)A(\alpha))x.
\end{align*}
Observe that $g(\cdot)$ is the pointwise maximum of $g_x(\cdot;\cdot)$ where the second variable is determined by the first variable and is uniform in $x$. By the weak rule for pointwise supremum, a subgradient of $g$ at $\alpha$ is any element in $\partial g_{x^*}(\alpha)$ where $x^*$ is such that $g(\alpha)=g_{x^*}(\alpha)$. For $\alpha=\alpha_{k-1}$, we have $g(\alpha_{k-1})=g_{x_k}(\alpha_{k-1};P_k)$ and thus
\begin{align*}
\partial g(\alpha_{k-1}) \ni \partial g_{x_k}(\alpha_{k-1};P_k).
\end{align*}
Due to $g_x(\cdot;\cdot)$ is affine in the first variable, $\partial g_x=\nabla g_x$. Let $\eta=\nabla g_{x_k}(\alpha_{k-1};P_k)\in\mathbb R^{N\times N}$. Then, $\eta\in\partial g(\alpha_{k-1})$. By the property of subgradient, for $s>0$ small enough,
\begin{align*}
g(\alpha_k)=g(\alpha_{k-1}+s\eta)\ge g(\alpha_{k-1})+s\langle\eta, \Pi_{\mathcal{T}_{\mathcal A}(\alpha_{k-1})}(\eta)\rangle,
\end{align*}
where $\mathcal{T}_{\mathcal A}(\alpha)$ denotes the tangent cone of $\mathcal A$ at $\alpha$ and $\Pi_{\mathcal{M}}(\cdot)$ denotes the projection operator onto $\mathcal{M}$. For $\alpha\in\interior(\mathcal A)$, $\Pi_{\mathcal{T}_{\mathcal A}(\alpha)}(\eta)=\eta,\forall \eta\in\mathbb R^n$. For $\alpha\in\partial(\mathcal A)$, $0\le \langle\eta, \Pi_{\mathcal{T}_{\mathcal A}(\alpha_{k-1})}(\eta)\rangle<\|\eta\|^2$. Thus,
\begin{align*}
\gamma_k=g(\alpha_k)\ge g(\alpha_{k-1})=\gamma_{k-1},\forall k\in\mathbb N.
\end{align*}
Now that the sequence $\{\gamma_k\}_{k\in\mathbb N}$ is increasing and upper bounded by 0, the rest of the proof follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:LyaPsuff}.
\end{proof}
\section{Simulation Results}
\label{sec:sim}
In this section, we illustrate the proposed resilience framework on the IEEE 39-bus system~\cite{rogers2012power}. To obtain the linearized model of the form~(\ref{eq:cl}), an object-oriented version of PST has been used~\cite{chow1992toolbox}. There are $N=10$ buses in the network-reduced model where bus 1 represents subtransient salient pole with $n_1=7$ states, bus 2-9 represent subtransient round rotor with $n_i=8$ states for $i=2,\cdots,9$ and bus 10 represents subtransient round rotor with $n_{10}=4$ states. Each bus from 1 to 9 has a scalar wide-area control input, i.e. $m_i=1, i=1,\cdots,9$ and bus 10 has no control, i.e. $m_{10}=0$. The overall system has $n=75$ states and $m=9$ control inputs. The dimension of system matrices are summarized are follows: $A\in\mathbb R^{75\times 75},B\in\mathbb R^{75\times 9},K\in\mathbb R^{9\times 75}$.
We consider two wide-area controllers $K_1,K_2\in\mathbb R^{9\times 75}$ that are relatively centralized as compared with the sparse-promoting controller $K_{sp}$ given in~\cite{dorfler2014sparsity}. The spectral abscissas (maximal real part of eigenvalues) of closed-loop system under the three controllers are summarized in Table~\ref{tbl:eig}. We can see that $K_1,K_2$ have better closed loop performance than $K_{sp}$ since the former two leverage more remote state information than the latter. However, the better closed-loop performance comes at the price of exposing vulnerabilities to cyber attacks. Next, we will analyze the resilience of $K_1,K_2$ under attacks on the communication channels using the proposed framework.
We first give an overview on the resilience of the two controllers. In particular, we enumerate all possible single- and double-channel attack strategies and summarize the worst attack strategy of each scenario in Table~\ref{tbl:atk}. We can see that $K_1$ is resilient to all the 81 single-channel attack strategies, among which the worst attack 10$\to$2 still results in negative spectral abscissa -0.1744. On the other hand, $K_2$ is not resilient to single-channel attack and there are 2 out of 81 single-channel attack strategies that can destabilize the system. Furthermore, neither $K_1$ nor $K_2$ is resilient to double-channel attack. But $K_1$ is relatively more resilient than $K_2$ as $K_1$ has much less destabilizing double-channel attack strategies (total of 4) than $K_2$ (total of 167). Overall, $K_1$ is more resilient than $K_2$. In what follows, we quantify and analyze the resilience under cyber attacks of the two controllers by first computing their resilience indices and then identifying critical channels based on the machinery we developed in this paper.
\begin{table}[!ht]
\caption{spectral abscissa of closed-loop system}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{}lllll@{}}\toprule
& w/o feedback & w/ $K_1$ & w/ $K_2$ & w/ $K_{sp}$\\ \midrule
$\max_i\Real(\lambda_i)$ & -4.9523e-06 & -0.19184 & -0.19195 & -5.8433e-02 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tbl:eig}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!ht]
\caption{single- and double-channel attack}
\resizebox{1\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{@{}ccccccccc@{}}\toprule
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{total \# of destab.} & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{worst attack} & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{max spec. abs.} \\
\cmidrule{2-3} \cmidrule{5-6} \cmidrule{8-9}
& 1-ch & 2-ch & & 1-ch & 2-ch & & 1-ch & 2-ch \\\midrule
$K_1$ & 0/81 & 4/3240 & & $10\to 2$ & {\small $\begin{array}{c}5\to4\\6\to4\end{array}$} & & -0.1744 & 0.1268 \\
$K_2$ & 2/81 & 167/3240 & & $5\to 4$ & {\small $\begin{array}{c}4\to1\\5\to4\end{array}$} & & 0.1484 & 0.6332 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\label{tbl:atk}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/K_ch}
\caption{resilience index under single- and double-channel attack}
\label{fig:index}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/K_algo}
\caption{left: convergence of Algorithm~\ref{algo:pd}, right: spectral abscissa under $k$-channel attack}
\label{fig:algo}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Resilience Index}
We compute resilience indices of the two controllers under single- and double-channel attack using the definition given in~(\ref{eq:index}) and present them in Fig.~\ref{fig:index}. The worst three single-channel attack strategies, corresponding to the smallest three resilience indices, are highlighted by red dots. We can see that resilience index of $K_1$ is larger than that of $K_2$, suggesting $K_1$ is more resilient than $K_2$, as what is expected. This shows that our resilience index is an effective metric to quantify resilience.
\subsection{Identification of Critical Channels}
We apply Algorithm~\ref{algo:pd} to check the resilience criterion for the two controllers. The sequences of optimal value are plotted in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:algo}. We can see that $\gamma_k\uparrow 0$ in both cases. By Theorem~\ref{thm:cvgce}, we know that $K_1$ and $K_2$ both satisfy the necessary condition for non-resilience. To identify critical channels, we focus on the optimal relaxed strategy $\alpha^*$ obtained at the instance $k^*$ when the optimal value firstly reaches 0. We rank the criticality of channels by the magnitude of their corresponding entry of $\alpha^*$, that is the smaller $\alpha^*_{ij}$ is, the more critical channel $j\to i$ is. We consider $k$-channel attacks for $k=1,\cdots,8$ generated by the criticality ranking and plot the resulting spectral abscissa on the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:algo}. The $k$-th most critical channel is labeled on top of the red circle corresponding to $k$-channel attack, whose attack set includes the first $k$ most critical channels. We can see that the system is driven more and more unstable under the sequence of critical $k$-channel attack strategy. Therefore, we successfully identify structural vulnerabilities by the criticality ranking.
\section{Conclusion}
This paper proposes a novel framework for resilience analysis and quantification of wide-area control of power systems. We formally define the notion of resilience in the presence of cyber attacks. Resilience conditions are given in terms of Lyapunov-based optimization problems. A resilience index is defined to quantify the degree of resilience. We develop an efficient numerical algorithm to check the proposed resilience criterion as well as identify structural vulnerabilities.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
The dominant source of optical-UV emission in active galactic nuclei (AGN) is
likely an accretion flow surrounding a central super-massive black hole (SMBH).
For most cases, it is believed that this accretion flow takes the form of an
optically thick, geometrically thin accretion disc (thin AD), as described in
\citet{Shakura73}.
The physics of an actively accreting BH is governed by three key parameters,
namely its mass (\ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi), spin (defined using the dimensionless parameter $a_*$),
and accretion rate (\ifmmode \dot{M} \else $\dot{M}$\fi). These
parameters are intimately connected to the nature of the accretion flow around
the BH, and AGN with very large accretion rates are believed to have optically
thick, geometrically thick accretion discs
\citep[``slim'' ADs;][and references therein]{Abramowicz88,Ohsuga11,Netzer13}.
\defcitealias{Capellupo15}{Paper~I}
There are several `standard' models in the literature that predict the emitted
SED of thin ADs, based on the general ideas in \citet{Shakura73} and with
various improvements, including general relativistic (GR) corrections,
radiative transfer in the disc atmosphere, and disc winds
\citep[e.g.][]{Hubeny01,Davis11,Done12,Slone12}. As described in
\citet{Koratkar99} and \citet{Davis11}, as well as in our previous paper,
\citet{Capellupo15} (hereafter, \citetalias{Capellupo15}), early attempts to
fit such thin AD models to observed AGN spectra have generally found that the
theoretical SEDs are significantly bluer than those observed. However, these
studies were likely affected by relatively narrow wavelength coverage, by
potential variability between different observations taken by different
instruments, and/or stellar light contamination at long wavelengths.
Furthermore, while estimates of \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and \ifmmode \dot{M} \else $\dot{M}$\fi\ (or the Eddington ratio,
\ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi) have been obtained for many active SMBHs, the spin parameters are
largely unknown. Up until recently, spin measurements have been limited to
X-ray observations of relatively nearby AGN that are able to probe the
innermost regions of the AD. Specifically, high-quality X-ray observations are
required to model the profile of the relativistic 6.4 keV K$\alpha$ line, and
such measurements have been performed for only a handful of AGN at low redshift
\citep[][and references therein]{Fabian00,Brenneman13,Risaliti13,Reis14,Reynolds14}.
The highest redshift AGN with such a measurement so far is at z $\sim$ 0.6, and
this was possible only because it is lensed \citep{Reis14}. A further downside
to this approach is that these measurements cannot distinguish between negative
spin and spin of 0 because the changes are too small in the broad 6.4 keV line
profile. Therefore, a method that is sensitive to the full range of spin
parameters ($-1 \le a_* \le 1$) and can be applied to AGN at larger redshifts
is necessary.
In \citetalias{Capellupo15}, we introduced a new sample of AGN, observed with
a unique instrument, X-shooter, at the VLT \citep{Vernet11}. This sample was
selected based on the BH mass and
the Eddington ratio (\ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi), two of the three fundamental
properties of active BHs. Nothing was known about the spin of
this sample at the time the sample was selected.
Our sample was selected in a narrow redshift range centered around
$z \simeq 1.55$. This redshift was selected so that the four strongest broad
emission lines (BELs; H$\alpha$, H$\beta$, MgII 2800\AA, and CIV 1549\AA) would
fall within the observed spectral range of the X-shooter instrument. This is
important for addressing the physics of BELs and the estimation of \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ based
on these BELs.
Using the X-shooter instrument avoids
the problem of line and continuum variations that arises when observing
individual BELs at different times and with different instruments.
The results of this part of the project are described in
Mej\'{i}a-Restrepo et al. (hereafter, Paper II).
Our work in \citetalias{Capellupo15} showed that with wide, single-epoch
wavelength coverage of the SEDs, the thin AD theory is indeed consistent with
the data for at least 25 out of the 30 AGN we studied, in contrast with many of
the earlier works on AGN SED fitting. Futhermore, we were able to constrain the
spin parameter for those sources with satisfactory thin AD fits to the SEDs.
In the current work, we improve and expand upon the work in
\citetalias{Capellupo15} in three ways. First, we add an additional 9 AGN to
the sample to fill a section of the \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi$-$\ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ plane missing in
\citetalias{Capellupo15}, namely fainter AGN with a combination of smaller
\ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and lower \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi. Second, we improve our Bayesian AGN SED fitting
procedure by including improved \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ estimates from Paper II and, instead of
applying intrinsic reddening only to those AGN that could not otherwise be fit
with a thin AD SED, as we did in \citetalias{Capellupo15}, we now include an
intrinsic reddening correction in our Bayesian fitting procedure for all
sources.
Third, we investigate the inclusion of archival photometry from GALEX, in
order to extend our wavelength coverage further into the UV.
This allows us to cover a larger portion of the AGN SED that is dominated by
radiation from the AGN accretion disc. Although, this analysis is hampered
by potential variability between the non-simultaneous GALEX and X-shooter
observations.
We summarize the sample selection, observations, and data reduction in
Section~\ref{sec:data}. In Section~\ref{sec:fit}, we describe the thin AD model
we use, our procedure for fitting the model to the data, and the results of
fitting both the X-shooter spectra alone and the combined X-shooter+GALEX SEDs.
In Section~\ref{sec:discuss}, we discuss the implications of our results on the
nature of AGN accretion discs and our understanding of AGN BH spin evolution.
Throughout this work, we assume a $\Lambda$CDM cosmological model with
$\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.7$, $\Omega_{m}=0.3$, and
$H_{0}=70\, {\rm km\, s^{-1}} \, {\rm Mpc}^{-1}$.
\section{Sample Observations and Data Reduction}
\label{sec:data}
\subsection{X-shooter}
\label{sec:xsh}
In this work, we use a sample of AGN selected from the seventh data release of
the SDSS \citep{Abazajian09}, as described in \citetalias{Capellupo15}, and from 2SLAQ
\citep{Croom09}. To summarize, our sample
was selected to cover the widest possible range in $M_{BH}$ and $L/L_{Edd}$,
within a narrow redshift range, z $\simeq$ 1.45 -- 1.65. For the purpose of
selecting the sample only, we use measurements of the \ifmmode {\rm Mg}{\textsc{ii}} \else Mg\,{\sc ii}\fi\ emission line in
the SDSS (for the original 30 sources described in \citetalias{Capellupo15}) and 2SLAQ (for the
new nine sources presented here) spectra, along with a standard bolometric
correction (BC) factor and relations given in \citet{McLure04}, to estimate
$M_{BH}$ and $L/L_{Edd}$. We divide the known $M_{BH}$--$L/L_{Edd}$ plane into
9 bins, and we select five objects per bin (Fig. \ref{fig:mbh_ledd}). We have
currently observed 39 AGN, in bins A$-$H, with $M_{BH}$ ranging from
$\sim$$9 \times 10^{7}$ to $4 \times 10^{9}$ \ifmmode M_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi\ and $L/L_{Edd}$ from
$\sim$0.04 to 0.7.
\begin{table}
\caption{Summary of observations and data reduction.}
\begin{tabular}{clcc}
\hline
Name & Dates observed & $A_V^{(a)}$ & Notes \\
\hline
J0042$+$0008 & 2013 October 24 & 0.02 & c \\
& 2013 October 31 & & \\
J1021$-$0027 & 2014 February 23 & 0.05 & b \\
& 2014 February 26 & & \\
& 2014 February 27 & & \\
& 2014 April 24 & & \\
& 2014 April 24 & & \\
& 2014 April 27 & & \\
J0038$-$0019 & 2013 November 03 & 0.02 & c \\
& 2013 November 03 & & \\
& 2013 November 04 & & \\
& 2013 November 08 & & \\
J0912$-$0040 & 2013 December 31 & 0.03 & c \\
& 2014 January 30 & & \\
J1048$-$0019 & 2014 April 27 & 0.04 & c \\
& 2015 January 27 & & \\
& 2015 January 27 & & \\
& 2015 January 27 & & \\
J1045$-$0047 & 2014 March 08 & 0.04 & \\
& 2014 March 08 & & \\
& 2014 April 23 & & \\
& 2014 April 23 & & \\
& 2014 April 24 & & \\
J0042$-$0011 & 2013 November 04 & 0.02 & c \\
& 2013 November 08 & & \\
& 2014 July 28 & & \\
& 2014 July 28 & & \\
& 2014 July 29 & & \\
& 2014 July 29 & & \\
J1046$+$0025 & 2014 February 24 & 0.04 & c \\
& 2014 February 26 & & \\
& 2014 February 26 & & \\
& 2014 February 27 & & \\
& 2014 March 01 & & \\
& 2014 March 01 & & \\
J0930$-$0018 & 2014 February 04 & 0.03 & c \\
& 2014 February 22 & & \\
& 2014 February 22 & & \\
& 2014 February 23 & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
$(a)$ {Galactic extinction.}
$(b)$ {BALQSO}
$(c)$ {Requires host galaxy subtraction.}
\label{tab:data}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{fig01_M_BH_L_Ledd.pdf}
\caption{Our sample selection plotted on the $M_{BH}$--$L/L_{Edd}$ plane,
using the measured values based on SDSS and 2SLAQ spectra and
\citet{McLure04}. Black points are the original 30 and blue points are the
nine new sources.}
\label{fig:mbh_ledd}
\end{figure}
The X-shooter instrument at the VLT provides spectra with continuous wavelength
coverage from $\sim$3000 to 25 000 \AA, by simultaneously observing three
wavelength regions, the UV-blue (UVB), visible (VIS), and near-infrared
(NIR; \citealt{Vernet11}). The instrumental set-up for the 9 new sources
presented in this paper (ESO program 092.B-0613) is the same as for the
original 30 (\citetalias{Capellupo15}; ESO program 088.B-1034). We observe with
the widest available slit widths, 1.2 to 1.6 arcsec, giving a resolving power
of 3300 to 5400, depending on the arm. Table \ref{tab:data} lists the nine new
objects in our sample and the dates of observation.
The spectra were reduced using the ESO Reflex environment \citep{Freudling13}
and version 2.5.2 of the ESO X-shooter pipeline, in nodding mode
\citep{Modigliani10}. The pipeline subtracts the detector bias and dark
current, rectifies and calibrates the wavelength scale of the spectra, and uses
an observed spectroscopic standard star spectrum to calculate an absolute
flux-calibrated spectrum. In general, the standard star is observed the same
night as the science target.
With the pipeline-calibrated result, we then corrected the spectra for telluric
absorption within the VIS arm spectrum, using a telluric standard star
observation at a similar airmass as the AGN observation taken either right
before or right after the AGN observation. In the case of the wavelength region
$\sim$8950$-$9800\AA, we used a model telluric spectrum instead of a standard
star observation. In the NIR arm, where there is more significant telluric
absorption, we simply remove the regions of the spectrum most affected by this
absorption.
Finally, we use the \citet{Schlegel98} maps and \citet{Cardelli89} extinction
law to correct the spectra for Galactic extinction. Table \ref{tab:data} lists
the values of $A_V$ due to the Galaxy for the nine new targets.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=160mm]{fig02a_v_vLv_log_good.pdf}
\caption{Spectra of the nine new X-shooter sources with the best-fit thin AD
models (red curves) over-plotted.
For those objects whose best model fit required an intrinsic reddening
correction, we plot the dereddened spectrum in gray.
Seven of the 9 spectra were corrected for host galaxy contribution
before fitting. The objects are ordered by source luminosity, as determined
from $\lambda L_{\lambda}(3000)$\AA.
}
\label{fig:sp1}
\end{figure*}
\addtocounter{figure}{-1}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=160mm]{fig02b_v_vLv_log_good.pdf}
\caption{continued...}
\end{figure*}
Fig. \ref{fig:sp1} shows the full X-shooter spectra of the nine new sources.
All sources are corrected for Galactic extinction, and some have been corrected
for host galaxy contamination, as described in Section \ref{sec:thinad}. The
spectra are ordered by source luminosity as determined from
$\lambda L_{\lambda}(3000)$\AA. For consistency, the sources are ordered in
this same way in Table \ref{tab:data}.
\subsection{GALEX}
\label{sec:galex}
To increase our wavelength coverage, we incorporate measurements from the sixth
and seventh data release of GALEX. The GALEX mission has surveyed the sky in
two UV bands. The far-UV filter has a bandwidth of 1344--1786 \AA, with an
effective wavelength of 1538.6 \AA, and the near-UV filter has a bandwidth of
1771--2831 \AA, with an effective wavelength of 2315.7 \AA\
\citep{Morrissey07}. This corresponds to rest wavelengths of $\sim$600 and
900 \AA\ for our sample. The GALEX catalog contains photometric measurements of
38 out of 39 of the AGN in our sample in the NUV band and 20 in the FUV band.
We have up to five epochs of GALEX photometry per source, taken anywhere from
September 2003 to February 2012. The first X-shooter observations from
\citetalias{Capellupo15} began in October 2011, whereas 75\% of our sample only
have GALEX data from before 2010. As detailed below, time variability is
evident in many of these observations, so we consider all epochs here.
The GALEX magnitudes range from 17.7 to 23.5, and most of the errors range from
0.02 to 0.3 mag, with a few measurements having errors as high as 0.6 mag. We
also corrected the GALEX measurements for Galactic extinction, using the same
extinction maps and extinction law as for the X-shooter spectra.
\section{Fitting Accretion Disc Models}
\label{sec:fit}
\subsection{Standard thin AD models}
\label{sec:thinad}
As described in \citetalias{Capellupo15}, most current AD models are based on the blackbody thin
disc model of \citet{Shakura73}, with two significant improvements: the
inclusion of general relativity (GR) terms and the improvement of the radiative
transfer in the disc atmosphere \citep[e.g.][]{Hubeny01,Davis11}. In the
current paper, we continue to use the numerical code presented in
\citet{Slone12} to calculate thin AD spectra, with a viscosity parameter
($\alpha$) of 0.1.
Before calculating thin AD models, we calculate both \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and \ifmmode \dot{M} \else $\dot{M}$\fi\ (the
accretion rate in \ifmmode M_{\odot}\, {\rm yr}^{-1} \else $M_{\odot}\, {\rm yr}^{-1}$) directly
from the observed spectrum. A major improvement relative to
\citetalias{Capellupo15} is the use of new \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ measurements based on the
comparison of four strong emission lines in our own sample $-$ H$\alpha$,
H$\beta$, \ifmmode {\rm Mg}{\textsc{ii}} \else Mg\,{\sc ii}\fi, and \ifmmode {\rm C}\,\textsc{iv} \else C\,{\sc iv}\fi\ (Paper II).
The main results of Paper II are:
1) H$\alpha$, H$\beta$, and \ifmmode {\rm Mg}{\textsc{ii}} \else Mg\,{\sc ii}\fi\ give consistent estimates of \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi, albeit
with a normalization which is somewhat different from the one used in
\citetalias{Capellupo15} (based on the \citealt{Trakhtenbrot12} calibration of
the \ifmmode {\rm Mg}{\textsc{ii}} \else Mg\,{\sc ii}\fi\ method). The \ifmmode {\rm Mg}{\textsc{ii}} \else Mg\,{\sc ii}\fi-based estimates are less reliable for broad
absorption line AGNs and for sources where FWHM(\ifmmode {\rm Mg}{\textsc{ii}} \else Mg\,{\sc ii}\fi)$>$FWHM(H$\beta$).
2) The \ifmmode {\rm C}\,\textsc{iv} \else C\,{\sc iv}\fi\ line by itself does not provide reliable BH mass estimates for
many of the sources.
3) New estimates of \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ that are based on
the FWHM of \ifmmode {\rm Mg}{\textsc{ii}} \else Mg\,{\sc ii}\fi\ are larger than the estimates used in
\citetalias{Capellupo15} by $\sim$0.16 dex, with a scatter of 0.20 dex. All
calculations and model fitting presented in this paper use the new mass
measurements.
The method for measuring \ifmmode \dot{M} \else $\dot{M}$\fi, in units of \ifmmode M_{\odot}\, {\rm yr}^{-1} \else $M_{\odot}\, {\rm yr}^{-1}$, is the
same as in \citetalias{Capellupo15}, and is based on the properties
of thin ADs \citep{Collin02,Davis11} and the fact that thin AD SEDs can be
described by a canonical power law of the form $L_{\nu} \propto \nu^{1/3}$ at
long enough wavelengths. Using the measured \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and equation 1 from \citetalias{Capellupo15},
we can determine the mass accretion rate directly from the monochromatic
luminosity in a wavelength region along this power law portion of the SED. The
one additional unknown is the inclination of the disc with respect to our line
of sight.
The nine new sources presented here are fainter than the 30 sources presented
in \citetalias{Capellupo15}, and therefore, they are more susceptible to host
galaxy contamination at longer wavelengths, including the wavelength region
used for measuring the accretion rate. We therefore have to subtract the host
galaxy emission in order to more accurately measure the AGN SED.
We determine which objects require a host galaxy subtraction based on the
rest-wavelength equivalent width (EW) of the H$\alpha$ emission line. The EW
of the Balmer lines is not affected by the Baldwin effect, and the H$\alpha$
line intensity is a reliable bolometric luminosity indicator \citep{Stern12}.
We first look at the EW distribution of the brightest 28 AGN in the sample,
whose luminosity at 5100\AA\ is high enough that host contamination is small
enough to safely be neglected \citep{Shen11}. We then compare the EW
distribution for the 11 faintest AGN in the sample to the distribution for the
brighter AGN, and we find most of the faint AGN have EW smaller than the median
EW of the brighter AGN (i.e. EW $<$ 400\AA). This clustering of AGN at low EW,
as compared to the distribution of EW for the brighter sample, indicates there
is host galaxy light raising the observed continuum luminosity in this
wavelength region for these few objects.
In order to subtract the host galaxy for these few faint objects, we use a
\citet{Bruzual03} model of an old stellar population, with an age of 11 Gyr and
solar metallicity. Such stellar population models have been used in many
earlier works to correct for host galaxy contamination
\citep[e.g.][]{Bongiorno14,Banerji15}. We scale the stellar population model
based on the ratio between the observed H$\alpha$ EW and the median of the EW
distribution (400\AA). Younger stellar populations have a larger contribution
in the UV, but using a stellar population with an age of 900 Myr, instead of
the 11 Gyr model, changes the luminosity by less than 5\% at 3000 \AA\ in the
corrected AGN spectrum. Therefore, the choice of stellar population model does
not have a large effect on the UV spectrum of our AGN. We now use these
corrected spectra for measuring \ifmmode \dot{M} \else $\dot{M}$\fi\ and for the remainder of the analysis in
this paper.
\subsection{Bayesian SED-Fitting Procedure}
\label{sec:bayes}
\begin{table}
\caption{Parameter values for the grid of AD models.}
\begin{tabular}{ccl}
\hline
Parameter & $\Delta$ & Min-Max values \\
\hline
$\log M_{BH}$ [\ifmmode M_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi] & 0.075 & $7.40:10.25$ \\
$\log \dot{M}$ [\ifmmode M_{\odot}\, {\rm yr}^{-1} \else $M_{\odot}\, {\rm yr}^{-1}$] & 0.075 & $-1.50:+2.10$ \\
$a_*$ & 0.1 & $-1.0:+0.998$ \\
cos$\theta$(1+2cos$\theta$)/3 & 0.067 & $1.000:0.330$ \\
$A_V$ (mag) & 0.05 & $0.00:0.50$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:bay}
\end{table}
We again generate a grid of thin AD models using the \citet{Slone12} code, and
we use a Bayesian method to fit the models to the observed spectra, in order to
take into account the errors in \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and \ifmmode \dot{M} \else $\dot{M}$\fi\ and the unknown disc
inclination. We use the same method described in \citetalias{Capellupo15},
except that the grid now extends to lower \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\
and we now have a finer spacing in \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and \ifmmode \dot{M} \else $\dot{M}$\fi\ values
(0.075 dex, instead of 0.15 dex; see Table \ref{tab:bay}). The expanded grid
now includes 441,441 models.
In \citetalias{Capellupo15}, we explored applying an intrinsic reddening
correction to those AGN spectra that were not initially well fit by the thin AD
model. However, it is
possible that some of the AGN whose spectra are well fit are also affected by
some amount of intrinsic reddening. We therefore add intrinsic reddening as
another parameter in the Bayesian analysis. We adopt a range in $A_V$ from
0. to 0.50 mag, in intervals of 0.05. To minimize the number of parameters, we
adopt only a simple power-law curve, where $A(\lambda)=A_{o}\lambda^{-1}$ mag,
to deredden the X-shooter spectra. To deredden the GALEX photometry, we use the
MRN dust extinction model \citep{Mathis77}.
To summarize our Bayesian approach, we determine the posterior probability for
each of the 441,441 models for each value of $A_V$ for each source. This
probability is the product of the likelihood, $\mathcal{L}(m)$, and the priors
on \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and \ifmmode \dot{M} \else $\dot{M}$\fi. We have no prior knowledge on $a_*$,
cos $\theta$\footnote{We only consider cos $\theta$ $>$ 0.5, appropriate for
type-I AGN.},
or the amount of intrinsic reddening.
The likelihood is based on the standard $\chi^2$ statistic, measured using up
to seven line-free continuum windows, centred at 1353, 1464, 2200, 4205, 5100,
6205, and 8600 \AA. The widths of these bands range from 10 to 50 \AA. For five
objects at the upper end of the narrow redshift range of our sample, the bands
centred on 4205 and 5100 \AA\ fall within regions of strong atmospheric
absorption and are thus unusable. When calculating $\chi^2$, we combine the
standard error from Poisson noise and an assumed 5 per cent error on the flux
calibration.
We use Gaussian distributions, centred on the observed values ($M^{obs}_{BH}$,
$\dot{M}^{obs}$) and with standard deviations ($\sigma_M$, $\sigma_{\dot{M}}$)
given by their uncertainties, to represent the priors on $M_{BH}$ and
$\dot{M}$. We again adopt 0.3 and 0.2 dex for $\sigma_M$ and
$\sigma_{\dot{M}}$, respectively. The resulting posterior probability is given
by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\textrm{posterior} \propto \exp(-\chi^2/2) \times \exp(-(M^{obs}_{BH}\!-M^{mod}_{BH})^{2}/2\sigma_{M}^{2}) \\
\times \exp(-(\dot{M}^{obs}\! \times\! \frac{M^{obs}_{BH}}{M^{mod}_{BH}}-\dot{M}^{mod})^{2}/2\sigma_{\dot{M}}^{2}).
\label{eq:bay}
\end{eqnarray*}
Appendix A in \citetalias{Capellupo15} gives the full derivation of the posterior probability.
The Bayesian procedure ranks the 441,441 models based on the posterior
probability for each one. We consider an AGN to have a satisfactory thin AD fit
when the model with the highest probability has a reduced $\chi^2$ statistic
less than 3.
\subsection{Fitting X-shooter Spectra}
\label{sec:xsh_only}
We first fit thin AD models to just the X-shooter spectra for all the sources.
From \citetalias{Capellupo15}, 22 out of 30 AGN have a satisfactory fit, before
making any additional corrections to the spectra (i.e. correcting for intrinsic
reddening or considering disc winds). After correcting for intrinsic reddening,
but using only a single value of $A_V$ per source, we found satisfactory fits to
another 3 out of 30 sources, bringing the total to 25 out of 30 AGN.
Using a larger model grid and considering multiple values of $A_V$, we find
that 37 out of the entire sample of 39 AGN have satisfactory fits. Three of the
AGN with marginal fits in \citetalias{Capellupo15} can now be fit satisfactorily, and all of the
9 AGN we add to the sample in the current work have satisfactory fits. Only one
of the 9 new sources (J1021-0027) requires an intrinsic reddening correction
for a satisfactory fit (in total, six of the 39 sources require such a
correction for a satisfactory fit).
The best-fit models for the 9 new sources are overplotted in
Fig.~\ref{fig:sp1}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=175mm]{fig03_a_Mbh_grid_xshonly.pdf}
\caption{Contour plots of spin parameter $a_*$ versus $M_{BH}$ for the 37
sources with satisfactory fits to just the X-shooter spectrum.
The objects labeled with red typeface are those sources which require an
intrinsic reddening correction to obtain a satisfactory fit.
The darkest blue contours correspond to a probability of less than 10
per cent.}
\label{fig:a_mbh_xsh}
\end{figure*}
In Fig. \ref{fig:a_mbh_xsh}, we show the probability contours for two of the
five parameters, $a_*$ versus
\ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi, for the 37 AGN with satisfactory fits to the X-shooter spectrum. The six
sources that can only be fit after dereddening the spectra are highlighted in
red. Table \ref{tab:master_table} lists the median values of the deduced
parameters based on the probabilities.
\subsection{Fitting X-shooter+GALEX SEDs}
\label{sec:xsh_galex}
While X-shooter provides excellent wavelength coverage, we are missing a
significant portion of the AGN SED that is dominated by emission from the
accretion disc. In particular, we are missing wavelengths blueward of
$\sim$1200 \AA, where, in most cases, a turnover in the thin AD spectrum
occurs. Some constraint on the AGN SED at these short wavelengths is necessary
to fully test the thin AD theory and constrain the various input parameters via
the Bayesian method we adopt.
One solution that is already readily available is the GALEX survey. As
described in Section \ref{sec:galex}, the latest data release of GALEX contains
photometric data for all but one of our sources at $\sim$900\AA, and for 20 out
of 39 at $\sim$600\AA. However, there are two main caveats to the usage of
GALEX photometry. The first is that the GALEX bands are very broad, and we
cannot properly take into account any emission lines or potential intervening
Ly$\alpha$ absorption that could affect the flux at these wavelengths. The
second caveat is variability between the GALEX and X-shooter epochs, especially
given that variability is known to be more significant at these short
wavelengths \citep{MacLeod12,Zuo12}.
With these caveats in mind, we apply our Bayesian method to a combined
X-shooter+GALEX SED. The procedure is the same as in
Section~\ref{sec:xsh_only}, but we now have up to 9 continuum regions, instead
of 7. Because we have multiple epochs of GALEX photometry for most sources, we
use the weighted average of all the epochs for each source. For the error on
each GALEX measurement, we combine the standard measurement errors with an
extra error of 20\% to take into account the unknown variability between the
X-shooter and GALEX epochs and an additional 5\% error based on the unknown
slope of the SED through the GALEX filters. The error estimate for the unknown
variability is based on the typical variability
amplitudes found by \citet{MacLeod12} and \citet{Zuo12} and the variability
between individual GALEX epochs in our own sample.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=165mm]{fig04a_J1152+0702.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=165mm]{fig04b_J0143-0056.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=165mm]{fig04c_J1013+0245.pdf}
\caption{Examples of satisfactory fits to the combined X-shooter+GALEX SED.
The blue curve is the best-fit to just the X-shooter spectrum, and the red
curve is the best-fit to X-shooter+GALEX. The colored points are the
individual GALEX epochs, and the black points are the weighted average of
the different epochs.}
\label{fig:gal_sp1}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=165mm]{fig05a_J0155-1023.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=165mm]{fig05b_J0213-0036.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=165mm]{fig05c_J1050+0207.pdf}
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:gal_sp1}, but for cases where no satisfactory
fit was found to the X-shooter+GALEX SED. For J0213$-$0036, we show just
the fits to the X-shooter+GALEX SED, for before and after applying an
intrinsic reddening correction. The grey curve and points are the
dereddened SED.}
\label{fig:gal_sp2}
\end{figure*}
In Figs \ref{fig:gal_sp1} and \ref{fig:gal_sp2}, we show several
representative examples of the X-shooter+GALEX SED, with the best-fit model
shown in red and the best-fit model to the X-shooter spectrum alone shown in
blue. The colored points are the individual GALEX epochs, and the black points
are the weighted average of all the epochs. Fig. \ref{fig:gal_sp1} shows three
examples of satisfactory fits, and Fig. \ref{fig:gal_sp2} shows three examples
of cases with a marginal fit or with clearly no fit at all.
We are able to find satisfactory fits to 26/38 of the combined X-shooter+GALEX
SEDs.
Just as in Section~\ref{sec:xsh_only}, we consider intrinsic reddening when
fitting the X-shooter+GALEX SEDs. However, we find that correcting for
intrinsic reddening does not solve the discrepancy we find between the models
and the GALEX photometry for the objects that have satisfactory fits to
X-shooter alone. There are just two sources whose X-shooter+GALEX SEDs are fit
only with $A_V$ > 0, but these are two of the sources that already required
dereddening for a satisfactory fit to the X-shooter spectrum alone.
The examples in Fig. \ref{fig:gal_sp1}, in particular J0143$-$0056 and
J1013+0245, show how variability between the X-shooter and GALEX epochs can
cause the
difference between a good and a bad fit. For example, the magenta GALEX point
for J0143$-$0056 and the green points for J1013+0245 would not be fit with the
thin AD model. If we only had those epochs available, then these two objects
would not be considered to have satisfactory fits. If we had contemporaneous
UV data for J1050+0207 (Fig. \ref{fig:gal_sp2}), for example, it is possible
that we would find a satisfactory fit to the entire SED. Therefore, we can see
from many of the objects with multi-epoch GALEX data that the unknown
variability between the X-shooter and GALEX epochs is a real uncertainty, and
the fraction with satisfactory fits (26/38) is likely a lower limit.
It is also instructive to examine in how many cases our `best-fit' models
overestimate and underestimate the GALEX luminosities. If the discrepancies
between the model and the GALEX measurements are due primarily to variability,
then one would expect to find roughly the same number of cases where the model
overestimates these measurements versus the number where the model
underestimates these measurements. Considering the best-fit model to just the
X-shooter spectrum, roughly the same number overestimate the GALEX photometry
versus underestimate (11 versus 9 sources). Similarly, when fitting the
X-shooter+GALEX SED, half of the best-fit models overestimate the GALEX
luminosities and half underestimate. For this comparison, we are
considering just the weighted average of the GALEX measurements. These results
show that the thin AD model does not systematically overestimate or
underestimate the GALEX data.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=175mm]{fig06_a_Mbh_grid_xshgal.pdf}
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:a_mbh_xsh}, but for fits to the combined
X-shooter+GALEX SEDs.}
\label{fig:a_mbh_gal}
\end{figure*}
As in Section \ref{sec:xsh_only}, we plot the $a_*$ versus \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ probability
contours for fitting the thin AD models now to the X-shooter+GALEX SED. The
constraints on the spin are less confined for many sources when including the
GALEX photometry in the fitting, especially for the AGN with higher \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi, e.g.
J1152+0702. For some of these high mass cases, the contours are shifted to
lower spin parameters than when fitting the X-shooter spectrum alone.
\input{master_table}
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:discuss}
\subsection{AGN Accretion Discs}
In this work, we fit standard thin AD models (Section \ref{sec:thinad}) to
X-shooter spectra of 39 AGN at $z$$\sim$1.5 and also to the combined
X-shooter+GALEX SED of 38 of these sources.
When considering just the X-shooter spectrum, we can fit 37 out of 39 AGN
spectra in our sample when allowing for a small intrinsic reddening correction.
\citet{Collinson15} also find agreement between the thin AD model and the
optical/IR spectra for many of their 11 sources.
When including GALEX photometry in our fitting procedure, the number of AGN
that we can fit satisfactorily is reduced to 26 out of 38 AGN.
Accurately fitting SEDs to X-shooter and GALEX data is hampered by
potential variability between the X-shooter and GALEX epochs.
For the sample overall, in roughly half the cases where we do not find a model
fit that is consistent with both the X-shooter spectrum and the GALEX
photometry, the model fit overestimates the GALEX measurements
(See Section \ref{sec:xsh_galex}). Therefore, there is an even
split between overestimating and underestimating the GALEX measurements, indicating
that variability is a likely cause for the discrepancy between model and observations
for the 11 sources that no longer have a satisfactory thin AD model fit.
However, if we consider just the AGN with \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ $>10^{9}$ \ifmmode M_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi, and ignore the
two AGN with broad absorption, the tendency is for the model to overestimate
the GALEX photometry for those cases with no satisfactory fit.
This at least suggests that the discrepancy between the thin AD model and the
GALEX photometry might not be due solely to variability between the GALEX and
X-shooter epochs, at least for the brighter half of the sample, but rather that
there is some physical explanation for the discrepancy.
While we found both in \citetalias{Capellupo15} and in the current work that an
intrinsic reddening correction can cure discrepancies between the model and the
X-shooter spectrum in the bluer part of the X-shooter spectrum, we do not find
that intrinsic reddening helps to cure the discrepancies between the model and
the GALEX photometry mentioned above when our models overestimate the GALEX
luminosities.
One possibility for the discrepancy at short wavelengths is outflowing gas from
the accretion disc. Both \citet{Slone12} and \citet{Laor14} show how including
a mass outflow from a thin AD reduces the radiation at shorter wavelengths,
and this could explain the discrepancy between the data and the model for
those cases where the model overestimates the GALEX photometry.
Another further possibility is that some of these systems do not harbour a
thin AD, but rather a `slim' accretion disc. Such discs are expected at larger
\ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ (\ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ $>\sim0.2$; \citealt{Abramowicz88,Ohsuga11,Netzer13,Wang14}).
However, current models of `slim' discs are not yet able to produce predicted
SEDs that are accurate enough for a comparison to observed SEDs as we perform
in this work \citep[see e.g.][]{Sadowski15}. It will be informative to compare
such model SEDs, when they are available, to datasets like the one presented
here to test what fraction of AGN are consistent with having a `slim' AD.
\subsection{Reddening in AGN Host Galaxies}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{fig07_Av_histogram.pdf}
\caption{The distribution in the median $A_V$ values from the Bayesian fitting
procedure. The blue curve is based on fits to the X-shooter spectra alone,
and the green curve is based on fits to the combined X-shooter+GALEX SED.}
\label{fig:Av_hist}
\end{figure}
In \citetalias{Capellupo15}, we compared three different extinction curves $-$
simple power-law, Galactic, and SMC $-$ and found that the simple power-law and
Galactic curves gave the best fits to the observed SEDs. In this paper, to
reduce the number of free parameters in our Bayesian fitting procedure, we only
consider the simple power-law model, but we can compare our results to the
typical amount of reddening found in AGN in other work.
In Figure \ref{fig:Av_hist}, we plot the distribution in $A_V$ values from our
Bayesian fitting routine for all the AGN with satisfactory thin AD fits. Most
of the AGN have $A_V$ values $\le 0.15$ mag. For comparison, \citet{Krawczyk15}
find that just 2.5\% of non-BAL quasars, out of a large sample of SDSS quasars,
have $A_V > 0.3$ mag. In our smaller sample, the results of our Bayesian
fitting routine gives 2 out of 37 non-BAL AGN (5\%) with $A_V > 0.3$ mag. This
is generally consistent with the results of \citet{Krawczyk15} and indicates
that, in general, we are not overcorrecting the spectra when including
intrinsic reddening as a parameter in the fitting routine.
While our sample was selected to avoid AGN with significant absorption, there
are two sources in the sample with BAL absorption (J1005+0245 and
J1021$-$0027). We could not find satisfactory fits for either of these two
sources before intrinsic reddening correction, even when fitting the X-shooter
spectrum alone. After correcting for intrinsic reddening, we find a
satisfactory fit for one and a marginal fit for the other. This is consistent
with previous work that has shown that BAL quasars tend to have redder spectra
than non-BAL quasars. For example, \citet{Krawczyk15} find that 13\% of BAL
quasars have $A_V > 0.3$ mag, compared to just 2.5\% of non-BAL quasars, as
mentioned above. One of the BAL AGN in our sample, J1021$-$0027, has
$A_V = 0.39^{+0.09}_{-0.15}$ mag. The other, J1005+0245, does not have a
satisfactory thin AD fit, but the closest fit we find is with an
$A_V$ = 0.50 mag.
\subsection{Disc-Derived \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ and Bolometric Correction Factors}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{fig08_Mbh_compare.pdf}
\caption{A comparison between the observed \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi, measured in Paper II directly
from the spectra, and the median value of \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ from the Bayesian fitting
procedure for just the X-shooter spectra (blue points) and for the combined
X-shooter+GALEX SED (green points). For reference, the dashed line is the
one-to-one line, and the dotted lines are $\pm$0.3 dex. The typical error on
log($M_{BH}^{obs}$) is 0.3 dex.}
\label{fig:mbh_comp}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{fig09_mdot_compare.pdf}
\caption{Same as Fig. \ref{fig:mbh_comp}, but instead showing a comparison
between \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi[BC], calculated directly from the observed spectra using a
bolometric correction (BC) factor (Paper II), and the median \ifmmode \dot{m} \else $\dot{m}$\fi\ value
from the Bayesian fitting routine. The typical errors on \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ are at
least as high as those on $M_{BH}^{obs}$.}
\label{fig:mdot_comp}
\end{figure}
Given the fitted thin AD SEDs, we can now compare the values of \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and
\ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ derived from the thin AD fits to our best estimates of \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and
\ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ derived directly from the observed spectrum (Paper II).
In particular, Fig.~\ref{fig:mbh_comp} shows that we are able to find
satisfactory fits for most of the AGN in our sample with thin AD models that
have BH masses within $\sim$1$\sigma$ of the observed values of \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi.
Interestingly, we also find good agreement between \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi[BC], which is
measured directly from the observed spectrum using a bolometric correction (BC)
factor, and the median value of \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ (\ifmmode \dot{m} \else $\dot{m}$\fi) from our thin AD fitting
procedure, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mdot_comp}. Comparing
Figs~\ref{fig:mbh_comp} and \ref{fig:mdot_comp} to the corresponding figures in
Paper I, it is clear that we find better agreement here between the results of
the Bayesian analysis and the observationally-derived quantities, especially
between \ifmmode \dot{m} \else $\dot{m}$\fi\ and \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi[BC]. This is largely due to the improvements in the
measurements of \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi, as described in Paper II. In Paper I, we see a systematic
offset between \ifmmode \dot{m} \else $\dot{m}$\fi\ and \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi. The \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ estimates used here are systematically larger than in Paper I, thus
reducing the values of \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi[BC] and bringing them more in line with our
estimates of \ifmmode \dot{m} \else $\dot{m}$\fi\ from the thin AD fitting.
The inputs to the Bayesian fitting procedure are \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ and \ifmmode \dot{M} \else $\dot{M}$\fi, as measured
from the spectra, neither of which require a bolometric correction to calculate.
On the other hand, calculating \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ directly from the spectra requires a
bolometric correction, and the good agreement between \ifmmode \dot{m} \else $\dot{m}$\fi\ and \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ found
here in Fig.~\ref{fig:mdot_comp} indicates that the bolometric correction
factors used in Paper II to calculate \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi\ give reasonable results.
\subsection{Black Hole Spin}
\label{sec:spin}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=140mm]{fig10a_a_Mbh_combine_xshonly.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=140mm]{fig10b_a_Mbh_combine_xshgal.pdf}
\caption{
The spin parameter, $a_*$, as a function of $M_{BH}$. Top panel is based on
fits to X-shooter only (37 sources), and the bottom panel is based on fits
to X-shooter+GALEX (26 sources).
The left panel is a contour plot of the combined probability distributions
in $a_*$ and $M_{BH}$ for the sources with satisfactory fits. The middle
panel shows the median $a_*$ and $M_{BH}$ values, with the red points
identifying those sources for which dereddening was required for a
satisfactory thin AD fit. The right panel shows the distribution in the
best-fit spin parameters.}
\label{fig:mbh_a}
\end{figure*}
The goal of the spectral fitting is not just to test the thin AD theory, but in
cases where the observed data is consistent with the theory, to attempt to
constrain $a_*$, as demonstrated already in \citetalias{Capellupo15}. With our
results, we see that we can obtain much tighter constraints for active BHs
above $M_{BH}$ $\sim$ 10$^{9}$ \ifmmode M_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi, as compared to those below this mass.
This tendency is expected since precise determination of the spin parameter
depends, crucially, on the wavelength range exhibiting the largest SED
curvature. This range is at longer wavelengths for more massive BHs and BHs
with lower \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi. For the most massive objects in our sample, this range is
well inside the X-shooter wavelength coverage, and hence we can better
constrain $a_*$. For lower mass, higher accretion rate BHs, much of the
curvature is at far-UV wavelengths, and the X-shooter range can thus be fitted
by a range of models with a wide range in $a_*$. Fig. \ref{fig:mbh_a} combines
the results presented in Figs \ref{fig:a_mbh_xsh} and \ref{fig:a_mbh_gal} and
Table \ref{tab:master_table}, and it is clear that the most massive BHs have
both the highest spin parameters and the tightest constraints on the spin
parameter.
If we focus on the 17 sources with \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ $>$ 10$^{9}$ \ifmmode M_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi\ and $a_* > 0.7$
(efficiency $\sim$ 0.1), when fitting just the X-shooter spectrum, 10 of those
have a satisfactory fit with GALEX. Of these 10, the estimate of $a_*$ decreases
to below 0.7 for 5 of them after fitting the X-shooter+GALEX SED, and the
errors on $a_*$ are larger. This reduction in spin parameter is due to the
GALEX photometry forcing the fits to lower luminosities at far-UV wavelengths.
We also see that while GALEX provides some crucial information on the SED shape
blueward of $\sim$1200\AA\ for our sample, it does not, in general, reduce the
uncertainties
on the parameters involved in fitting the thin AD model. As mentioned already,
our spin parameter estimates for the highest mass BHs are now more uncertain,
and the uncertainty on the spin for the BHs with \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ $<$ 10$^{9}$ \ifmmode M_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi\ is
similar after including GALEX. This is likely due mostly to the large
uncertainties on the GALEX points. If the `turnover' in the thin AD spectrum
occurs shortward of 1200\AA, then spectra are needed in this
wavelength regime to properly trace the SED and fit the thin AD models.
Follow-up spectroscopy with HST is thus necessary to confidently test the thin
AD model and obtain more precise constraints on the BH spin.
Despite the uncertainties mentioned above, the results still give some insight
into the evolution of SMBH spin in AGN. The two commonly discussed scenarios in
the literature to characterize this evolution are referred to as `spin-up' and
`spin-down'. The difference between these two scenarios is primarily in the
nature of the accretion episodes that fuel the BH. On the one hand, a series of
accretion episodes with random and isotropic orientations will cause the SMBH
to `spin-down' to moderate spins near $a_* \sim 0$, regardless of the final
mass of the SMBH \citep{King08,WangJM09,LiYR12,Dotti13}.
On the other hand, growing a SMBH via a single prolonged accretion episode, or
for the most massive BHs, when the orientations of the accretion episodes have
even a small amount of anisotropy, the SMBH will `spin-up' to a high spin
parameter \citep{Dotti13,Volonteri13}.
In \citetalias{Capellupo15}, we found that our results favour the `spin-up'
scenario, and our current results favour this scenario for similar reasons. We
again find a wide range in spin parameters for the sample,
as shown in the rightmost panels of Fig. \ref{fig:mbh_a}, with the exception
that there are almost no sources with $a_* < -0.5$. Furthermore, even with the
GALEX points included in the analysis, there are many sources with high spin
($a_* > \sim0.5$). If the `spin-down' scenario were dominating, i.e. if there
were multiple, randomly-oriented accretion events throughout the lifetime of
these SMBHs, we would expect a concentration of values around $a_* \sim 0$.
Instead, our results favour scenarios where there is just one long accretion
episode or multiple events with some preferred orientation.
In fact, compared to \citetalias{Capellupo15}, we see a clear shift in the
distribution of $a_*$ towards higher spin. This is due both to the higher black
hole mass estimates (see Section \ref{sec:thinad} and Paper II) and to the
inclusion of an intrinsic reddening correction in the Bayesian fitting
procedure. While for most objects the typical amount of intrinsic reddening is
small ($A_V < 0.15$ mag), any correction of the spectrum for reddening will
increase the luminosity at shorter wavelengths much more than at the longest
wavelengths in the SED. This will favor higher spin parameters, if all other
parameters remain roughly the same.
Previous efforts to constrain BH spin have also generally concluded that
many BHs have high spin, especially the most massive (\ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ $> 10^9$ \ifmmode M_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi) BHs
(\citealt{Davis11,Reis14,Reynolds14,Reynolds14a,Trakhtenbrot14}; Wang et al. 2014a).
All of this supports the `spin-up' scenario of BH spin evolution.
\section{Conclusions}
This work is the third in a series of papers describing the spectroscopic
properties of a sample of AGN at $z \sim 1.5$, selected to cover a wide range
in both \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ ($\sim$ 10$^{8}$ to 10$^{10}$ \ifmmode M_{\odot} \else $M_{\odot}$\fi) and \ifmmode L/L_{\rm Edd} \else $L/L_{\rm Edd}$\fi[BC]
($\sim$0.01 to 0.4) and observed with the X-shooter instrument, which provides
very wide, single-epoch coverage. We apply a similar, but improved,
Bayesian procedure as in Paper I to fit thin AD models to observed AGN SEDs,
this time with
a larger sample (39 AGN),
improved \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ estimates from Paper II,
and the inclusion of intrinsic reddening as a parameter in our Bayesian SED
fitting procedure.
When fitting the thin AD model to the X-shooter spectra alone, we find that we
are able to fit more of the AGN in our sample than in Paper I, with 37 out of
39 AGN (95\%) having a satisfactory fit (Section \ref{sec:xsh_only}).
For those AGN with satisfactory fits, we constrain the spin parameter,
$a_*$, with the constraints becoming less well-defined with decreasing \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi.
The distribution in $a_*$ for these sources ranges from negative spin to nearly
maximum spin. This distribution tends to
favor the `spin-up' scenario of BH spin evolution, suggesting that these AGN
are generally fueled by relatively long episodes of coherent accretion
with some preferred orientation (Section \ref{sec:spin}).
We also investigate the inclusion of non-simultaneous GALEX photometry in
our analysis.
This decreases the number with satisfactory fits to 26 out of 38 (68\%) sources
(Section \ref{sec:xsh_galex});
however, given the large variability that can occur for AGN
at these UV wavelengths, it is unclear how much variability is affecting our
fitting results for these combined X-shooter+GALEX SEDs.
The inclusion of GALEX photometry also tends to decrease the estimates of
$a_*$, especially for the AGN with larger \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi, but taken at face value, these
estimates of $a_*$ still support the `spin-up' scenario of BH spin evolution.
While our results support the thin AD theory for a majority of the AGN in our
sample, simultaneous UV and optical spectra are required to properly test the
thin AD theory in the far-UV, where, for many sources, the peak of the thin AD
spectrum occurs. Such simultaneous spectra will also provide the best
constraints on $a_*$, particularly for the lower \ifmmode M_{\rm BH} \else $M_{\rm BH}$\fi\ sources.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank the anonymous referee for helpful comments on the manuscript.
We thank the DFG for support via German Israeli Cooperation grant
STE1869/1-1.GE625/15-1. Funding for this work has also been provided by the
Israel Science Foundation grant number 284/13.
HN acknowledges useful discussions and local support from the International
Space Science Institute (ISSI), in Bern, during a work-group meeting in 2015.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{Introduction}
Thermoelectric materials with high Seebeck coefficient $S$ (thermopower) have been attracting significant attention because of potential applications, particularly in waste heat recovery.\cite{TE1,TE2,TE3,TE4} High figure of merit (ZT=$\sigma S^2T/\kappa$, where $\sigma$ and $\kappa$ are the electrical and thermal conductivity, respectively) usually requires high thermopower. This raises considerable interest in exploratory synthesis of strongly correlated electron materials. Thermopower represents an electrical current entropy flow and therefore the charge/spin/orbital degrees of freedom might be manipulated for its enhancement, particularly around metal-insulator transitions.\cite{SCE1,SCE2,SCE3,SCE4} For example, giant thermopower and a record high thermoelectric power factor up to $S^2/\rho\sim 2300~\mu WK^{-2}cm^{-1}$ was observed in FeSb$_2$ with narrow energy gaps and correlated bands.\cite{fesb,fesb1,fesb2,fesb3}
Since the discovery of high temperature superconductivity in layered iron pnictide and iron chalcogenide compounds, the large diversity of the layered transitional metal pnictide compounds have been explored.\cite{iron1,iron2} In particular, doped $AM_2Pn_2$ ($A$=Ca, Sr, Ba or Eu, $M$=Fe, Mn, Rh or Co, and $Pn$ is pnictide or chalcogenide element) with ThCr$_2$Si$_2$ (122-type) structure have been thoroughly investigated. Besides Fe-based high temperature superconductivity, high thermopower with metallic conduction was observed.\cite{Fe1,Fe2,Fe3} Mn-based $AM_2Pn_2$ materials usually exhibit magnetic ground states with strong correlations.\cite{BaMn2As2-1,BaMn2As2-2,LaMnAsO} BaMn$_2$As$_2$ and BaMn$_2$Sb$_2$ are antiferromagnetic semiconductors due to the strong Hund's coupling and the stability of the half-filled $d$-shell of the Mn$^{+2}$ ions.\cite{BaMn2As2-1,BaMn2As2-2,BaMn2Sb2-1,BaMn2Sb2-2} Both were predicted to exhibit large Seebeck coefficient.\cite{BaMn2As2-2,BaMn2Sb2-1} Therefore, it is of interest to explore thermoelectric properties of isostructural and semiconducting BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$.\cite{BaMn2Bi2}
Here we report electrical and thermal transport properties of Mn-based material BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ with ThCr$_2$Si$_2$ structure. The resistivity of the antiferromagnetic BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ shows a metal-semiconductor transition at $\sim 80$ K with decreasing temperature. Correspondingly, the thermopower $S$ shows a peak at the same temperature and the value approaches 150 $\mu$V/K. With increasing temperature $S$ decreases, but is still about 120 $\mu$V/K at the room temperature. The magnetic field enhances the peak value to 210 $\mu$V/K. The Hall resistivity reveals an abrupt change of the carrier density close to the metal-semiconductor transition temperature.
Single crystals of BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ were grown using a high-temperature self-flux method.\cite{Fisk,Canfield} X-ray diffraction (XRD) data were taken with Cu K$_{\alpha}$ ($\lambda=0.15418$ nm) radiation of Rigaku Miniflex powder diffractometer. Electrical transport measurements up to 9 T were conducted in Quantum Design PPMS-9 with conventional four-wire method. In the in-plane measurements, the current path was in the \textit{ab}-plane, whereas magnetic field was parallel to the \textit{c}-axis. Thermal transport properties were measured in Quantum Design PPMS-9 from 2 K to 350 K using one-heater-two-thermometer method. The direction of heat and electric current transport was along the $ab$-plane of single grain crystals with magnetic field along the \textit{c}-axis and perpendicular to the heat/electrical current. The relative error in our measurement was $\frac{\Delta \kappa}{\kappa}\sim$5$\%$ and $\frac{\Delta S}{S}\sim$5$\%$ based on Ni standard measured under identical conditions.
Fig. 1(a) shows the powder XRD pattern of flux grown BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ crystals, which were fitted by RIETICA software.\cite{rietica} All reflections can be indexed in the I4/mmm space group, and the crystal structure features polyanionic [Mn$_2$Bi$_2$]$^{2-}$ layers separated by Ba ions (Fig. 1(b)). The crystals are plate-like and the base-plane is $ab$-plane (inset in Fig. 1(a)). The temperature dependence of the magnetization is shown in Fig. 1(c). The high anisotropy and decreasing magnetization with temperature suggest collinear antiferromagnetic order below room temperature, in agreement with previous result.\cite{BaMn2Bi2}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Fig_1.eps}
\caption{(a) Powder XRD patterns and structural refinement results. The data were shown by ($+$) , and the fit is given by the red solid line. The difference curve (the green solid line) is offset. The inset is the XRD pattern of single crystal showing the base $ab$-plane. (b) The crystal structure of BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$. Ba ions are denoted by the largest balls, while Bi and Mn atoms are denoted as the medium and smallest balls respectively. (c) The magnetization of BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ crystal as function of temperature with 1 T magnetic field parallel to $ab$-plane and $c$-axis respectively.}
\end{figure}
Fig. 2 shows the temperature dependence of the electric resistivity in the $ab$-plane $\rho$, thermopower $S$ and thermal conductivity $\kappa$. The resistivity decreases with increasing temperature showing semiconducting behavior up to $\sim 70$ K. At higher temperatures $\rho(T)$ is metallic (Fig. 2(a)). The thermopower $S$ is 125 $\mu$ V/K at 350 K and remains nearly constant with decreasing temperature down to 150 K. The $S$ shows a peak at $\sim 75$ K and the peak value is 150 $\mu$V/K. Below that temperature $S$ decreases to zero gradually with decreasing temperature to 2 K (Fig. 2(b)). The thermal conductivity $\kappa$ shows a phonon peak at about 30 K and the maximum value is about $10$ W/K m (Fig. 2(c)). The 9 T magnetic field has small influence on the electric resistivity and thermal conductivity, but enhances the peak value of the thermopower to 210 $\mu$V/K. The thermopower of BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ is close to the value of typical thermoelectric materials such as PbTe and Bi$_2$Se$_3$, and the thermal conductivity is also small. However, the maximum value of ZT is $\sim0.005$ at 300 K due to high electric resistivity. It is reported that K-doping in Ba sites could induce the change of the ground state from semiconductor to metal with significant suppression of the resistivity.\cite{BaMn2Bi2} But the carrier doping could also decrease the Seebeck coefficient, such as the case in doped FeSb$_2$. This could compensate the suppression of the resistivity and make the enhancement of ZT smaller or even impossible. So the thermoelectric properties of K-doped BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ deserve further study.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\includegraphics[scale=0.4] {Fig_2.eps}
\caption{In-plane resistivity $\rho_{ab}(T)$ (a), Seebeck coefficient $S(T)$ (b) and thermal conductivity $\kappa(T)$(c) of BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ single crystal as a function of temperature in 0 T and 9 T magnetic field respectively.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\includegraphics[scale=0.4] {Fig_3.eps}
\caption{(Color online) (a) Hall resistivity $\rho_{xy}$ as a function of the magnetic field $B$ at different temperatures. (b) The temperature dependence of the carrier density $n$ deduced from Hall resistivity. The inset shows the linear fitting of the Hall resistivity at 40 K.}
\end{figure}
Fig. 3(a) shows the Hall resistivity $\rho_{xy}$ as a function of the magnetic field $B$ at different temperatures from 5 K to 200 K. In all temperature, the Hall resistivity is positive. This indicates the hole carriers in BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$, consistent with the positive Seebeck coefficient in Fig. 2(b). Besides, the Hall resistivity shows linear field dependence and indicates single-band conduction. In single band semiconductor, the Hall resistivity can be described by single-band Hall resistivity $\rho_{xy}=\frac{B}{n|e|}$ where $n$ is the carrier density and $e$ is the electron charge. The Hall resistivity of BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ can be fitted very well by this formula (the red line in the inset of Fig. 3(b)) and the temperature dependence of the carrier density $n$ derived from the linear fitting is shown in Fig. 3(b).
With increase in temperature, the slope of the Hall resistivity is nearly constant between 5 K and 15 K, and then increases indicating the decrease of the carrier density (Fig. 3(b)). At $\sim 40$ K, there is a large decrease in the slope of the Hall resistivity and carrier density. This position is close to the semiconductor-metal transition temperature and the peak position of Seebeck coefficient. After that, the carrier density shows a slow increase with increasing temperature.
Seebeck coefficient in a semiconductor is the sum of three different contributions: the diffusion term $S_{diff}$, the spin-dependent scattering term and the phonon-drag term $S_{drag}$ due to electron-phonon coupling. The diffusion term of a single-band metal always shows linear temperature dependence and the non-monotonic behavior can only come from spin scattering or phonon-drag.\cite{TEP1,TEP2} In BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$, the magnetic transition temperature (above 400 K) is much higher than the peak position of the Seebeck coefficient and the Seebeck coefficient does not show significant magnetic field dependence expect around the metal-semiconductor transition. This indicates the spin-dependent scattering should not dominate the Seebeck coefficient in BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$. The contribution of phonon-drag term gives $\sim T^3$ dependence for $T<<\Theta_D$, $\sim 1/T$ for $T\geq\Theta_D$ (where $\Theta_D$ is the Debye Temperature), and a peak structure for $\sim\frac{\Theta_D}{5}$.\cite{TEP2,TEP2} The Debye temperature of BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ is $\sim 150$ K.\cite{BaMn2Bi2} The peak structure from phonon-drag should be at $\sim 30$ K which is rather different from the observed peak position ($\sim 75$ K) in Fig. 2(b). Hence, the peak of Seebeck coefficient in BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ should not come from the spin-dependent scattering term and the phonon-drag term. Instead, its origin is in the sharp change in the carrier density and the metal-semiconductor transition which is related the strongly correlated effect.
In summary, we report the electronic and thermal transport properties of Mn-based material BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ with ThCr$_2$Si$_2$ structure. Thermopower of the antiferromagnetic BaMn$_2$Bi$_2$ shows a peak at the temperature of the metal-semiconductor transition ($\sim 80$ K) of 150 $\mu$V/K. With increasing temperature $S$ decreases slightly and the value is have 120 $\mu$V/K at room temperature. The magnetic field enhances the peak value to 210 $\mu$V/K. The Hall resistivity reveals an abrupt change of the carrier density close to the metal-semiconductor transition temperature.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We than John Warren for help with SEM measurements. Work at Brookhaven is supported by the U.S. DOE under contract No. DE-AC02-98CH10886.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{\label{sec:intro}Introduction}
Classical random walks play an important role in randomized algorithms that have been developed to achieve superior performance when solving various hard problems in computer science \cite{opac-b1089638}.
It is thus quite natural that quantum walks (QWs) \cite{AMBAINIS:2003aa,doi:10.1080/00107151031000110776,Kendon:2007:DQW:1348911.1348916,Venegas-Andraca:2012:QWC:2386737.2386759},
which are the quantum mechanical counterparts of classical random walks, become a powerful tool for building quantum algorithms, providing versatile applications such as quantum search algorithms \cite{PhysRevA.67.052307,PhysRevA.70.022314} and universal quantum computation \cite{PhysRevLett.102.180501,PhysRevA.81.042330,Childs15022013}. Two theoretical QW models have already been proposed: the discrete-time QW \cite{Aharonov:2001:QWG:380752.380758,Ambainis:2001:OQW:380752.380757} and the continuous-time QW \cite{PhysRevA.58.915}. In discrete-time QWs, the dynamics of a {\it walker} is determined by flipping
the coin state via a unitary operator at each discrete step. On the other hand, in continuous-time QWs, a {\it walker} evolves continuously on the basis of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation without flipping any coin states. These two models have revealed the unique features of QWs. A {\it walker} generates a coherent superposition state as a result of multiple interferences and propagates ballistically showing a bimodal profile of the probability distribution, which is in sharp contrast to classical random walks.
Implementations of QWs have been reported in a series of experiments using magnetic resonance, trapped ions, trapped neutral atoms, and some photonic systems \cite{Manouchehri:2013:PIQ:2566741}.
In particular, in recent years, continuous-time QWs including two {\it walkers} (i.e., two indistiguishable particles) have been attracting considerable attention \cite{PhysRevLett.102.253904,Peruzzo1500,PhysRevA.86.011603,Preiss13032015}.
Experiments with an array of coupled nanophotonic waveguides showed that nontrivial correlations emerge in the QW dynamics of two identical photons as a consequence of
Hanbury-Brown-Twiss interference \cite{Peruzzo1500}.
In Ref.\,\cite{PhysRevA.86.011603}, Lahini {\it et al.} precisely analyzed how such correlations are modified in the presence of interactions between the {\it walkers}. Using the Bose-Hubbard (BH) model as a basis, they revealed that the dynamical evolution of two {\it walkers} changes greatly depending on both the interaction strengths and the initial state.
This study sheds light on another important role of QWs as a fundamental building block of quantum simulators for many-body dynamics \cite{Bloch:2012aa,RevModPhys.86.153}.
Quite recently, the continuous-time QWs of two interacting particles were demonstrated using bosonic ultracold atoms in a one-dimensional (1D) optical lattice \cite{Preiss13032015}.
In this experiment, the high controllability of interatomic interactions is a great advantage when we investigate the dependence of particle correlations on the interaction strengths.
Furthermore, the advanced technique provided by a quantum gas microscope \cite{Sherson:2010aa,Weitenberg:2011aa} allows us to access directly the dynamics of QWs by resolving each atom over lattice sites \cite{Preiss13032015,Fukuhara:2013ab}.
The measured data quantitatively agree with theoretical calculations based on the BH model.
These features convince us that ultracold atoms can offer a promising platform on which we develop quantum simulations via multiparticle QWs.
We further expect that ultracold atoms will advance the study of QWs to the unexplored region where {\it walkers} contain internal degrees of freedom.
The atom manipulation technique currently provides us with the multicomponent many-body system referred to as spinor Bose gases \cite{PhysRevLett.80.2027,PhysRevLett.81.742,PhysRevLett.87.010404,Kawaguchi2012253,RevModPhys.85.1191}.
It is known that this system exhibits diverse and complex quantum phases caused by the interplay between interactions and spin degrees of freedom \cite{PhysRevLett.88.163001,PhysRevA.68.063602,PhysRevB.69.094410,PhysRevA.70.043628,PhysRevA.70.063610,PhysRevLett.94.110403,PhysRevLett.95.240404,PhysRevA.74.035601,PhysRevA.76.023606,Toga:2012aa,PhysRevB.88.104509}.
In particular, the spin-1 bosonic atom system has been intensively studied as the simplest spinor Bose gas. The spin-dependent interaction of spin-1 atoms generates transitions among the
spin states that preserve the $z$-component of the total spin \cite{PhysRevLett.81.5257}.
This phenomenon is called spin-mixing dynamics and has been observed using a spin-1 Bose-Einstein condensate in a single optical trap \cite{Stenger:1998aa,Chang:2005aa,PhysRevA.72.063619} and also in an optical lattice \cite{PhysRevLett.95.190405,1367-2630-8-8-152,PhysRevA.73.041602,PhysRevLett.114.225302}.
Therefore, the QWs of spin-1 bosons present an intriguing problem, namely the clarification of the dynamical evolution of {\it walkers} that are interfering and interacting, and
mixing spins under a condition where the total energy and total spins are both conserved.
In this paper, we study a continuous-time QW including two spin-1 bosons trapped in a 1D optical lattice.
We focus mainly on spin-mixing dynamics, which is one of the most intriguing features of spin-1 systems.
Furthermore, spin correlations as well as spatial correlations~\cite{PhysRevA.86.011603} can be studied with this model. Exploring the evolution of spin correlations helps towards an understanding of the dynamics involving spins in spin-1 lattice systems.
This paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:model}, we introduce the spin-1 BH model and explain the spin-mixing dynamics in a single-site system. In Sec.~\ref{sec:exact}, we derive the exact solution of the two-particle dynamics governed by the spin-1 BH model. Using the results in Sec.~\ref{sec:exact}, we discuss the spin-mixing dynamics in quantum walks in Sec.~\ref{sec:mixing}. The dependence on the interaction strength is discussed in detail. In Sec.~\ref{sec:LRSC}, we explain how the spin-dependent interaction affects the evolution of spin correlations. Finally, we conclude this paper in Sec.~\ref{sec:conclusion}. In Appendix.~\ref{app:EH}, we derive the spin-mixing dynamics in an alternative way based on the effective Hamiltonian.
\section{\label{sec:model}Model}
We consider spin-1 bosons in a 1D optical lattice. These atoms are well described by the spin-1 BH Hamiltonian,
\begin{align}
\hat{H}=\hat{H}_J&+\hat{H}_{U_0}+\hat{H}_{U_2},\label{eq:hamiltonian}\\
\hat{H}_{J}&=-J\sum_{i,\alpha=0,\pm1}(\hat{b}_{i+1,\alpha}^{\dagger}\hat{b}_{i,\alpha}+\text{h.c.}),\label{eq:hopping}\\
\hat{H}_{U_0}&=\frac{U_0}{2}\sum_{i}\hat{n}_{i}(\hat{n}_i-1),\\
\hat{H}_{U_2}&=\frac{U_2}{2}\sum_{i}(\hat{\bf F}_i^2-2\hat{n}_i),
\end{align}
where $\hat{b}_{i,\alpha}^{\dagger} (\hat{b}_{i,\alpha})$ is the bosonic creation (annihilation) operator at the $i$-th site with the hyperfine spin state $\alpha~(=0,\pm1)$, $\hat{n}_i=\sum_{\alpha=0,\pm1}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,\alpha}\hat{b}_{i,\alpha}$ is the corresponding local number operator.
$\hat{\bf F}_i$ denotes the hyperfine spin operator at the $i$-th site defined
in terms of $3 \times 3$ spin-1 matrices $F^{x, y, z}$ such as $\hat F_{i}^x=\sum_{\alpha, \beta} \hat b_{i,\alpha}^{\dag}(F^x)_{\alpha,\beta} \hat b_{i,\beta}$, etc. $\hat{H}_J$, $\hat{H}_{U_0}$ and $\hat{H}_{U_2}$ represent the nearest neighbor hopping, spin-independent interactions and spin-dependent interactions, respectively. $\hat{H}_{U_2}$ induces a transition among states, which preserves the z-component of the total spin $\sum_{i}\hat{F}_i^z$.
The spin-dependence of the interactions arises from the difference between the scattering lengths for the total spins $F=0$ and $F=2$. To obtain an exact analysis, we restrict the discussion to
a two-particle system. Furthermore, we set $\hbar$ and the lattice constant at unity throughout this paper.
It is useful in relation to our later discussions on quantum walks that we briefly explain the dynamics of interacting two spin-1 bosons localized in a certain single site with only $\hat{H}_{U_0}$ and $\hat{H}_{U_2}$ (i.e., $J=0$).
In the absence of an external magnetic field, we can discuss the intriguing spin-mixing dynamics without loss of generality in a limited case where the quantum state of spin-1 bosons
is given by the superposition of two spin states with the same z-component of the total spin, i.e., $m_F=0$. Such states are $|F=0,m_F=0\rangle=((\hat{b}^{\dagger}_0)^2-2\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{1}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{-1})|0\rangle/\sqrt{6}$ and $|F=2,m_F=0\rangle=((\hat{b}^{\dagger}_0)^2+\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{1}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{-1})|0\rangle/\sqrt{3}$, and the corresponding eigenenergies are
$E_{F=0}=-2U_2$ and $E_{F=2}=U_2$, respectively \cite{PhysRevLett.84.1066,PhysRevLett.84.4031}. The time evolution of the quantum mechanical average of an operator $\hat{O}$
is evaluated via the state $|\psi(t)\rangle$ at time $t$:
\begin{align}
\langle\hat{O}\rangle_t&=\langle\psi(t)|\hat{O}|\psi(t)\rangle, \nonumber\\
&=\sum_{F,F'}e^{i(E_F-E_{F'})t}\sum_{m_F,m_F'}[\langle F,m_F|\hat{O}|F',m_F'\rangle\nonumber\\
&\hspace{5em}\times\langle\psi(0)|F,m_F\rangle\langle F',m_F'|\psi(0)\rangle].\label{eq:obs}
\end{align}
Let us consider a case where two atoms stay in the hyperfine spin state of $\alpha=0$ at the initial time $t=0$: $|\psi(0)\rangle = (\hat b_0^{\dag})^2/\sqrt{2}|0\rangle =\sqrt{1/3}|F=0,m_F=0\rangle+\sqrt{2/3}\,|F=2,m_F=0\rangle$. Using \Eqref{eq:obs}, we obtain the average number of atoms in the hyperfine spin state $\alpha=0,\pm1$ at time $t$:
\begin{align}
\langle\hat{N}_0\rangle_t&=\frac{10+8\cos(3U_2t)}{9}.\label{eq:SimpleSpinMixing0}\\
\langle\hat{N}_1\rangle_t&=\frac{4-4\cos(3U_2t)}{9}\nonumber\\
&=\langle\hat{N}_{-1}\rangle_t \label{eq:SimpleSpinMixing1}
\end{align}
Figure~\ref{fig:fig8} shows the time evolution of the spin-state populations calculated from Eqs.~\eqref{eq:SimpleSpinMixing0} and \eqref{eq:SimpleSpinMixing1}. The spin-mixing dynamics emerges owing
to the $\hat{H}_{U_2}$ term in the Hamiltonian. The oscillation frequency $3U_2~(=E_{F=2}-E_{F=0})$ corresponds to the energy difference between the two states that we consider here.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{spin_mixing_single_well.eps}
\caption{
\label{fig:fig8}(Color online) Spin-mixing dynamics in the single site system ($J=0$). The solid and dashed lines represent the populations as a function of time in the spin state $\alpha=0$ and the sum of the populations in the spin states $\alpha=\pm1$, respectively.
}
\end{figure}
In the following sections, we show how such regular spin-mixing dynamics is modified by the inter-site hopping processes ($J\neq 0$).
\section{\label{sec:exact}Exact solution}
In this section, we analyze the quantum dynamics of two spin-1 bosons based on the Hamiltonian in \Eqref{eq:hamiltonian}.
We derive the time-dependent wave function exactly by employing the method developed by A. Deuchert {\it et al.} in Ref.\,\cite{PhysRevA.86.013618}.
The hopping of spin-1 atoms does not change their internal spin states, i.e., the two states $|F=0, m_F=0\rangle$ and $|F=2, m_F=0\rangle$ are not connected to each other via the hopping process. This allows us to straightforwardly generalize the bases $|F,m_F\rangle$ in the single-site system to the bases in the lattice system:
\begin{align}
|\psi_{-2U_2}\rangle_{i,j}&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left[\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,0}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,0}-\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,1}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,-1}-\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,-1}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,1}\right]|0\rangle,\label{eq:basis1}\\
|\psi_{U_2}\rangle_{i,j}&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left[\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,0}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,0}+\frac{\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,1}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,-1}+\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,-1}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,1}}{2}\right]|0\rangle. \label{eq:basis2}
\end{align}
Here the orthonormality is satisfied such that $_{i,j}\langle\psi_{\lambda}|\psi_{\lambda'}\rangle_{k,\ell}=\delta_{\lambda,\lambda'}(\delta_{i,k}\delta_{j,\ell}+\delta_{i,\ell}\delta_{j,k})/2$ where $\lambda$ and $\lambda'$ take $-2U_2$ or $U_2$. These bases also span all the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian in \Eqref{eq:hamiltonian}. Furthermore, in each spanned space represented by the quantum number $\lambda=-2U_2$ or $U_2$, the Hamiltonian becomes equivalent to the spinless BH Hamiltonian $\hat{H}_J+\hat{H}_{U_0}$ by replacing $U_0$ with $U_0-2U_2$ for \Eqref{eq:basis1} and with $U_0+U_2$ for \Eqref{eq:basis2}. This means that the dynamics of two interacting spin-1 bosons is essentially
identical to that of spinless bosons, which greatly simplifies the theoretical treatment.
Since the two-particle dynamics governed by the spinless BH model is exactly solvable by introducing center-of-mass coordinates $R=(i+j)/2$ and relative coordinates $r=i-j$ \cite{PhysRevA.86.013618}, we can calculate the exact dynamics for the spin-1 BH model. The eigenenergies and eigenstates in each space specified by $\lambda$ consist of scattering states and bound states. Hence the Schr\"{o}dinger equations are written as
\begin{align}
\hat{H}|\Psi_{\lambda,K}^B\rangle=E_{\lambda,K}^B|\Psi_{\lambda,K}^B\rangle,\nonumber\\
\hat{H}|\Psi_{\lambda,K,k}^S\rangle=E_{K,k}^S|\Psi_{\lambda,K,k}^S\rangle,
\end{align}
where $K$ and $k$ represent the center-of-mass and the relative quasi-momenta, respectively. We obtain the eigenenergies and eigenstates
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
E^B_{\lambda,K}&={\rm sign}(U_0+\lambda)\sqrt{(U_0+\lambda)^2+16J^2 [\cos(K/2)]^2},\\
|\psi^B_{\lambda,K}\rangle&=\sum_{R,r}\hspace{0em}'\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}e^{iKR}\frac{\sqrt{|{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}|}}{({\cal U}_{\lambda,K}^2+1)^{1/4}}
\left[{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}-{\rm sign}(U_0+\lambda)\sqrt{{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}^2+1}\right]^{|r|}
|\psi_{\lambda}\rangle_{R+r/2,R-r/2},
\end{align}
for bound states and
\begin{align}
E^S_{K,k}&=-4J\cos(K/2)\cos(k),\label{eq:Es}\\
|\psi^S_{\lambda,K,k}\rangle&=\sum_{R,r}\hspace{0em}'\frac{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}e^{iKR}}{\sqrt{\pi\left(1+\frac{{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}^2}{\sin^2(k)}\right)}}\left[\cos(kr)+\frac{{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}}{\sin(k)}\sin(k|r|)\right]|\psi_{\lambda}\rangle_{R+r/2,R-r/2},\label{eq:psi_s}
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
for scattering states. Here we employ the abbreviations: $J_K=2J\cos(K/2)$, ${\cal U}_{\lambda,K}=(U_0+\lambda)/2J_K$ and $\sum_{R,r}\hspace{0em}^{'}=\sum_{R\in{\bf Z}}\sum_{r\in2{\bf Z}}+\sum_{R\in{\bf Z}+1/2}\sum_{r\in2{\bf Z}+1}$. Note that the energies of the scattering states are independent of interactions.
Figure~\ref{fig:energy_band} illustrates the energy spectra as a function of center-of-mass quasi-momentum $K$. The band of bound states is split into two
depending on the spin-dependent interaction $U_2$ and located above the continuum of scattering states when $U_0/J>0$ and $U_0>2U_2$. If we take $U_2/U_0=1/2$ or $-1$, one of the bands disappears.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{Energy_band.eps}
\caption{
(Color online) Energy spectra for $U_2/U_0=0.3$ and $U_0/J=10$ as a function of center-of-mass quasi-momentum $K$. The thick solid and dashed lines correspond to the energy bands for bound states with $F=2$ and $F=0$, respectively. The bundle of thin solid lines represents the scattering continuum. The energy is defined in units of $J$.}
\label{fig:energy_band}
\end{figure}
Eigenstates satisfy the following orthonormality relations:
\begin{align}
\langle\psi^B_{\lambda',K'}|\psi^B_{\lambda,K}\rangle&=\delta_{\lambda,\lambda'}\delta(K-K'),\label{eq:ortho1}\\
\langle\psi^S_{\lambda',K',k'}|\psi^S_{\lambda,K,k}\rangle&=\delta_{\lambda,\lambda'}\delta(K-K')\delta(k-k'),\label{eq:ortho2}\\
\langle\psi^S_{\lambda',K',k'}|\psi^B_{\lambda,K}\rangle&=0.\label{eq:ortho3}
\end{align}
Now the initial state at time $t = 0$ is generally written as a superposition of the eigenstates Eqs. \eqref{eq:basis1} and \eqref{eq:basis2},
\begin{align}
|\Psi(0)\rangle&=\sum_{\lambda}\int^{\pi}_{-\pi}dK\left[a_{\lambda,K}|\psi^B_{\lambda,K}\rangle+\int^{\pi}_0dk~b_{\lambda,K,k}|\psi^S_{\lambda,K,k}\rangle\right],
\end{align}
where the coefficients $a_{\lambda,K}$ and $b_{\lambda,K,k}$ satisfy the proper normalization condition
\begin{align}
\langle\Psi(0)|\Psi(0)\rangle&=\sum_{\lambda}\int^{\pi}_{-\pi}dK\left[|a_{\lambda,K}|^2+\int^{\pi}_0dk~|b_{\lambda,K,k}|^2\right]\nonumber\\
&=1.\label{eq:norm}
\end{align}
When two atoms are initially located at the same site, the normalized number of atoms in the bound states of the subspace $\lambda$(first term of \Eqref{eq:norm}) becomes
\begin{align}
N_{B,\lambda}&=\int^{\pi}_{-\pi}dK~|a_{\lambda,K}|^2\nonumber\\
&=c_{\lambda}\frac{2}{\pi}\frac{U_0+\lambda}{E^B_{\lambda,0}}\,G\left(\frac{16J^2}{E^B_{\lambda,0}\hspace{0em}^2}\right).\label{eq:nb}
\end{align}
Here, $G(m)=\int_0^{\pi/2}\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-m\sin^2\theta}} d\theta$ represents the complete elliptic function of the first kind and $c_{\lambda}$ is the normalized number of atoms in the subspace $\lambda$, which is determined by the choice of the initial state. If we start from two $\alpha=0$ atoms at the same site, $c_{U_2}=2/3$ and $c_{-2U_2}=1/3$.
Figure~\ref{fig:bsr} shows the normalized number of bound states and scattering states in each space with respect to the spin-dependent interaction. Because of \Eqref{eq:norm}, the normalized number of atoms in the scattering states of the subspace $\lambda$ becomes $N_{S,\lambda}=c_{\lambda}-N_{B,\lambda}$.
Clearly, the normalized number of atoms in the bound states, \Eqref{eq:nb}, increases with the absolute value of the interaction in each space. This is natural because the bound states are created by the interaction.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{bound_state_ratio.eps}
\caption{
(Color online) The normalized number of bound states and scattering states in each space spanned by Eqs.~\eqref{eq:basis1} and \eqref{eq:basis2} as a function of the spin dependent interaction. The thick and thin lines represent the normalized number of atoms in the bound states and scattering states, respectively. The solid and dashed lines correspond to the indices $\lambda=U_2$ and $\lambda=-2U_2$, respectively. We assume a condition where two $\alpha=0$ atoms occupy the same site and we choose $U_0/J=1$.}
\label{fig:bsr}
\end{figure}
By definition, the state at time $t$ is straightforwardly given by
\begin{align}
|\Psi(t)\rangle&=\sum_{\lambda}\int^{\pi}_{-\pi}dK\Bigl[a_{\lambda,K}e^{iE^B_{\lambda,K}t}|\psi^B_{\lambda,K}\rangle\Bigr.\nonumber\\
&\hspace{7em}\Bigl.+\int^{\pi}_0dk~b_{\lambda,K,k}e^{iE^S_{K,k}t}|\psi^S_{\lambda,K,k}\rangle\Bigr]\nonumber\\
&\equiv \sum_{i,j}\sum_{\lambda}\Psi_{\lambda}(i,j,t)|\psi_{\lambda}\rangle_{i,j}.\label{eq:state}
\end{align}
This result enables us to calculate any physical quantities of the two-particle dynamics governed by the spin-1 BH model.
\section{\label{sec:mixing}spin-mixing dynamics in quantum walks}
In this section, we discuss the spin-mixing dynamics in quantum walks. We show in detail that the inter-site hopping of atoms in the lattice system greatly changes the simple oscillation behavior of spin-mixing dynamics discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:model}
\subsection{Analytical results}
The spin-mixing dynamics is described by the total number of atoms in a hyperfine state $\alpha$. The quantum mechanical average at time $t$ ($\langle\bullet\rangle_t=\langle\Psi(t)|\bullet|\Psi(t)\rangle$) of the corresponding operator $\hat{N}_{\alpha}=\sum_i\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,\alpha}\hat{b}_{i,\alpha}$ is calculated to be
\begin{align}
\langle\hat{N}_0\rangle_t
&=\frac{2}{3}\sum_{i,j}\Big(
|\Psi_{-2U_2}(i,j,t)|^2 +2|\Psi_{U_2}(i,j,t)|^2\nonumber\\
&~+2\sqrt{2}{\rm Re}\hspace{.2em}\left[\Psi^*_{-2U_2}(i,j,t)\Psi_{U_2}(i,j,t)\right]
\Big),\\
\langle\hat{N}_1\rangle_t
&=\frac{1}{3}\sum_{i,j}\Big(
2|\Psi_{-2U_2}(i,j,t)|^2 +|\Psi_{U_2}(i,j,t)|^2\nonumber\\
&~-2\sqrt{2}{\rm Re}\hspace{.2em}\left[\Psi^*_{-2U_2}(i,j,t)\Psi_{U_2}(i,j,t)\right]
\Big)\nonumber\\
&=\langle\hat{N}_{-1}\rangle_t.
\end{align}
The function defined in \Eqref{eq:state} can be expressed using the initial state $|\psi(0)\rangle$:
\begin{align}
\Psi_{\lambda}(i,j,t)&\equiv \sum_{i',j'}\hspace{0em}_{i',j'}\langle\psi_{\lambda}|\Psi(0)\rangle W^{\lambda}_{i,j;i',j'}(t),
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
W^{\lambda}_{R,r;R',r'}(t)=\int^{\pi}_{-\pi}\frac{dK}{2\pi}e^{iK(R-R')}&\biglb[w^{B}_{\lambda,K}(r,r',t)\bigrb.\nonumber\\
&\biglb.+w^{S}_{\lambda,K}(r,r',t)\bigrb],\label{eq:melment}
\end{align}
is a matrix element of the time evolution operator in the space $\lambda$. Here, we introduce $R'=(i'+j')/2$ and $r'=i'-j'$.
$w^{B}_{\lambda,K}(r,r',t)$ and $w^{S}_{\lambda,K}(r,r',t)$ correspond to the contributions of bound states and scattering states, respectively. The explicit formulae of these functions are
\begin{align}
w^{B}_{\lambda,K}(r,r',t)&=\frac{|{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}|}{\sqrt{1+{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}^2}}e^{-iE_{\lambda,K}^Bt}\nonumber\\
&\hspace{.5em}\times\left[{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}-{\rm sign}(U_0+\lambda)\sqrt{{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}^2+1}\right]^{|r|+|r'|},\label{eq:bcont}\\
w^{S}_{\lambda,K}(r,r',t)&=\int^{\pi}_{0}\frac{dk}{\pi}e^{-iE_{K,k}^St}\frac{f_{\lambda,K}(r)f_{\lambda,K}(r')}{1+\frac{{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}^2}{\sin^2(k)}},\label{eq:scont}
\end{align}
with
\begin{align}
f_{\lambda,K}(n)&=\cos(kn)+\frac{{\cal U}_{\lambda,K}}{\sin(k)}\sin(k|n|).
\end{align}
When two atoms in the hyperfine state $\alpha=0$ are initially located at the origin of a one-dimensional lattice, the projection of this initial state onto each space is given by
\begin{align}
\hspace{0em}_{i',j'}\langle\psi_{U_2}|\Psi(0)\rangle&=\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\delta_{i',0}\delta_{j',0},\\
\hspace{0em}_{i',j'}\langle\psi_{-2U_2}|\Psi(0)\rangle&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\delta_{i',0}\delta_{j',0}.
\end{align}
Hence the total number of $\alpha=0$ atoms at time $t$ becomes
\begin{align}
\langle\hat{N}_0\rangle_t
&=\frac{1}{9}\left(
10+8\sum_{R,r}\hspace{0em}^{'}{\rm Re}\hspace{.2em}\left[W^{-2U_2}_{R,r;0,0}\hspace{0em}^*(t)W^{U_2}_{R,r;0,0}(t)\right]
\right)\nonumber\\
&\equiv\frac{1}{9}\left[10+8(X_B(t)+X_S+X_{BS}(t))\right].\label{eq:n0}
\end{align}
From \Eqref{eq:melment}, the matrix element $W$ is the sum of the contributions of the bound states (\Eqref{eq:bcont}) and scattering states (\Eqref{eq:scont}).
We can thus separate the time dependent term of $\langle\hat{N}_0\rangle_t$ into three parts: the product of the contribution of the bound states, $X_B$, the product of the contribution of the scattering states, $X_S$, and the interference between the contributions of the bound and scattering states, $X_{BS}$.
Specifically,
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
X_B(t)&=\frac{(U_0-2U_2)(U_0+U_2)}{2U_0-U_2}\int^{\pi}_{-\pi}\frac{dK}{2\pi}\frac{E_{-2U_2,K}^B+E_{U_2,K}^B}{E_{-2U_2,K}^BE_{U_2,K}^B}\nonumber\\
&\hspace{8em}\times\cos\left[(E_{-2U_2,K}^B-E_{U_2,K}^B)t\right],\label{eq:X_B}\\
X_S&=1-\frac{2}{\pi}\frac{1}{2U_0-U_2}\left[\frac{(U_0+U_2)^2}{E_{U_2,0}^B}\,G\left(\frac{16J^2}{E_{U_2,0}^B\hspace{0em}^2}\right)+\frac{(U_0-2U_2)^2}{E_{-2U_2,0}^B}\,G\left(\frac{16J^2}{E_{-2U_2,0}^B\hspace{0em}^2}\right)\right],\\
X_{BS}(t)&=3U_2\int^{\pi}_{-\pi}\frac{dK}{2\pi}\int^{\pi}_{0}\frac{dk}{\pi}~\left[\frac{A_{K,k}(U_0-2U_2)}{1+\frac{{\cal U}_{U_2,K}^2}{\sin^2(k)}}-\frac{A_{K,k}(U_0+U_2)}{1+\frac{{\cal U}_{-2U_2,K}^2}{\sin^2(k)}}\right],\label{eq:X_BS}
\end{align}
with
\begin{align}
A_{K,k}(\lambda)&=\frac{U_0+\lambda}{E_{\lambda,K}^B}\frac{\left(U_0+\lambda-E_{\lambda,K}^B\right)\cos\left[\left(E_{\lambda,K}^B-E^S_{K,k}\right)t\right]}{16J^2[\cos(K/2)]^2+(U_0+\lambda+E^S_{K,k})\left(U_0+\lambda-E_{\lambda,K}^B\right)}.
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
Here the function $G(m)$ represents the complete elliptic integral of the first kind.
The time independent nature of $X_S$ comes from the interaction independence of the energy of the scattering states.
$X_S$ is calculated via the product of $w_{-2U_2,K}^*$ and $w_{U_2,K}$, and its time dependence is determined by the difference between the energies in the exponential part included in the
$w_{\lambda,K}$ function.
However, $E^S_{K,k}$ in \Eqref{eq:Es} clearly shows that this energy difference vanishes and therefore $X_S$ becomes independent of time.
Regarding $X_B$ and $X_{BS}$, it is difficult to derive their expressions as a function of time $t$ by analytically dealing with the integrals with respect to quasi-momenta in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:X_B} and \eqref{eq:X_BS}.
Instead, at $t=0$, we can perform the integrals and obtain the following useful expressions:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
X_B(0)&=\frac{2}{\pi}\frac{(U_0+U_2)(U_0-2U_2)}{2U_0-U_2}\left[\frac{1}{E^B_{U_2,0}}\,G\left(\frac{16J^2}{E^B_{U_2,0}\hspace{0em}^2}\right)+\frac{1}{E^B_{-2U_2,0}}\,G\left(\frac{16J^2}{E^B_{-2U_2,0}\hspace{0em}^2}\right)\right],\\
X_{BS}(0)&=-\frac{2}{\pi}\frac{3U_2}{2U_0-U_2}\left[\frac{U_0-2U_2}{E^B_{-2U_2,0}}\,G\left(\frac{16J^2}{E^B_{-2U_2,0}\hspace{0em}^2}\right)-\frac{U_0+U_2}{E^B_{U_2,0}}\,G\left(\frac{16J^2}{E^B_{U_2,0}\hspace{0em}^2}\right)\right].
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
Then we can immediately find $X_B(0)+X_S+X_{BS}(0)=1$, which is consistent with the choice of the initial condition.
A similar calculation shows
\begin{align}
\langle\hat{N}_1\rangle_t
&=\frac{1}{9}\left[4-4(X_B(t)+X_S+X_{BS}(t))\right]\nonumber\\
&=\langle\hat{N}_{-1}\rangle_t.\label{eq:n1}
\end{align}
We note that \Eqref{eq:n0} (\Eqref{eq:n1}) has the same form as \Eqref{eq:SimpleSpinMixing0} (\Eqref{eq:SimpleSpinMixing1}) because the constant term comes from the norm of
the wave functions in each space, which does not change with time.
\subsection{Numerical results}
We carried out numerical calculations to reveal the properties of the spin-mixing dynamics in a lattice system. Although the ratio $U_2/U_0$ is rather small in experiments such as $^{23}$Na (positive) and $^{87}$Rb (negative), i.e., less than a few percent, here we choose $U_2/U_0=0.3$ to demonstrate the effect of spin-dependent interactions more clearly.
Figure \ref{fig:int} shows $X_{B}$, $X_{S}$, and $X_{BS}$ at the initial time $t=0$ as a function of the normalized interaction strength $U_0/J$.
In Fig. \ref{fig:fig9}, the contribution of the bound states $X_{B}(0)$ gradually increases with the interaction, while the contribution of the scattering states $X_{S}$ decreases with the interaction. This reflects the fact that the interaction reduces the number of particles in the scattering states (see \Eqref{eq:psi_s}). Since the energy of the initially localized state must be conserved, the interaction suppresses the dissociation of the pair \cite{Winkler2006RB}. On the other hand, the interference term $X_{BS}(0)$ exhibits a non-monotonic dependence on the interaction, reaching maximum at around $U_0/J\sim1$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:fig10}). However, $X_{BS}(t)$ rapidly decreases with time as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:fig11}. This characteristic time dependence can be interpreted by considering the evolution of the bound and scattering states. The wave functions of the scattering states spread over the lattice with time, while the wave functions of the bound states remain localized. The overlaps between these two kinds of states decrease with time. Hence we neglect $X_{BS}$ in the following discussion.
\begin{figure*}
\subfloat[$X_{B},X_S$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{F_B_F_S_with_int.eps}
\label{fig:fig9}}~
\subfloat[$X_{BS}$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{F_BS+F_SB_with_int.eps}
\label{fig:fig10}
}
\caption{
(Color online) Interaction dependence of $X_B,~X_S$ and $X_{BS}$ at $t=0$. (a) $U_2/U_0=0.3$. The solid and dashed lines represent $X_B$ and $X_S$, respectively. (b) Interference term $X_{BS}(0)$ for three kinds of $U_2/U_0$ values. The solid, dot-dashed and dashed lines correspond to $U_2/U_0=0.3,~1$, and 5, respectively.}
\label{fig:int}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{F_BS+F_SB_with_time.eps}
\caption{
(Color online) Time dependence of the interference term $X_{BS}$. We choose three sets of interactions $U_0$ and $U_2$ in the vicinity of the maximum point of $X_{BS}(0)$
in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig10}. The solid, dot-dashed, and dashed lines correspond to $(U_0/J,~U_2/U_0)=(1,~0.3),~(2,~1)$, and $(0.5,~5)$, respectively.}
\label{fig:fig11}
\end{figure}
Next we analyze the spin-mixing dynamics based on Eqs.~\eqref{eq:n0} and \eqref{eq:n1}. Figure \ref{fig:fig13} shows the time-evolution of the total number of atoms in the hyperfine state
$\alpha$ corresponding to the four different $U_2/J$ values. We see that the spin-mixing dynamics is highly sensitive to the interactions. For a large $U_2/J$, there are two distinct frequencies and the amplitude of the slower oscillation gradually decreases with time. We elucidate the dependence of the two frequencies on the interactions from the results of a spectral analysis: the higher frequency
$\omega_{\rm high}$ coincides with the characteristic frequency of spin-mixing in the single site system $3U_2$ and the lower frequency $\omega_{\rm low}$ is reduced
as the interaction decreases. For a small $U_2/J$ with the fixed ratio $U_2/U_0=0.3$, the spin-mixing dynamics is highly suppressed. This behavior comes from the fact that the coefficient of $X_B(t)$ becomes small in the vicinity of $U_0-2U_2=0$ or $U_0+U_2=0$. In these situations, the number of atoms in the bound states decreases. Moreover, the reduction of the frequencies $\omega_{\rm high}$ and $\omega_{\rm low}$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:frequency}) around $U_2=0$ makes it difficult to observe the spin-mixing. Finally, all results discussed in this section are completely applicable
when the $U_0$ sign changes while maintaining the ratio $U_2/U_0$, because of the symmetry of the dynamics governed by the 1D spinless BH model~\cite{PhysRevA.86.013618}.
\begin{figure*}
\subfloat[$U_0/J=20,~U_2/J=6$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{spin_mixing_u0_20.eps}
}~
\subfloat[$U_0/J=10,~U_2/J=3$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{spin_mixing_u0_10.eps}
}
\newline
\subfloat[$U_0/J=5,~U_2/J=1.5$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{spin_mixing_u0_5.eps}
}~
\subfloat[$U_0/J=1,~U_2/J=0.3$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{spin_mixing_u0_1.eps}
}
\caption{
(Color online) Spin-mixing dynamics in a 1D optical lattice with $U _2/U_0 = 0.3$. The solid and the dashed lines represent the populations in the spin state $\alpha= 0$ and the sum of the populations in the spin states $\alpha=\pm1$, respectively.}
\label{fig:fig13}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Discussions}\label{sec:smdisc}
Here, we reveal why two frequencies appear in the spin-mixing dynamics by taking the limits of both $U_0+U_2\gg4J$ and $U_0-2U_2\gg4J$. In these limits, $X_B(t)$ becomes
\begin{align}
X_{B}(t)&\simeq{\cal J}_0(2\epsilon t)\cos[(3U_2-2\epsilon)t]\label{eq:FB},
\end{align}
where ${\cal J}_n(x)$ denotes the Bessel function of the first kind. $\epsilon=J_{U_0-2U_2}-J_{U_0+U_2}$ is related to the cotunneling process, namely the simultaneous hopping of two particles at the same site to an adjacent site. $J_U\equiv2J^2/U$ is the effective hopping of the cotunneling process in the large interaction limit, $U/J\gg1$ \cite{Folling:2007aa}. Using the addition theorem of the Bessel function: ${\cal J}_{m}(x-y)=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}{\cal J}_n(x){\cal J}_{n-m}(y)$ with $|x|>|y|$, the factor ${\cal J}_0(2\epsilon t)$ can be rewritten as
\begin{align}
\nonumber {\cal J}_0(2\epsilon t)& =\sum_{n}{\cal J}_n(2J_{U_0-2U_2}t){\cal J}_{n}(2J_{U_0+U_2}t),\\
&~=\sum_n\psi_{J_{U_0-2U_2}}^*(n,t)\psi_{J_{U_0+U_2}}(n,t).
\end{align}
Here, $\psi_J(n,t)=i^{|n|}{\cal J}_{|n|}(2Jt)$ is the wave function of the continuous-time QW (dynamics of single particle initially located at the origin, governed by $H_J$) at the $n$-th site at time $t$ \cite{PhysRevE.72.026113}. Hence, one can say that the Bessel function in \Eqref{eq:FB} represents the overlap of the bound-state wave functions in different bands.
In the limit of $U_0/J\to\infty$, $\epsilon$ becomes $0$ and thus the Bessel function becomes 1. Since $X_S$ and $X_{BS}$ disappear in this limit, \Eqref{eq:n0} (\Eqref{eq:n1}) coincides with \Eqref{eq:SimpleSpinMixing0} (\Eqref{eq:SimpleSpinMixing1}).
Note that \Eqref{eq:FB} can also be derived by using the effective Hamiltonian for bound states (see appendix \ref{app:EH}).
Since \Eqref{eq:FB} is the product of periodic and quasi-periodic functions, the frequencies of the spin-mixing dynamics are determined by the sum and the difference between the frequencies of each function. The sum $\omega_+=[(3U_2-2\epsilon)+2\epsilon]=3U_2$ is identical to the frequency in a single site system (see \Eqref{eq:SimpleSpinMixing0}, \eqref{eq:SimpleSpinMixing1}). Because the approximation in \Eqref{eq:FB} cannot be established for $U/J\sim1$, the difference $\omega_-(\epsilon)=[(3U_2-2\epsilon)-2\epsilon]=3U_2-4\epsilon$ does not coincide with $\omega_{\rm low}$,
which is the smaller frequency calculated from the spin-mixing dynamics (see the dashed line and circles in Fig. \ref{fig:frequency}). Since $4J_U$ coincides with the bandwidth of the bound states in the large interaction limit, we consider the exact bandwidth of the bound states $4J_U'=U-{\rm sign}(U)\sqrt{U^2+16J^2}$, instead of $4J_U$. Then $\epsilon$ becomes
\begin{align}
\epsilon'=|J_{U_0-2U_2}'-J_{U_0+U_2}'|.
\end{align}
Substituting $\epsilon'$ for $\omega_-$, $\omega_-(\epsilon')$ coincides with $\omega_{\rm low}$ (see the solid line and circles in Fig. \ref{fig:frequency}). As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:envelop}, $\pm{\cal J}_0(2\epsilon't)$ well describes the envelope function of $X_B(t)$. Surprisingly, $\omega_+$ is always correct even for small interactions (compared with $\omega_{\rm high}$).
\begin{figure*}
\subfloat[]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{F_BB_with_time_u_10.eps}
\label{fig:envelop}
}~
\subfloat[]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{U_dependence_of_frequency.eps}
\label{fig:frequency}
}
\caption{
(Color online) (a) Time dependence of bound state term $X_B(t)$. Interactions are $U_0/J=10$, and $~U_2/U_0=0.3$. The envelope functions plotted by the dashed lines
correspond to $\pm{\cal J}_0(\epsilon't)$. (b) Three characteristic frequencies of spin-mixing dynamics
as a function of $U_0$: $\omega_{\rm low}$ (circle), $\omega_-(\epsilon)$ (dashed line) and $\omega_-(\epsilon')$ (solid line). }
\label{fig:fig12}
\end{figure*}
\section{\label{sec:LRSC}Emergence of Long-range Spin Correlations}
Quantum correlations in the 1D bosonic two-particle QW are discussed in Refs.~\cite{PhysRevA.86.011603,Preiss13032015} on the basis of the spinless BH model.
It has been clarified that the time evolution of two-particle correlation depends strongly on both the interaction strength and the initial condition of the QWs.
When two bosons are initially localized at the same site, the relative motion is suppressed with increases in interactions. In contrast, when two bosons are initially located at adjacent sites, the relative motion is enhanced as the interaction increases. These dynamical properties can be understood by noting the energy conservation of the system.
Let us consider a case where two bosons are localized at the same site.
The repulsive (attractive) interaction makes the energy of this boson pair higher (lower) than the energy of the other states.
The two bosons therefore tend to maintain their localized states to conserve energy \cite{Winkler2006RB}. For the same reason, the spatially separated bosons rarely occupy the same site,
leading to the enhancement of relative motion.
In the spin-1 boson system, we observed the similar two-particle correlations mentioned above. Thus we focus on the evolution of
two-particle spin correlations given by $\langle \hat{F}_{z,i}\hat{F}_{z,j}\rangle_t$. To elucidate the role of spin-dependent interaction, we choose the initial state, which does not have
non-local spin correlations ($i\neq j$) for $U_2=0$. This state corresponds to the superposition of a parallel spin state and an anti-parallel spin state with an equal ratio:
\begin{align}
|\Psi_{i,j}^{\theta}(0)\rangle=A_{i,j}\hat{B}^{\dagger}_i(\theta)\hat{B}^{\dagger}_j(\theta)|0\rangle,
\end{align}
where $A_{i,j}\equiv1/(\sqrt{4+2\delta_{i,j}})$ is a normalization factor and $\hat{B}^{\dagger}_j(\theta)\equiv\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,1}+e^{i\theta}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,-1}$ is a corresponding creation operator with
an arbitrary angle $\theta$.
From Eqs.~\eqref{eq:basis1} and \eqref{eq:basis2}, and also by introducing the spin states ~$|\hspace{-.25em}\uparrow\uparrow\rangle_{i,j}\equiv\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,1}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,1}|0\rangle/\sqrt{2}$ and $|\hspace{-.25em}\downarrow\downarrow\rangle_{i,j}\equiv \hat{b}^{\dagger}_{i,-1}\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{j,-1}|0\rangle/\sqrt{2}$, we can rewrite the initial state in a more informative way:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
|\Psi_{i,j}^{\theta}(0)\rangle=\sqrt{2}A_{i,j}\left[|\hspace{-.25em}\uparrow\uparrow\rangle_{i,j}+e^{2i\theta}|\hspace{-.25em}\downarrow\downarrow\rangle_{i,j}
+\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}e^{i\theta}|\psi_{U_2}\rangle_{i,j}-\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}}e^{i\theta}|\psi_{-2U_2}\rangle_{i,j}\right].
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
Here $|\hspace{-.25em}\uparrow\uparrow\rangle_{i,j},~|\hspace{-.25em}\downarrow\downarrow\rangle_{i,j}$ and $|\psi_{U_2}\rangle_{i,j}$ correspond to the three basis states
of the total spin $F=2$ states with an interaction energy of $U_0+U_2$, and they give the positive spin correlations. On the other hand, $|\psi_{-2U_2}\rangle_{i,j}$
is the basis of the $F=0$ state with an interaction energy of $U_0-2U_2$, and it gives the negative spin correlations.
All these four states evolve separately over time while keeping their spin states as discussed in Sec.\,\ref{sec:exact}.
Therefore, the time dependence of two-particle spin correlations is determined by the quantum-mechanical superposition of spins during the dynamical evolution in QWs.
Under the condition of a finite $U_2$, we can expect the emergence of non-local spin correlations owing to the difference in interaction energy mentioned above.
Figure \ref{fig:fig02} shows simulation results for spin correlations at $t=5/J$ calculated with $U_0/J=2$ and $\theta=0$.
We further assume the spin-dependent interaction: $U_2=0.3U_0$ in Fig.\,\ref{fig:same+} and Fig.\,\ref{fig:ad+}; $U_2=-0.3U_0$ in Fig.\,\ref{fig:same-} and Fig.\,\ref{fig:ad-}.
We find that the long-range spin correlations depend strongly on the sign of $U_2$ and the initial states,
which is a characteristic of two-particle QWs of interacting spin-1 bosons.
First we consider a case where two spin-1 bosons are initially localized at the origin $|\Psi_{0,0}^{0}(0)\rangle$.
Long-range spin correlations ($|i-j|\gg1$) are negative for $U_2/U_0>0$ (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:same+}) and positive for $U_2/U_0>0$ (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:same-}).
We can understand this property as follows.
The interaction greatly suppresses the relative motion of two spin-1 bosons for this initial state, which is similar to the spinless case.
On the other hand, a spin-dependent interaction reduces the whole interaction energy and then enhances the relative motions for the $F=0$ ($F=2$)
states when $U_2/U_0>0$ ($U_2/U_0<0$). Correspondingly, long-range spin correlations become negative (positive).
Next we start from the spatially separated initial state $|\Psi_{0,1}^{0}(0)\rangle$, i.e., each spin-1 boson is initially located at the origin and the 1st site.
Long-range spin correlations become positive for $U_2/U_0>0$ (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:ad+}) and negative for $U_2/U_0<0$ (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:ad-}). For this type of initial state, the interaction enhances relative motions. By noting the spin-dependent interaction, the relative motions of $F=2$ ($F=0$) states are relatively enhanced for $U_2/U_0>0$ ($U_2/U_0<0$), leading
to positive (negative) long-range spin correlations.
Note that two-particle spin correlations do not show any dependence on the angle $\theta$. Therefore, we show the results for $\theta=0$ only.
\begin{figure*}
\subfloat[$U_2/U_0=0.3$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{s_z_same_u_0.30.eps}\label{fig:same+}
}~
\subfloat[$U_2/U_0=-0.3$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{s_z_same_u_m0.30.eps}\label{fig:same-}
}\\
\subfloat[$U_2/U_0=0.3$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{s_z_ad_u_0.30.eps}\label{fig:ad+}
}~
\subfloat[$U_2/U_0=-0.3$]{
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{s_z_ad_u_m0.30.eps}\label{fig:ad-}
}
\caption{
(Color online) Two-particle spin correlations at $t=5/J$ calculated with $U_0/J=2$ and $\theta=0$. The vertical and horizontal axes represent the lattice site indices. (a) and (b) Spin correlations starting from the initial state $|\Psi_{0,0}^{0}(0)\rangle$ where two spin-1 bosons are placed at the origin. (c) and (d) Spin correlations for the initial state $|\Psi_{0,1}^{0}(0)\rangle$ where two bosons are placed
at the origin and the 1st site. We assume a positive $U_2$ in (a) and (c), and a negative $U_2$ in (b) and (d).}
\label{fig:fig02}
\end{figure*}
\section{\label{sec:conclusion}Conclusion}
In this work, we studied the QWs of interacting spin-1 bosons on the basis of the 1D spin-1 BH model. We derive an exact expression for the time-dependent wave function by extending the method developed in Ref.\,\cite{PhysRevA.86.013618} to a case including spin degrees of freedom. Using this expression, the spin-mixing dynamics in QWs is discussed in detail both analytically and numerically.
We show that the spin-mixing dynamics is characterized by two frequencies in the limit of large spin-dependent interaction.
One of the two frequencies is determined by the energy difference between two bound states and coincides with the characteristic frequency of the spin-mixing dynamics in a single site system. The other frequency is related to the cotunneling process that is the simultaneous hopping of a pair of atoms between lattice sites. These properties indicate that the dynamics in the spin space is strongly correlated
to the dynamical evolution in real space via spin-dependent interactions. We find that the spin-mixing amplitude is suppressed in the vicinity of interactions satisfying $U_0-2U_2=0$ or $U_0+U_2=0$ because the number of spin-1 bosons in the bound states is greatly reduced there.
We also numerically investigate two-particle spin correlations in the present system. Long-range spin-correlations emerge and the signs of the spin correlations can be controlled by changing the sign of spin-dependent interaction and/or the initial condition. This comes from the fact that the spin-dependent interaction effectively shifts the spin-independent interaction in accordance with the subspace specified by the total spin $F=0$ or $F=2$.
Experiments with ultracold atoms have been making rapid progress in recent years. The results presented here will be demonstrated experimentally in the near future.
An interesting idea for future work is to extend the present study to a case including quadratic Zeeman effects, which are induced by magnetic fields \cite{PhysRev.38.2082.2} or microwaves \cite{PhysRevA.73.041602}, and examine how the spin-mixing dynamics is modified.
Although we focus on a system of interacting spin-1 bosons in this paper, generalization to other spinfull boson systems can be realized by performing similar calculations. On the other hand, from the viewpoint of two-particle dynamics, spin-mixing is a universal phenomenon in various spinfull systems except for spin-1/2. It might be another intriguing problem to study spin-mixing dynamics in fermionic systems and
reveal the qualitative difference between bosons and fermions.
Our study paves the way for exploring continuous-time QWs including internal degrees of freedom.
This opens up the possibility of searching novel algorithmic applications of QWs by utilizing spin degrees of freedom.
Furthermore, the nontrivial QW dynamics in combination with spin-mixing that we elucidate in this paper will offer a clue to understanding the equilibration or thermalization processes in spinfull systems.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI Grant No. 25287104.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction and Main Results}
\label{sec;introduction}
The Heston model \cite{heston} is given by the stochastic differential equation (SDE)
\begin{align} \begin{split}
\d S_t &= \mu S_t \d t + \sqrt{v_t} S_t (\rho \d W_t + \sqrt{1-\rho^2} \d B_t), \qquad \, \, t \in [0,T], \\
\d V_t &= \kappa(\lambda - V_t) \d t + \theta \sqrt{V_t} \d W_t, \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad t \in [0,T], \label{hes-eq}
\end{split}
\end{align}
with $S_0, V_0, \kappa, \lambda, \theta >0$, $\mu \in \mathbb{R}$, $\rho \in [-1,1]$ and independent Brownian motions $W,B$. It is a simple and popular extension of the Black--Scholes model.
Here $S$ models the price of an asset and $V$ its volatility, which is given by the so called Cox--Ingersoll--Ross process (CIR).
\medskip
While numerous discretization schemes and simulation methods for SDE \eqref{hes-eq} have been proposed and numerically tested, see e.g. \cite{KJ,And-H,NN,lord-comparison,AA2,GlaKim}, an analysis of the weak convergence rate has not been carried out so far\,---\,up to the best of our knowledge.
In this manuscript we are addressing this gap by analyzing a numerical scheme, which uses the drift-implicit Milstein scheme \cite{KGJ} for the volatility and an Euler discretization for the log-Heston
price. Our approach relies on a recent regularity result for the Heston PDE \cite{FP}, tail estimates for the CIR process, the Kolmogorov PDE approach for the weak error analysis from \cite{TT} and Malliavin calculus tools.
It is crucial that the scheme is built on a positivity preserving discretization of the CIR process,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] since the domain of the Kolmogorov PDE is restricted to non-negative values
of the volatility,
\item[(ii)] since the positivity of the discretization scheme allows to establish required estimates of its inverse moments.
\end{itemize}
Note that SDE \eqref{hes-eq} can be simulated exactly, an algorithm for this was given by Broadie and Kaya in \cite{BK}.
Nevertheless discretization schemes for the Heston model are important and interesting for at least two reasons: (i)
they can be easily extended to multidimensional versions of the Heston model consisting of $d$ assets (for which exact simulation methods are unknown), and (ii) the method given in \cite{BK} still requires the numerical inversion of a characteristic function, which turns out to be a computational bottleneck.
\medskip
It is common numerical practice to consider the log-Heston model instead of the Heston model. The transformation $X_t=\log(S_t)$ yields the SDE
\begin{align} \begin{split}
\d X_t &= \big(\mu-\frac12 V_t\big ) \d t + \sqrt{V_t} \d (\rho W_t + \sqrt{1-\rho^2} B_t), \\
\d V_t &= \kappa (\lambda-V_t) \d t + \theta \sqrt{V_t} \d W_t, \label{hes-log} \end{split}
\end{align}
with $X_0=x_0=\log(S_0) \in \mathbb{R}$, $V_0=v_0 >0$,
and the exponential is then incorporated in the payoff $g:[0,\infty) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, i.e.\ $g$ is replaced by
$f: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ with $f(x)=g(\exp(x))$.
\medskip
To analyse the convergence rate, we will work under the following assumption on the payoffs and the parameters of the CIR process (for a discussion see Remarks \ref{rem-S} and \ref{rem-Feller}):
{\it \begin{itemize}
\item[\textrm{(S)}] The function $f\colon \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is twice continuous differentiable with compact support. Moreover, there exists an $\varepsilon >0$ such that $f''\colon \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is H\"older continuous of order
$\varepsilon$, i.e.\ $f''$ satisfies
$$ \sup_{x,y \in \mathbb{R}, \, x \neq y} \frac{|f''(x)-f''(y)|}{|x-y|^{\varepsilon}} < \infty $$
\item[\textrm{(F)}] We have $$ \nu:= \frac{2\kappa \lambda}{\theta^2}>2$$
\end{itemize}}
\medskip
The scheme we consider consists of a drift-implicit Milstein scheme for the volatility and an Euler scheme for the log-price:
\begin{align*}
{} \qquad {x}_0 &= x_0, \qquad {v}_0 = v_0, \\
(D) \qquad {x}_{n+1} &= {x}_n + \Big(\mu-\frac12 {v}_n\Big) (t_{n+1}-t_n) + \sqrt{{v}_n} \Big( \rho \Delta_n W + \sqrt{1-\rho^2} \Delta_n B \Big), \\
{} \qquad {v}_{n+1} &= {v}_n + \kappa(\lambda-{v}_{n+1}) (t_{n+1}-t_n) + \theta \sqrt{{v}_n} \Delta_n W + \frac{\theta^2}{4} \big((\Delta_n W)^2 - (t_{n+1}-t_n) \big)
\end{align*}
Here $$0 = t_0 < t_1 < \dots < t_N = T$$ is a discretization of $[0,T]$ and we use the abbreviations $$\Delta_n B = B_{t_{n+1}} - B_{t_n} \qquad \textrm{and} \qquad \Delta_n W = W_{t_{n+1}} - W_{t_n}.$$
This scheme is well defined, iff $4 \frac{ \kappa \lambda}{\theta^2} \geq 1$, since
the discretization of the CIR process can be written as
$$ {v}_{n+1} = \frac{1}{1+ \kappa (t_{n+1}-t_n)} \left( \Big( \sqrt{{v}_{n}} + \frac{\theta}{2} \Delta W_n \Big)^2 + \Big( \kappa \lambda - \frac{\theta^2}{4}\Big)(t_{n+1}-t_n) \right),$$
and thus $v_n \geq 0$, $n=0,1, \ldots$.
\medskip
In the following we use the notations $$ \Delta=\max_{k=1, \ldots, N} |t_{k}-t_{k-1}|$$
for the maximal stepsize and
$$ e(f;\Delta)= | Ef({x}_N) - Ef(X_T) | $$
for the weak error.
\medskip
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem-main} Assume (S) and (F). Then, for all $\alpha \in (0,1)$ the scheme
(D) satisfies
$$ \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{e(f;\Delta)}{\Delta^{\alpha}} =0 $$
\end{theorem}
\medskip
For the weak convergence result without a rate we will assume on the Feller index that:
{\it
\begin{itemize}
\item[(F-min)] We have $$ \nu:= \frac{2\kappa \lambda}{\theta^2}> \frac{1}{2}$$
\end{itemize}
}
\medskip
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem-weak} Assume (F-min) and let $f \in C(\mathbb{R} \setminus O ; \mathbb{R})$ with $O \subset \mathbb{R}$ a finite set. Moreover assume that
$$ \textrm{(Int)} \qquad \limsup_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} E |f(x_N)|^{1+ \varepsilon} < \infty $$
for some $\varepsilon >0$. Then (D) satisfies
$$ \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} e(f;\Delta) = 0$$
\end{theorem}
\medskip If the correlation $\rho$ is negative, i.e.\ $\rho <0$,
assumption {\it (Int) } is satisfied e.g.\ for European call options, i.e.\ $f(\cdot )=(\exp(\cdot)-K)^+$, and more generally for $g \leq \textrm{const} \cdot \textrm{id}$. A negative correlation often appears in practice, see e.g. \cite{kimmel,BK}.
\medskip
\begin{prop}
\label{prop-int} Assume (F-min) and let $f\colon \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be such that $$ \sup_{x \in \mathbb{R}} |f(x)\exp(-x)| < \infty$$ If $\rho < 0$, then (Int) is satisfied.
\end{prop}
\subsection{Remarks}
\smallskip
\smallskip
\begin{rmk}
Theorem \ref{theorem-main} states that the weak error converges faster than any order $\alpha <1$. For payoffs with compact support in the log-asset price and the volatility we obtain in estimate
\eqref{order_delta} weak convergence order $\alpha=1$. The slightly weaker statement in Theorem \ref{theorem-main} is due to the additional use of tail estimates for the CIR process to avoid the compact support assumption for the volatility.
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
The weak approximation of the CIR process has been analyzed by Alfonsi in \cite{AA1} and \cite{AA2}. In \cite{AA1}
he shows\,---\,among other results\,---\,that several schemes have weak order one if $f \in C^{4}_{pol}(\mathbb{R}; \mathbb{R}) $ and $\nu \geq 1/2$, respectively $\nu \geq 1$, depending on the considered scheme.
In \cite{AA2} he constructs second and third order schemes for the CIR process for $f \in C^{\infty}_{pol}(\mathbb{R}; \mathbb{R})$ and without a restriction on the Feller index.
The notation $C^{k}_{pol}(\mathbb{R}; \mathbb{R})$ stands here for the subset of functions of $C^k(\mathbb{R}; \mathbb{R})$, which have polynomially bounded derivatives up to order $k \in \mathbb{N}$.
\end{rmk}
\smallskip
\begin{rmk}\label{rem-S} Payoffs in mathematical finance are typically at most Lipschitz continuous, thus the smoothness conditions of (S) are in general not satisfied. Assumption (S)
arises from using the results from \cite{FP}, see Section 3, which give estimates for the smoothness of the Kolmogorov PDE. In \cite{MA} a weak error analysis for the scheme {\it (D)} has been given by the first author for payoffs which are
only bounded and measurable. Weak order one is established there, however the analysis requires the restriction $\n> \frac{9}{2}$ on the Feller index $\nu = \frac{2\kappa \lambda}{\theta^2} $.
A boundedness assumption (which is implied by (S)) for the payoff or assumption (Int) is typical for a convergence rate analysis, since
the Heston model admits moment explosions, i.e.\ $E(S_T^p)=\infty$ for certain parameter constellations and $p>1$, see e.g.\ \cite{And-M}.
\end{rmk}
\smallskip
\begin{rmk}\label{rem-BT} In a seminal work Bally and Talay (\cite{Talay}) analyse the weak error of the Euler scheme for test functions (i.e.\ payoffs in our setting), which are only bounded and measurable.
Using Malliavin calculus techniques they establish a weak error of order one (together with an error expansion) for such test functions, if the considered SDE
has smooth coefficients and
additionally satisfies a non-degeneracy condition
of H\"ormander type. The latter assumptions are not met for the Heston model.
Kebaier \cite{Keb} illustrates the necessity of the non-degeneracy condition. He constructs an SDE with smooth coefficients but degenerated support of the law and $C^1$-test functions $f_{\alpha}$ such that the weak error of the Euler scheme
is of exact order $\alpha \in [1/2,1)$.
\end{rmk}
\smallskip
\begin{rmk}\label{rem-Feller} The assumption $\nu >2$ on the Feller index ensures that the inverse of our volatility approximation ${v}_n$
has a finite first moment, which is needed in our error analysis. Note that the inverse of $V_t$, i.e.\ of the CIR process itself, has a finite first moment iff $\nu >1$.
The Feller index controls the probability distribution of $V_t$. The smaller it is, the more likely $V_t$ takes values close to zero. The results given in \cite{AA1,AA2,MA} and here indicate that there
is a tradeoff in the error analysis between the smoothness assumptions on $f$ and the restriction on the Feller index: the more smoothness on $f$ is assumed, the smaller is the restriction on $\nu$.
\end{rmk}
\smallskip
\section{Numerical Results}
In this section we will present numerical results which indicate that for the scheme {\it (D)} a weak error rate of order one is typically reached even under milder assumptions than {\it (S)} and {\it (F)} -- as so often when
a weak and strong error analysis of the CIR process respectively the Heston model is carried out, see e.g. \cite{AA1,AA2,AN,MA}.
We use model parameters from \cite{kimmel} (Model 1) and \cite{BK} (Model 2 and 3):
\bigskip\\
Model 1: $T=2$, $\mu=0$, $\kappa=5.07$, $\lambda=0.0457$, $\theta=0.48$, $\rho=-0.767$, $S_0=100$, $V_0=\lambda$.\smallskip\\
Model 2: $T=1$, $\mu=0.0319$, $\kappa = 6.21$, $\lambda = 0.019$, $\theta = 0.61$, $\rho = -0.7$, $S_0 = 100$, $V_0=0.010201$.\smallskip\\
Model 3: $T=5$, $\mu = 0.05$, $\kappa = 2$, $\lambda = 0.09$, $\theta = 1$, $\rho = -0.3$, $S_0 = 100$, $V_0 = 0.09$.\\
Note that the Feller index is $\nu = 2\kappa\lambda/\theta^2 \approx 2.01$ in the first model, $\nu\approx 0.63$ in Model 2 and $\nu \approx 0.34$ in the third model. In the letter case, our approximations of the CIR process might become negative. Here we replace $\sqrt{v_n}$ by $\sqrt{v_n^+}$ in {\it (D)}.
We use the following functionals, all depending on a parameter $K \in \mathbb{R}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Put: $f_1(x) = e^{-\mu T}(K-x)^+$.
\item Smoothed put: $f_2(x) = f_1(x)$ for $x \not\in [0.9\cdot K,1.1 \cdot K]$. Inside the interval $[0.9\cdot K,1.1 \cdot K]$ the function $f_2$ is given by a polynomial whose function values and first, second, and third order derivatives coincide with those of $f_1$ at $0.9\cdot K$ and $1.1\cdot K$.
\item Indicator: $f_3(x) = e^{-\mu T} 1_{[0,K]}(x)$.
\end{enumerate}
To maximize the influence of the irregularity of the functional we set $K=S_0$.
In order to measure the weak error rate, we have simulated at least $2\cdot 10^7$ samples of $f(S_T^\Delta)$ for each combination of model parameters, functional and number of steps $N \in \{2^0,\dots,2^{8}\}$, where $\Delta=T/N$. The mean of these samples was then compared to a reference solution and the resulting error (depending on $\Delta=T/N$) is plotted in Figures \ref{fig:plot1}-\ref{fig:plot3}. For the put and indicator functionals semi-exact formulae are available and have been used to compute the reference solution. In fact, the put price can be computed from the call price formula given in \cite{heston} and the well-known put-call parity. The price of the digital option can be computed from the probability $P_2$ given in \cite{heston}; it equals $e^{-\mu T}\cdot(1-P_2)$. For the smoothed put such a formula is not available and the reference solution was computed using (at least) $2\cdot 10^7$ samples with $2^{10}$ steps. Each curve is accompanied by a least-squares fit whose slope was used to measure the rate of convergence. The results can be found in Table \ref{tbl:convergence_rates}.
\begin{table}[h] \centering
\begin{tabular}{l | c | c | c | c}
& $\nu$ & Smoothed Put & Put & Indicator\\ \hline \hline
Model 1 & $2.01$ & $0.62$ & $0.58$ & $1.01$ \\ \hline
Model 2 & $0.63$ & $1.00$ & $0.91$ & $1.02$ \\ \hline
Model 3 & $0.36$ & $0.96$ & $0.90$ & $0.88$ \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Measured convergence rates.} \label{tbl:convergence_rates}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h] \centering
\includegraphics[width=0.70\linewidth]{plot_aitsahalia}
\caption{Weak error in Model 1.} \label{fig:plot1}
\end{figure}
It turns out that the most regular behavior is obtained in Model 2: For all three functionals the error decays with order one. Because the Feller index is only about $0.63$, this indicates that the assertion of Theorem \ref{theorem-main} also holds under weaker assumptions. In Model 3, which has an even lower Feller index, the error decay is weaker and less regular. Also, the rate now decreases slightly when the functional becomes less smooth.
\begin{figure}[h] \centering
\includegraphics[width=0.70\linewidth]{plot_broadiekaya}
\caption{Weak error in Model 2.}
\end{figure}
Model 1 has the highest Feller index $\nu\approx 2.01$, thus satisfies {\it (F)}, and is the only model to fulfill the differentiability assumptions of Theorem \ref{theorem-main}. Surprisingly though, the error of the put functionals decays very irregular in this model and weak order one can only be observed for the indicator functional.
On first thought, this behaviour seems to violate Theorem \ref{theorem-main}. However, a closer look at the error of the put functionals, in particular for $N\in\{2^2,2^3,2^4\}$, reveals that this error is much smaller in Model 1 (approx.\ $2^{-12}$) than in Models 2 and 3 (within $[2^{-8},2^{-2}]$).
A comparison with the indicator functional in Model 1 shows that the reason for the low measured rate is simply the fact that in Model 1 a small number of steps is already sufficient to approximate the put functionals with an astonishingly high precision.
\begin{figure}[h] \centering
\includegraphics[width=0.70\linewidth]{plot_broadiekaya2}
\caption{Weak error in Model 3.} \label{fig:plot3}
\end{figure}
\section{Auxiliary Results}
\label{sec;preliminary}
In this section we will collect and establish, respectively, several auxiliary results for the weak error analysis.
Without loss of generality we can assume in the following $\mu =0$
by replacing $f$ with $f(\cdot + \mu T)$.
\subsection{Kolmogorov PDE}
In our error analysis we will follow the now classical approach of \cite{TT}, which exploits
the regularity of the Kolmogorov backward equation for
$$u(t,x,v) := E(h(X_{T}^{t,x,v},V_T^{t,v})), \qquad t \in [0,T], \, x \in \mathbb{R}, \, v \geq 0$$
Here
\begin{align*}
X_s^{t,x,v} &= x -\frac12 \int_t^s V_r^{t,v} \d r + \int^s_t \sqrt{V_r^{t,v}} \d \big(\rho W_r + \sqrt{1-\rho^2} B_r\big), \quad & s \geq t\\
V_s^{t,v} &= v+ \int_t^s \kappa (\lambda-V_r^{t,v}) \d r + \theta \int^s_t \sqrt{V_r^{t,v}} \d W_r, \quad & s \geq t
\end{align*}
and by an application of the Feynman--Kac theorem (see e.g. Theorem 5.7.6 in \cite{KS}) we obtain for $h\colon \mathbb{R} \times [0, \infty) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ bounded and continuous that $u$ satisfies
\begin{align} \label{pde1}
\partial_t u(t,x,v) = & \frac v 2 \partial_x u(t,x,v) - \kappa(\lambda-v) \partial_v u(t,x,v) \\ & \,\, - \frac v 2 \left( \partial_{xx} u(t,x,v) + 2 \rho\theta \partial_{xv} u (t,x,v) + \theta^2 \partial_{vv} u (t,x,v) \right) \nonumber, \qquad
t \in (0,T), \, x \in \mathbb{R},\, v > 0 \end{align} with terminal condition
\begin{align} u(T,x,v)=h(x,v), \qquad x \in \mathbb{R}, \, v \geq 0\label{pde2} \end{align}
Due to the presence of the variable $v$ in front of the second order partial derivatives this partial differential equation (PDE) is a degenerate parabolic equation for which a-priori regularity estimates on $[0,T]\times \mathbb{R} \times [0,\infty)$ have
been only recently established in \cite{FP}. To deal with the degeneracy of the differential operator Feehan and Pop use the cyclodical distance $d_c$ (see e.g.\ \cite{DH}) given by
\begin{align*}
& d_c((t_1,x_1,v_1),(t_2,x_2,v_2)) \\ & \qquad \qquad \qquad := \frac{|x_1-x_2|+|v_1-v_2|}{\sqrt{v_1}+\sqrt{v_2}+\sqrt{|x_1-x_2|}}+\sqrt{|t_1-t_2|}, \qquad (t_i,x_i,v_i) \in \mathcal{D}, \, i=1,2
\nonumber \end{align*}
with $\mathcal{D} \subseteq [0,T]\times \mathbb{R} \times [0, \infty)$
and the Euclidean distance
\begin{align*}
& d_e((t_1,x_1,v_1),(t_2,x_2,v_2)) \\ & \qquad \qquad \qquad := |x_1-x_2|+|v_1-v_2|+ \sqrt{|t_1-t_2|}, \qquad (t_i,x_i,v_i) \in {\mathcal{D}}, \, i=1,2 \nonumber
\end{align*}
Furthermore set $\mathcal{D}_1= [0,T]\times \mathbb{R} \times [0, 1]$ and $\mathcal{D}_2= [0,T]\times \mathbb{R} \times [1, \infty)$.
Roughly spoken the main result (Theorem 1.1) of \cite{FP} states that, if the terminal condition is smooth enough, i.e. twice continuously differentiable with $\varepsilon$-H\"older continuous second order derivatives, and has compact support, then the solution $u$ to the Kolmogorov backward PDE has the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] On $\mathcal{D}_2$, i.e.~if $v$ is bounded away from zero, then $u,\partial_t u,\partial_v u,\partial_x u,\partial_{xx} u,\partial_{xv} u$ and $\partial_{vv} u$ are bounded and H\"older continuous of order $\varepsilon$ with respect to $d_{e}$.
\item[(ii)] On $\mathcal{D}_1$, i.e.~for $v$ close to zero, then $u,\partial_t u,\partial_v u,\partial_x u$ and the damped second order derivatives $v \partial_{xx} u,v \partial_{xv} u$ and $v \partial_{vv} u$ are bounded and H\"older continuous of order $\varepsilon$ with respect to $d_{c}$.
\end{itemize}
For us, it will be sufficient to use the following result, which states a control for the (damped) derivatives of $u$ and which is a direct consequence of Theorem 1.1 in \cite{FP}.
To state the result, let $M>0$ be sufficiently large and let $\phi_M \in C^{3}([0, \infty); [0, \infty))$ be functions such that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $\sup_{v \in (0, \infty)} \left| \left(\frac{d}{dv}\right)^k\phi_M(v) \right| \leq 1 $ for $ k \in \{0,1,2,3\}$
\item[(ii)] $\phi_M(v)=1$ for $v \leq M$
\item[(iii)] $\phi_M(v)=0$ for $ v \geq 2M$
\end{itemize}
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{FP-main} {\it
Let $f: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ satisfy (S) and let $M>0$ be such that $\{ x \in \mathbb{R}: \, f(x) \neq 0 \} \subset [-2M,2M]$.
Then, there exist $q >0$ and $c(f,\varepsilon,q)>0$, which are in particular independent of $M$, such that the solution $u$ to \eqref{pde1} and \eqref{pde2} with
right hand side $h(x,v)=f(x) \phi_M(v), x \in \mathbb{R}, v \geq 0$ satisfies
\begin{align*}
&\sup_{(t,x,v) \in \mathcal{D}_1 \cup \mathcal{D}_2} \big(|u(t,x,v)| + |\partial_t u(t,x,v)| + |\partial_v u(t,x,v)|+ |\partial_x u(t,x,v)| \big) \leq c(f,\varepsilon,q)(1+M^q) \\
&\sup_{(t,x,v) \in \mathcal{D}_1} \big(|v\partial_{xx} u(t,x,v)| + |v\partial_{xv} u(t,x,v)| + |v\partial_{vv} u(t,x,v)|\big) \leq c(f,\varepsilon,q)(1+M^q) \\
&\sup_{(t,x,v) \in \mathcal{D}_2} \big(|\partial_{xx} u(t,x,v)| + |\partial_{xv} u(t,x,v)| + |\partial_{vv} u(t,x,v)| \big) \leq c(f,\varepsilon,q)(1+M^q)
\end{align*}
}
\end{theorem}
\bigskip
\subsection{Malliavin calculus}
To establish our main results, we will use a Malliavin integration by parts procedure, see Lemma \ref{lem:ibp}. Otherwise, we would require stronger smoothness assumptions on the payoffs to obtain a weak convergence order of one,
or would obtain a non-sharp convergence rate. This paragraph gives a short introduction into Malliavin calculus, for more details we refer to \cite{nualart}.
\medskip
Malliavin calculus adds a derivative operator to stochastic analysis. Basically, if $Y$ is a random variable and $(W_t,B_t)_{t\in[0,T]}$ a two-dimensional Brownian motion, then the Malliavin derivative measures
the dependence of $Y$ on $(W,B)$. The Malliavin derivative is defined by a standard extension procedure:
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be the set of smooth random variables of the form
$$ S= \varphi \left( \int_0^T h_1(s) \d (W_s,B_s), \ldots ,\int_0^T h_k(s) \d (W_s,B_s) \right)$$ with $ \varphi \in C^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{k};\mathbb{R})$ bounded with bounded derivatives,
$h_i \in L^2([0,T]; \mathbb{R}^2)$, $i=1, \ldots, k$, and the stochastic integrals
$$ \int_0^T h_j(s) \d (W_s,B_s)= \int_0^T h_j^{(1)}(s) \d W_s + \int_0^T h_j^{(2)}(s) \d B_s$$
The derivative operator $D$ of such a smooth random variable is defined as
$$ D S = \sum_{i=1}^{k}
\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial x_{i}} \left( \int_0^T h_1(s) \d (W_s,B_s), \ldots, \int_0^T h_k(s) \d (W_s,B_s) \right) h_i $$
This operator is closable from $L^{p}(\Omega)$ into $L^{p}\big(\Omega; L^2([0,T]; \mathbb{R}^2) \big)$ and the Sobolev space $\mathbb{D}^{1,p}$ denotes
the closure of $\mathcal{S}$ with respect to the norm
$$\| Y \|_{1,p} \; = \; \left( E |Y|^p + {E} \left| \int_0^T |D_s Y|^2 \d s \right|^p \right)^{1/p}$$
In particular, if $D^{W}$ denotes the first component of the Malliavin derivative, i.e.\ the derivative with respect to $W$,
we have $$D^{W}_t Y = \left \{ \begin{array}{clc} 1_{[0,t]} & \textrm { if } & Y=W \\ 0 & \textrm{ if } & Y=B\end{array} \right. $$ and vice versa for the derivative with respect to $B$, i.e.
$$D^{B}_t Y = \left \{ \begin{array}{clc} 1_{[0,t]} & \textrm { if } & Y=B \\ 0 & \textrm{ if } & Y=W\end{array} \right. $$ This in particular implies that if $Y \in \mathbb{D}^{1,2}$ is independent of $W$,
then $D^{W}Y=0$.
The derivative operator follows rules similar to ordinary calculus. For example, for a random variable
$Y \in {\mathbb{D}}^{1,p}$ and $g \in C^{1}(\mathbb{R}; \mathbb{R})$ with bounded derivative
the chain rule reads as
\begin{eqnarray*}
D g(Y)= g'(Y) \, DY
\end{eqnarray*}
This rule admits also a multidimensional localized version. Assume that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $g \in C^{1}(\mathbb{R}^d; \mathbb{R})$,
\item[(ii)] $Y_1, \ldots, Y_d \in \mathbb{D}^{1,p}$,
\item[(iii)] $g(Y_1, \ldots, Y_d) \in L^p(\Omega)$,
\item[(iv)] $ \nabla g(Y_1, \ldots, Y_d) \cdot (DY_1, \ldots, D Y_d) \in L^p(\Omega; L^2([0,T]; \mathbb{R}^2))$,
\end{itemize}
then the chain rule also holds: $g(Y) \in \mathbb{D}^{1,p}$ and its derivative is given by
\begin{align} \nabla g(Y_1, \ldots, Y_d) \cdot (DY_1, \ldots, D Y_d)
\label{chain_rule_md_2}
\end{align}
The divergence operator $\delta$ is the adjoint of the derivative operator. If a random variable $u \in L^{2} \big(\Omega;L^2([0,T]; \mathbb{R}^2) \big) $
belongs to $\textrm{dom}(\delta)$, the domain of the divergence operator, then $\delta(u)$ is defined by the duality (also called integration by parts) relationship
\begin{eqnarray}\label{duality}
{ E} [Y \delta(u)]= { E} \left[ \int_0^T \langle D_s Y, u_s \rangle \d s \right] \qquad \textrm{ for all } \quad Y \in {\mathbb D}^{1,2} \end{eqnarray}
If $u$ is adapted to the canonical filtration generated by $(W,B)$
and satisfies $E \int_0^T |u_t|^2 \d t <\infty$, then $u \in \textrm{dom}(\delta)$ and
$\delta(u)$ coincides with the It\=o integral $\int_0^T u_1(s) \d W_s + \int_0^T u_2(s) \d B_s$.
\bigskip
\subsection{Properties of the CIR process}
We will need the following estimates for the CIR process, which are well known or can be found in \cite{HK}.
\begin{lemma} {\it \label{CIR_moments}
(1) We have
$$ E \Big( \sup_{t \in [0,T]} V_t^p \Big) < \infty$$ for all $p \geq 1$ and
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} E V_t^p < \infty \qquad \textrm{iff} \qquad p > -\frac{2 \kappa \lambda}{\theta^2}$$
(2) We have
$$ E \exp (p V_T) < \infty \qquad \textrm{iff} \qquad p < \frac{2 \kappa}{\theta^2} \frac{1}{1-\exp(-\kappa T)} $$
(3) For all $p \geq 1$, there exist constants $C_p >0$ such that
$$ E|V_t -V_s|^p \leq C_p |t-s|^{p/2}, \qquad s,t \in [0,T] $$}
\end{lemma}
\bigskip
\subsection{Properties of the discretization scheme}
We also require several estimates for our discretization of the CIR process. For their and also the subsequent proofs we introduce the following notation: For a fixed time discretization $0=t_0 < t_1 < \dots <t_N=T$, define $n(t):=\max\{n\in\{0,\dots,N\} : t_n\leq t\}$, $\eta(t):= t_{n(t)}$ and $\Delta_t = t-\eta(t)$. Our proofs will make use of the following processes:
\begin{align*}
\widetilde{W}_t &:= W_t-W_{\eta(t)} \\
\widetilde{B}_t &:= B_t-B_{\eta(t)} \\
\widehat{x}_t &:= {x}_{n(t)} -\frac12 {v}_{n(t)} \Delta_t + \sqrt{{v}_{n(t)}} \Big(\rho \widetilde{W}_t + \sqrt{1-\rho^2} \widetilde{B}_t \Big) \\
\widetilde{v}_t &:= {v}_{n(t)} + \kappa\lambda \Delta_t + \theta\sqrt{{v}_{n(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t + \frac{\theta^2}{4} (\widetilde{W}^2_t-\Delta_t) \\
\widehat{v}_t &:= \frac{1}{1+\kappa\Delta_t} \widetilde{v}_t
\end{align*}
Note that $\lim_{t\nearrow t_n} \widehat{x}_t = \widehat{x}_{t_n} = {x}_n$ and $\lim_{t\nearrow t_n} \widehat{v}_t = \widehat{v}_{t_n} = {v}_n$ and that inside each interval $[t_n,t_{n+1}]$ the processes $\widehat{x}_t$ and $\widetilde{v}_t$ are It\=o processes:
\begin{align*}
\widehat{x}_t &:= {x}_{n(t)} -\frac12 \int_{\eta(t)}^t {v}_{n(t)} \d s + \int_{\eta(t)}^t \sqrt{{v}_{n(t)}} \;\;\d \Big(\rho {W}_s + \sqrt{1-\rho^2} {B}_s\Big) \\
\widetilde{v}_t &:= {v}_{n(t)} + \int_{\eta(t)}^t \kappa\lambda \;\d s + \int_{\eta(t)}^t \Big(\theta\sqrt{{v}_{n(t)}} +\frac{\theta^2}{2} \widetilde{W}_s\Big) \d {W}_s
\end{align*}
\smallskip
The quantities on which numerical constants depend will be indicated by subscripts. In particular, constants will be independent of the discretization $\{ t_1, \ldots, t_N \}$ unless stated otherwise.
\medskip
\begin{lemma} \label{inverse_moments} Let (F-min) be satisfied. (1) For all $p \geq 1$ there exists a constant $C=C_{p, \kappa, \lambda, \theta, v_0, T} >0$ such that
$$ E \Big( \sup_{t \in [0,T]} \widehat{v}_t^p \Big) \leq C $$
(2) For all $p \leq \frac{2 \kappa \lambda}{\theta^2}-1$ there exists a constant $C=C_{p, \kappa, \lambda, \theta, v_0, T} >0$ such that
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} E \big( \widehat{v}_t^{-p} \big) \leq C $$
(3) For all $p \leq \frac{ 2\kappa }{\theta^2}$ there exists a constant $C=C_{p, \kappa, \lambda, \theta, v_0, T} >0$ such that
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} E \exp( p \widehat{v}_t \big) \leq C $$
(4) We have
$$ {v}_{k} \geq \frac{1}{1+\kappa T }\Big( \kappa \lambda - \frac{\theta^2}{4} \Big) (t_k-t_{k-1}) \qquad \textrm{for } \quad k= 1, \ldots, N, $$
and, respectively,
$$ \widehat{v}_{t} \geq \frac{1}{1+\kappa T} \Big ( \kappa \lambda -\frac{\theta^2}{4} \Big) \Delta_t \qquad \textrm{for } \quad t \in [0,T] \setminus \{ t_0, \ldots, t_N \} $$
(5) For all $2 \leq q \leq \frac{4 \kappa \lambda}{\theta^2}-2$ there exists a constant $C=C_{q, \kappa, \lambda, \theta, v_0, T} >0$ such that
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} t^{-q/2} E \left| \int_0^t \frac{1}{\sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(u)}}} \d B_u \right|^{q} \leq C$$
(6) For all $q\geq 1$ there exists a constant $C=C_{q, \kappa, \lambda, \theta, T} >0$ such that
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} E \left| \frac{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}}{\widehat{v}_t} \right|^q \leq C$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assertion (1) can be shown by straightforward calculations using the Burkholder--Davis--Gundy inequality.
For assertion (2) let $\varepsilon \in (0,v_0)$ and define $\tau_{\varepsilon}:= \inf \{t \geq 0: \widetilde{v}_t= \varepsilon\}.$ Applying It\=o's lemma,
noting that
$$ \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}= v_{n(t)}= \widetilde{v}_{\eta(t)} $$
and taking expectations give
\begin{align*} E \big( \widetilde{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big) = & E \big(\widetilde{v}_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big) - p \kappa \lambda E \left( \int_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} \widetilde{v}_u^{-p-1}\d u\right)
\\ & \qquad + p(p+1)\frac{\theta^2}{2} E \left( \int_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} \widetilde{v}_u^{-p-2}\Big( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(u)}} + \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_u \Big)^2\d u\right), \qquad t \in [t_{n(t)},t_{n(t)+1}]
\end{align*}
However, since
\begin{align} \widetilde{v}_t = \Big( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} + \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t \Big)^2 + \Big( \kappa \lambda - \frac{\theta^2}{4}\Big)\Delta_t, \label{vtilde} \end{align}
it follows
$$ \widetilde{v}_u^{-p-2}\Big( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(u)}} + \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_u \Big)^2 \leq \widetilde{v}_u^{-p-1} ,$$
and thus we have
\begin{align*} E \big( \widetilde{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big) \leq E \big( \widetilde{v}_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big) + p \left( (p+1)\frac{\theta^2}{2} - \kappa \lambda \right) E \left( \int_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} \widetilde{v}_u^{-p-1}\d u\right)
\end{align*}
Now $2 \kappa \lambda / \theta^2 \geq p +1$ implies
\begin{align} E \big( \widetilde{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big) \leq E \big(\widetilde{v}_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big)
= E \big(\widehat{v}_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} 1_{\{ \tau_{\varepsilon} \geq \eta(t) \}} \big) + E \big(\widetilde{v}_{\tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} 1_{\{ \tau_{\varepsilon} < \eta(t) \}} \big)
\label{help_1}
\end{align}
Let $t < t_1$. Then $\eta(t)=0$ and $$ E \big(\widetilde{v}_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big) = v_0^{-p}, $$ thus \eqref{help_1} implies
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,t_1]} E \big( \widetilde{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big) \leq v_0^{-p} $$
Hence we have
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,t_1]} E \big( \widehat{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big) \leq \exp(p\kappa t_1) v_0^{-p} $$
An induction over the discretization subintervals using \eqref{help_1} now yields
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} E \big( \widehat{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{-p} \big) \leq \exp(p\kappa T) v_0^{-p} $$
and an application of Fatou's lemma concludes the proof for $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$.
To prove assertion (3) let $\varepsilon \in (0, v_0^{-1})$ and define $\tau_{\varepsilon}:= \inf \{t \geq 0: \widehat{v}_t= \varepsilon^{-1} \}.$ Applying It\=o's lemma to $(t,v) \mapsto \exp(p \frac{1}{1+ \kappa \Delta_t}v)$ and taking expectations give
\begin{align*} E \exp(p \widehat{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}) = & E \exp( p \widehat{v}_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} \big) \\
& + p \kappa \lambda E \left( \int_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} \frac{\exp(p \widehat{v}_u)}{1+ \kappa \Delta_u}
\d u\right)
\\ & + p^2\frac{\theta^2}{2} E \left( \int_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} \frac{\exp(p\widehat{v}_u)}{(1+ \kappa \Delta_u)^2} \Big( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(u)}} + \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_u \Big)^2\d u\right)
\\ & - p \kappa E \left( \int_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}^{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} \frac{\exp(p\widehat{v}_u) \widehat{v}_{u}}{1+ \kappa \Delta_u} \d u\right), \qquad t \in [t_{n(t)},t_{n(t)+1}]
\end{align*}
Recall that
$$ \widehat{v}_t = \frac{1}{1+ \kappa \Delta_t}\Big( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} + \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t \Big)^2 + \frac{1}{1+ \kappa \Delta_t} \Big( \kappa \lambda - \frac{\theta^2}{4}\Big)\Delta_t,$$
and thus $p \leq \frac{2 \kappa}{\theta^2}$ implies that
\begin{align*} E \exp(p \widehat{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}) \leq & E \exp( p \widehat{v}_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} \big)
+ p \kappa \lambda \int_{\eta(t)}^{t } E \exp(p \widehat{v}_{u \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} ) \d u
\end{align*}
Gronwall's Lemma now yields
$$ E \exp(p \widehat{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}) \leq E \exp( p \widehat{v}_{\eta(t) \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}} \big) \exp (\kappa \lambda p \Delta_t) $$
An induction over the discretization subintervals gives
$$ E \exp(p \widehat{v}_{t \wedge \tau_{\varepsilon}}) \leq \exp( p v_0) \exp (\kappa \lambda p T) $$
and an application of Fatou's lemma concludes the proof for $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$.
Assertion (4) is a consequence of
\begin{align*} \widehat{v}_t & = \frac{1}{1+ \kappa \Delta_t}\left(\sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} + \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t \right)^2 + \frac{1}{1+ \kappa \Delta_t} \Big( \kappa \lambda- \frac{\theta^2}{4} \Big)\Delta_t
\\ & \geq \frac{1}{1+ \kappa T } \Big( \kappa \lambda- \frac{\theta^2}{4} \Big)\Delta_t
\end{align*} for $t >0$.
Assertion (5) follows straightforwardly from (2) and the Burkholder--Davis--Gundy inequality.
For assertion (6) note that it is enough to show that
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} E \left| \frac{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}}{\widetilde{v}_{t} } \right|^p \leq C .$$
However, \eqref{vtilde} and the independence of $\widetilde{W}_t$ and $\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}$ imply that
$$ E \left( \Big| \frac{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}}{\widetilde{v}_{t}} \Big|^p \Big | \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}= \xi \right) =
E \left| \frac{\xi}{(\sqrt{\xi}+ \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t)^2 + c \Delta_t} \right|^p $$
where $c= \kappa \lambda- \frac{\theta^2}{4}$.
Now set
$$ A= \{ \xi - \theta^{2} \widetilde{W}_t^2 \geq 0 \}.$$
Since $(a-b)^2 \geq \frac{1}{2}a^2 -b^2$ it follows
$$ \frac{\xi}{(\sqrt{\xi}+ \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t )^2 + c \Delta_t} {1}_A \leq \frac{\xi}{\frac{\xi}{2} - \frac{\theta^2}{4} \widetilde{W}_t^2+ c \Delta_t} {1}_A $$
Now, on $A$ we have
$$ \frac{\xi}{2} - \frac{\theta^2}{4} \widetilde{W}_t^2 \geq \frac{\xi}{4},$$ and we obtain
$$ E \left( \left| \frac{\xi}{(\sqrt{\xi}+ \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t)^2 + c \Delta_t} \right|^p {1}_{A} \right)
\leq \left| \frac{ \xi}{ \frac{\xi}{4} + c \Delta_t} \right|^p P(A)\leq 4^p$$
Moreover, on the complementary event we have
$$ E \left( \left| \frac{\xi}{(\sqrt{\xi}+ \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t)^2 + c \Delta_t} \right|^p {1}_{ \Omega \setminus A } \right)
\leq 2 \left| \frac{\xi}{ c \Delta_t} \right|^p P \left( W_1 > \sqrt{ \frac{1}{\theta^2} \frac{\xi}{ \Delta_t }} \right)
$$
Using a standard tail estimate for the Gaussian distribution, i.e.
$$ P(W_1>x) \leq \frac{\exp \left( - x^2 /2 \right)}{x \sqrt{2 \pi}}, \qquad x>0,$$
it follows
$$ E \left( \left| \frac{\xi}{(\sqrt{\xi}+ \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t)^2 + c \Delta_t} \right|^p {1}_{ \Omega \setminus A } \right)
\leq C \left| \frac{ \xi}{ 2 \theta^2 \Delta_t} \right|^{p-1/2} \exp\left( - \frac{1}{2\theta^2} \frac{\xi}{\Delta_t} \right)
$$ for some constant $C=C_{p,\kappa, \lambda, \theta} >0$.
But we have
$$ \sup_{y \geq 0} \, y^{p-1/2} \exp(-y) \leq (p-1/2)^{p-1/2} \exp(-p+1/2), $$
for $p \geq 1$,
and
therefore
$$ E \left( \left| \frac{\xi}{(\sqrt{\xi}+ \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t)^2 + c \Delta_t} \right|^p {1}_{ \Omega \setminus A } \right) \leq C (p-1/2)^{p-1/2} \exp(-p+1/2)$$
So finally, we can conclude that there exists a constant $C=C_{p, \kappa, \lambda, \theta}>0$ such that
$$ E \left( \Big| \frac{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}}{\widetilde{v}_{t}} \Big|^p \Big | \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}= \xi \right) \leq C, $$
which implies that
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} E \Big| \frac{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}}{\widetilde{v}_{t}} \Big|^p \leq C$$
\end{proof}
\bigskip
By straightforward computations and using the first assertion of the previous Lemma, we also have:
\begin{lemma} \label{smooth_inc} {\it (1) For all $p \geq 1$, there exists a constant $C=C_{p, \kappa, \lambda, \theta, v_0, T} >0$ such that
$$ E | \widehat{x}_t - \widehat{x}_s|^p \leq C \cdot |t-s|^{p/2}, \qquad s,t \in [0,T]$$
(2) For all $p \geq 1$, there exists a constant $C=C_{p, \kappa, \lambda, \theta, v_0, T} >0$ such that
$$ E | \widehat{v}_t - \widehat{v}_s|^p \leq C \cdot |t-s|^{p/2}, \qquad s,t \in [0,T]$$}
\end{lemma}
\bigskip
The next lemma deals with the Malliavin smoothness of our approximation of the log-Heston SDE. Here we use the notation ${\mathbb D}^{1,\infty}= \cap_{p \geq 1} {\mathbb D}^{1,p}$.
\medskip
\begin{lemma} \label{mall-smooth} {\it Let $t \in [0,T]$. Under (F-min) we have
$\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t \in {\mathbb D}^{1,\infty}$. In particular
$$ D_r^B \widehat{x}_t = \sqrt{1-\rho^2}\sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{\eta(r)}} 1_{[0,t]}(r), \qquad r,t \in [0,T]$$}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(1) We consider first the discretized volatility process. For a fixed discretization $0=t_0<t_1< \ldots < t_N=T$ Lemma \ref{inverse_moments} (4) implies the existence of a constant $C=C_{\kappa, \lambda, \theta, v_0, t_1, \ldots, t_N}>0$ such that
$$ \inf_{t \in [0,T]} \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)} \geq C $$
Hence we can write
\begin{align*} \widehat{v}_t & = \frac{1}{1+ \kappa \Delta_t}\left(g(\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}) + \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t \right)^2 + \frac{1}{1+ \kappa \Delta_t} \Big( \kappa \lambda- \frac{\theta^2}{4} \Big)\Delta_t
\end{align*}
where $g \in C^{1}(\mathbb{R};\mathbb{R})$ with bounded derivative and $g(x)=\sqrt{x}$ for $x \geq C/2$. Now fix $t>0$ and assume that $ \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)} \in {\mathbb D}^{1,\infty}$. Then, the
localised chain rule implies that $ \widehat{v}_{t} \in {\mathbb D}^{1,\infty}$, since
$$D^B \widehat{v}_t=0,$$
due to the independence of
$W$ and $B$,
and
\begin{align*}
D_r^W \widehat{v}_t
&= \frac{2}{1+ \kappa \Delta_t} \Big(g( \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}) + \frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t \Big) \Big( g'( \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}) D_r^W \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)} + \frac{\theta}{2} 1_{(\eta(t),t]}(r) \Big)
\end{align*}
by the chain rule \eqref{chain_rule_md_2} and using the boundedness of $g'$ as well as the existence of all moments of $ \sup_{t\in [0,T]} \widehat{v}_t$.
Now, ${v}_0$ is non-random, so we obtain $\widehat{v}_{t} \in {\mathbb D}^{1,\infty}$ by induction.
(2) Note that
$$ \widehat{x}_t = \widehat{x}_{\eta(t)} - \frac{1}{2} \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)} (t - \eta(t)) + \rho g(\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}) \widetilde{W}_t + \sqrt{1-\rho^2} g(\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}) \widetilde{B}_t $$
and
$$ \widehat{x}_{\eta(t)}= - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{k=0}^{n(t)-1} {v}_k (t_ {k+1}-t_{k}) + \sum_{k=0}^{n(t)-1} g({v}_k) \Big( \rho ( W_{t_{k+1}}-W_{t_{k}} )
+ \sqrt{1-\rho^2} ( B_{t_{k+1}}-B_{t_{k}} ) \Big)
$$
Thus, a direct application of the localised chain rule and the first step give that
$ \widehat{x}_t \in \mathbb{D}^{1,\infty}$ for any $t \in [0,T]$. Moreover, since $D_r^B v_k= D_r^Bg({v}_k)= D_r^B( W_{t_{k+1}}-W_{t_{k}} )=0$ and $g({v}_k)=\sqrt{{v}_k }$ the chain rule also yields
$$ D_r^B \widehat{x}_{\eta(t)}=
\sqrt{1-\rho^2} \sum_{k=0}^{n(t)-1} \sqrt{{v}_k} 1_{({t_{k}},t_{k+1}]}(r) $$
and $$ D_r^B \widehat{x}_{t}= D_r^B \widehat{x}_{\eta(t)} + \sqrt{1-\rho^2} \sqrt{ {v}_{n(t)}} 1_{({t_{n(t)}},t_{n(t)+1}]}(r) $$
\end{proof}
\subsection{Drift-implicit square-root Euler approximation of CIR}
A helpful tool for the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem-weak} will be the so called drift-implicit square-root Euler approximation of the CIR process proposed by Alfonsi \cite{AA1}.
This scheme reads as
\begin{align} \label{sqrt_euler} \begin{split}
a_{k+1} &= \left( \frac{\sqrt{a_{k}} + \frac{\theta}{2} \Delta_k W}{2 +\kappa (t_{k+1}-t_k)} + \sqrt{ \frac{(\sqrt{a_{k}} + \frac{\theta}{2} \Delta_k W)^2}{(2+ {\kappa} (t_{k+1}-t_k)^2} + \frac{ ( \kappa \lambda - \frac{\theta^2}{4})(t_{k+1}-t_k)}{2 + {\kappa} (t_{k+1}-t_k)} } \right)^2, \\
a_0 & = v_0, \end{split}
\end{align}
and is well defined and positive under {\it (F-min)}, i.e.\ $\frac{4 \kappa \lambda}{\theta^2} \geq 1$. It arises by discretizing the Lamperti-transformed process $A_t=\sqrt{V_t}$, $t \in [0,T]$,
with a drift-implicit Euler scheme, and transforming back.
Strong convergence rates for this scheme have been established for $\frac{2 \kappa \lambda}{\theta^2} >1$ in
\cite{DNS,AA3,NS}.
The recent work \cite{HJN} performs a convergence analysis under {\it (F-min)}. The authors establish $L^p$-convergence rates for \eqref{sqrt_euler} in the case of an equidistant discretization. Using Corollary 3.9 in \cite{HJN} and Lemma \ref{CIR_moments} (1) and (3) we obtain $L^1$-convergence
without a rate for general discretizations, i.e.\ it holds
\begin{align} \label{hjn_help}\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \, E \sup_{k=0, \ldots, N} |\sqrt{a_k} -\sqrt{V_{t_k}} |=0 \end{align}
under {\it (F-min)}.
\medskip
Note that the drift-implicit Milstein scheme dominates the square-root Euler approximation:
\begin{align} v_k \geq a_k, \qquad k=0,1,2, \ldots \label{dom_sqrt} \end{align} To see this, set
\begin{align*}
a_{k+1}^x= \left( \frac{\sqrt{x} + \frac{\theta}{2} \Delta_k W}{2 +\kappa (t_{k+1}-t_k))} + \sqrt{ \frac{(\sqrt{x} + \frac{\theta}{2} \Delta_k W)^2}{(2+ {\kappa} (t_{k+1}-t_k))^2} + \frac{ ( \kappa \lambda - \frac{\theta^2}{4})(t_{k+1}-t_k)}{2 + {\kappa} (t_{k+1}-t_k)} } \right)^2,
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\qquad {v}_{k+1}^x &= x + \kappa(\lambda-v_{k+1}^x) (t_{k+1}-t_k) + \theta \sqrt{x} \Delta_n W + \frac{\theta^2}{4} \big((\Delta_k W)^2 - (t_{k+1}-t_k) \big)
\end{align*} with $x \geq 0$.
From \cite{AA1} it is known that $a_{k}^x$ is increasing in $x$ for all $x \geq 0$, $k\in \mathbb{N}$.
Since
$$a_{k+1}^x=v_{k+1}^x - \frac{1}{1+\kappa (t_{k+1}-t_k)} \left( \frac{4 \kappa \lambda - \theta^2}{8 \sqrt{a_{k+1}^x}} - \frac{\kappa}{2} \sqrt{a_{k+1}^x} \right)^2 (t_{k+1}-t_k)^2, $$
an induction gives \eqref{dom_sqrt}.
Using this domination property and Lemma \ref{inverse_moments} (1) we obtain
\begin{align} \label{bound_ak} E \sup_{k=0, \ldots, N} |a_k|^p < \infty \end{align}
for all $p \in \mathbb{N}$. Since moreover
$$ | a_k - V_{t_k}|^p = | \sqrt{a_k} - \sqrt{V_{t_k}}|^p \cdot |\sqrt{a_k} + \sqrt{V_{t_k}}|^p \leq |\sqrt{a_k} - \sqrt{V_{t_k}}|^{1/(1+\varepsilon)} \cdot |\sqrt{a_k} + \sqrt{V_{t_k}}|^{2p - 1/(1+ \varepsilon)}$$
we have
$$ | a_k - V_{t_k}|^p \leq |\sqrt{a_k} - \sqrt{V_{t_k}}|^{1/(1+\varepsilon)} \cdot C_{p,\varepsilon} \big( 1 + a_k^{2p - 1/(1+ \varepsilon)} + V_{t_k}^{2p - 1/(1+ \varepsilon)} \big) $$
for some constant $C_{p,\varepsilon}>0$. Now
estimates \eqref{hjn_help}, \eqref{bound_ak}, Lemma \ref{CIR_moments} (1) and H\"older's inequality give
\medskip
\begin{lemma}\label{con_sqrt}
Let $p \geq 1$. Under {\it (F-min)}, we have
$$ \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \, \sup_{k=0, \ldots, N} E |a_k -V_{t_k} |^p = 0 $$
\end{lemma}
\medskip
\section{Proof of the Main Results}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem-main}}
Following \cite{TT} we write the weak error as telescoping sum of local errors, i.e.
$$|E(h({x}_N,v_N))-E(h(X_T,V_T))| = \left|\sum_{n=1}^N E\big(u(t_n, {x}_n, {v}_n) - u(t_{n-1},{x}_{n-1}, {v}_{n-1})\big)\right|$$
where $h(x,v)=f(x) \phi_M(v)$ with $f$ satisfying $(S)$ and the localizing function $\phi_M$ from Theorem \ref{FP-main}.
Next we expand the local errors using the It\=o formula and the function $$ \widetilde{u}(t,x,v):=u(t,x,v/(1+\kappa\Delta_t)), \qquad t\in [0,T], x \in \mathbb{R}, v \geq 0$$ For brevity we will often omit the arguments of $\widetilde{u}(t,\widehat{x}_t, \widetilde{v}_t)$ and $u(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t)$.
We have
\begin{align*}
e_n&:=E\big(u(t_{n+1}, {x}_{n+1}, {v}_{n+1}) - u(t_n,{x}_n, {v}_n)\big) \\
&= E\big(\widetilde{u}(t_{n+1},\widehat{x}_{t_{n+1}}, \widetilde{v}_{t_{n+1}}) - \widetilde{u}(t_n,\widehat{x}_{t_n}, \widetilde{v}_{t_n})\big) \\
&= \int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} E\left[ \partial_t \widetilde{u}(t,\widehat{x}_t, \widetilde{v}_t) - \frac12 {v}_n \partial_x \widetilde{u} + \kappa\lambda \partial_v \widetilde{u} + \frac12 {v}_n \partial_{xx} \widetilde{u}\right.\\
&\qquad+\left.\sqrt{{v}_n} \rho\theta \left(\sqrt{{v}_n}+\frac{\theta}{2} \widetilde{W}_t\right) \partial_{xv}\widetilde{u} + \frac{\theta^2}{2} \left(\sqrt{{v}_n} + \frac{\theta}{2}\widetilde{W}_t\right)^2 \partial_{vv} \widetilde{u} \right] \; \d t
\end{align*}
The derivatives of $\widetilde{u}$ can be written in terms of derivatives of $u$:
\begin{align*}
\partial_t\widetilde{u}(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widetilde{v}_t) &= \partial_t u(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t) - \frac{\kappa \widehat{v}_t}{1+\kappa\Delta_t}\cdot \partial_v u(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t) \\
\frac{\partial^{k+l}}{\partial x^k\partial v^l} \widetilde{u}(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widetilde{v}_t) &= \frac{1}{(1+\kappa\Delta_t)^l} \cdot \frac{\partial^{k+l}}{\partial x^k\partial v^l} u(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t)
\end{align*}
Using $(\sqrt{{v}_n}+ \frac{\theta}{2}\widetilde{W}_t)^2 = \widetilde{v}_t - (\kappa\lambda-\theta^2/4)\Delta_t$ and the Kolmogorov-backward PDE for $u$, i.e.
$$\partial_t u = \frac12 v \partial_x u - \kappa(\lambda-v) \partial_v u - \frac12 v \partial_{xx} u - \rho\theta v \partial_{xv} u - \frac{\theta^2}{2} v \partial_{vv} u,$$
we can write the local error expansion as
\begin{align*}
e_n &= \int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} E\left[ \frac12 (\widehat{v}_t - {v}_n) \partial_x u + \kappa\lambda \left(\frac{1}{1+\kappa\Delta_t}-1\right) \partial_v u + \kappa\left(1-\frac{1}{1+\kappa\Delta_t}\right) \widehat{v}_t \partial_v u \right. \\
&\qquad + \frac12 \left({v}_n - \widehat{v}_t\right) \partial_{xx} u + \rho\theta \left(\frac{{v}_n}{1+\kappa\Delta_t} - \widehat{v}_t\right) \partial_{xv} u + \frac{\theta^2\rho}{2} \sqrt{{v}_n} \widetilde{W}_t \frac{1}{1+\kappa\Delta_t} \partial_{xv} u \\
&\left.\qquad + \frac{\theta^2}{2}\left(\frac{1}{1+\kappa\Delta_t}-1\right)\widehat{v}_t \partial_{vv} u - \frac{\Delta_t\theta^2}{2(1+\kappa\Delta_t)^2} \left(\kappa\lambda-\frac{\theta^2}{4}\right) \partial_{vv}u
\right] \d t
\end{align*}
In the next step we use the identities
\begin{align*}
\frac{{v}_n}{1 + \kappa \Delta_t} - \widehat{v}_t &= \frac{1}{1+ \kappa \Delta_t} ({v}_n - \widetilde{v}_t),\\
\widehat{v}_t-{v}_n & = \widetilde{v}_t-{v}_n-\kappa\Delta_t \widehat{v}_t = \kappa\Delta_t(\lambda-\widehat{v}_t) + \theta \sqrt{{v}_n}\widetilde{W}_t + \frac{\theta^2}{4}(\widetilde{W}_t^2 - \Delta_t),
\end{align*}
and after regrouping the terms we end up with
\begin{align*}
e_n &= e_n^{(1)} + e_n^{(2)} + e_n^{(3)},
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
e_n^{(1)}&=\int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} \Delta_t \cdot E\left[\frac{\kappa^2}{1+\kappa\Delta_t} (\widehat{v}_t-\lambda) \partial_v u - \frac{\theta^2}{2(1+\kappa\Delta_t)} \left(\kappa \widehat{v}_t + \frac{4\kappa\lambda- \theta^2}{4(1+\kappa\Delta_t)} \right) \partial_{vv} u\right.\\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad+\left. \frac{\kappa}{2} (\lambda-\widehat{v}_t) (\partial_x u -\partial_{xx} u) - \frac{\rho\theta\kappa\lambda}{1+\kappa\Delta_t} \partial_{xv} u\right] \d t, \\
e_{n}^{(2)}&= \int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} E\left[\sqrt{{v}_n} \widetilde{W}_t \left(\frac{\theta}{2} \partial_x u - \frac{\theta}{2} \partial_{xx} u - \frac{\rho\theta^2}{2(1+\kappa\Delta_t)} \partial_{xv} u \right)\right] \d t,\\
e_n^{(3)}&= \int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} E\left[ (\widetilde{W}_t^2 - \Delta_t) \cdot \left(\frac{\theta^2}{8} \partial_x u - \frac{\theta^2}{8} \partial_{xx} u - \frac{\theta^3\rho}{4(1+\kappa\Delta_t)} \partial_{xv} u \right)\right] \d t
\end{align*}
Now Theorem \ref{FP-main} implies that
\begin{align} \label{deriv-1}
| \partial _t u(t,x, v)| + | \partial_x u(t,x, v)| + |\partial_v u(t,x, v)| \leq c(f,\varepsilon,q)(1+M^q), \qquad t \in [0,T], \, x \in \mathbb{R}, \, v \geq 0 \end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\label{deriv-2} & | \partial_{xx} u(t,x, v)| + | \partial_{xv} u(t,x, v)| + | \partial_{vv} u(t,{x}, v)| \\ & \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \leq c(f,\varepsilon,q)(1+M^q) \Big (1+ \frac{1}{{v}} \Big), \qquad t \in [0,T], \, x \in \mathbb{R}, \, v > 0 \nonumber
\end{align}
In the following we denote by $c$ constants, which only depend on $c(f,\varepsilon,q)$, $\kappa$, $\lambda$, $\theta$, $\rho$, $T$, $x_0$, $v_0$ regardless of their value.
Using equations \eqref{deriv-1} and \eqref{deriv-2} we obtain
\begin{align*}
|e_n^{(1)}| \leq c \left( \Delta^2 + E \int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} \Big( \widehat{v}_t + \frac{1}{\widehat{v}_t} \Big) \Delta_t \d t \right) (1+M^q)
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
|e_n^{(3)}| \leq c \left( \Delta^2 + E \int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} \frac{1}{\widehat{v}_t} |\widetilde W_t^2 - \Delta_t| \d t \right)(1+M^q)
\end{align*}
Since
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} \left( E \left| \widehat{v}_t \right|^{p}\right)^{1/p} + \sup_{t \in [0,T]} \left( E \left| \frac{1}{\widehat{v}_t} \right|^{1+\delta}\right)^{1/(1+\delta)} \leq c$$
for all $p \geq 1$ and $\delta \in \left(0, \frac{2\kappa \lambda}{\theta^2}-2 \right)$
by Lemma \ref{inverse_moments} (1), (2), we have
\begin{align} \label{en_1_final}
|e_n^{(1)}|+ |e_n^{(3)}| &\leq c (1+M^q) \Delta^2
\end{align}
To deal with $e_n^{(2)}$ we will carry out an integration by parts first, which is summarized in the following lemma. Estimating this term directly would only give a bound of order $\sqrt{\Delta}$.
\medskip
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:ibp} {\it {
Let $t > 0$, $g \in C^{(0,1,1)} ( [0,T] \times \mathbb{R} \times [0, \infty); \mathbb{R})$ be bounded and such that
$$ \int_0^T E\left | D_r \left( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t g(t,\widehat{x}_t, \widehat{v}_t) \right) \right |^2 \d r
< \infty$$
Then we have
$$ E\left[\sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t \partial_x g(t,\widehat{x}_t, \widehat{v}_t) \right] = \frac{1}{ t \sqrt{1-\rho^2} } E\left[ \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t g(t,\widehat{x}_t, \widehat{v}_t)
\int_0^t \frac{1}{\sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(r)}}} \d B_r
\right]$$}}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}{
Because $\widetilde{W}$ and $\widehat{v}$ are independent of $B$, the chain rule of Malliavin calculus implies that $$D_r^{B}\Big( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t g(t,\widehat{x}_t, \widehat{v}_t) \Big) = \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t \partial_x g(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t) \cdot D_r^B \widehat{x}_t$$ with $D_r^B \widehat{x}_t = \sqrt{1-\rho^2}\sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(r)}} {1}_{[0,t]}(r)$, see Lemma \ref{mall-smooth}.
Applying the integration by parts formula \eqref{duality} to
$$ D_r Y= \left( \begin{array}{c} D^W_r \big( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t g(t,\widehat{x}_t, \widehat{v}_t) \big) \\ D^B_r \big( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t g(t,\widehat{x}_t, \widehat{v}_t) \big) \end{array} \right), \qquad u_r =
\left( \begin{array}{c} 0 \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(r)}}}{1}_{[0,t]}(r) \end{array} \right), \qquad r \in [0,T],
$$
we obtain
\begin{align*}
E \left( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t \partial_x g (t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t) \right) &= \frac{1}{t \sqrt{1- \rho^2}} E \left( \int_0^{t} D_r^B \left( \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t g(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t) \right) \frac{1}{\sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(r)}}} \d r \right)
\\ & = \frac{1}{t \sqrt{1- \rho^2}} E \left[ \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t g(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t) \int_0^t \frac{1}{\sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(r)}}} \d B_r \right]
\end{align*}}
\end{proof}
\bigskip {
Now set
$$g(t,x,v)= \frac{\theta}{2} u (t,x,v)- \frac{\theta}{2} \partial_{x} u(t,x,v) - \frac{\rho\theta^2}{2(1+\kappa\Delta_t)} \partial_{v} u (t,x,v)
$$
Theorem 3.1 implies that $g$ is bounded and also provides the required smoothness assumptions for $g$. Moreover, the estimates \eqref{deriv-1} and \eqref{deriv-2} imply that
\begin{align} | \partial_x g(t,x,v)| +|\partial_v g(t,x,v)| \leq c \Big(1+ \frac{1}{v}\Big)(1+M^q), \qquad t \in [0,T], \, x \in \mathbb{R}, \, v \geq 0 \label{est-g} \end{align}
Recall that $$\inf_{t \in [0,T]} \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)} \geq C$$
for some constant $C=C_{\kappa, \lambda, \theta, v_0, t_1, \ldots, t_N}>0$ by Lemma \ref{inverse_moments} (4). Hence
the assumption of Lemma \ref{lem:ibp} is a consequence of Lemma \ref{mall-smooth}, Lemma \ref{inverse_moments} (1) and the Malliavin chain rule. Thus we can write
$$ e_n^{(2)} =\int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} \frac{1}{t \sqrt{1- \rho^2}} E \left[ \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t g(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t)I^B_t \right] dt$$
with
$$I^B_t= \int_0^t \frac{1}{\sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(r)}}} \d B_r, \qquad t \in [0,T]$$
Since moreover $ \widetilde{W}_t$ is independent of $B,\widehat{x}_{\eta(t)}$ and $\widehat{v}_{u}, u \in [0,\eta(t)]$, it follows that
$$ E \left[ \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t g(t,\widehat{x}_{\eta(t)},\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}) I_t^B\right] = 0 $$
and hence
\begin{align*}
e_n^{(2)} &=
\int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} \frac{1}{t \sqrt{1- \rho^2}} E \left[ \sqrt{\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} \widetilde{W}_t I_t^B \big( g(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t) - g(t,\widehat{x}_{\eta(t)},\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)})\big)\right] dt
\end{align*}
The mean value theorem now gives
\begin{align*}
g(t,\widehat{x}_t,\widehat{v}_t) - g(t,\widehat{x}_{\eta(t)},\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}) &= (\widehat{x}_t-\widehat{x}_{\eta(t)} ) \int_0^1 \partial_x g(t, \chi \widehat{x}_t + (1- \chi) \widehat{x}_{\eta(t)}, \chi \widehat{v}_t +(1-\chi) \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}) \d \chi \\ & \qquad +
(\widehat{v}_t-\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)} ) \int_0^1 \partial_v g(t,\chi \widehat{x}_t + (1- \chi) \widehat{x}_{\eta(t)}, \chi \widehat{v}_t +(1-\chi) \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}) \d \chi
\end{align*}
Using \eqref{est-g} and
$$ \frac{1}{\chi v_1 +(1-\chi)v_2} \leq \frac{1}{v_1}+ \frac{1}{v_2}, \qquad v_1,v_2 >0,$$
it follows that
\begin{align} \label{est_err-2}
e_n^{(2)} & \leq
c (1+M^q) \int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}} E |\widetilde{W}_t | ( |\widehat{v}_t-\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}| + | \widehat{x}_t-\widehat{x}_{\eta(t)} |) \Theta_t \d t
\end{align}
with
\begin{align*}
\Theta_t = \frac{|I_t^B|}{\sqrt{t}} \left( \sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} + \frac{1}{ \sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{t}}} \frac{\sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}}}{\sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{t}}} + \frac{1}{ \sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}}} \right), \qquad t \in [0,T]
\end{align*}
Lemma \ref{inverse_moments} (1), (2), (5), (6) imply now
that
$$ \sup_{t \in [0,T]} \left( E \left| \frac{I_t^B}{\sqrt{t}} \right|^p \right)^{1/p} + \sup_{t \in [0,T]} \left( E\left( \sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}} + \frac{1}{ \sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{t}}} \frac{\sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}}}{\sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{t}}} + \frac{1}{ \sqrt{ \widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}}} \right)^p \right)^{1/p} \leq c $$
for $2 \leq p < \frac{4 \kappa \lambda}{\theta^2}-2$.
Hence the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality yields
\begin{align} {E} \Theta_t^{1+\delta} \leq c \label{theta_1} \end{align}
for $\delta \in \left(0, \frac{2\kappa \lambda}{\theta^2}-2 \right)$. Note that {\it (F)} ensures that the interval for $\delta$ is non-empty.
Lemma \ref{smooth_inc} implies
\begin{align} \label{smooth_th} \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}} \left( E |\widetilde{W}_t |^q ( |\widehat{v}_t-\widehat{v}_{\eta(t)}| + | \widehat{x}_t-\widehat{x}_{\eta(t)} |)^q \right)^{1/q} \leq c \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}} \Delta_t, \qquad t \in [0,T], \end{align}
for any $q \geq 1$. Hence \eqref{est_err-2}, \eqref{theta_1}, \eqref{smooth_th} and an application of H\"older's inequality give
\begin{align*}
e_n^{(2)} \leq c (1+M^q)\int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}} (t -\eta(t)) \d t
\end{align*}
}
Using \eqref{en_1_final} we now obtain
$$ |e_n| \leq c (1+M^q) \Delta^2 + c (1+M^q)\int_{t_n}^{t_{n+1}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}} (t -\eta(t)) \d t$$
Since $ [0,T] \ni t \mapsto \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}} \in (0, \infty)$ is integrable, it follows
\begin{align} |E(h({x}_N,v_N)-E(h(x_T,v_T))| \leq \sum_{n=1}^{N}|e_n| \leq c (1+M^q) \cdot \Delta \label{order_delta}, \end{align}
where $h(x,v)=f(x) \phi_M(v)$ with $f$ satisfying $(S)$ and the localizing function $\phi_M$.
\medskip
Now write
$$ f(x)=h(x,v) + f(x)(1-\phi_M(v))$$
By construction we have
$$ f(x)(1- \phi_M(v)) = 0 \qquad \textrm{if} \qquad v \leq M $$
and
$$ |f(x)(1- \phi_M(v))| \leq \|f \|_{\infty} \left( :=\sup_{x \in \mathbb{R}} |f(x)| \right) \qquad \textrm{if} \qquad v > M$$
The Markov inequality, Lemma \ref{CIR_moments} (2) and Lemma \ref{inverse_moments} (3) imply the existence of a constant $c_{tail}>0$ such that
\begin{align*} P( V_T \geq M ) + P( v_N \geq M ) \leq c_{tail} \exp \left(-\frac{2 \kappa}{\theta^2} M \right) \end{align*}
Hence we obtain
$$ |E f(X_T)(1- \phi_M(V_T))| + |E f({x}_N)(1- \phi_M(v_N))| \leq c_{tail} \|f \|_{\infty} \exp \left(-\frac{2 \kappa}{\theta^2} M \right) $$
Choosing $$M= - \frac{\theta^2}{2 \kappa} \log(\Delta) $$
and using \eqref{order_delta}
we end up with
$$ |E f(X_T) - Ef(x_N)| \leq c \left(1 + \Big( \frac{\theta^2}{2 \kappa}\Big)^q |\log(\Delta)|^q \right) \cdot \Delta + c_{tail} \|f \|_{\infty} \cdot \Delta $$
which finishes the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem-main}.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem-weak}}
Note that we only have to show
\begin{align} \label{to_show} E|x_N - X_T| \rightarrow 0 , \qquad \Delta \rightarrow 0, \end{align}
since $L^1$-convergence implies convergence in probability, $X_T$ has a Lebesgue density, see e.g. \cite{dens}, and $f$ is continuous up to a finite number of points.
Assumption {\it (Int)} provides then the uniform integrability required to deduce
$$ Ef(x_N) \rightarrow E f(X_T), \qquad \Delta \rightarrow 0$$
To establish \eqref{to_show} write
\begin{align*}
x_N-X_T = & - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} (v_k-V_{t_k}) (t_{k+1}-t_{k}) + \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} (\sqrt{v_k}-\sqrt{V_{t_k}}) \Delta_k Z
\\ & +
\frac{1}{2} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \int_{t_{k}}^{t_{k+1}} (V_t -V_{t_k}) \d t - \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \int_{t_{k}}^{t_{k+1}} (\sqrt{V_t} -\sqrt{V_{t_k}})
\d Z_t
\end{align*}
with the Brownian motion $Z = \rho W + \sqrt{1- \rho^2} B$. The It\=o isometry, the Minkowski and Lyapunov inequalities and $ |\sqrt{x} - \sqrt{y}| \leq \sqrt{|x-y|}$ for $x,y \geq 0 $ now yield
\begin{align*}
E |x_N-X_T| \leq & \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} E |v_k-V_{t_k}| (t_{k+1}-t_{k}) + \sqrt{ \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} E|v_k-V_{t_k}| (t_{k+1}-t_{k}) }
\\ & +
\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \int_{t_{k}}^{t_{k+1}} E |V_t -V_{t_k}| \d t + \sqrt{ \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \int_{t_{k}}^{t_{k+1}} E |V_t -V_{t_k}| \d t }
\end{align*}
Lemma \ref{CIR_moments} (3) implies
\begin{align} \label{heston_strong}
E |x_N-X_T| \leq \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} E |v_k-V_{t_k}| (t_{k+1}-t_{k}) + \sqrt{ \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} E|v_k-V_{t_k}| (t_{k+1}-t_{k}) } + c \Delta^{1/4} \end{align}
for some constant $c>0$ independent of $\Delta$.
Using the drift-implicit square-root Euler approximation $a_k$ given by \eqref{sqrt_euler} and
$ v_k \geq a_k$, see \eqref{dom_sqrt}, we have
$$ E |v_k-V_{t_k}| \leq E|v_k -a_k| + E |V_{t_k} - a_k| = E(v_k-a_k) + E |V_{t_k} - a_k|, \qquad k=0,1, \ldots, N, $$
and thus \begin{align} \label{dimp_strong}
E |v_k-V_{t_k}| \leq E(v_k-V_{t_k}) + 2 E |V_{t_k} - a_k|, \qquad k=0,1, \ldots, N \end{align}
It remains to analyse the first summand on the right hand side of \eqref{dimp_strong}. Here we have
$$ E v_{k+1} = E v_{k} + \kappa (\lambda - E v_{k+1}) (t_{k+1}-t_k), \qquad k=0,1, \ldots, N-1,$$
which is the drift-implicit Euler approximation of
$$ {E} V_t = v_0 + \int_0^t \kappa(\lambda - E V_s) \,ds, \qquad t \in [0,T],$$ and hence it follows
$$ \sup_{k=0, \ldots, N} |{E} (v_k - V_{t_k})| \leq c \cdot \Delta$$
for some constant $c>0$ independent of $\Delta$.
This estimate, equation \eqref{dimp_strong} and Lemma 3.6 now give
$$ \sup_{k=0, \ldots, N} E |v_k-V_{t_k}| \rightarrow 0, \qquad \Delta \rightarrow 0 $$
which finally together with \eqref{heston_strong} yields \eqref{to_show}.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop-int}}
Since
$$ {v}_{k+1} - {v}_k - \kappa(\lambda-{v}_{k+1}) (t_{k+1}-t_k) - \frac{\theta^2}{4} \big((\Delta_k W)^2 - (t_{k+1}-t_k) \big) = \theta \sqrt{{v}_k} \Delta_k W $$
for $k=0,1, \ldots$, we
have
$$ \rho \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sqrt{{v}_k} \Delta_k W \leq \frac{|\rho|}{\theta} \left( v_0 + \kappa \lambda T + \frac{\theta^2}{4} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} (\Delta_k W)^2 \right)$$
if $\rho < 0$.
Thus we obtain for $$ x_N = - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} v_k (t_{k+1}-t_{k}) + \rho \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sqrt{{v}_k} \Delta_k W + \sqrt{1 -\rho^2} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sqrt{v_k} \Delta_k B $$ the upper bound
\begin{align*}
x_N = & - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} v_k (t_{k+1}-t_{k}) + \frac{|\rho|}{\theta} \left( v_0 + \kappa \lambda T \right) + \frac{|\rho|\theta}{4} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} (\Delta_k W)^2 + \sqrt{1 -\rho^2} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sqrt{v_k} \Delta_k B
\end{align*}
and hence
$$ \exp( p \, x_N) \leq c \exp \left( - \frac{p}{2} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} v_k (t_{k+1}-t_{k}) + p \sqrt{1 -\rho^2} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sqrt{v_k} \Delta_k B + \frac{ p |\rho| \theta}{4} \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} (\Delta_k W)^2 \right) $$
for some constant $c>0$ depending only on the parameters of the Heston model and $p,T$.
Since $v_k$, $k=0,1, \ldots,$ and $B$ are independent we have
$$ \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \sqrt{v_k} \Delta_k B\, \stackrel{\mathcal{L}}{=} \, B_1 \sqrt{\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} v_k (t_{k+1}-t_k)} $$
and therefore
\begin{align*}
E \exp( p \, x_N) &= E (E( \exp( p \, x_N) | W)) \\ &\leq c E \exp \left( \left( \frac{p^2(1-\rho^2)}{2} -\frac{p}{2} \right) \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} v_k (t_{k+1}-t_{k}) + \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \frac{ p|\rho|\theta}{4} (\Delta_k W)^2 \right)
\end{align*}
Note that
$$ \frac{ p^2(1-\rho^2) }{2} - \frac{p}{2} \leq 0 $$
iff
$$ p(1-\rho^2) \leq 1 $$
For $p=1+ \rho^2$ and $\rho <0$, this is satisfied and it follows
$$E \exp( p \, x_N) \leq c E \exp \left( \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \frac{p |\rho| \theta}{4} (\Delta_k W)^2 \right) $$
The moment generating function of $W_1^2$ is given by
$$ E \exp (t W_1^2)= \exp \left( -\frac{1}{2} \ln(1-2t) \right), \qquad t < \frac{1}{2},$$ and we obtain
$$ E \exp \left( \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \frac{p |\rho| \theta}{4} (\Delta_k W)^2 \right) = \exp \left( -\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}\frac{1}{2} \ln\left(1- \frac{p |\rho| \theta}{2} (t_{k+1}-t_k) \right) \right) $$
for $\Delta < 2 / p |\rho| \theta $. If $\Delta < 1/ p |\rho| \theta $ we have $1- \frac{p |\rho| \theta}{2} (t_{k+1}-t_k) \geq \frac{1}{2}$ for all $k=0, 1, \ldots, N-1$ and hence
$$ \ln\left(1- \frac{p |\rho| \theta}{2} (t_{k+1}-t_k) \right) \geq -p |\rho| \theta (t_{k+1}-t_k), \qquad k=0,1, \ldots,N-1$$
Thus
it follows that
$$ E \exp \left( \sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \frac{p |\rho| \theta}{4} (\Delta_k W)^2 \right) \leq \exp \left( T \frac{p |\rho| \theta}{2} \right), $$
which concludes the proof.
\bigskip
\bigskip
{\bf Acknowledgements.} \,\, The authors would like to thank Camelia A. Pop for very helpful comments on the results from \cite{FP} and an unknown mathematician for pointing out a mistake in the proof of Theorem 1.1.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\mathrm{Par}{\mathrm{Par}}
\def\mathcal{A}{\mathcal{A}}
\def\mathcal{B}{\mathcal{B}}
\def\mathcal{M}{\mathcal{M}}
\def\mathcal{P}{\mathcal{P}}
\def\mathrm{Ind}{\mathrm{Ind}}
\def\mathrm{codim}{\mathrm{codim}}
\def{\mathrm{d \mathcal{A}}}{{\mathrm{d \mathcal{A}}}}
\deft{t}
\def\mathrm{Trace}{\mathrm{Trace}}
\DeclareMathOperator*{\slim}{\mathrm{stablim}}
\newcommand{\lim}{\lim}
\begin{document}
\title{Polynomial Splitting Measures and Cohomology of the Pure Braid Group}
\author{Trevor Hyde}
\address{Dept. of Mathematics\\
University of Michigan \\
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1043\\
}
\email{<EMAIL>}
\author{Jeffrey C. Lagarias}
\address{Dept. of Mathematics\\
University of Michigan \\
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1043\\
}
\email{<EMAIL>}
\subjclass{Primary 11R09; Secondary 11R32, 12E20, 12E25}
\thanks{Work of the second author was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1401224.}
\date{February 24, 2017}
\begin{abstract}
We study for each $n$ a one-parameter family of complex-valued measures
on the symmetric group $S_n$, which interpolate the probability of a monic, degree $n$, square-free polynomial in $\mathbb F_q[x]$ having a given factorization type.
For a fixed factorization type, indexed by a partition $\lambda$ of $n$, the measure is
known to be a Laurent polynomial.
We express the coefficients of this polynomial in terms of characters associated to
$S_n$-subrepresentations of the cohomology of the pure braid group $H^{\bullet}(P_n, \mathbb Q)$.
We deduce that the splitting measures for all parameter values $z= -\frac{1}{m}$ \big(resp. $z= \frac{1}{m}$\big), after rescaling, are characters
of $S_n$-representations (resp. virtual $S_n$-representations.)
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\section{Introduction}\label{sec1}
The purpose of this paper is to study for each $n \ge 1$ a one-parameter family of complex-valued measures on
the symmetric group $S_n$ arising from a problem in number theory, and to exhibit
an explicit representation-theoretic connection between these measures and the characters of the natural $S_n$-action
on the rational cohomology of the pure braid group $P_n$.
This family of measures, denoted $\nu_{n, z}^{\ast}$,
was introduced by the second author and B. Weiss in \cite{Lagarias-W:2015},
where they were called {\em $z$-splitting measures}, with parameter $z$.
The measures interpolate from prime power values $z=q$ the probability of a monic, degree $n$, square-free polynomial
in $\mathbb F_q[x]$ having a given factorization type.
Square-free factorization types are indexed by partitions $\lambda$ of $n$ specifying the degrees of the irreducible factors.
Each partition $\lambda$ of $n$ corresponds to a conjugacy class $C_{\lambda}$ of the symmetric group $S_n$;
distributing the probability of a factorization of type $\lambda$ equally across the elements of $C_{\lambda}$ defines a
probability measure on $S_n$.
A key property of the resulting probabilities is that for a fixed partition $\lambda$, their values are described by a rational function
in the size of the field $\mathbb F_q$ as $q$ varies. This property permits interpolation from $q$ to a parameter $z \in \mathbb P^{1}(\mathbb C)$
on the Riemann sphere, to obtain a family of complex-valued measures $\nu_{n, z}^{\ast}$ on $S_n$ given in Definition \ref{de23} below.
On the number theory side, these measures connect with problems on the splitting of ideals in $S_n$-number fields, which are degree $n$ number fields
formed by adjoining a root of a degree $n$ polynomial over $\mathbb Z[x]$ whose splitting field has Galois group $S_n$.
The paper \cite[Theorem 2.6] {Lagarias-W:2015} observed that for primes $p < n$ these measures vanish on certain conjugacy classes,
corresponding to the phenomenon of essential discriminant divisors of polynomials having Galois group $S_n$, first noted by Dedekind \cite{Dedekind:1878}
in 1878. These measures converge to the uniform measure on the symmetric group as $z= p \to \infty$, and in this limit agree with
a conjecture of Bhargava \cite[Conjecture 1.3]{Bhargava:2007} on the distribution of splitting types of the prime $p$ in $S_n$-extensions of discriminant $|D| \le B$
as the bound $B \to \infty$, conditioned on $(D, p)=1$.
The second author subsequently studied these measures interpolated
at the special value $z = 1$, viewed as representing splitting probabilities for polynomials
over the (hypothetical) ``field with one element $\mathbb F_1$'' \cite{Lagarias:2016}.
These measures, called {\em $1$-splitting measures}, turn out to be
signed measures for all $n \ge 3$.
They are
supported on a small set of conjugacy classes, the Springer regular elements of $S_n$ which are those conjugacy
classes $C_{\lambda}$ for which $\lambda$ has a rectangular Young diagram or a rectangle plus a single box.
Treated as class functions on $S_n$, rather than as measures, they
were found to have a representation-theoretic interpretation:
after rescaling by $n!$, the 1-splitting measures are virtual characters of $S_n$ corresponding to explicitly determined representations.
As $n$ varies, their values on conjugacy classes were observed to have arithmetic properties compatible
with the multiplicative structure of $n$; letting $n = \prod_{p} p ^{e_p}$ be the prime factorization
of $n$, the value of the measure on each conjugacy class factors
as a product of
values on classes
of smaller symmetric groups $S_{p^{e_p}}$.
That paper also showed the rescaled $z$-splitting measures at $z=-1$
have a related representation-theoretic interpretation.
In this paper we extend the representation-theoretic interpretation to the entire family of $z$-splitting measures and
relate it to the cohomology of the pure braid group.
Our starting point is the observation made in \cite[Lemma 2.5]{Lagarias:2016}
that for a fixed conjugacy class
the $z$-splitting measures
are Laurent polynomials in $z$.
They have
degree at most $n-1$, so may be written
\[
\nu_{n, z}^{\ast} (C_{\lambda}) = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda})\big(\tfrac{1}{z}\big)^k,
\]
with rational coefficients $\alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda})$, where $\lambda$ is a partition of $n$.
We call the $\alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda})$ {\em splitting measure coefficients.}
A main observation of this paper is that
each splitting measure coefficient $\alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda})$, viewed as a function of $\lambda$,
is a rescaled character $\chi_n^k$ of a certain $S_n$-subrepresentation $A_n^k$ of the cohomology of the pure braid group $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$.
{ The pure braid groups $P_n$ and their cohomology, along with the subrepresentations $A_n^k$,
are defined
and discussed in Section \ref{sec:braid-group}.}
{In Section \ref{sec:43a} we identify the $S_n$-representation $A_n^k$ with the cohomology of a complex manifold $Y_n$ carrying an $S_n$-action.
We deduce as a consequence a topological interpretation of the $1$-splitting measure as a rescaled version of the $S_n$-equivariant Euler characteristic of $Y_n$.}
We also deduce that the rescaled $z$-splitting measure is a character of $S_n$
at $z = -\frac{1}{m}$ and is a virtual character of $S_n$ at $z = \frac{1}{m}$, for all integers $m\geq 1$.
The last result extends the representation-theoretic connection of \cite{Lagarias:2016} for $z= \pm 1$ to parameters $z= \pm \frac{1}{m}$
for all $m \ge 1$.
\subsection{Results}\label{sec11}
The {\em $z$-splitting measure} on a conjugacy class $C_{\lambda}$ of $S_n$ is the rational function of $z$
\[
\nu_{n, z}^{\ast} (C_{\lambda}) := \frac{N_{\lambda}(z)}{ z^n - z^{n-1}},
\]
where $N_{\lambda}(z) \in \mathbb Q[z]$ denotes
the {\em cycle polynomial} associated to a partition
$\lambda$ describing the cycle lengths of $C_\lambda$.
Given $\lambda= \big(1^{m_1(\lambda)} 2^{m_2(\lambda)} \cdots n^{m_n(\lambda)} \big)$,
the associated cycle polynomial is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:11}
N_{\lambda}(z) := \prod_{j\geq 1} {{M_j(z)}\choose{m_j(\lambda)}},
\end{equation}
where $M_j(z)$ denotes the $j$th necklace polynomial.
The \emph{necklace polynomial} $M_j(z)$ of order $j$ is given by
\[
M_j(z) := \frac{1}{j} \sum_{d \mid j} \mu(d) z^{j/d}.
\]
where $\mu(d)$ is the M\"{o}bius function.
To avoid confusion we make a remark on values of measures.
Given a class function $f$ on $S_n$ we write $f(C_{\lambda})$ to mean the sum of the values of $f$ on $C_\lambda$,
and write $f(\lambda)$ to mean the value $f(g)$
taken at one element $g \in C_{\lambda}$; the latter notation is standard for characters.
Thus $\nu_{n,z}^{\ast}(C_{\lambda}) = |C_\lambda| \nu_{n, z}^{\ast}(\lambda)$.
In Section \ref{sec:rep-interpretation} we express the coefficients of
the family of cycle polynomials $N_\lambda(z)$ in terms of characters of the cohomology of the pure braid group
$P_n$ viewed as an $S_n$-representation.
\begin{thm}[Character interpretation of cycle polynomial coefficients]\label{thm:main-0}
Let $\lambda$ be a partition of $n$
and $N_\lambda(z)$ be a cycle polynomial.
Then
\[
N_\lambda(z) = \frac{|C_{\lambda}|}{n!}\sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^k h_n^k(\lambda) z^{n-k}}.
\]
where $h_n^k$ is the character of the $k$th cohomology of the pure braid group $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$, viewed as an $S_n$-representation.
\end{thm}
Theorem \ref{thm:main-0} is a rescaled version of a result of Lehrer \cite[Theorem 5.5]{Lehrer:1987}.
Lehrer arrived at it from his study of the Poincar\'{e} polynomials associated to the elements of a Coxeter group
acting on the complements of certain complex hyperplane arrangements.
We arrived at it through a direct study of the cycle polynomial $N_{\lambda}(z)$
appearing in the definition of the $z$-splitting measure, relating it to representation stability
using the twisted Grothendieck-Lefschetz formula
of Church, Ellenberg, and Farb \cite[Prop. 4.1]{CEF:2014}.
We include a proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main-0} (as Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs});
the method behind this proof also traces back to work of Lehrer
\cite{Lehrer:1992}.
At the end of Section \ref{sec:rep-interpretation} we apply Theorem \ref{thm:main-0}
together with the formula \eqref{eq:11} for $N_{\lambda}(z)$
to obtain explicit expressions for various
characters $h_n^k$ showing number-theoretic structure, and to determine restrictions on the support
of various $h_n^k$.
In Section \ref{sec:braid-group} we review Arnol'd's presentation of the cohomology ring
of the pure braid group.
In Section \ref{sec:N41} we use it derive an exact
sequence determining certain $S_n$-subrepresentations $A_n^k$ of $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$
which play the main role in our results. These subrepresentations lead to a direct sum
decomposition $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q) \simeq A_n^{k-1}\oplus A_n^k$, for each $k \ge 0$.
In Section \ref{sec:43a} we interpret the $A_n^k$
as the cohomology of an $(n-1)$-dimensional complex manifold $Y_n$ that carries an $S_n$-action.
The manifold $Y_n$ is the quotient of the pure configuration space $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$ of $n$ distinct
(labeled) points in $\mathbb C$ by a free action of $\mathbb C^{\times}$.
The main result of this paper, given in Section \ref{sec:splitting-characters}, expresses the $z$-splitting measures $\nu_{n, z}^{\ast}$
in terms of the characters $\chi_n^k$ of the $S_n$-representations $A_n^k$.
\begin{thm}[Character interpretation of splitting measure coefficients]\label{thm:main-1}
For each $n \ge 1$ and $0 \le k \le n-1$ there is an $S_n$-subrepresentation $A_n^k$ of $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$ (constructed explicitly in Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma})
with character $\chi_n^k$
such that for each partition $\lambda$ of $n$,
\[
\nu_{n,z}^\ast(C_\lambda) = \frac{|C_{\lambda}|}{n!} \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\chi_n^k(\lambda)\big(-\tfrac{1}{z}\big)^k.
\]
Thus the splitting measure coefficient $\alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda})=|C_{\lambda}| \,\alpha_n^k(\lambda)$ is given by
\[
\alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda}) =(-1)^k \frac{|C_{\lambda}|}{n!} \chi_n^{k}(\lambda).
\]
\end{thm}
In Section \ref{sec:hyperplane2} we interpret this result in terms of
cohomology of the manifold $Y_n$.
On setting $t = -\frac{1}{z}$, we have that for each $g \in S_n$,
\[
\nu_{n, z}^{\ast}(g) = \frac{1}{n!} \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \mathrm{Trace}(g, H^k(Y_n, \mathbb Q)) t^k,
\]
which is a value of the equivariant Poincar\'{e} polynomial for $Y_n$ with respect to the $S_n$-action (Theorem \ref{thm:splitting-coeffs2}).
{In particular we obtain the following topological interpretation
of the $1$-splitting measure, as the special case $t=-1$.}
\begin{thm}[Topological interpretation of $1$-splitting measure]\label{thm:cor-main-1a}
Let $Y_n$ denote the open complex manifold $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^{\times}$,
which carries an $S_n$-action under permutation of the $n$ points.
Then the rescaled $1$-splitting measure $\nu^*_{n,1}(\cdot)$ evaluated
at elements $g \in S_n$
is the equivariant Euler characteristic of $Y_n$,
\[
\nu^*_{n,1}(g) = \frac{1}{n!}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}{ (-1)^k \mathrm{Trace}(g, H^k( Y_n, \mathbb Q))},
\]
with respect to its $S_n$-action.
\end{thm}
In Section \ref{sec:52} we obtain another corollary of Theorem \ref{thm:main-1}.
For $z = -\frac{1}{m}$ with $m \ge 1$, the rescaled splitting measure
$\frac{n!}{|C_\lambda|}\nu_{n,z}^{k} (C_\lambda)$ is the character of an $S_n$-representation, and when $z= \frac{1}{m}$
it is the character of a virtual $S_n$-representation (Theorem \ref{thm:main-2a}).
In Section \ref{sec:53} we deduce an interesting consequence concerning the $S_n$-action on
the full cohomology ring $H^{\bullet}(P_n, \mathbb Q)$.
{The structure of the cohomology ring of the pure braid group $H^{\bullet}(P_n, \mathbb Q)$
as an $S_n$-module has an extensive literature.
Orlik and Solomon \cite{OrlikS:1980} noted that $H^{\bullet}(P_n, \mathbb Q) \simeq H^{\bullet} (M(\mathcal{A}_n), \mathbb Q)$ as $S_n$-modules, where
$$M(\mathcal{A}_n) = \mathbb C^n \smallsetminus \cup_{H \in \mathcal{A}_n} H$$
is the complement of the (complexified) braid arrangement $\mathcal{A}_n$, i.e. the arrangement of $n(n-1)/2$ hyperplanes $z_i = z_j$
in $\mathbb C^n$ where $1\leq i < j \leq n$ are the coordinate functionals of $\mathbb C^n$. }
The structure of the cohomology groups $H^k(M(\mathcal{A}_n), \mathbb C) = H^k(M(\mathcal{A}_n),\mathbb Q)\otimes \mathbb C$ as $S_n$-representations was determined
in 1986 by Lehrer and Solomon \cite[Theorem 4.5]{LS:1986} in terms of induced representations
$\mathrm{Ind}_{Z(C_\lambda)}^{S_n}(\xi_{\lambda}) $ for specific linear representations $\xi_{\lambda}$ on the centralizers $Z(C_{\lambda})$ of
conjugacy classes $C_{\lambda}$ having $n-k$ cycles.
In 1987 Lehrer \cite[p. 276]{Lehrer:1987} noted that his results on Poincar\'{e} polynomials
implied the ``curious consequence'' that the
action of $S_n$ on $\bigoplus_k H^{k}(M(\mathcal{A}_n, \mathbb C))$ is ``almost'' the regular representation in the sense that the dimension is $n!$ and the character $\theta(g)$
of this representation is $0$ unless $g$ is the identity element or a transposition, see
also \cite[Corollary (5.5)', Prop. (5.6)]{Lehrer:1987}.
where $r$ is a reflection and $1$ is the trivial representation.
In Section \ref{sec:53} we apply
Theorem \ref{thm:main-1} together with
values of the $(-1)$-splitting measure computed in \cite{Lagarias:2016} to
make a precise connection between the
$S_n$-representation structure on pure braid group cohomology and the regular representation $\mathbb Q[S_n]$.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:main-2}
Let $\mathbf{1}_n$, $\mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n$, and $\mathbb Q[S_n]$ be the trivial, sign, and regular representations of $S_n$ respectively. Then there is an isomorphism of $S_n$-representations,
\begin{equation*}
\label{reg isom}
\bigoplus_{k=0}^n{H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)\otimes \mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n^{\otimes k}} \cong \mathbb Q[S_n].
\end{equation*}
Here $\mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n^{\otimes k}\cong \mathbf{1}_n$ or $\mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n$ according to whether $k$ is even or odd.
\end{thm}
When combined with Lehrer's \cite[Prop. 5.6 (i)]{Lehrer:1987} determination
{of the character $\theta$
as $2 \,\mathrm{Ind}_{\langle \tau \rangle}^{S_n}(1)$, where $\tau$ is a transposition,}
this result implies that each of the characters of the $S_n$-representations acting on the even-dimensional cohomology, resp. odd-dimensional cohomology are supported on the identity element plus transpositions. We comment on other related work in Section \ref{sec:12}.
{ In Section \ref{sec:stability} we describe further interpretations of the representations $A_n^k$
in terms of other combinatorial homology theories.
For fixed $k$ and varying $n$, the sequence of $S_n$-representations $H^{k} (P_n, \mathbb Q)$ was one of
the basic examples exhibiting
\emph{representation stability} in the sense of Church and Farb \cite{CF:2013}, see \cite{CEF:2014}, \cite{CEF:2015}).}
We show in Proposition \ref{prop:connections} that the representations $A_n^k$ are isomorphic to others appearing in the literature
known to exhibit representation stability. Hersh and Reiner \cite[Corollary 5.4]{HerRein:2015} { determine the precise rate of stabilization of these representations,}
yielding the following result.
\begin{thm}[Representation stability for $A_n^k$]\label{thm:main-3a}
For each fixed $k \ge 1$,
the sequence of $S_n$-representations $A_n^k$
with characters $\chi_n^k$ are representation stable, and stabilize sharply at $n=3k+1$.
\end{thm}
To summarize these results:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
We start from {a construction in} number theory: a set of probability measures on $S_n$ that
{describe the distribution of degree $n$ squarefree monic polynomial factorizations $\pmod{p}$} defined for a parameter $z$ being a prime $p$. These measure values
interpolate at each fixed $g \in S_n$ in the $z$-variable as polynomials in
$1/z$ to define complex-valued measures on $S_n$.
\item[(ii)]
We make a connection {of the interpolated measures as functions of $z$} to topology and representation theory:
For fixed $n$ the $k$th Laurent coefficients of the $z$-parametrization at $g \in S_n$
(rescaled by $n!$) coincide with the character of an
$S_n$-subrepresentation $A_n^k$
of the cohomology of the pure braid group $P_n$, which is an $S_n$-representation on the cohomology of
{ the complex manifold} $Y_n= \mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C) / \mathbb C^{\times}$. As $n$ varies with $k$ fixed these
coefficients { exhibit} representation stability as $n \to \infty.$
\item[(iii)]
We deduce that (rescaled) measure values at values $z= -\frac{1}{m}$ for $m \ge 1$ coincide with characters of
certain $S_n$-representations; those at $z= \frac{1}{m}$ with $m \ge 1$ coincide with certain virtual $S_n$-representations.
For each $n$ these representations combine
stable and unstable cohomology of $P_n$.
\item[(iv)]As a by-product we find a precise connection between the (total) cohomology of the pure braid group
as an $S_n$-representation and the regular representation of $S_n$.
\end{itemize}
{The main observation of this paper is the relation of these interpolation measures to representation theory.
We demonstrate this relation by calculation, and leave open the problem of finding
a deeper conceptual explanation for its existence.}
\subsection{Related work}\label{sec:12}
The representations $A_n^k$ have appeared in the literature in numerous places.
In particular, a 1995 result of Getzler \cite[Corollary 3.10]{Getzler:1995} permits an identification of
$A_n^k$ as an $S_n$-module with the $k$th cohomology group of the moduli space $\mathcal{M}_{0, n+1}$ of
the Riemann sphere with $n+1$ marked points, viewed as an $S_n$-module, holding one point fixed. Getzler identifies this cohomology
with the $S^1$-equivariant cohomology of
$\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$, which is the cohomology of $Y_n$ given in Theorem \ref{thm:splitting-coeffs2}.
Some more recent occurrences of $A_n^k$ are discussed in Section \ref{sec:stability}.
In connection with Theorem \ref{thm:main-2}, in 1996 Gaiffi \cite{Gai:1996} further explained Lehrer's
formula $\theta= 2 \,\mathrm{Ind}_{\langle \tau \rangle}^{S_n}(1)$
by showing that
\[
H^{\bullet}( M(\mathcal{A}_{n-1}), \mathbb C) \simeq H^{\bullet}( M(d\mathcal{A}_{n-1}), \mathbb C) \otimes \big(\mathbb C \oplus \tfrac{\mathbb C[\varepsilon]}{ \varepsilon^2}\big),
\]
as $S_n$-modules, where $d\mathcal{A}_{n-1}$ is obtained by a deconing construction,
while the class $\varepsilon$ has degree $1$ and carries the
trivial $S_n$-action. (His space $M(\mathcal{A}_{n-1})$ lies in $\mathbb C^{n-1}$ and is obtained by restricting the braid arrangement on $\mathbb C^n$
to the hyperplane $x_1+ x_2 + \cdots + x_n=0$ in $\mathbb C^{n}$, and the deconed configuration space $M(d\mathcal{A}_{n-1}) \subset \mathbb C^{n-2}$.)
On comparison with our direct sum decomposition we have $H^k(d \mathcal{A}_{n-1}, \mathbb C) \simeq A_n^k$ as $S_n$-modules,
showing that the deconed space $d\mathcal{A}_{n-1}$ has an isomorphic cohomology ring as the complex manifold $Y_n$ with
an appropriate $S_n$-module structure.
Gaiffi and also Mathieu \cite{Mathieu:1996}
showed there is a ``hidden'' $S_{n+1}$-action on this cohomology ring.
For more recent developments on the ``hidden'' action see Callegaro and Gaiffi \cite{CallegaroG:2015}.
\subsection{Plan of the Paper }\label{subsec: plan}
In Section \ref{sec:splitting-measure} we recall properties of the $z$-splitting measures from \cite{Lagarias-W:2015}.
In Section \ref{sec:rep-interpretation} we use the twisted Grothendieck-Lefschetz formula to relate the coefficients of cycle polynomials
to the characters of the $S_n$-representations $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$.
In Section \ref{sec:braid-group} we discuss the cohomology $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$ of the pure braid group $P_n$,
and derive an exact sequence leading to the construction of the $S_n$-representations $A_n^k$.
In Section \ref{sec:splitting-characters} we express
the splitting measure coefficients $\alpha_n^k(C_\lambda)$ in terms of the character $\chi_n^k$ of the representation $A_n^k$.
In Section \ref{sec:stability} we discuss representation stability and connect the $S_n$-representations $A_n^k$ with others in the literature.
\subsection{Notation} \label{subsec:notation}
\begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=*]
\item $q=p^f$ denotes a prime power.
\item The set of monic, degree $n$, square-free polynomials in $\mathbb F_q[x]$ is denoted $\mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)$.
\item We write partitions either as $\lambda =\big[\lambda_1, \lambda_2, \cdots, \lambda_{\ell}\big]$,
with parts $\lambda_1 \ge \lambda_2 \ge \cdots$
eventually $0$, or as $\lambda = (1^{m_1} 2^{m_2}\cdots)$ where $m_j = m_j(\lambda)$ is the number of parts of $\lambda$ of size $j$.
The length of $\lambda$ is $\ell(\lambda) = \max\{ r : \lambda_r \ge 1\}$, the size of $\lambda$ is $|\lambda| = \sum_{i} \lambda_i = \sum_j{jm_j}$,
and $\lambda_i$ is the $i$th largest part of $\lambda$. (Compare \cite{Macdonald:1995}.)
\item Each partition $\lambda$ of $n$ corresponds to a conjugacy class
$C_{\lambda}$ of $S_n$ given by the common cycle structure of the elements in $C_\lambda$.
We let $Z_\lambda$ denote the centralizer of $C_{\lambda}$ in $S_n$. The size of the centralizer and conjugacy class are
\[
z_\lambda := |Z_{\lambda}| = \prod_{j \geq 1}{j^{m_j(\lambda)}m_j(\lambda)!} \hspace{2em} c_\lambda:= |C_{\lambda}|= \frac{n!}{z_\lambda}
\]
respectively. Note that $c_\lambda z_\lambda = n!$.
\item
Following Stanley \cite{Stanley:1997}, we let
$\mathrm{Par}(n)$ denote the set of partitions of $n$ and $\mathrm{Par} = \bigcup_n{\mathrm{Par}(n)}$ the set of all partitions. However
in Section \ref{sec:stability}, we let $\Pi_n$ denote the set of partitions of $n$, partially ordered by refinement.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Splitting Measures}\label{sec:splitting-measure}
We review the splitting measures introduced in \cite{Lagarias-W:2015}, summarize their properties, and introduce the normalized splitting measures.
\subsection{Necklace polynomials and cycle polynomials}\label{subsec:necklace}
\begin{defi}\label{de21}
{\em
For $j\geq 1$, the \emph{$j$th necklace polynomial} $M_j(z)\in \frac{1}{j}\mathbb Z[z]$ is
\[
M_j(z) := \frac{1}{j}\sum_{d\mid j}{\mu(d) z^{j/d}},
\]
where $\mu(d)$ is the M\"{o}bius function.}
\end{defi}
Moreau \cite{Moreau:1872} noted in 1872
that for all integers $m \ge 1$, $M_j(m)$ is the number of distinct
necklaces having $j$ beads drawn from a set of $m$ colors, up to cyclic permutation.
This fact motivated Metropolis and Rota \cite{Metropolis:1983} to name them {\em necklace polynomials.}
Relevant to the present paper, $M_j(q)$ is the number of monic, degree $j$, irreducible polynomials in
$\mathbb F_q[X]$ \cite[Prop. 2.1]{Rosen:2002}.
The factorization type of a polynomial $f\in \mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)$
is the partition formed by the degrees of its irreducible factors, which we write $[f]$.
\begin{defi}\label{def: cycle}
{\em
Given a partition $\lambda$ of $n$, the \emph{cycle polynomial} $N_\lambda(z) \in \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\mathbb Z[z]$ is
\[
N_\lambda(z) := \prod_{j\geq 1}{\binom{M_j(z)}{m_j(\lambda)}},
\]
where $\binom{\alpha}{m}$ is the usual extension of a binomial coefficient,
\[
\binom{\alpha}{m} := \frac{1}{m!}\prod_{k=0}^{m-1}{(\alpha - k)}.
\]
}
\end{defi}
The cycle polynomial $N_\lambda(z)$ has degree $n = |\lambda|$ and is integer valued for $z\in\mathbb Z$.
The number of $f\in \mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)$ with $[f] = \lambda$ is $N_\lambda(q)$ (see \cite[Sect. 4]{Lagarias-W:2015}.)
\subsection{$z$-splitting measures}\label{subsec:splitting}
If $\lambda$ a partition of $n$, then the probability of a uniformly chosen $f\in \mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)$ having factorization type $\lambda$ is
\[
\mathrm{Prob}\{f\in \mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q) : [f] = \lambda\} = \frac{N_\lambda(q)}{|\mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)|}.
\]
When $n = 1$, $|\mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)| = q$ and for $n\geq 2$ we have $|\mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)| = q^n - q^{n-1}$.
(See \cite[Prop. 2.3]{Rosen:2002} for a proof via generating functions. A proof due to Zieve appears in \cite[Lem. 4.1]{Weiss:2013}.) Hence, the probability is a rational function in $q$.
Replacing $q$ by a complex-valued parameter $z$ yields the $z$-splitting measure.
\begin{defi}\label{de23}
For $n \ge 2$ the \emph{$z$-splitting measure} $\nu_{n,z}^*(C_{\lambda}) \in \mathbb Q(z)$
is given by
\[
\nu_{n,z}^{\ast}(C_{\lambda}) := \frac{N_\lambda(z)}{z^n - z^{n-1}}.
\]
\end{defi}
\begin{prop}\label{laurent-poly}
For each partition $\lambda$ of $n \ge 1$, the rational function
$\nu_{n, z}^{\ast}(C_{\lambda})$ is a polynomial in $\frac{1}{z}$
of degree at most $n-1$. Thus it may be written as
\[
\nu_{n, z}^{\ast}(C_{\lambda}) = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda})\big(\tfrac{1}{z}\big)^k.
\]
The function $\nu_{1, z}^{\ast}(C_{1}) = 1$ is independent of $z$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} The case $n=1$ is clear.
For $n\geq 2$ we have $N_\lambda(1) = 0$ by \cite[Lemma 2.5]{Lagarias:2016}, whence $\frac{N_\lambda(z)}{z-1}$
is a polynomial of degree at most $n-1$ in $z$. Therefore,
\[
\nu_{n, z}^{\ast}(C_\lambda) = \frac{N_\lambda(z)}{z^n - z^{n-1}} = \frac{1}{z^{n-1}}\left(\frac{N_\lambda(z)}{z-1}\right)
\]
is a polynomial in $\frac{1}{z}$ of degree at most $n - 1$.
\end{proof}
For $n \ge 2$ the Laurent polynomial $\nu_{n, z}^{\ast}(C_{\lambda})$ is of degree at most $n-2$ since
$z \mid N_{\lambda}(z)$ (\cite[Lemma 4.3]{Lagarias-W:2015}); that is, $\alpha_n^{n-1}(C_{\lambda}) =0$.
Tables \ref{table11} and \ref{table12} give
$\nu^*_{n,z}(C_{\lambda})$, exhibiting the splitting measure coefficients $\alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda})$
for $n=4$ and $n=5$.
\begin{table}[h]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l |c |c| l | l }
\hline
$\lambda$ & $|C_\lambda|$ & $z_\lambda$ & $\nu^*_{4,z}(C_{\lambda})$ \\ \hline
$[1,1,1,1]$ & $1$ & $24$& $\frac{1}{24}\big(1 -\frac{5}{z} + \frac{6}{z^2}\big)$ \\
$[2,1,1]$ & $6$ & $4$ &$\frac{1}{4}\big(1 - \frac{1}{z}\big)$ \\
$[2,2]$ & $3$ & $8$ &$\frac{1}{8}\big(1 - \frac{1}{z} - \frac{2}{z^2}\big)$ \\
$[3,1]$ & $8$ & $3$ &$\frac{1}{3}\big(1 + \frac{1}{z}\big)$ \\
$[4]$ & $6$ & $4$ &$\frac{1}{4}\big(1 + \frac{1}{z}\big)$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\medskip
\caption{Values of the $z$-splitting measures $\nu_{4, z}^{\ast}(C_\lambda)$ on partitions $\lambda$ of $n=4$.}
\label{table11}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l |c |c| l | l |}
\hline
$\lambda$ & $|C_\lambda|$ & $z_\lambda$ & $\nu^*_{5,z}(C_\lambda)$ \\ \hline
$[1,1,1,1,1]$ &$1$ & $120$ &$\frac{1}{120}\big(1 - \frac{9}{z} + \frac{26}{z^2} - \frac{24}{z^3}\big)$ \\
$[2,1,1,1]$ & $10$ &$12$ &$\frac{1}{12}\big(1 - \frac{3}{z} + \frac{2}{z^2}\big)$ \\
$[2,2,1]$ & $15$ &$8$ &$\frac{1}{8}\big(1 - \frac{1}{z} - \frac{2}{z^2}\big)$ \\
$[3,1,1]$ & $20$ &$6$ &$\frac{1}{6}\big(1 - \frac{1}{z^2}\big)$ \\
$[3,2]$ & $20$ &$6$ &$\frac{1}{6}\big(1 - \frac{1}{z^2}\big)$ \\
$[4,1]$ & $30$ &$4$ &$\frac{1}{4}\big(1 + \frac{1}{z}\big)$ \\
$[5]$ & $24$ &$5$ &$\frac{1}{5}\big(1 + \frac{1}{z} + \frac{1}{z^2} + \frac{1}{z^3}\big)$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\medskip
\caption{Values of the $z$-splitting measures $\nu_{5, z}^{\ast}(C_\lambda)$ on partitions $\lambda$ of $n=5$.}
\label{table12}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\newpage
\section{Interpretation of Cycle Polynomial Coefficients}\label{sec:rep-interpretation}
In Section \ref{subsec:necklace} we defined
the cycle polynomials $N_\lambda(z) \in \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\mathbb Z[z]$ for each partition $\lambda$ of $n$.
In this section we express the coefficients of $N_\lambda(z)$ as a function of $\lambda$
in terms of characters $h_n^k$ of the cohomology of the pure braid group $P_n$ viewed as an $S_n$-representation.
We establish this connection using the twisted Grothendieck-Lefschetz formula of Church, Ellenberg, and Farb \cite{CEF:2014}.
Using explicit formulas for the cycle polynomials we obtain constraints on the support of $h_n^k$,
and we compute $h_n^k(\lambda)$ for varying $n$ in several examples.
\subsection{Cohomology of the pure braid group}\label{subsec:braid-group}
Given a set $X$ of $n$ distinct points in $3$-dimensional
affine space, the \emph{braid group} $B_n$ consists of homotopy classes of simple, non-intersecting paths beginning and terminating in $X$, with concatenation as the group operation. Each element of $B_n$ determines a permutation of $X$, giving a short exact sequence of groups
\[
0 \rightarrow P_n \rightarrow B_n \xrightarrow{\pi} S_n \rightarrow 0.
\]
Then $P_n := \ker \pi$
is called the \emph{pure braid group}. $P_n$ consists of homotopy classes of simple, non-intersecting \emph{loops} based in $X$. The action of $S_n$ on $X$ induces an action on $P_n$ by permuting the loops. Thus, for each $k$, the $k$th group cohomology $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$ carries an $S_n$-representation whose character we denote by $h_n^k$.
\subsection{Twisted Grothendieck-Lefschetz formula}\label{subsec:twist}
A \emph{character polynomial} is a polynomial $P(x) \in \mathbb Q[x_j : j\geq 1]$.
Character polynomials induce functions $P: \mathrm{Par} \rightarrow \mathbb Q$ by
\[
P(\lambda) := P\big(m_1(\lambda), m_2(\lambda), \ldots\big),
\]
noting that $m_i(\lambda) = 0$ for all but finitely many $i$.
For $f \in \mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)$ we let $P(f) := P([f])$.
Given two $\mathbb Q$-valued functions $F$ and $G$ defined on $S_n$ let
\[
\langle F, G \rangle := \frac{1}{n!}\sum_{g \in S_n}{F(g)G(g)}.
\]
The following Theorem is due to Church, Ellenberg, and Farb \cite[Prop. 4.1]{CEF:2014}.
\begin{thm}[Twisted Grothendieck-Lefschetz formula for $\mathrm{PConf}_n$]
\label{GrothLef}
Given a prime power $q$, an integer $n\geq 1$, and a character polynomial $P$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{twistEq}
\sum_{f\in \mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)}{P(f)} = \sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^k \big\langle P, h_n^k\big\rangle\, q^{n-k}},
\end{equation}
where $h_n^k$ is the character of
the cohomology of the pure braid group $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$.
\end{thm}
The classic {Lefschetz trace formula} counts the fixed points of an endomorphism $f$ on a compact manifold $M$ by the
trace of the induced map on the singular cohomology of $M$.
One may interpret the $\overline{\mathbb F}_q$ points on an algebraic variety $V$ defined over $\mathbb F_q$ as the fixed points of the
\emph{geometric Frobenius endomorphism} of $V$.
Using the machinery of $\ell$-adic \'{e}tale cohomology, Grothendieck \cite{Gro:1963} generalized Lefschetz's formula to
count the number of points in $V(\mathbb F_q)$
by the trace of
Frobenius on the \'{e}tale cohomology of $V$.
For nice varieties $V$ defined over $\mathbb Z$, there are comparison theorems relating the \'{e}tale cohomology of $V(\overline{\mathbb F}_q)$ to
the singular cohomology of $V(\mathbb C)$.
This connects the topology of a complex manifold to point counts of a variety over a finite field. For hyperplane complements the connection was
made in 1992 by Lehrer \cite{Lehrer:1992}, and for equivariant actions of a finite group on varieties the
equivariant Poincar\'{e} polynomials were determined by Kisin and Lehrer \cite{KisinL:2002} in 2002.
Church, Ellenberg, and Farb \cite{CEF:2014} build upon Grothendieck's extension of the Lefschetz formula to relate point counts on natural subsets of $\mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)$ to the singular cohomology of the covering space $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C) \rightarrow \mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb C)$.
$\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$ is the space of $n$ distinct, labelled points in $\mathbb C$. The space $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$ has fundamental group $P_n$, the pure braid group,
and is a $K(\pi,1)$ for this group. Hence, the singular cohomology of $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$ is the same as the group cohomology of $P_n$.
This fact yields the connection between $\mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)$ on the left hand side of \eqref{twistEq} and the character of the pure braid group cohomology.
\subsection {Cycle polynomials and pure braid group cohomology}\label{subsec:cycle-braid}
We express the coefficients of the cycle polynomials $N_\lambda(z)$ in terms of the characters $h_n^k$ as an application of Theorem \ref{GrothLef}.
Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} is equivalent to Lehrer's \cite[Theorem 5.5]{Lehrer:1987} by comparing numerators and making a slight change of variables.
\begin{thm}\label{cycle-coeffs}
Let $\lambda$ be a partition of $n$,
then
\[
N_\lambda(z) = \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^k h_n^k(\lambda) z^{n-k}},
\]
where $h_n^k$ is the character of the $S_n$-representation $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Define the character polynomial $1_\lambda(x) \in \mathbb Q[x_j : j \geq 1]$ by
\[
1_\lambda(x) = \prod_{j\geq 1}{\binom{x_j}{m_j(\lambda)}}.
\]
Observe that for a partition $\mu \in \mathrm{Par}(n)$ we have
\[
1_\lambda(\mu) = \begin{cases} 1 & \text{if }\mu = \lambda,\\ 0 & \text{otherwise.}\end{cases}
\]
Therefore,
\[
N_\lambda(q) = \sum_{f\in \mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)}{1_\lambda(f)}.
\]
On the other hand, by Theorem \ref{GrothLef} we have
\[
\sum_{f\in \mathrm{Conf}_n(\mathbb F_q)}{1_\lambda(f)} = \sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^k \big\langle 1_\lambda, h_n^k\big\rangle q^{n-k} }.
\]
If $g \in S_n$, let $[g] \in \mathrm{Par}(n)$ be the partition given by the cycle lengths of $g$. Thus,
\[
\big\langle 1_\lambda, h_n^k\big\rangle = \frac{1}{n!}\sum_{g \in S_n}{1_\lambda(g)h_n^k(g)} =
\frac{1}{n!}\sum_{\substack{g \in S_n\\ [g]=\lambda}}{h_n^k(g)} = \frac{c_\lambda}{n!}h_n^k(\lambda) =
\frac{1}{z_\lambda}h_n^k(\lambda).
\]
Therefore the identity
\[
N_\lambda(q) = \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^k h_n^k(\lambda) q^{n-k}}
\]
holds for all prime powers $q$, giving the identity as polynomials in $\mathbb Q[z]$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
A recent result of Chen \cite[Theorem 1]{Chen:2016} also yields the identity in Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} by specializing at $t=0$.
\end{remark}
One can explicitly compute $h_n^k(\lambda)$ using Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs}
by expanding the formula \eqref{eq:11} for $N_\lambda(z)$ and comparing coefficients.
Lehrer \cite{Lehrer:1987} derives several corollaries this way.
Here we give further examples intended to explore possible connections with number theory.
We obtain restrictions on the support of $h_n^k$ in Proposition \ref{prop:support}. Then we
compute values of $h_n^k(\lambda)$ in Sections \ref{subsec:application-1} and \ref{subsec:application-2}.
For any fixed $k$, the $h_n^k$ are given by character polynomials, while $h_n^{n-k}$ for $k < 2n/3$ exhibit interesting arithmetic structure.
\subsection{Support restrictions on characters $h_n^k$ }\label{subsec:application-0}
The character $h_n^k$ is supported on partitions with at least one small part, while $h_n^{n-k}$ is supported on partitions
having at most $k$ different parts. The latter are {\em multi-rectangular Young diagrams} having at most $k$ steps,
using the terminology of Do\l ega et al. \cite[Sect. 1.7]{DolegaFS:2010} and \'{S}niady \cite{Sniady:2014}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:support}
Let $0 \le k \le n$ and $h_n^k$ be the character of the $S_n$-representation $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$, then
(1) $h_n^k$ is supported on partitions having at least one part of size
at most $2k$. The value $h_n^k(\lambda)$ is determined by $m_j(\lambda)$ for $1 \le j \leq 2k$.
(2) $h_n^{n-k}$ is supported on multi-rectangular partitions $\lambda$ having at most $k$ distinct values of $j$
with $m_j(\lambda)>0$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
(1) Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} implies $h_n^k(\lambda)$ is nonzero iff
the coefficient of $z^{n-k}$ in $N_{\lambda}(z)$ is nonzero.
The degree of $M_j(z) - \frac{1}{j}z^j$ is at most $\lfloor j/2 \rfloor$. Hence if $j > 2k$, then the coefficient of $z^{n-k}$ in $\Big( {M_j(z) \atop m_j(\lambda)} \Big)$ is zero.
Thus the only $j$ contributing to the coefficient of $z^{n-k}$ in $N_{\lambda}(z)$ in \eqref{eq:11} are those with $1 \le j\leq 2k$.
(2) Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} implies $h_n^{n-k}(\lambda)$ is nonzero iff the coefficient of $z^k$ in $N_\lambda(z)$ is nonzero. If $m_j(\lambda) > 0$, then $z$ divides $\Big( {M_j(z) \atop m_j(\lambda)} \Big)$. Hence if $m_j(\lambda) > 0$ for more than $k$ values of $j$, then $h_n^{n-k}(\lambda) = 0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
{Property (1) is a manifestation of representation stability of $h_n^k$, which says that for fixed $k$ and all sufficiently large $n$,
the values of $h_n^k(\lambda)$ are described by
a character polynomial in $\lambda$. A {\em character polynomial} for a partition $\lambda=(1^{m_1}2^{m_2} \cdots n^{m_n})$ is a polynomial in
the variables $m_j$, see Example \ref{h1-h2-example}.
Farb \cite{Farb:ICM2014} raised the problem of explicitly determining such character polynomials.}
Proposition \ref{prop:support} bounds which variables $m_j$ may occur in the character polynomial for $h_n^k$.
A known sharp representation stability property of $h_n^k$ is that it equals such a character polynomial for all $n \ge 3k+1$,
as shown in \cite[Theorem 1.1]{HerRein:2015}, taking dimension $d=2$.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Character values $h_n^k(\lambda)$ for fixed $\lambda$ and varying $k$}\label{subsec:application-1}
We give special cases of explicit determinations for $h_n^k(\lambda)$ for various fixed $\lambda$ and varying $k$ by
directly expanding the cycle polynomial $N_\lambda(z)$.
\begin{example}[Dimensions of cohomology]
The dimension of $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$ is the value of $h_n^k$ at the identity element, corresponding to the partition $(1^n)$. Since $M_1(z) = z$ and the centralizer of the identity in $S_n$ has order $z_{(1^n)} = n!$, we have
\[
N_{(1^n)}(z) = \binom{z}{n} = \frac{1}{n!}\prod_{i=0}^{n-1}(z - i) = \frac{1}{n!}\sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^k{n \brack n-k}z^{n-k}},
\]
where ${n \brack n-k}$ is an
{\em unsigned Stirling number of the first kind}. Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} says
\[
N_{(1^n)}(z) = \frac{1}{n!}\sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^k h_n^k\big((1^n)\big) z^{n-k}}.
\]
Comparing coefficients recovers the well-known formula due to Arnol'd \cite{Arn:1969}
for the dimension of the pure braid group cohomology:
\[
\mathrm{dim}\,H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q) = h_n^k\big((1^n)\big) = {n \brack n-k}.
\]
These values are given in Table \ref{betti}.
\end{example}
\begin{table}[h]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.8}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | r |r | r| r | r |r |r|r|r|r|r|}
\hline
$n$ $\backslash$ $k$ & $0$ & $1$ & $2$ & $3$ & $4$ & $5$ & $6$ & $7$ & $8$ \\ \hline
$1$ & $1$ &$0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
$2$ &$1$ & $1$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
$3$ & $1$ &$3$ & $2$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
$4$ & $1$ &$6$ &$11$ & $6$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
$5$ & $1$ &$10$ &$35$ & $50$ & $24$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
$6$ & $1$ &$15$ &$85$ & $225$ & $274$ & $120$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
$7$ & $1$ &$21$ &$175$ & $735$ & $1624$ & $1764$ & $720$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
$8$ & $1$ &$28$ &$322$ & $1960$ & $6769$ & $13132$ & $13068$ & $5040$ & $0$ \\
$9$ & $1$ &$36$ &$546$ & $4536$ & $22449$ & $67284$ & $118124$ & $109584$ & $40320$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\medskip
\caption{Betti numbers of pure braid group cohomology $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$.}
\label{betti}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{example}
The partition $\lambda = [n]$ corresponds to an $n$-cycle in $S_n$. The centralizer of an $n$-cycle has order $z_{[n]} = n$ and
\begin{equation}\label{first-exp}
N_{[n]}(z) = \binom{M_n(z)}{1} = M_n(z) = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{d\mid n}{\mu(d) z^{n/d}}.
\end{equation}
Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} gives us
\begin{equation}\label{second-exp}
N_{[n]}(z) = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^kh_n^k\big([n]\big)z^{n-k}}.
\end{equation}
Comparing coefficients, we find that
\begin{equation*}\label{eqn:304}
h_n^{n-k}\big([n]\big) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
(-1)^{n-k} \mu(\frac{n}{k}) & \mbox{if}~ k \mid n, \\
~~~ \\
0 & \mbox{if} ~~k\nmid n.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation*}
\end{example}
\subsection{Character values $h_n^k(\lambda)$ for fixed $k$ and varying $\lambda$}\label{subsec:application-2}
We now compute $h_n^k(\lambda)$ for fixed $k$ and varying $\lambda$.
\begin{example}[Computing $h_n^0$ and $h_n^n$]\label{h0 example}
The cases $k=0$ and $n$ are both constant: $h_n^0 = 1$ and $h_n^n = 0$.
The leading coefficient of $N_\lambda(z)$ is $1/z_\lambda$, hence Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} tells us $h_n^0(\lambda) = 1$ for all $\lambda$. For $j\geq 1$, we have $z \mid M_j(z)$, from which it follows that $z \mid N_\lambda(z)$ for all partitions $\lambda$ of $n \geq 1$. In other words, for all $m_j \geq 1$
\[
\frac{1}{z_\lambda}(-1)^n h_n^n(\lambda) = N_\lambda(0) = 0.
\]
Thus $h_n^n(\lambda) = 0$ for all $\lambda$, and $H^n(P_n, \mathbb Q) =0.$
\end{example}
\begin{example}[Computing $h_n^1$ and $h_n^2$] \label{h1-h2-example}
Taking $\lambda= ( 1^{m_1} 2^{m_2} \cdots)$,
a careful analysis of the $z^{n-1}$ and $z^{n-2}$ coefficients in $N_\lambda(z)$ and Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} yields the following formulas
\begin{align*}
h_n^1(\lambda) &= \binom{m_1}{2} + \binom{m_2}{1}\\
h_n^2(\lambda) &= 2\binom{m_1}{3} + 3\binom{m_1}{4} +\binom{m_1}{2}\binom{m_2}{1}-\binom{m_2}{2} - \binom{m_3}{1} - \binom{m_4}{1},
\end{align*}
where $m_j = m_j(\lambda)$.
These formulas represent $h_n^1$ and $h_n^2$ as character polynomials, and they appear
in \cite[Lemma 4.8]{CEF:2014}.
Note that $h_n^1(\lambda) = h_n^2(\lambda) = 0$ for partitions $\lambda$ having all parts larger than 2 and 4 respectively,
illustrating Proposition \ref{prop:support} (1).
\end{example}
\begin{example}[Computing $h_n^{n-1}$]
The $z$ coefficient of $N_\lambda(z)$ determines the value of $h_n^{n-1}(\lambda)$. Since each $j$ with $m_j(\lambda)>0$ contributes a factor of $z$ to $N_\lambda(z)$, $h_n^{n-1}$ is supported on partitions of the form $\lambda = (j^{m})$. Note that the $z$ coefficient of the necklace polynomial $M_j(z)$ is $\mu(j)/j$. Let $\lambda = (j^{m})$, then the $z$ coefficient of
\[
N_\lambda(z) = \binom{M_j(z)}{m} = \frac{M_j(z)(M_j(z) - 1)\cdots(M_j(z) - m + 1)}{m!}
\]
is $(-1)^{m -1}\frac{\mu(j)}{j m}$. Since $z_\lambda = j^{m}m!$, we conclude
\begin{equation*}\label{n-1}
h_n^{n-1}(\lambda) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
(-1)^{m - n}\mu(j) j^{m - 1} (m - 1)! & \mbox{if}~ \lambda= (j^{m}), \\
~~~ \\
0 & \mbox{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation*}
By \cite[Corollary $(5.5)^{' {} '}$]{Lehrer:1987} $h_n^{n-1} = \mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n \otimes \mathrm{Ind}_{c_{n}}^{S_n}(\zeta_n),$
where $c_n$ is a cyclic group of order $n$ and $\zeta_n$ is a faithful character on it,
noted earlier by Stanley \cite{Stanley:1982}.
\end{example}
\begin{example}[Computing $h_n^{n-2}$]
The $z^2$ coefficient of $N_\lambda(z)$ determines $h_n^{n-2}(\lambda)$.
Proposition \ref{prop:support} (2)
tells us that $h_n^{n-2}(\lambda) = 0$ when $m_j(\lambda) > 0$ for at least three $j$. We
treat the two remaining cases $\lambda = (i^{m_i} j^{m_j})$ and $\lambda = ( j^{m})$ in turn.
If $\lambda = (i^{m_i}j^{m_j})$, then the $z$ coefficient of $\Big( {M_i(z) \atop m_i} \Big)$ is $(-1)^{m_i -1}\frac{\mu(i)}{i m_i}$,
and similarly for $\Big( {M_j(z) \atop m_j} \Big)$.
We have $z_\lambda = (i^{m_i} m_i!)(j^{m_j}m_j!)$. Thus, by Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs}
\begin{align*}
h_n^{n-2}\big( (i^{m_1} j^{m_j}) \big)&= (-1)^{m_i + m_j - n} z_\lambda \frac{\mu(i)\mu(j)}{(i m_i )(jm_j)}\\
&= (-1)^{m_i + m_j - n} \big(\mu(i)i^{m_i -1}(m_i -1)!\big)\big(\mu(j) j^{m_j-1} (m_j-1)!\big).
\end{align*}
If $\lambda = (j^{m})$, then
the $z^2$ coefficient of $N_\lambda(z)$ receives a contribution of $(-1)^{m-1}\frac{\mu(j/2)}{j m}$ from the quadratic term of $M_j(z)$ if $j$ is even.
The $z$ coefficient of
$\Big({M_j(z) \atop m_j}\Big)/M_j(z)$ is
\[
\frac{\mu(j)}{j m!}\left( \sum_{i=1}^{m-1}{\frac{(-1)^{m-2}(m-1)!}{i}} \right) = (-1)^{m} \frac{\mu(j)}{j m} H_{m -1},
\]
where $H_{m-1}=\sum_{i=1}^{m-1} \frac{1}{i}$ denotes the {\em $(m-1)$th harmonic number}. The $z$ coefficient of $M_j(z)$ is $\frac{\mu(j)}{j}$.
Using the convention that the M\"{o}bius function $\mu(\alpha) $ vanishes at non-integral $\alpha$,
we arrive at the following expression for $h_n^{n-2}(\lambda)$:
\begin{align*}
h_n^{n-2}\big( (j^{m}) \big) &= z_\lambda (-1)^{m - n}\frac{\big(\mu(j)^2 H_{m-1} - \mu(\frac{j}{2})\big)}{jm}\\
&= (-1)^{m - n}\big(\mu(j)^2 H_{m-1} - \mu(\tfrac{j}{2})\big)j^{m - 1} (m -1)!.
\end{align*}
\end{example}
\section{Submodules $A_n^k$ of Pure Braid Group Cohomology}\label{sec:braid-group}
Starting from Arnol'd's presentation for the $S_n$-algebra $H^\bullet(P_n,\mathbb Q)$ we obtain a decomposition $H^k (P_n, \mathbb Q) = A_n^{k-1} \oplus A_n^k$ of $S_n$-modules.
The characters of the sequence $A_n^k$ of $S_n$-modules determine the splitting measure coefficients $\alpha_n^k(C_\lambda)$.
In Section \ref{sec:43a} we interpret $A_n^\bullet$ as the cohomology of $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^\times$, where $\mathbb C^\times$ acts freely on $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$ by scaling coordinates.
\subsection{Presentation of pure braid group cohomology ring}\label{sec:40}
Arnol'd \cite{Arn:1969} gave the following presentation of the cohomology ring $H^{\bullet}(P_n,\mathbb Q)$ of the pure braid group $P_n$ as an $S_n$-algebra.
\begin{thm}[Arnol'd] \label{arnold}
There is an isomorphism of graded $S_n$-algebras
\[
H^{\bullet}(P_n,\mathbb Q) \cong \Lambda^{\bullet}[\omega_{i,j}]/\langle R_{i,j,k} \rangle,
\]
where $1 \leq i,j,k \leq n$ are distinct, $\omega_{i,j} = \omega_{j,i}$ have degree $1$, and
\[
R_{i,j,k} = \omega_{i,j}\wedge\omega_{j,k} + \omega_{j,k}\wedge\omega_{k,i} + \omega_{k,i}\wedge\omega_{i,j}.
\]
An element $g \in S_n$ acts on $\omega_{i,j}$ by $g\cdot \omega_{i,j} = \omega_{g(i),g(j)}$.
\end{thm}
In what follows, we identify $H^{\bullet}(P_n,\mathbb Q)$ with this presentation as a quotient of an exterior algebra.
The ring $\Lambda^{\bullet}[\omega_{i,j}]/\langle R_{i,j,k} \rangle$ is an example of an \emph{Orlik-Solomon algebra},
which arise as cohomology rings of complements of hyperplane arrangements
(see Orlik and Solomon \cite{OrlikS:1980}, Dimca and Yuzvinsky \cite{DY:2010}, and Yuzvinsky \cite{Yuzvinsky:2001}.)
\subsection{$S_n$-modules $A_n^k$ inside braid group cohomology} \label{sec:N41}
Let $\tau = \sum_{1\leq i< j \leq n}{\omega_{i,j}} \in H^1(P_n, \mathbb Q)$.
The element $\tau$ generates a trivial $S_n$-subrepresentation of $H^1(P_n,\mathbb Q)$.
We define maps $d^k: H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q) \rightarrow H^{k+1}(P_n,\mathbb Q)$ for each $k$ by $\nu \mapsto \nu \wedge \tau$. This map is
linear and $S_n$-equivariant, since
\[
g \cdot d^k(\nu) = g\cdot (\nu \wedge \tau) = (g\cdot \nu) \wedge (g \cdot \tau) = (g\cdot \nu) \wedge \tau = d^k(g\cdot \nu).
\]
From $d^{k+1}\circ d^k = 0$ we conclude that
\begin{equation*}
0 \rightarrow H^0(P_n, \mathbb Q) \xrightarrow{d^0} H^1(P_n, \mathbb Q) \xrightarrow{d^1} \cdots \xrightarrow{d^{n-1}} H^n(P_n, \mathbb Q) \xrightarrow{d^n} 0
\end{equation*}
is a chain complex of $S_n$-representations. It follows from the general theory of Orlik-Solomon algebras that the above sequence
is exact \cite[Thm. 5.2]{DY:2010}.
We include a proof in this case for completeness.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:exact-lemma}
In the above notation,
\begin{equation} \label{Exact}
0 \rightarrow H^0(P_n, \mathbb Q) \xrightarrow{d^0} H^1(P_n, \mathbb Q) \xrightarrow{d^1} \cdots \xrightarrow{d^{n-1}} H^n(P_n, \mathbb Q) \xrightarrow{d^n} 0
\end{equation}
is an exact sequence of $S_n$-representations. Set $A_n^k := \mathrm{Im}(d^k)
\subset H^{k+1}(P_n, \mathbb Q)$.
Hence we have an isomorphism of $S_n$-representations for each $k$,
\begin{equation*}\label{k-split}
H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q) \cong A_n^{k-1} \oplus A_n^{k}.
\end{equation*}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Arnol'd \cite[Cor. 3]{Arn:1969} describes an additive basis $\mathcal B_k$ for $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$ comprised of all simple wedge products
\begin{equation*}
\omega_{i_1, j_1} \wedge \cdots \wedge \omega_{i_k, j_k}\text{ such that } i_s < j_s\text{ for each $s$, and }j_1 < j_2 < \ldots < j_k.
\end{equation*}
Let
\[
U_k = \{ \omega_{i_1,j_1} \wedge \cdots \wedge \omega_{i_k,j_k} \in \mathcal B_k : (i_s, j_s) \neq (n-1, n)\},
\]
for $k >0$ and $U_0 = \{1\}$. Then set
\[
\mathcal C_k = U_k \cup \{\omega \wedge \tau : \omega \in U_{k-1}\}.
\]
\noindent{\bf Claim.} {\em $\mathcal C_k$ is a basis of $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$.}\\
For example, we have
\[
\mathcal C_1 = \{\omega_{i,j} : (i,j) \neq (n-1, n)\} \cup \{\tau\},
\]
which is clearly a basis for $H^1(P_n,\mathbb Q)$.
To prove the claim, since $|\mathcal B_k| = |\mathcal C_k|$, it suffices to show $\mathcal C_k$ spans $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$. Note that
\[
\mathcal B_k = U_k \cup \{\omega \wedge \omega_{n-1,n} : \omega \in U_{k-1}\},
\]
further reducing the problem to expressing $\omega \wedge \omega_{n-1,n}$ as a linear combination of $\mathcal C_k$ for each $\omega \in U_{k-1}$.
Given $\omega = \omega_{i_1,j_1} \wedge \cdots \wedge \omega_{i_{k-1},j_{k-1}} \in U_{k-1}$, we use the relation
\[
\omega_{i_s,j}\wedge \omega_{i,j} = \omega_{i_s,i}\wedge\omega_{i,j} - \omega_{i_s,i}\wedge\omega_{i_s,j}
\]
to express $\omega \wedge \omega_{i,j}$ in terms of elements of $U_k$ as follows:
\[
\omega \wedge \omega_{i,j} = \begin{cases}
\pm \omega_{i_1,j_1}\wedge \cdots \wedge \omega_{i_s,j_s}\wedge \omega_{i,j} \wedge \omega_{i_{s+1},j_{s+1}} \wedge \cdots \wedge \omega_{i_{k-1},j_{k-1}}\\
\quad\quad\quad \quad\quad\quad\quad\quad \quad \mbox{for} \quad j_s < j < j_{s+1},\\
\pm \omega_{i_1,j_1} \wedge \cdots \wedge (\omega_{i_s,i}\wedge \omega_{i,j} - \omega_{i_s,i}\wedge \omega_{i_s,j}) \wedge \cdots \wedge \omega_{i_{k-1},j_{k-1}}\\
\quad\quad\quad \quad\quad\quad\quad\quad \quad \mbox{for} \quad j_s = j, i_s \neq i,\\
0 \quad\quad \quad\quad\quad \quad\quad\quad\,\,\, \mbox{for} \quad (i_s, j_s) = (i,j).
\end{cases}
\]
The first and third cases are easily seen to belong in the span of $U_k$. Since $i_s, i < j$ and $j$ does not occur twice as a largest subscript in
$\omega$, we see inductively that the second case also belongs in the span of $U_k$. Therefore,
$\omega \wedge \tau = \omega \wedge \omega_{n-1,n} + \nu$, where $\nu$ is in the span of $U_k$. Hence $\omega\wedge \omega_{n-1,n} = \omega \wedge \tau -\nu$ is in the span of $\mathcal C_k$ and we conclude that $\mathcal C_k$ is a basis, proving the claim.
We now show the sequence \eqref{Exact} is exact. Suppose $\nu \in \ker(d^k)$. Express $\nu$ in the basis $\mathcal C_k$ as
\[
\nu = \sum_{\omega \in U_k}{a_\omega\, \omega} + \sum_{\omega\in U_{k-1}}{b_\omega\, \omega}\wedge \tau.
\]
Then
\[
0 = d^k(\nu) = \nu \wedge \tau = \sum_{\omega \in U_k}{a_\omega \, \omega \wedge \tau}.
\]
Since $\omega \wedge \tau$ is an element of the basis $\mathcal C_{k+1}$ for each $\omega \in U_k$, we have $a_\omega= 0$. Hence, $\nu = \mu \wedge \tau = d^{k-1}(\mu)$ where
\[
\mu = \sum_{\omega \in U_{k-1}}{b_\omega \, \omega},
\]
so $\ker(d^k)= \mathrm{Im}(d^{k-1}).$
\end{proof}
Recall from Section \ref{subsec:application-1} that the
dimension of $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$ is given by an unsigned Stirling number of the first kind
\[
\dim\big(H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)\big)= {n \brack n - k},
\]
where the unsigned Stirling numbers are determined by the identity
$\prod_{k=0}^{n-1}{(x + k)} = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}{{n \brack k} x^k}.$
The exact sequence in Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma} shows the dimension of $A_n^k$ is
\[
\dim(A_n^k) = \sum_{j=0}^k {(-1)^j {n \brack n - k + j}}.
\]
Table \ref{table4} gives values of $\dim(A_n^k)$ for small $n$ and $k$; here $\dim (A_n^{n-1})=0$ for $n \ge 2$.
\begin{table}[h]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.9}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | r |r | r| r | r |r |r|r|r|r|}
\hline
$n$ $\backslash$ $k$ & $0$ & $1$ & $2$ & $3$ & $4$ & $5$ & $6$ & $7$ \\
\hline
$1$ & $1$ &$0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$\\
$2$ & $1$ &$0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$\\
$3$ & $1$ &$2$ &$0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$\\
$4$ & $1$ &$5$ &$6$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$\\
$5$ & $1$ &$9$ &$26$ & $24$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
$6$ & $1$ &$14$ &$71$ & $154$ & $120$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$\\
$7$ & $1$ &$20$ &$155$ & $580$ & $1044$ & $720$ & $0$ & $0$\\
$8$ & $1$ &$27$ &$295$ & $1665$ & $5104$ & $8028$ & $5040$ & $0$\\
$9$ & $1$ &$35$ &$511$ & $4025$ & $18424$ & $48860$ & $69264$ & $40320$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\medskip
\caption{$\dim(A_n^k)$}
\label{table4}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{$A_n^k$ as cohomology of a complex manifold with an $S_n$-action}\label{sec:43a}
Recall from Section \ref{subsec:twist}
that the pure configuration space $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$ is defined by
\[
\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C) = \{(z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_n) \in \mathbb C^n : z_i \neq z_j \text{ when } i\neq j\}.
\]
It is an open complex manifold, and
the symmetric group $S_n$ acts on $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$ by permuting coordinates. There is also a free action of $\mathbb C^\times$ on $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$ defined by
\[
c\cdot(z_1,z_2,\ldots, z_n) = (c z_1, c z_2, \ldots, c z_n).
\]
This action commutes with the $S_n$-action, hence it induces an action of $S_n$ on the quotient complex manifold $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^\times$.
Therefore $H^\bullet(\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^\times,\mathbb Q)$ is an $S_n$-algebra. We now relate the graded components
$H^k(\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^\times, \mathbb Q)$ to the $S_n$-submodules $A_n^k$ of
$H^k(\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C),\mathbb Q) = H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$ constructed in Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:equivariant}
Let $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^\times$ be the quotient of pure configuration space by the free $\mathbb C^\times$ action. The symmetric group
$S_n$ acts on $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^\times$ by permuting coordinates. Let $A_n^\bullet$ be the sequence of $S_n$-modules constructed in
Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma}. Then for each $k\geq 0$ we have an isomorphism of $S_n$-modules
\[
H^k(\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^\times,\mathbb Q)\cong A_n^k.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We regard $X_n := \mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$ as the total space of a $\mathbb C^{\times}$-bundle over the base
space $Y_n := \mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^\times$.
As noted in Section \ref{subsec:twist} the cohomology of $X_n$ is that of the pure braid group, with its $S_n$-action.
Viewing $\mathbb C^{\times}$ as $\mathbb R^+ \times S^1$,
we see that $X_n$
is an $\mathbb R^+$-bundle over the base space
$Z_n := \mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb R^+$, such that $Z_n$ is an $S^1$-bundle over $Y_n$.
The space $Z_n$ is a real-analytic manifold which inherits the $S_n$-action.
For any $(z_1,z_2, \ldots, z_n) \in \mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$, let $[[z_1,z_2, \ldots, z_n]]$ denote its image in $Z_n$
Since $z_1 \neq z_2$, we may
rescale this vector by $c = \frac{1}{|z_1- z_2|} \in \mathbb C^{\times}$ to get
$(\tilde{z}_1, \tilde{z}_2, \ldots, \tilde{z}_n) = \frac{1}{|z_1 - z_2|} (z_1, \ldots, z_n)$, which
comprise exactly the set of all $(\tilde{z}_1, \tilde{z}_2, \ldots, \tilde{z}_n) \in X_n$
satisfying the linear constraint $\tilde{z}_1 - \tilde{z}_2 \in U(1) = \{ z \in \mathbb C: \, |z|=1\}$.
We obtain a global section $Z_n \to X_n$ by mapping $[[z_1,z_2, \ldots, z_n]] \mapsto \frac{1}{|z_1 - z_2|}(z_1, \ldots, z_n)$,
so may regard $Z_n \subset X_n$, noting that it is invariant under the $S_n$-action. Under this embedding we see that $Z_n$ is
a strong deformation retract of $X_n$, so has the same homotopy type as $X_n$.
The retraction map is:
\[
h_t(z_1, z_2,\ldots, z_n) := \big((1-t) |z_1 -z_2| + t\big) \frac{1}{|z_1-z_2|} (z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_n) \quad \mbox{for} \quad 0 \le t\le 1.
\]
Consequently $H^k( X_n, \mathbb Q) \cong H^k(Z_n, \mathbb Q)$,
for each $k \ge 0$ as $S_n$-modules.
For any $(z_1,z_2, \ldots, z_n) \in X_n$, let $[z_1,z_2, \ldots, z_n]$ denote its image in $Y_n$.
Since $z_1 \neq z_2$, we may
rescale this vector by $\frac{1}{z_1- z_2} \in \mathbb C^{\times}$ to get
$(\tilde{z}_1, \tilde{z}_2, \ldots, \tilde{z}_n) = \frac{1}{z_1 - z_2}(z_1, \ldots, z_n)$, which
comprise exactly the set of all $(\tilde{z}_1, \tilde{z}_2, \ldots, \tilde{z}_n) \in X_n$
satisfying the linear constraint $\tilde{z}_1 - \tilde{z}_2 = 1$.
These define a global coordinate system for $Y_n$, identifying it as an open complex manifold,
and the map $Y_n \to X_n$ sending $[z_1, z_2 \ldots, z_n] \mapsto (\tilde{z}_1, \tilde{z}_2, \ldots, \tilde{z}_n)$
is a nowhere vanishing global section of this bundle, so we may view $Y_n \subset Z_n \subset X_n$.
This map is a nowhere vanishing section of $Y_n$ inside the $S^1$-bundle $Z_n$ as well.
The Gysin long exact sequence for $Z_n$ as an $S^1$-bundle over $Y_n$ is
\[
\xrightarrow{e_\wedge} H^{k}(Y_n, \mathbb Q) \rightarrow H^k(Z_n, \mathbb Q) \rightarrow H^{k-1}(Y_n, \mathbb Q)
\xrightarrow{e_\wedge} H^{k+1}(Y_n, \mathbb Q) \rightarrow H^{k+1}(Z_n, \mathbb Q) \rightarrow
\]
The Euler class $e \in H^2(Y_n, \mathbb Q)$ of this is zero since the bundle has a nowhere vanishing global section in $Z_n$.
Thus $e_\wedge$ is the zero map and the Gysin sequence
splits into short exact sequences
\[
0 \longrightarrow H^{k}(Y_n, \mathbb Q) \longrightarrow H^k(Z_n, \mathbb Q) \longrightarrow H^{k-1}(Y_n, \mathbb Q) \longrightarrow 0.
\]
The maps are $S_n$-equivariant, since the Gysin sequence is
functorial.
It follows from Maschke's theorem that
\begin{equation}
\label{sum decomp}
H^k(X_n,\mathbb Q) \cong H^k(Z_n, \mathbb Q) \cong H^{k-1}(Y_n,\mathbb Q) \oplus H^k(Y_n,\mathbb Q)
\end{equation}
as $S_n$-modules.
Since $H^{-1}(Y_n,\mathbb Q) = A_n^{-1} = 0$ by convention, we have $H^0(Y_n,\mathbb Q) \cong A_n^0 \cong H^0(Z_n,\mathbb Q) \cong H^0(X_n, \mathbb Q)$.
It then follows inductively from \eqref{sum decomp} and
\[
H^k(X_n,\mathbb Q) \cong A_n^{k-1} \oplus A_n^k,
\]
that $H^k(Y_n,\mathbb Q) \cong A_n^k$ as $S_n$-modules for all $k\geq 0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rmak}
The configuration space $\mathrm{PConf}(\mathbb C)$ is a hyperplane complement as treated in
the book of Orlik and Terao \cite{OrlikT:1992}. It equals
\[
M(\mathcal{A}_n): = \mathbb C^n \smallsetminus \bigcup_{H_{i,j} \in \mathcal{A}_n} H_{i,j},
\]
where
$\mathcal{A}_n :=\{ H_{i,j}: \, 1 \le i < j \le n\}$ denotes the {\em braid arrangement} of
hyperplanes
$H_{i,j} : z_i = z_j$ for $1 \le i< j\le n$.
\end{remark}
\section{Polynomial splitting measures and characters}\label{sec:splitting-characters}
We now express the splitting measure coefficients $\alpha_n^k(C_\lambda)$ in terms of the character values $\chi_n^k(\lambda)$
where $\chi_n^k$ is the character of the $S_n$-representation $A_n^k$ constructed in Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma}.
As a corollary we deduce that the rescaled $z$-splitting measures are characters when $z = -\frac{1}{m}$ and virtual characters when $z = \frac{1}{m}$, generalizing results from \cite{Lagarias:2016}.
\subsection{Expressing splitting measure coefficients by characters}\label{sec:51}
Recall,
\[
\nu_{n, z}^{\ast}(C_{\lambda}) = \frac{N_\lambda(z)}{z^n - z^{n-1}}= \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda}) \big(\tfrac{1}{z}\big)^k.
\]
We now express the splitting measure coefficient $\alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda})$ in terms of the character value $\chi_n^k(\lambda)$.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:splitting-coeffs}
Let $n\geq 2$ and $\lambda$ be a partition of $n$, then
\[
\nu^*_{n,z}(C_\lambda) = \frac{1}{z_\lambda} \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}{(-1)^k \chi_n^k(\lambda) \big(\tfrac{1}{z}\big)^k},
\]
where $\chi_n^k$ is the character of the $S_n$-representation $A_n^k$ defined in Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma}.
Thus,
\[
\alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda}) = \frac{1}{z_\lambda}(-1)^k \chi_n^k(\lambda).
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
In Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} we showed
\[
N_\lambda(z) = \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\sum_{k=0}^{n}{(-1)^k h_n^k(\lambda)z^{n-k}},
\]
where $h_n^k$ is the character of $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)$. The $S_n$-representations $A_n^k$ were defined in
Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma} where we showed that
\begin{equation}\label{dir sum}
H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q) \cong A_n^{k-1} \oplus A_n^k.
\end{equation}
Taking characters in \eqref{dir sum} gives
\[
h_n^k = \chi_n^{k-1} + \chi_n^k.
\]
We compute
\begin{align*}
\frac{N_\lambda(z)}{z^n} &= \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^kh_n^k(\lambda) \big(\tfrac{1}{z}\big)^k}\\
&= \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\sum_{k=0}^n{(-1)^k\big(\chi_n^{k-1}(\lambda) + \chi_n^k(\lambda)\big)\big(\tfrac{1}{z}\big)^k}\\
&= \big(1 - \tfrac{1}{z}\big)\frac{1}{z_\lambda}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}{(-1)^k \chi_n^k(\lambda)\big(\tfrac{1}{z}\big)^k}.
\end{align*}
Dividing both sides by $\big(1 - \frac{1}{z}\big)$ yields
\[
\nu_{n,z}^\ast(C_\lambda) = \frac{N_\lambda(z)}{\big(1 - \tfrac{1}{z}\big)z^n} = \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}{(-1)^k \chi_n^k(\lambda)\big(\tfrac{1}{z}\big)^k}.
\]
Comparing coefficients in the two expressions for $\nu_{n,z}^\ast(C_\lambda)$ we find
\[
\alpha_n^k(C_{\lambda}) = \frac{1}{z_\lambda}(-1)^k \chi_n^k(\lambda).
\]
\end{proof}
\subsection{Cycle polynomial and splitting measure as equivariant Poincar\'{e} polynomials} \label{sec:hyperplane2}
Given a complex manifold $X$, the \emph{Poincar\'{e} polynomial of $X$} is defined by
\[
P(X, t) = \sum_{k\geq 0}{\dim H^k(X,\mathbb Q) t^k}.
\]
If a finite group $G$ acts on $X$, then the cohomology $H^k(X,\mathbb Q)$ is a $\mathbb Q$-representation of $G$ with character $h_X^k$, and the \emph{equivariant Poincar\'{e} polynomial of $X$ at $g\in G$} is defined by
\[
P_g(X,t) = \sum_{k\geq 0}\mathrm{Trace}(g, H^k(X, \mathbb Q) t^k = \sum_{k \ge 0} h_X^k(g) t^k.
\]
Note that if $g = 1$ is the identity of $G$, then $h_X^k(1) = \dim H^k(X,\mathbb Q)$ and $P_1(X,t) = P(X,t)$.
Under the change of variables $z = -\frac{1}{t}$,
the work of Lehrer \cite[Theorem 5.5]{Lehrer:1987} identifies
(rescaled) cycle polynomials with equivariant Poincar\'{e} polynomials of $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$,
for $g \in S_n$, as
\[
\frac{1}{z^n}N_{[g]}(z) = \frac{|C_{\lambda}|}{n!}\sum_{k\geq 0}{h_n^k(g) t^k} = \frac{1}{z_\lambda}P_{g}(\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C), t)
\]
Using the result of Section \ref{sec:43a} we obtain a similar interpretation of the splitting measure values.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:splitting-coeffs2}
Let $Y_n= \mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^{\times}$.
Setting $t = -\frac{1}{z}$, for each $g \in S_n$ the $z$-splitting measure is given
by the scaled equivariant Poincar\'{e} polynomial
\[
\nu^*_{n,z}(g) = \frac{1}{n!} \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}{ \mathrm{Trace}(g: H^k( Y_n, \mathbb Q)) t^k},
\]
attached to the complex manifold $Y_n$, where $g$
acts as a permutation of the coordinate.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
This formula follows from Theorem \ref{thm:splitting-coeffs}, using also the identification of $A_n^k = H^k(Y_n, \mathbb Q)$
as an $S_n$-module in Theorem \ref{thm:equivariant}.
Since we evaluate the character on a single element $g \in S_n$, the prefactor
becomes $\frac{1}{z_{\lambda} c_{\lambda}} = \frac{1}{n!}.$
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In the theory of hyperplane arrangements treated in \cite{OrlikT:1992} the change of variable $z= -\frac{1}{t}$ appears as an involution
converting the Poincar\'{e} polynomial of a hyperplane complement (such as $\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)$) to another invariant,
the {\em characteristic polynomial} of an arrangement, given in \cite[Defn. 2.52]{OrlikT:1992}).
\end{remark}
\subsection{Splitting measures for $z = \pm \frac{1}{m}$.}\label{sec:52}
Representation-theoretic interpretations of the rescaled $z$-splitting measures for $z = \pm 1$ were studied in \cite[Sec. 5]{Lagarias:2016}.
Theorem \ref{thm:main-2a} below generalizes those results to give representation-theoretic interpretations for $z = \pm \frac{1}{m}$ when $m\geq 1$ is an integer.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:main-2a}
Let $n\geq 2$ and $\lambda$ be a partition of $n$, then
\noindent(1) For $z = -\frac{1}{m}$ with $m\geq1$ an integer, we have
\[
\nu_{n,-\frac{1}{m}}^\ast(C_\lambda) = \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}{\chi_n^k(\lambda)m^k}.
\]
The function $z_\lambda \nu_{n, -\frac{1}{m}}^\ast(C_\lambda)$ is therefore the character of the $S_n$-representation
\[
B_{n,m} = \bigoplus_{k=0}^{n-1}{\big(A_n^k\big)^{\oplus m^k}},
\]
with dimension
\[
\dim B_{n,m} = \prod_{j=2}^{n-1}{(1 + jm)}.
\]
(2) For $z = \frac{1}{m}$ with $m\geq 1$ an integer, we have
\[
\nu_{n, \frac{1}{m}}^\ast(C_\lambda) = \frac{1}{z_\lambda}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}{(-1)^k\chi_n^k(\lambda) m^k}.
\]
The function $z_\lambda \nu_{n,\frac{1}{m}}^\ast(C_\lambda)$ is a virtual character, the difference of characters of representations $B_{n,m}^+$ and $B_{n,m}^-$,
\[
B_{n,m}^+ \cong \bigoplus_{2j < n}{\big(A_n^{2j}\big)^{\oplus m^{2j}}} \hspace{2em} B_{n,m}^- \cong \bigoplus_{2j+1 < n}{\big(A_n^{2j+1}\big)^{\oplus m^{2j+1}}}.
\]
These representations have dimensions
\[
\dim B_{n,m}^{\pm} = \frac{1}{2} \Big( \prod_{j=2}^{n-1}(1+ jm) \pm \prod_{j=2}^{n-1} (1-jm) \Big)
\]
respectively.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
(1) The formula for the $(-\frac{1}{m})$-splitting measure follows by substituting $z = -\frac{1}{m}$ in Theorem \ref{thm:splitting-coeffs}.
Arnol'd \cite[Cor. 2]{Arn:1969} shows the Poincar\'{e} polynomial $p(t)$ of the pure braid group $P_n$ has the product form
\[
p(t) = \prod_{j=1}^{n-1}{(1 + jt)} = \sum_{k=0}^n{h_n^k\big((1^n)\big) t^k}.
\]
On the other hand, by Theorem \ref{cycle-coeffs} we have
\begin{equation}
\label{poincare}
n! (-1)^n t^n N_{(1^n)}(-t^{-1}) = \sum_{k=0}^n{h_n^k\big((1^n)\big) t^k}.
\end{equation}
Dividing \eqref{poincare} by $1 + t$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{poincare2}
\prod_{j=2}^{n-1}{(1 + jt)} = n! (-1)^n t^n \frac{N_{(1^n)}(-t^{-1})}{1 + t} = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}{\chi_n^k\big((1^n)\big) t^k}.
\end{equation}
Substituting $t = m$ gives the dimension formula.
(2) Substituting $z= \frac{1}{m}$ in Theorem \ref{thm:splitting-coeffs} gives the formula for the $(\frac{1}{m})$-splitting measure. Separating the even and odd parts we have
\[
z_\lambda \nu_{n, \frac{1}{m}}^\ast(C_\lambda) = \sum_{2j < n}{\chi_n^{2j}(\lambda)m^{2j}} - \sum_{2j+1 < n}{\chi_n^{2j+1}(\lambda)m^{2j+1}}.
\]
Hence $z_\lambda \nu_{n,\frac{1}{m}}^\ast(C_\lambda) = \chi_{n,m}^+(\lambda) - \chi_{n,m}^-(\lambda)$, where $\chi_{n,m}^{\pm}$ are characters of $B_{n,m}^{\pm}$ respectively.
The dimension formulas follow from decomposing \eqref{poincare2} into even and odd parts.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Other results in \cite[Theorems 3.2, 5.2 and 6.1]{Lagarias:2016} determine the values of the rescaled splitting measures for $z = \pm 1$,
showing they are supported on remarkably few conjugacy classes; for $z=1$ these were the Springer regular
elements of $S_n$. Theorem \ref{thm:main-2a} does not account for the small support of the characters for $z =\pm1$.
The characters $h_n^k$ and $\chi_n^k$ have large support in general, hence cancellation must occur to explain the small support.
It would be interesting to account for this phenomenon.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Cohomology of the pure braid group and the regular representation}\label{sec:53}
We use Theorem \ref{thm:splitting-coeffs} together with the splitting measure values at $z=-1$ computed in \cite{Lagarias:2016}
to determine a relation between the $S_n$-representation structure of the pure braid group cohomology
and the regular representation of $S_n$.
Let $A_n^k$ be the $S_n$-subrepresentation constructed in Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma}, and define the $S_n$-representation
\[
A_n := \bigoplus_{k=0}^{n-1} A_n^k.
\]
\begin{thm}\label{thm:53}
Let $\mathbf{1}_n$, $\mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n$, and $\mathbb Q [S_n]$ denote the trivial, sign, and regular representations of $S_n$ respectively.
Then there are isomorphisms of $S_n$-representations,
\[
\bigoplus_{k=0}^n{H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)\otimes \mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n^{\otimes k} }\cong\mathbb Q[S_n].
\]
and
\[
A_n\otimes \big( \mathbf{1}_n \oplus\mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n\big)\cong\mathbb Q [S_n].
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We showed in Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma} that $H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q) \cong A_n^{k-1} \oplus A_n^k$, with
$A_n^{-1} = A_n^n = 0$. Therefore, summing over $0 \le k \le n$,
\[
A_n \cong \bigoplus_{k \text{ even}}H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q) \cong \bigoplus_{k \text{ odd}}H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q).
\]
Since $\mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n^{\otimes 2} \cong \mathbf{1}_n$, we have
\begin{align*}
\bigoplus_{k=0}^n{H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)\otimes \mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n^{\otimes k}}
&\cong \Big(\bigoplus_{k \text{ even}}H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)\otimes \mathbf{1}_n \Big) \oplus \Big(\bigoplus_{k \text{ odd}}H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)\otimes \mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n \Big)\\
&\cong (A_n \otimes \mathbf{1}_n) \oplus (A_n \otimes \mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n)\\
&\cong A_n \otimes (\mathbf{1}_n \oplus \,\mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n).
\end{align*}
If $\chi_n$ is the character of $A_n$, then it follows from Theorem \ref{thm:main-2} that
\[
\chi_n(\lambda) = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\chi_n^k(\lambda) = z_\lambda \nu_{n,-1}^\ast(C_\lambda),
\]
so the values of $\chi_n$ are given by the rescaled $(-1)$-splitting measure.
Theorem 6.1 of \cite{Lagarias:2016} shows
\[
\nu_{n,-1}^\ast(C_\lambda) = \begin{cases} \frac{1}{2} & \lambda = (1^n) \text{ or } (1^{n-2}\, 2),\\ 0 & \text{otherwise.}\end{cases}
\]
Now let $\rho = \chi_n \cdot (1_n + \mathrm{sgn}_n)$ be the character of $A_n \otimes (\mathbf{1}_n \oplus\, \mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n)$. If $\lambda = (1^n)$, we compute
\[
\rho(\lambda)= \chi_n(\lambda)\big(1 + \mathrm{sgn}_n(\lambda)\big) = n! \nu_{n,-1}^\ast(C_\lambda)(2) = n!.
\]
If $\lambda = (1^{n-2}\, 2)$, then $\big(1 + \mathrm{sgn}_n(\lambda)\big) = 0$, hence $\rho(\lambda) = 0$. If $\lambda$ is any other partition, then $\nu_{n,-1}^\ast(C_\lambda) = 0$, hence $\rho(\lambda) = 0$. Therefore $\rho$ agrees with the character of the regular representation, proving
\[
\bigoplus_{k=0}^n{H^k(P_n,\mathbb Q)\otimes \mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n^{\otimes k}} \cong A_n \otimes (\mathbf{1}_n \oplus\, \mathrm{\mathbf{Sgn}}_n) \cong \mathbb Q[S_n].
\]
\end{proof}
\section{Other Interpretations of $A_n^k$}\label{sec:stability}
Theorem \ref{thm:equivariant} interprets the $S_n$-representation $A_n^k$ geometrically as
\[
A_n^k \cong H^k(\mathrm{PConf}_n(\mathbb C)/\mathbb C^\times,\mathbb Q).
\]
{ In this section we note two other interpretations of $A_n^k$, coming from combinatorial constructions previously
studied in the literature. These interpretations imply that the $A_n^k$ for fixed $k$ exhibit representation stability
in the sense of Church, and Farb \cite{CF:2013} as $n \to \infty$.}\\
Proposition \ref{prop:exact-lemma} gave the following direct sum decomposition of the pure braid group cohomology,
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:A-iso}
H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q) \cong A_n^{k-1} \oplus A_n^k.
\end{equation}
The isomorphisms \eqref{eqn:A-iso} uniquely determine the $A_n^k$ as $S_n$-representations up to isomorphism.
Uniqueness holds since finite-dimensional representations are semisimple by Maschke's theorem, using the general result that if
$0 = C^0, C^1, C^2,\ldots$ is any sequence of semisimple modules with submodules $B^k \subseteq C^k$, then isomorphisms
\[
C^k \cong B^{k-1} \oplus B^k
\]
for each $k$ determine the $B^k$ up to isomorphism.
Let $\Pi_n$ denote the collection of partitions of a set with $n$ elements, partially ordered by refinement (see Stanley \cite[Example 3.10.4]{Stanley:1997}).
Hersh and Reiner \cite[Sec. 2]{HerRein:2015} describe two other sequences of $S_n$-representations giving direct sum decompositions
of $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$ coming from the Whitney and simplicial homology of the lattice $\Pi_n$.
%
%
\begin{prop}\label{prop:isomorphisms}
(1) There is an isomorphism of $S_n$-representations
\begin{equation}\label{whitney}
H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q) \cong WH_k(\Pi_n),
\end{equation}
where $WH_k(\Pi_n)$ is the $k$th Whitney homology of the lattice $\Pi_n$.
(2) There is an isomorphism of $S_n$-representations
\[
WH_k(\Pi_n) \cong \beta_{ [k-1]} (\Pi_n) \oplus \beta_{ [k]} (\Pi_n)
\]
where $\beta_{ [k]} (\Pi_n)$ is the $[k]= \{ 1, 2, ..., k\}$-rank selected homology of the lattice $\Pi_n$.
(3) There is an isomorphism of $S_n$-representations
\begin{equation*}
\beta_{[k]}(\Pi_n) \cong \widetilde{H}_{k-1}\big(\Pi_n^k\big),
\end{equation*}
where $\Pi_n^k$ is the sub-poset of $\lambda \in \Pi_n$ with $|\lambda| - \ell(\lambda) \leq k$ and $\widetilde{H}_{k-1}\big(\Pi_n^k\big)$
denotes its reduced simplicial homology.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
(1) This result is due to Sundaram and Welker \cite[Theorem 4.4 (iii)]{Sundaram-W:1997},
cf. \cite[Thm. 2.11, Sec. 2.3]{HerRein:2015}.
(See \cite[Sec. 2.4]{HerRein:2015} for more on the Whitney homology of $\Pi_n$.)
(2) Sundaram \cite[Prop. 1.9]{Sundaram:1994}
decomposes $WH_k(\Pi_n)$ as
\begin{equation}\label{rank-selected}
WH_k(\Pi_n) \cong \beta_{[k-1]}(\Pi_n) \oplus \beta_{[k]}(\Pi_n),
\end{equation}
where $[k] = \{1,2,\ldots,k\}$ and $\beta_{[k]}(\Pi_n)$ is the \emph{$[k]$-rank selected homology} of the lattice $\Pi_n$ \cite[Prop. 2.17]{HerRein:2015}.
(3) Because the lattice $\Pi_n$ is \emph{Cohen-Macaulay}, Hersh and Reiner \cite[Sec. 2.5]{HerRein:2015} note the isomorphism
\begin{equation}\label{simplicial}
\beta_{[k]}(\Pi_n) \cong \widetilde{H}_{k-1}\big(\Pi_n^k\big),
\end{equation}
where $\Pi_n^k$ is the sub-poset of $\lambda \in \Pi_n$ with $|\lambda| - \ell(\lambda) \leq k$ and $\widetilde{H}_{k-1}\big(\Pi_n^k\big)$ is its {\em reduced simplicial homology}.
\end{proof}
The following proposition relates $A_n^k$, $\beta_{[k]}(\Pi_n)$, and $\widetilde{H}_{k-1}\big(\Pi_n^k\big)$ using \eqref{eqn:A-iso}.
%
%
\begin{prop}\label{prop:connections}
Let $\Pi_n$ be the lattice of partitions of an $n$-element set, and $\Pi_n^k \subseteq \Pi_n$ the sub-poset comprised of $\lambda \in \Pi_n$ with $|\lambda| - \ell(\lambda) \leq k$. Then we have the following isomorphisms of $S_n$-representations
\[
A_n^{k} \cong \beta_{[k]}(\Pi_n) \cong \widetilde{H}_{k-1}\big(\Pi_n^k\big).
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The isomorphisms \eqref{whitney} and \eqref{rank-selected} in Proposition \ref{prop:isomorphisms}
give the direct sum decompositions
\[
H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q) \cong \beta_{[k-1]}(\Pi_n) \oplus \beta_{[k]}(\Pi_n)
\]
for $ 0 \le k \le n$. By \eqref{eqn:A-iso} we have that
\[
H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q) \cong A_n^{k-1} \oplus A_n^{k}.
\]
Since for $k=0$,
\[
\beta_{[-1]}(\Pi_n) \cong A_n^{-1} = \{0\},
\]
we obtain by induction on $k \ge 1$ that
\[
A_n^k \cong \beta_{[k]}(\Pi_n)
\]
Combining this isomorphism with \eqref{simplicial} finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
{ We deduce the representation stability of the characters $\chi_n^k$ from known results.}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main-3a}]
The $S_n$-representations of the rank-selected homology $\beta_{[k-1]}(\Pi_n)$ were shown by Hersh and Reiner \cite[Corollary 5.4]{HerRein:2015}
to exhibit representation-stability for fixed $k$
and varying $n$ and to stabilize sharply at $n=3k+1$ . This fact combined with
Proposition \ref{prop:connections} proves Theorem \ref{thm:main-3a}.
\end{proof}
{The following tables for $A_n^1$ and $A_n^2$ exhibit representation stability and the sharp stability phenomenon at $n=3k+1$. We give
irreducible decompositions, with multiplicities, of $H^k(P_n, \mathbb Q)$ and $A_n^1$ in Table \ref{table3a} and for $A_n^2$ in
Table \ref{table3c}.
To read the tables, for example, the entry $[4,1,1]$ denotes the isomorphism class of the irreducible representation of $S_6$ associated to the
Specht module of the partition $[4, 1, 1]$ of $n=6$, in the notation of Sagan \cite[Sec. 2.3]{sagan},
who gives a construction of the Specht module representatives of the irreducible isomorphism classes.}
\begin{table}[h]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c |c | c|c|}
\hline
$n$ & $\dim{H^1}$ & $H^1(P_n, \mathbb Q)$ & $\dim A_n^1$ & $A_n^1$ \\ \hline
$2$ & $1$ & $[2] $ & $0$ & $0$ \\
$3$ & $3$ & $[3] \oplus [2,1]$ &$2$& $[2,1]$ \\
$4$ & $6$ & $[4]\oplus [3,1] \oplus [2,2]$ &$5$& $[3,1] \oplus [2,2]$ \\
$5$ & $10$ & $[5] \oplus [4,1] \oplus [3,2]$ & $9$& $[4, 1] \oplus [3, 2]$ \\
\hline
$n \ge 4$ & ${n \brack n-1}$ & $[n] \oplus [n-1,1] \oplus [n-2,2]$ & ${n \brack n-1} -1$& $[n-1,1] \oplus [n-2,2]$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\medskip
\caption{Irreducible $S_n$-module decompositions for $H^1(P_n, \mathbb Q)$ and $A_n^1$.
Here $\lambda$ abbreviates the irreducible representation $\mathcal S^{\lambda}$.}
\label{table3a}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | c |c |}
\hline
$n$ & $\dim A_n^2$& $A_n^2$ \\ \hline
$3$ & $0$& $0$ \\
$4$ & $6$ & $[3, 1] \oplus [2,1,1]$\\
$5$ & $26$ & $[4,1] \oplus [3,2] \oplus 2[3,1,1] \oplus [2,2,1]$\\
$6$ & $71$ & $[5,1] \oplus [4,2] \oplus 2[4,1,1] \oplus [3,3] \oplus 2[3,2,1]$ \\
$7$ & $155$ & $[6,1] \oplus [5,2] \oplus 2[5,1,1] \oplus [4,3] \oplus 2[4,2,1] \oplus [3,3,1]$ \\
$8$ & $295$ & $[7,1] \oplus [6,2] \oplus 2[6,1,1] \oplus [5,3] \oplus 2[5,2,1] \oplus [4,3,1]$ \\
\hline
$n \ge 7$ & ${n \brack n-2} - {n \brack n-1} +1$ & $[n-1,1] \oplus [n-2,2] \oplus 2[n-2,1,1] \oplus [n-3,3]$\\
& & $\oplus 2[n-3,2,1] \oplus [n-4,3,1]$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\medskip
\caption{Irreducible $S_n$-module decomposition for $A_n^2$. }
\label{table3c}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\paragraph{\bf Acknowledgments.} We thank Richard Stanley for raising a question about the relation of the
braid group cohomology to the regular representation, answered by Theorem \ref{thm:main-2}.
We thank Weiyan Chen for pointing out to us that Theorem \ref{thm:main-0} is shown
in Lehrer \cite{Lehrer:1987} and for subsequently bringing the work of Gaiffi \cite{Gai:1996} to our attention.
We thank Philip Tosteson and John Wiltshire-Gordon for helpful conversations. We thank the reviewers for
helpful comments.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec1}\setcounter{equation}{0}
Nonconventional ergodic theorems (with the name coming from \cite{Fur})
motivated originally by multiple recurrence problems have attracted much
attention during the last 30 years. Probabilistic limit theorems for
corresponding expressions have appeared more recently, in particular,
a functional central limit theorem for nonconventional sums of the form
\begin{equation}\label{1.1}
S_N(t)=\sum_{Nt\geq n\geq 1}F\big(X_{q_1(n)},\ldots,X_{q_\ell(n)})
\end{equation}
was obtained in \cite{KV1} for sequences of random variables $X_1,X_2,...$
with weak dependence. In this paper we consider polynomial functions
\begin{equation}\label{1.2}
F(x_1,...,x_\ell)=\sum_{\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_\ell}h_{\sigma_1\cdots
\sigma_\ell} \,x_1^{\sigma_1}\cdots x_\ell^{\sigma_\ell},
\end{equation}
where the sum is taken over a finite set of nonnegative integer indexes,
and study the tail probabilities of $F(X_1,X_2,...,X_\ell)$ for independent
random variables $X_i,\, i\geq 1$ with heavy tails. Then we obtain various
results concerning convergence of distributions of properly normalized and
centralized sums of the form (\ref{1.1}) where for all $i$'s either
$q_i(n)=n-1+i$ or $q_i(n)=in$, $F$ has the form (\ref{1.2}) and
$X_i$'s are independent and have identical distributions with heavy tails.
We start with random variables $X$ having the same asymptotical
tail behavior as stable distributions, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{1.3}
\bfP\{\pm X>x\}\sim c^\pm x^{-\al}\,\,\mbox{as}\,\, x\to\infty
\end{equation}
where $0<\al <2$ and $c^\pm\geq 0$ with $c^++c^->0$. Then we consider the
minimal class which contains all such random variables and which is closed
with respect to sums and products of independent random variables with such
tails. It turns out that this class consists of random variables $X$ with
tails
\begin{equation}\label{1.4}
P\{\pm X>x\}\sim c^\pm x^{-\al}(\ln x)^k\,\,\mbox{as}\,\, x\to\infty
\end{equation}
where $k\geq 0$ is an integer.
Namely, if we start with $\ell$ independent random variables $X_1,...,X_\ell$
with tails of the form
\begin{equation}\label{1.5}
P\{\pm X_i>x\}\sim c_i^\pm x^{-\al_i}(\ln x)^{k_i}\,\,\mbox{as}\,\, x\to
\infty,
\end{equation}
where $0<\al<2$, $k_i\geq 0$ are some integers and $c^\pm\ge 0$, $c^+_i+c^-_i>0$,
then the polynomial $Y=F(X_1,...,X_\ell)$, with $F$ given by (\ref{1.2}), will
have the tail behavior
\begin{equation}\label{1.6}
P\{\pm Y>x\}\sim c_\ast^\pm x^{-\al_\ast}(\ln x)^{k_\ast}\,\,\mbox{as}\,\,
x\to\infty
\end{equation}
where $c_\ast^+ +c_\ast^->0$, $0<\al_\ast <2 $ and both $\alpha_*$ and an
integer $k_\ast\geq 0$ can be explicitly described. Actually, this holds
true for a somewhat larger class of random variables $X_i$ having tail
distributions satisfying (\ref{1.5}) with any real $k_i\geq 0$, and so we
obtain our results for the latter. Allowing
negative integer values for $k$ will generate tail behavior that contains
additional $\ln\ln x$ terms. In fact, our method works directly also for
$F$ given by a finite sum (\ref{1.2}) with arbitrary real nonnegative
$\sig_1,...,\sig_\ell$ provided random variables $X_i$'s are nonnegative
to make sense of their arbitrary real powers.
Next, we consider nonconventional sums (\ref{1.1}) where $F$ is a polynomial
of the form (\ref{1.2}), \hbox{$\{ X_i,\, i\geq 1\}$ } is a sequence of
independent identically distributed (i.i.d.) random variables with the tail
behavior given by (\ref{1.4}). Concerning integer valued functions
$1\leq q_1(n)<q_2(n)<\cdots <q_\ell(n)$ we will concentrate on two important
cases, namely, the $\ell$-dependence case $q_j(n)=n+j-1$ and the long range
dependence
arithmetic progression case $q_j(n)=jn$ which leads to an interesting
comparison
of results for these two cases. After obtaining the tail behavior of the
form
(\ref{1.6}) for summands of $S_N$ we proceed to establishing limit theorems
for
$S_N$ showing that for a particular class of polynomials $F$ and certain
sequences $a_N$ and $b_N$,
\[
\frac 1{b_N}(S_N(t)-Nta_N)
\]
weakly converges in the Skorokhod $J_1$ topology to an $\al_\ast$-stable
L\' evy
process. On the other hand, for general polynomials $F$ in the
$\ell$-dependence case $q_i(n)=n+j-1$ the convergence in $J_1$ may not
hold true though finite dimensional distributions always weakly converge.
In the arithmetic progression case $q_j(n)=jn$, while the convergence in
$J_1$ takes place for any polynomial $F$, the limiting process in some cases
may have dependent increments.
In the $\ell$-dependence case the summands form a stationary sequence, and so
after verifying corresponding conditions it is possible to rely on previous
results (see \cite{TK}). On the other hand, in the arithmetic progression case $q_j(n)=jn$
the sum $S_N$ consists of summands with a strong long range
dependence which do not form a stationary sequence. This does not enable
us to rely directly on existing results concerning stable limit theorems for
sums of stationary weakly dependent random variables
(see, for instance \cite{DR}, \cite{Da}, \cite{DJ}, \cite{TK} and references
there). Some of our results can be extended to a wider class of
random variables which have tail behavior given by (\ref{1.4}) with more
general slowly varying functions in place of powers of the
logarithm but then most of our explicit computations will not be available.
\section{Preliminaries and main results}\label{sec2}\setcounter{equation}{0}
Let $X_1,...,X_\ell$ be independent random variables with tail distribution
satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{2.1}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_j}(\ln z)^{-k_j}P\{\pm X_j>z\}=c_j^\pm,\,
j=1,...,\ell
\end{equation}
for some $\al_j\in(0,2),\, k_j\geq 0$ and $c_j^\pm\geq 0$ with
$c_j^++c_j^->0$, $j=1,...,\ell$. We will often consider a space $\mathcal W$
of bounded continuous functions $W$ defined on some $m$-dimensional
Euclidean space $R^m$ and satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{2.1+}
|W(x)|\le C|x|^2(1+|x|^2)^{-1}
\end{equation}
for some constant $C>0$. It is known (see Theorem 3.6 of \cite{Re} and
Lemma \ref{l5.1} in Appendix) that (\ref{2.1}) holds true if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{2.2}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_j}(\ln z)^{-k_j}E[ W(\frac{X_j}{z})]=\int W(x)
(c^j_-{\bf 1}_{x<0}+c^j_+{\bf 1}_{x<0})\frac{dx}{|x|^{1+\alpha_j}}
\end{equation}
for all $W\in\mathcal W$ (here $m=1$) and $j=1,\ldots,\ell$.
First, we want to establish the tail behavior of random variables
$Y=F(X_1,...,X_\ell)$ where $F$ is a polynomial of the form
\begin{equation}\label{2.2+}
F(x_1,...,x_\ell)=\sum_{\theta\in\Theta} h_\theta g_\theta(\bf x)
\end{equation}
where $\theta=(\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_\ell)$ is a multi index from a finite
set $\Te$ of multi indices of integers $\sigma_i> 0$ and $g_\theta(\bf x)=
x_1^{\sigma_1}\cdots x_\ell^{\sigma_\ell}$ is a monomial.
We will also assume that $\Theta$ consists only of those $\theta$ for which
$h_\theta\neq 0$.
Introduce the following notations
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\alpha(\theta)=\min_{1\leq j\leq\ell}\frac {\al_j}{\sigma_j},
\, J(\theta)=\{ j: \frac{\al_j}{\sigma_j}=\alpha(\theta) \},\, p(\theta)=
|J(\theta)|=\#\{ j: \frac{\al_j}{\sigma_j}=\alpha(\theta)\}\nonumber\\
&k(\theta)=p(\theta)-1+\sum_{j\in J(\theta)} k_j,\,\alpha_*=\min_{\theta\in
\Theta} \alpha(\theta),\, k_*=\max_{\theta\in \Theta, \alpha(\theta)=
\alpha_*} k(\theta)\nonumber\\
&\mbox{and}\,\,\Theta_*=\{ \theta:\,\alpha(\theta)=\alpha_* \,\,\mbox {and}
\, \,k(\theta)=k_*\}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray*}
Now we can state our first main result. Consider the collection of random
variables $\{g_\theta(X_1,\ldots, X_\ell)\}$
and view them as a random vector $\bf Z$ in $R^m$ where $m$ is the cardinality
of $\Theta$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm2.1} (i) The limit
\begin{equation}\label{2.3}
\lim_{z\to\infty} z^{\alpha_*} (\ln z)^{-k_*} E[W(\frac{\bf Z}{z})]=
\int_0^\infty \int_{S^{m-1}}W(rs)\frac{\nu(ds)\, dr}{r^{1+\alpha_*}}
\end{equation}
exists for any $W\in\mathcal W$ with some measure $\nu$ on the sphere
$S^{m-1}$
satisfying $\nu(S^{m-1})>0$. Moreover, let $m_*$ be the cardinality of
$\Theta_*$ and
$R^{m_*}$ be any $m_*$-dimensional subspace containing the support of the
distribution
of the random vector $\{ g^*_\theta(X_1,...,X_\ell),\,\theta\in\Theta\}$ where
$g^*_\theta=g_\theta$ if $\theta\in\Theta_*$ and $g_\theta^*\equiv 0$ if
$\theta\in\Theta\setminus\Theta_*$.
Then $\nu\big(S^{m-1}\setminus (R^{m_*}\cap S^{m-1})\big)=0$.
(ii) The tail behavior of the polynomial $Y=F(X_1,...,X_\ell)$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{2.4}
\lim_{z\to\infty} z^{\al_*}(\ln z)^{-k_*}P\{\pm Y>z\}=c^F_\pm
\end{equation}
where $c_F^\pm\geq 0$ satisfies $c_F^++c_F^->0$.
\end{theorem}
Theorem \ref{thm2.1} claims, in particular, that the class of random variables
satisfying (\ref{2.1}) is closed with respect to taking products and sums of
products of independent random variables. We will prove Theorem \ref{thm2.1}
by establishing first the joint tail behavior of the collection of monomials
$\{g_\theta (X_1,...,X_\ell),\,\theta\in\Theta\}$ which is the assertion (i)
and deduce from it the tail behavior of the linear combination
$\sum_{\theta\in\Theta} h_\theta g_\theta({X_1,...,X_\ell})$ which is the
assertion (ii) of the theorem.
It is natural to inquire whether the wider class of random variables $X_j$
satisfying (\ref{2.1}) with arbitrary integers $k_j$ is closed with respect
to products of independent random variables, as well. This turns out to be
false as the following example shows.
\begin{example}\label{ex2.2}
Let $X_1$ and $X_2$ be independent symmetric random variables such that
\begin{equation}\label{2.5}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^\al P\{ X_1>z\}=c_1\,\,\mbox{and}\,\,
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^\al(\ln z)P\{ X_2>z\}=c_2.
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{equation}\label{2.6}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^\al(\ln\ln z)^{-1}P\{ X_1X_2>z\}=2c_1c_2\al.
\end{equation}
\end{example}
We will make necessary computations leading to (\ref{2.6}) at the end of
Section \ref{sec3}. This example also shows that it may be difficult to
obtain general precise folmulas for tail asymptotics beyond the class of
random variables satisfying (\ref{2.1}).
Next, we consider a sequence of i.i.d. random variables $X_1,X_2,...$
satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{2.1a}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al}(\ln z)^{-k} P\{\pm X_j>z\}=c_\pm
\end{equation}
where, again, $\al\in(0,2),\, k\geq 0,\, c^\pm\geq 0$ and $c^++c^->0$.
For $0\le t\le T$, set
\begin{equation}\label{2.10}
S_N(\theta,t)=\sum_{1\le n\le Nt} g_\theta(X_{q_1(n)},X_{q_2(n)}
,...,X_{q_\ell(n)})
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{2.7}
S_N(t)=\sum_{1\le n\le Nt} F(X_{q_1(n)},X_{q_2(n)},...,X_{q_\ell(n)})
=\sum_{\theta\in\Theta}h_\theta S_N(\theta, t).
\end{equation}
Here $F$ is the same as in (\ref{1.2}) and (\ref{2.2+}) while the integer
valued functions \hbox{$1\leq q_1(n)<q_2(n)<\cdots <q_\ell(n)$ } will be
considered
here in two situations
\begin{equation}\label{2.8}
\ell-\mbox{dependence case: }\,\, q_j(n)=n+j-1,\,\, j=1,2,...,\ell;\,
n=1,2,...\,\,\mbox{and}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{2.9}
\mbox{arithmetic progression case: }\,\, q_j(n)=jn,\,\, j=1,2,...,\ell;\,
n=1,2,....
\end{equation}
Set
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\sigma(\theta)=\max_{1\le j\le \ell}\sigma_j,\,\alpha(\theta)=\frac{\alpha}
{\sigma(\theta)}, \,J(\theta)=\{j: \sigma_j=\sigma(\theta)\};\,
p(\theta)=\# \{j:j\in J(\theta)\},\\
& k(\theta)=(k+1)p(\theta)-1\,\,\mbox{and}\,\, \alpha_*=\min_{\theta\in\Theta}
\alpha(\theta),\, k_*=\max_{\theta: \alpha(\theta)=\alpha_*} k(\theta).
\end{eqnarray*}
We define again $\Te_*$ as above and observe that for all $\te\in\Te_*$,
\[
p_*=p(\te)=(k_*+1)(k+1)\quad\mbox{and}\quad\sig_*=\sig(\te)=\al\al_*^{-1}
\]
are the same. We denote also by $m_*$ the cardinality of $\Te_*$.
Consider the collection of random variables $\{Z_\theta,\,\theta\in\Theta\}$
where $Z_\theta=g_\theta(X_1,\ldots,X_\ell)$. Let
$$
b_N=N^{\frac {1}{\al_*}}(\frac {1}{\al_*}\ln N)^{\frac{ k_*}
{\al_*}},\,\,\mbox{and}\,\,
a^\theta_N=E[\frac{b_N^2 Z_\theta}{ b_N^2+Z_\theta^2}]
$$
In Section \ref{sec5} we will establish the following limit theorem
for the $\ell$-dependence case.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm2.3} Let $q_j(n)$ be defined by (\ref{2.8}).
(i) As $N\to\infty$, all finite dimensional distributions of the $R^m$ valued
process
\begin{equation}\label{2.12}
\Xi_N(\theta, t)=\frac {1}{b_N}\big(S_N(\theta,t)-Nta^\theta_N\big),\,\,
t\in [0,T],\,\,\theta\in\Theta
\end{equation}
converge weakly to the corresponding finite dimensional distributions of
an $\al _*$-stable L\' evy process $\{\Xi(\theta,t),\, \theta\in\Theta\},\,
t\in[0,T]$ where $\Xi(\theta,\cdot)\equiv 0$ for $\theta\in\Theta\setminus
\Theta_*$.
For each $\theta$ the process $\Xi_N(\theta, t)$ converges in $J_1$
topology but the $R^m$ valued vector process $\{\Xi_N(\theta,\cdot),\,\theta
\in\Theta\}$
may not converge weakly in any of Skorokhod's $J_1,J_2,M_1$ or $M_2$
topologies.
(ii) Suppose now that in the representation (\ref{2.10}) there
exists no pair $\theta_1,\theta_2\in\Theta$ satisfying
$J(\theta_2)=J(\theta_1)+r$ in the sense that there is
no integer $r$ such that $i\in J(\theta_1)$ if and only if $i+r\in
J(\theta_2)$. Then, as $N\to\infty$, the vector process $\{\Xi_N(\theta,\cdot),
\,\theta\in\Theta\}$ converges weakly in the $J_1$ topology on the space
$D([0,T],\,\bbR^m)$
to the above $\al_*$-stable vector L\' evy process $\{\Xi(\theta,\cdot),\,
\theta\in\Theta\}$ and the component processes $\Xi(\theta,\cdot)$
are mutually independent for different $\te\in\Te$.
(iii) The sum $\xi_N(t)=\sum_{\theta\in\Theta}h_\theta \,\Xi_N(\theta, t)$
converges to the $\alpha_*$-stable L\' evy process
$\xi(t)=\sum_{\theta\in\Theta}h_\theta\,\Xi(\theta, t)$, in general,
only in the sense of weak convergence of finite dimensional distributions
while under the additional condition of (ii) the convergence is in the $J_1$
topology.
\end{theorem}
For the arithmetic progression case we will obtain in Section \ref{sec6} the
following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm2.4} Let $S_N(\theta,t)$ and $\Xi_N(\theta,t)$ be
defined by (\ref{2.10}) and (\ref{2.12}), respectively, with $q_j(n)$
defined by (\ref{2.9}).
(i) As $N\to\infty$, the $R^m$-valued vector process $\{\Xi_N(\theta,\cdot),
\,\theta\in\Theta\}$ converges weakly in the $J_1$ topology on the space $D([0,T],\,\bbR^m)$
to a process $\{\Xi(\theta,\cdot),\,\theta\in\Theta\}$ where
$\Xi(\theta,\cdot)
\equiv 0$ for $\theta\in\Theta\setminus\Theta_*$. Each $\Xi(\theta,\cdot),\,
\theta\in\Theta_*$ is an $\alpha_*$ stable L\' evy process but, in general,
these processes are mutually dependent. Their dependence structure will be
clarified in the proof. Furthermore, the vector process $\{\Xi(\theta,\cdot),
\,\theta\in\Theta\}$ has, in general, dependent increments.
(ii) Suppose that in the representation (\ref{2.10}) there exists no pair
$\theta_1,\theta_2\in\Theta_*$ satisfying $J(\theta_2)=r\,J(\theta_1)$ in the
sense that there is no positive number $r$ such that $i\in J(\theta_1)$ if
and only if $ir\in J(\theta_2)$. Then, as $N\to\infty$, for each $\theta\in
\Theta_*$ the process $\Xi_N(\theta,\cdot)$ weakly converges in $J_1$
topology to an $\alpha_*$-stable L\' evy process $\Xi(\theta,\cdot)$ and
the latter processes are independent. Moreover, as $N\to\infty$ the vector
process $\{\Xi_N(\theta,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te_*\}$ weakly converges in the $J_1$
topology of $D([0,T];R^{m_*})$ to the $m_*$-dimensional $\alpha_*$ stable
L\' evy process $\{\Xi(\theta,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te_*\}$.
(iii) The sum $\xi_N(t)=\sum_{\theta\in\Theta}h_\theta\Xi_N(\theta,t ),\,
t\in[0,T]$
converges weakly in the $J_1$ topology to an $\al_*$-stable process $\xi(t)
=\sum_{\theta\in\Theta}h_\theta\,\Xi(\theta, t),
\, t\in[0,T]$ which may have, in general, dependent increments but under the
additional condition of (ii) this process has independent increments, i.e.
it is a L\' evy process.
\end{theorem}
Setting $Y_n=F(X_{q_1(n)},X_{q_2(n)},...,X_{q_\ell(n)})$
we observe that when $q_j(n)=n+j-1$ then the sequence $\{Y_n,n\geq 1\}$ is
stationary and $\ell$-dependent, and it is known that under conditions which
can be veryfied in our circumstances the stable limit theorem holds true (see,
for instance, \cite{TK}).
When $q_j(n)=jn$ the sequence $\{Y_n; \,n\geq 1\}$ is strongly long
range dependent and it is not stationary. So we are not able to rely
directly on any known results. We deal with this case
establishing first a multidimensional stable limit theorem for
$\Xi_N(\theta, t)$ splitting the whole sum into independent subsums
similarly to \cite{KV2} and applying some time rescaling. It turns out that
under additional arithmetic conditions specified in the above theorems
the limiting behavior as $N\to\infty$ of the process $\Xi_N$ is similar in
both cases (\ref{2.8}) and (\ref{2.9}) while, in general, it is quite
different in these two cases. Indeed, in the $\ell$-dependence case consider
$F(x_1,x_2)=
x_2-x_1$ with $\ell=2$ then $S_N(t)=X_{[Nt]}-X_1$ and it is not difficult
to understand (see \cite{AT}) that all finite dimensional distributions
of $S_N/b_N$ converge to the unit mass at 0 while there is no weak
convergence in any of Skorokhod's topologies. It is shown also in \cite{AT}
that if, for instance, we take here $F(x_1,x_2)=x_1+x_2$ then there
will be weak convergence of $S_N/b_N$ in the $M_1$ topology but not in $J_1$.
On the other hand, in the arithmetic progression case with $F(x_1,x_2)=x_1+x_2$
and $\ell=2$ the weak convergence of $S_N/b_N$ in $J_1$ will hold true but the
increments of the limiting process on the time intervals $[T/4,T/2]$ and
$[T/2,T]$ will be dependent. The same remains true for vector processes
from Theorem \ref{thm2.4}(i) considering $g_{\te_1}(x_1,x_2)=x_1$ and
$g_{\te_2}(x_1,x_2)=x_2$ so that we will be dealing with the sums
$S_N(t)=\sum_{1\leq n\leq Nt}(X_n,X_{2n})$. Then the partial sums from $TN/4$
to $TN/2$ and from $TN/2$ to $TN$ will be strongly dependent which will lead
to dependence of increments of the limiting vector process on the time
intervals $[T/4,T/2)$ and $[T/2,T]$.
\begin{remark}\label{rem2.5}
The truncated average $E(Z_\theta\bbI_{|Z_{\theta}|\leq b_n})$ is often
taken as a centering expression in stable limit theorems in place of
$a^\theta_N$ introduced above. The latter is more convenient for our
purposes and this change does not influence convergence in the
corresponding limit theorem but leads only to an additional drift term in
the L\' evy limiting process. Actually, we can
interpret truncation in a wider sense as replacing $EX$ by $E(f(X))$ where
$f$ is a bounded function and $|f(x)-x|=o(|x|^2)$ near $0$. Two common
choices are $f(x)=x{\bf 1}_{|x|\le \tau}(x)$ or $\frac{x}{1+|x|^2}$.
They affect only the values of $\gamma$ in the L\'{e}vy-Khintchine
representations
$$
\log\psi(t)=i <\gamma_1, t>+\int_{|x|\le \tau}(e^{i <t, x>}-1-
i<t, x>)+\int_{|x|>\tau}(e^{i <t, x>}-1)dM(x)
$$
or
$$
\log\psi(t)=i <\gamma_2, t>+\int\big(e^{i <t, x>}-1-\frac{i
<t, x>}{1+|x|^2}\big)dM(x)
$$
with
$$
\gamma_1=\gamma_2+\int\big(x {\bf 1}_{|x|\le \tau}-\int \frac {x}{1+
|x|^2}\big)dM(x)
$$
If we want to relate the truncated mean of $X+Y$ to the sum of the truncated
means of $X$ and $Y$ it is easier to handle $f(X+Y)-f(X)-f(Y)$
with $f(x)=\frac{x}{1+|x|^2}$ than with $f(x)=x {\bf 1}_{|x|\le \tau}$.
If we use the truncated mean with some $f(x)$ and center by subtracting the
truncated mean then we end up in the limit with the representation
$$
\log\psi(t)=\int[e^{i\ <t, x>}-1- i <t, f(x)>]dM(x)
$$
with $\gamma=0$. We can do one truncation and still go to the other
representation by defining $\gamma$ suitably (cf. \cite{GK}).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{rem2.6}
An obvious corollary of Theorems \ref{thm2.3} and \ref{thm2.4} when
$\al_*>1$ is a weak law of large numbers saying that for all $\te\in\Te$,
\[
\lim_{N\to\infty}\frac 1NS_N(\te,1)=EZ_\te
\]
where convergence is considered in probabability. This is not new in the
$\ell$-dependence case since then the summands in $S_N(\te,1)$ form a
stationary sequence but in the arithmetic progression case of Theorem
\ref{thm2.4} this assertion does not seem to follow directly from previous
results.
\end{remark}
\section{Tails of products of independent random variables}\label{sec3}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
Clearly, in order to establish Theorem \ref{thm2.1} for products, i.e.
$F(x_1,x_2,...,x_\ell)=x_1x_2\cdots x_\ell$ it suffices to prove it for
$\ell=2$ and then to proceed by induction. Thus, we prove first
\begin{proposition}\label{prop3.1}
Let $X_1$ and $X_2$ be independent random variables such that $X_1$ satisfies
(\ref{2.1}) with $0<\al_1<2,\, k_1\geq 0$ and $c_1^\pm\geq 0,\,
c_1^++c_1^->0$.
(i) Suppose that for some $\al_2>\al_1$,
\begin{equation}\label{3.1}
\lim\sup_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_2}P\{ |X_2|>z\}=\rho<\infty.
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{eqnarray}\label{3.2}
&\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-k_1}P\{\pm X_1X_2>z\}\\
&=\al_1\int_0^\infty x^{\al_1-1}(c_1^+P\{\pm X_2>x\}+c^-_1
P\{\mp X_2>x\})dx.
\nonumber\end{eqnarray}
(ii) Suppose that $X_2$ satisfies (\ref{2.1}) with $\al_2=\al_1\in(0,2)$ and
some $k_2\in\bbZ_+\cup\{ 0\}$ and $c_2^\pm\geq 0,\,c_2^++c_2^->0$. Then
\begin{eqnarray}\label{3.3}
&\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-(k_1+k_2+1)}P\{\pm X_1X_2>z\}\\
&=\al_1c^\pm\frac {\Gam(k_1+1)\Gam(k_2+1)}{\Gam(k_1+k_2+2)}
\nonumber\end{eqnarray}
where $c^+=c^+_1c^+_2+c^-_1c^-_2$, $c^-=c^+_1c^-_2+c^-_1c^+_2$ and $\Gam$
denotes the Gamma function.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The assertion (i) follows actually from the theorem of Breiman
as presented by means of Proposition 7.5 in \cite{Re}. On the other hand, the
assertion (ii) seems to be specific for the class of
random variables satisfying (\ref{2.1}) and for readers' convenience we will
give the complete proof of the whole result here. In the proof we will employ
several times integration by parts for Stiltjes integrals which will be
legitimate since integrands in our circumstances will be differentiable
(see, for instance, \cite{Bi}, Theorem 18.4 and remarks there or \cite{Sh},
Theorem 11 and Corollary 1 in \S 6, Ch.II). For any $z>1$ we write
\begin{equation}\label{3.4}
Q(z)=P\{ X_1X_2>z\}=Q_1^+(z)+Q_1^-(z)+R_1(z)
\end{equation}
where for some small $\del>0$,
\[
Q_1^+(z)=E{\bf 1}_{0<X_2\leq z/(\ln z)^\del}P\{X_1>\frac z{X_2}|X_2\},
\]
\[
Q_1^-(z)=E{\bf 1}_{0>X_2\geq -z/(\ln z)^\del}P\{-X_1>\frac z{-X_2}|X_2\}
\]
and by (\ref{3.1}) or by (\ref{2.1}) depending on the case,
\begin{equation}\label{3.5}
|R_1(z)|\leq P\{ |X_2|>\frac z{(\ln z)^\del}\}\leq C_1z^{-\al_2}
(\ln z)^{\al_2\del}\big(\ln\frac z{(\ln z)^\del}\big)^{k_2}
\end{equation}
for some $C_1>0$ independent of $z$. Next, set
\begin{eqnarray*}
&Q^+_2(z)=c^+_1E{\bf 1}_{0<X_2<z/(\ln z)^\del}\big(\frac {X_2}z\big)^{\al_1}
\big(\ln\frac z{X_2}\big)^{k_1}=c_1^+I_1^+(z)\\
&\mbox{where}\,\, I_1^+(z)=\int_0^{z/(\ln z)^\del}(\frac xz)^{\al_1}(\ln
\frac zx)^{k_1}dP\{ X_2\leq x\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Then taking into account that $\frac z{X_2}\geq(\ln z)^\del$ when $0<X_2
<z/(\ln z)^\del$ we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{3.6}
|Q_1^+(z)-Q_2^+(z)|\leq I_1^+(z)R_2(z)
\end{equation}
where by (\ref{2.1}),
\begin{equation}\label{3.7}
R_2(z)=\sup_{u\geq(\ln z)^\del}|u^{\al_1}(\ln u)^{-k_1}P\{ X_1>u\}-c^+_1|
\to 0\,\,\mbox{as}\,\, z\to\infty.
\end{equation}
Now integrating by parts we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{3.8}
&I_1^+(z)=z^{-\al_1}x^{\al_1}(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1}P\{ X_2\leq
x\}|_0^{z/(\ln z)^\del}\\
&-z^{-\al_1}\int_0^{z/(\ln z)^\del}x^{\al_1-1}\big(\al_1(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1}-
k_1(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1-1}\big)P\{ X_2\leq x\}dx=Q_3^+(z)\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\[
Q_3^+(z)=z^{-\al_1}\int_0^{z/(\ln z)^\del}x^{\al_1-1}\big(\al_1
(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1}-
k_1(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1-1}\big)P\{\frac z{(\ln z)^\del}>X_2>x\}dx.
\]
Set
\[
Q_4^+(z)=z^{-\al_1}\int_0^{z/(\ln z)^\del}x^{\al_1-1}\big(\al_1
(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1}-
k_1(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1-1}\big)P\{ X_2>x\}dx.
\]
Then
\begin{equation}\label{3.9}
|Q_3^+(z)-Q_4^+(z)|\leq R_3(z)P\{ |X_2|>z/(\ln z)^\del\}
\end{equation}
where changing variables $y=\ln\frac zx$ we have
\[
R_3(z)=|\int_{\del\ln\ln z}^\infty e^{-\al_1y}(\al_1y^{k_1}-k_1y^{k_1-1})dy|.
\]
Assuming $\al_2>\al_1$ we have from (\ref{3.1}) that $x^{\al_2}P\{ X_2>x\}$ is
bounded and then it follows easily that
\begin{equation}\label{3.10}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-k_1}Q^+_4(z)=\al_1\int_0^\infty x^{\al_1-1}
P\{ X_2>x\}dx
\end{equation}
and the integral in (\ref{3.10}) converges. On the other hand, when
$\al_2>\al_1$, it follows from (\ref{3.1}) and (\ref{3.5})--(\ref{3.9}) that
\begin{equation}\label{3.11}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-k_1}|Q^+_1(z)-c_1^+Q_4^+(z)|=0.
\end{equation}
This together with (\ref{3.10}) and similar estimates for $Q^-_1(z)$ yields
(\ref{3.2}) proving (i).
Next we complete the proof of (ii) considering the case $\al_2=\al_1$. By
(\ref{2.1}),
\begin{equation}\label{3.12}
R_4(u)=\sup_{w\geq u}|c^+_2-w^{\al_2}(\ln w)^{-k_2}P\{ X_2>w\}|\to 0\,\,
\mbox{as}\,\, u\to\infty.
\end{equation}
For each $\ve>0$ choose $u_\ve\geq 1$ so that
\begin{equation}\label{3.13}
R_4(u_\ve)\leq\ve\,\,\mbox{and}\,\, u_\ve\to\infty\,\,\mbox{as}\,\,\ve\to 0.
\end{equation}
If $z$ is large enough so that $z/(\ln z)^\del>u_\ve$ then setting $y=\ln x$
we write
\begin{eqnarray*}
&Q_5^{(\ve)}(z)=c_2^+I_2^{(\ve)}(z)\,\,\mbox{where}\\
&I^{(\ve)}_2(z)=z^{-\al_1}\int_{u_\ve}^{z/(\ln z)^\del}x^{-1}
(\ln x)^{k_2}\big(\al_1(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1}-k_1(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1-1}\big)dx\\
&=c^+_2z^{-\al_1}\int_{u_\ve}^{\ln z-\del\ln
\ln z}y^{k_2}\big(\al_1(\ln z-y)^{k_1}
-k_1(\ln z-y)^{k_1-1}\big)dy
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\[
Q_6^{(\ve)}(z)=z^{-\al_1}\int_0^{u_\ve}x^{\al_1-1}
\big(\al_1(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1}-k_1(\ln\frac zx)^{k_1-1}\big)P\{ X_2>x\}dx.
\]
Then
\begin{equation}\label{3.14}
|Q_4^+(z)-Q_5^{(\ve)}(z)-Q_6^{(\ve)}(z)|\leq\ve I_2^{(\ve)}..
\end{equation}
Changing variables $u=\frac y{\ln z}$ and integrating by parts repeatedly
we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{3.15}
&\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-(k_1+k_2+1)}I_2^{(\ve)}(z)\\
&=\al_1\int_0^1u^{k_2}(1-u)^{k_1}du=\al_1\frac {\Gam(k_1+1)\Gam(k_2+1)}
{\Gam(k_1+k_2+2)}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
since the last integral above is the well known $\beta$-function $B(k_1+1,
k_2+1)$. On the other hand,
\begin{equation}\label{3.16}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-(k_1+k_2+1)}Q_6^{(\ve)}(z)=0.
\end{equation}
Now observe that by (\ref{3.5}) choosing $\del<\frac {k_1}{\al_1}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{3.17}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-(k_1+k_2+1)}|R_1(z)|=0.
\end{equation}
Similarly, by (\ref{3.5}) and (\ref{3.9}),
\begin{equation}\label{3.18}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-(k_1+k_2+1)}|Q^+_3(z)-Q^+_4(z)|=0.
\end{equation}
It follows from (\ref{3.8}), (\ref{3.9}), (\ref{3.12})--(\ref{3.16})
and (\ref{3.18}) that the (finite) limit
\[
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-(k_1+k_2+1)}Q_2^+(z)
\]
exists. Since $\lim_{z\to\infty} R_2(z)=0$ by (\ref{3.7}) we see from
(\ref{3.6}) that
\begin{equation}\label{3.19}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_1}(\ln z)^{-(k_1+k_2+1)}|Q^+_1(z)-Q^+_2(z)|=0.
\end{equation}
Finally, (\ref{3.8}) and (\ref{3.14})--(\ref{3.19}) together with similar
estimates for $Q^-_1(z)$ yields (\ref{3.3}) with $"+"$ while (\ref{3.3})
with $"-"$ follows in the same way.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem3.2}
Suppose that $X_1$ and $X_2$ are positive random variables having the tail
behavior $P\{ X_i>x\}\sim c_ix^{-\al_i}(\ln x)^{k_i}$, $i=1,2$ as $x\to\infty$
with $\al_i,c_i>0$ and $k_i\geq 0$, $i=1,2$. Then $Y_i=\ln X_i$, $i=1,2$ have
the tail behavior $P\{ Y_i>y\}\sim c_ie^{-\al_i}y^{k_i}$, $i=1,2$ as
$y\to\infty$. The latter tail behavior (with a proper normalization) is the
same as for the $\Gam$-distribution with parameters $k_i+1$ and $\al_i^{-1}$.
Thus, we can first study the tail behavior of the sum $Y_1+Y_2$ of two
independent random variables $Y_1$ and $Y_2$ having the $\Gam$-distribution
with parameters $k_1+1,\al_1^{-1}$ and $k_2+1,\al^{-1}$, respectively, and
then consider $\exp(Y_1+Y_2)$. This is strightforward when $\al_1=\al_2=\al$
since then $Y_1+Y_2$ has the $\Gam$-distribution with parameters $k_1+k_2+2,\,
\al^{-1}$. If $\al_1\ne\al_2$ then one has to obtain the tail behavior of
a convolution of two $\Gam$-distributions which involves computation of some
integrals. Of course, we can take the logarithm only if $X_1$ and $X_2$ are
positive but negative values can be treated similarly considering positive
tails of $-X_1$ and $-X_2$. Still, one has to take special care of the cases
when some of $c_i$'s are zero and when $X_i$'s may take on zero values.
\end{remark}
Proceeding by induction in the number of variables we derive from Proposition
\ref{prop3.1} the following result.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor3.3}
Theorem \ref{thm2.1} holds true for any monomial
\[
F(X_1,...,X_\ell)=X_1^{\sig_1}X_2^{\sig_2}\cdots X_\ell^{\sig_\ell},\,\,
\sig_j\in\bbZ_+
\]
where $X_1,...,X_\ell$ are independent random variables satisfying (\ref{2.1}).
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Observe first that the assertions (i) and (ii) of Theorem \ref{thm2.1}
coincide here since now $F$ consists of only one monomial, and so the
descriptions of the tail behavior (\ref{2.3}) and (\ref{2.4}) are
equivalent in view of Theorem 3.6 in \cite{Re} and Lemma \ref{l5.1} of
Appendix.
Next, set $Y_i=X_i^{\sig_i}$, $i=1,...,\ell$. Then (\ref{2.1}) implies that for
$i=1,...,\ell$,
\begin{equation}\label{3.20}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_i/\sig_i}(\ln z)^{-k_i}P\{ -Y_i>z\}=0\,\,\,\mbox{if}
\,\, \sig_i\,\,\,\mbox{is even and}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{3.21}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_i/\sig_i}(\ln z)^{-k_i}P\{\pm Y_i>z\}=
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_i/\sig_i}(\ln z)^{-k_i}P\{ \pm X_i>z^{1/\sig_i}\}=
\sig_i^{-k_i}c_i^\pm
\end{equation}
provided $\sig_i$ is odd and, furthermore, if $\sig_i>0$ is even then
\begin{eqnarray}\label{3.22}
&\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al_i/\sig_i}(\ln z)^{-k_i}P\{ \pm Y_i>z\}
=\lim_{z\to\infty}\\
&z^{\al_i/\sig_i}(\ln z)^{-k_i}(P\{ X_i>z^{1/\sig_i}\}+
P\{ X_i<-z^{1/\sig_i}\})=\sig_i^{-k_i}(c_i^++c_i^-).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Next, we proceed by induction in $\ell$. For $\ell=1$ the result follows
from (\ref{3.20})--(\ref{3.22}). Suppose that it still holds true for
$\ell=1,2,...,n-1$. In order to obtain it for $\ell=n$ we set
$Z=Y_1\cdots Y_{n-1}$. Then by the induction hypothesis
\[
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^\al(\ln z)^{-k}P\{\pm Z>z\}=c^\pm
\]
for some $\al,\, k$ and $c^\pm$ described in Theorem \ref{thm2.1}. Since $Y_n$
satisfies (\ref{3.20})--(\ref{3.22}) we derive the result for $ZY_n$ from
Proposition \ref{prop3.1} completing both the induction step and the proof
of this corollary.
\end{proof}
Next, we derive (\ref{2.6}) of Example \ref{ex2.2}. We write
\begin{equation}\label{3.23}
Q_0(z)=P\{ X_1X_2>z\}=2Q_1(z)+R_1(z)
\end{equation}
where $Q_1(z)=Q_1^+(z)=Q_1^-(z)$ and $R_1(z)$ are the same as in (\ref{3.4})
and now
\begin{equation}\label{3.24}
|R_1(z)|\leq P\{ |X_2|>\frac z{(\ln z)^\del}\}\leq Cz^{-\al}(\ln z)^{\al
\del}\big(\ln\frac z{(\ln z)^\del}\big)^{-1}
\end{equation}
for some $C>0$.
Similarly to (\ref{3.6}) we have also
\begin{equation}\label{3.25}
|Q_1^+(z)-Q_2^+(z)|\leq\frac 1{c^+_1}Q_2^+(z)R_2(z)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{3.26}
Q_2(z)=c_1E{\bf 1}_{0<X_2<\frac z{(\ln z)^\del}}(\frac {X_2}z)^\al=c_1z^{-\al}
\int_0^{z/(\ln z)^\del}x^\al dP\{ X_2\leq x\}
\end{equation}
and
\[
R_2(z)=\sup_{u\geq(\ln z)^\del}|u^{\al}P\{ X_1>u\}-c_1|.
\]
Next, we write
\begin{equation}\label{3.27}
Q_2(z)=Q_3(z)-R_3(z)
\end{equation}
where
\[
Q_3(z)=c_1\al z^{-\al}\int_0^{z/(\ln z)^\del}x^{\al-1}dP\{ X_2>x\}dx-R_3(z)
\]
and by (\ref{3.23}),
\begin{equation}\label{3.28}
R_3(z)=\frac {c_1}{(\ln z)^{\del\al}}P\{ X_2>\frac z{(\ln z)^\del}\}\leq
Cc_1z^{-\al}\big(\ln\frac z{(\ln z)^\del}\big)^{-1}.
\end{equation}
Now, we write
\begin{equation}\label{3.29}
Q_3(z)=Q_4^{(\ve)}(z)+Q_5^{(\ve)}(z)+R_4^{(\ve)}(z)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{3.30}
Q_4^{(\ve)}(z)=c_1\al z^{-\al}\int_0^{u_\ve}x^{\al-1}P\{ X_2>x\} dx
\leq c_1z^{-\al}u_\ve^\al,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{3.31}
Q_5^{(\ve)}(z)=c_1c_2\al z^{-\al}\int_{u_\ve}^{z/(\ln z)^\del}x^{-1}
(\ln x)^{-1}dx=c_1c_2\al z^{-\al}\ln\big(\frac {\ln-\del\ln\ln z}
{\ln u_\ve}\big)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{3.32}
|R^{(\ve)}_4(z)|\leq\frac \ve{c_2\al} Q_5^{(\ve)}(z)=\ve c_1z^{-\al}
\ln\big(\frac {\ln-\del\ln\ln z}{\ln u_\ve}\big)
\end{equation}
provided $u_\ve\to\infty$ as $\ve\to 0$ is chosen so that
\[
\sup_{w\geq u_\ve}|c_2-w^\al(\ln w)P\{ X_2>w\}|\leq\ve.
\]
By (\ref{3.29})--(\ref{3.32}),
\begin{equation}\label{3.33}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^{\al}(\ln\ln z)^{-1}Q_3(z)=\lim_{\ve\to 0}\lim_{z\to\infty}
Q_5^{(\ve)}(z)=c_1c_2\al
\end{equation}
which together with (\ref{3.23})--(\ref{3.28}) yields (\ref{2.6}). \qed
\section{Tails of polynomials}\label{sec4}\setcounter{equation}{0}
In order to prove Theorem \ref{thm2.1} we will view the collection of
monomials which compose the polynomial $F$ as a vector and fit them
into the following setup. For $i=1,2,...,M$ let $Z_i=(Z_{i1},Z_{i2},...,
Z_{im_i})$ be $m_i$-dimensional random vectors and $\mathcal W_i$ be the
spaces of bounded continuous functions $W$ on $R^{m_i}$ satisfying
(\ref{2.1+}). Suppose that for each $i$ and any $W\in\cW_i$,
\begin{equation}\label{4.1}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^\al(\ln\rho)^{-k}E[W(\frac {Z_i}\rho)]=
\int_0^\infty\int_{S^{m_i-1}}W(sz)\frac {\nu_i(ds)dz}{|z|^{1+\al}}
\end{equation}
where $\al>0$ and $\nu_i$ are measures on $S^{m_i-1}$, $i=1,...,M$ with
$\nu_i(S^{m_i-1})>0$. Let also $Z_0=(Z_{01},...,Z_{0,m_0})$ be a
$m_0$-dimensional random vector such that
\begin{equation}\label{4.2}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^\al(\ln\rho)^{-k}P\{ |Y_0|>\rho\}=0.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem4.1} With the above notations consider the
$m=\sum_{i=0}^Mm_i$-dimensional random vector $Z=(Z_0,Z_1,...,Z_M)$ and
assume that
\begin{equation}\label{4.3}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^\al(\ln\rho)^{-k}P\{ |Z_{il_1}|>\rho,\,
|Z_{jl_2}|>\rho\}=0
\end{equation}
for any $i,j=1,...,M,\, i\ne j$ and $1\leq l_1\leq m_i,\, 1\le l_2\leq m_j$.
Then for each bounded continuous $W$ on $R^m$ satisfying (\ref{2.1+})
the limit,
\begin{equation}\label{4.4}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^\al(\ln\rho)^{-k}E[W(\frac Z\rho)]=\int_0^\infty
\int_{S^{m-1}}W(sx)\frac {\nu(ds)dx}{|x|^{1+\al}}
\end{equation}
exists with a measure $\nu$ supported on $S^{m-1}\cap (\cup_{i=1}^M\Gam_i)$
where $\Gam_i=(0,...,0,R^{m_i},0,...,0),\, i=1,...,M$. Moreover, the
projection to $R^{m_i}$ of the restriction $\nu |_{\Gam_i}$ coinsides with
$\nu_i,\, i=1,...,M$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In view of (\ref{4.2}) and (\ref{4.3}) any weak limit as $\rho\to\infty$ of
the distributions
\[
\rho^\al(\ln\rho)^{-k}P\{\frac Z\rho\in\cdot\}
\]
has support on $\cup_{i=1}^M\Gam_i$, and by (\ref{4.1}) the limiting measure
$\nu$ exists and the projection of $\nu |_{\Gam_i}$ to $R^{m_i}$ coincides
with $\nu_i$.
\end{proof}
We will need also the following result where we denote by $\cW$ and $\cW_m$
the spaces of bounded continuous functions on $R$ and $R^m$, respectively,
satisfying (\ref{2.1+}).
\begin{lemma}\label{lem4.2}
Let a scalar random variable $V$ be such that for some $\alpha, k$ with
$0<\alpha<2$, $k\ge 0$ and all $W\in\cW$,
$$
\lim_{\rho\to\infty} \rho^\alpha(\ln \rho)^{-k}E[W\big(\frac{V}{\rho}\big)]=
\int_{-\infty}^\infty (c_-{\bf 1}_{x<0}+c_+{\bf 1}_{x>0})W(x)\frac{dx}{|x|^{1+
\alpha}}.
$$
Next, let $Y$ be a random vector in $R^m$ independent of $V$ and satisfying
$E[|Y|^\alpha]<\infty$. Then the tail behavior of the vector $Z=VY$ is
given by the limit
\begin{equation}\label{4.5}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty} \rho^\al(\ln \rho)^{-k} E[ W(\frac{Z}{\rho})]=
\int_0^\infty\int_{S^{m-1}} W(sx)\frac{\nu(ds)\,dx}{|x|^{1+\alpha}}
\end{equation}
which holds true for any $W\in\cW_m$. The measure $\nu(ds)$ on $S^{m-1}$ is
computed for subsets $A\subset S^{m-1}$ from the identity
$$
E[\int_0^\infty (c_+W(xY)+c_-W(-xY)] \frac{dx}{x^{1+\alpha}})dx=\int_{S^{m-1}}
\int_0^\infty W(sr)\frac{\nu(ds)dr}{r^{1+\alpha}}
$$
as
$$
\nu(A)=c_+\int_{\widehat A} |{\bf y}|^\alpha d\lambda+c_-\int_{-\widehat A}
|{\bf y}|^\alpha d\lambda
$$
where ${\widehat A}$ is the cone $\cup_{\sigma>0}\sigma A$, ${-\widehat A} =
\cup_{\sigma<0} \,\sigma A$ and $\lambda$ is the distribution of $Y$ on $R^m$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Given $W\in \mathcal W$, for each fixed ${\bf y}\in R^m$ as a
function of $x$, $W(x{\bf y})\in \mathcal W$ on $R$. Therefore
$$
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^\alpha (\ln \rho)^{-k} E[W(\frac{V{\bf y}}{\rho})]=
\int_0^\infty (c_+W(x{\bf y})+c_-W(-x{\bf y})) \frac{dx}{x^{1+\alpha}}
$$
Moreover, the convergence is easily seen to be uniform over bounded sets of
${\bf y}$. Hence if $\rho\ge 3$,
$$
\sup_{\rho\ge 3}\sup_{\|{\bf y}\|\le 1}\rho^\alpha (\ln \rho)^{-k}
E[W(\frac{V{\bf y}}{\rho})]\le C.
$$
If $1\le |{\bf y}|\le \frac{\rho}{3}$ then setting
$\rho'=\frac{\rho}{|{\bf y}|}
\ge 3$, writing ${\bf y}=|{\bf y}|{\bf y'}$ with $|{\bf y}'|=1$ and observing
that $\rho'\le \rho$ we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\rho^\alpha (\ln \rho)^{-k} E[W(\frac{V{\bf y}}{\rho})] =\rho^\alpha
(\ln \rho)^{-k} E[W(\frac{V{\bf y}'}{\rho |{\bf y}|^{-1}})]
=\rho^\alpha (\ln \rho)^{-k} E[W(\frac{V{\bf y}'}{\rho'})]\\
&\le \frac{\rho^\alpha (\ln \rho)^{-k} }{(\rho')^\alpha (\ln \rho')^{-k} }
(\rho')^\alpha (\ln \rho')^{-k}E[W(\frac{V{\bf y}'}{\rho'})]
\le C\frac{\rho^\alpha (\ln \rho)^{-k} }{(\rho')^\alpha (\ln \rho')^{-k} }
\le C |{\bf y}|^\alpha.
\end{eqnarray*}
If $|{\bf y}|\ge \frac{\rho}{3}$ and $\ln \rho\ge 1$ then
$$
\rho^\alpha (\ln \rho)^{-k} E[W(\frac{V{\bf y}}{\rho})]\le \|W\|_\infty
\rho^\alpha \le C|{\bf y}|^\alpha.
$$
We can now apply the dominated convergence theorem to conclude that
$$
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^\alpha (\ln \rho)^{-k} E[W(\frac{VY}{\rho})]=
E\int_0^\infty (c_+W(xY)+c_-W(-xY)) \frac{dx}{x^{1+\alpha}}.
$$
Replacing $W(\cdot)$ by $W(\sigma\, \cdot)$ and changing variables we see
that
$$
E\int_0^\infty (c_+W(xY)+c_-W(-xY)) \frac{dx}{x^{1+\alpha}}
$$
is homogeneous of order $\alpha$ under dilation and therefore can be
expressed as
$$
\int_{S^{m-1}} \int_0^\infty W(rs)\frac{\nu(ds)dr}{r^{1+\alpha}}
$$
where for a Borel $A\subset S^{m-1}$,
$$
\nu(A)=c_+\int_{\widehat A} |{\bf y}|^\alpha d\lambda+c_-\int_{-\widehat A}
|{\bf y}|^\alpha d\lambda
$$
with $\lambda$ being the distribution of $Y$. If $Y$ is a scalar then the
L\'{e}vy measure on $R$ is given for each Borel $A\subset R$ by
$$
\nu(A)=\int_A(c^*_- {\bf 1}_{x<0}+c^*{\bf 1}_{x>0})\frac{dx}{|x|^{1+\alpha}}
$$
where
$$
c^*_-=c_+\int_{-\infty}^0 |y|^\alpha d\lambda+c_-\int_{0}^\infty |y|^\alpha
d\lambda
$$
and
$$
c^*_+=c_-\int_{-\infty}^0 |y|^\alpha d\lambda+c_+\int_{0}^\infty
|y|^\alpha d\lambda.
$$
\end{proof}
In order to apply Lemma \ref{4.1} to the collection of monomials composing
the polynomial $F$ we will need the following result which will
ensure the compliance with the condition (\ref{4.3}).
\begin{lemma}\label{lem4.3}
Let $Y=V_1V_2$ and $Z=V_2V_3$ where $V_1,\, V_2$ and $V_3$ are independent
random variables such that
\begin{equation}\label{4.6}
\lim_{z\to\infty}z^\al(\ln z)^{-u_i}P\{\pm V_i>z\}=v^{\pm}_i
\end{equation}
where $\al>0,\, u_i\geq 0,\, v_i^++v_i^->0,\, i=1,2,3$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{4.7}
\limsup_{z\to\infty}z^\al(\ln z)^{-u_2}P\{ |Y|>z,\, |Z|>z\}<\infty.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Observe that
\begin{equation}\label{4.8}
P\{ |Y|>z,\, |Z|>z\}\leq P\{ |YZ|^{1/2}>z\}=P\{ |V_1V_2|^{1/2}|V_2|>z\}.
\end{equation}
By (\ref{4.6}) and Proposition \ref{prop3.1},
\[
\limsup_{z\to\infty}z^{2\al}(\ln z)^{-(u_1+u_3+1)}P\{ |V_1V_2|^{1/2}>z\}
<\infty,
\]
and so, again, by (\ref{4.6}) and Proposition \ref{prop3.1},
\[
\limsup_{z\to\infty} z^\al(\ln z)^{-u_2}P\{ |V_1V_3|^{1/2}|V_2|>z\}<\infty
\]
which together with (\ref{4.8}) gives (\ref{4.7}).
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor4.3+}
Let $\theta_1,\theta_2$ be two multi indices with corresponding monomials
$g_{\theta_1}=\Pi_{j=1}^\ell x_j^{ \sigma_j}$ and $g_{\theta_2}=\Pi_{j=1}^\ell
x_j^{\tau_j}$. If $\alpha(\theta_1)=\alpha(\theta_2)=\alpha^\ast$ and
$k(\theta_1)=k(\theta_2)=k^\ast$ but $J(\theta_1)\not= J(\theta_2)$, then
$$
\lim_{x\to\infty} x^{\alpha^\ast}(\log x)^{-k^\ast} P[|g_{\theta_1}(X_1,
\ldots,X_\ell) |\ge x, \,|g_{\theta_2}(X_1,\ldots,X_\ell )|\ge x]=0
$$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} In Lemma \ref{lem4.3} set $Y=g_{\te_1}(X_1,...,X_\ell)$,
$Z=g_{\te_1}(X_1,...,X_\ell)$ and $V_2=\prod_{i=1}^mX_{j_i}$ where
$j_1,...,j_m\in J(\te_1)\cap J(\te_2)$ while if the latter intersection
is empty we take $V=1$. Now, the result follows immediately from Lemma
\ref{lem4.3}.
\end{proof}
Now we are able to complete the proof of Theorem \ref{thm2.1}. Order
arbitrarily the sets $J(\te),\,\te\in\Te_*$ and denote these different
sets by $J_1,J_2,...,J_M$. Next, we define vectors $Z_i,\, i=1,...,M$ so that
$Z_i$ consists of different monomials $g_\te,\,\te\in\Te_*$ having the form
\begin{equation}\label{4.9}
g_\te=(\prod_{j\in J_i}x_j)^{\sig_*}\prod_{l\not\in J_i,\sig_l\in\te}
x^{\sig_l}_l
\end{equation}
observing that $\sig_l<\sig_*$ here for all $l\not\in J_i$. Define
also the vector $Z_0$ which consists of monomials $g_\te,\,\te\in\Te
\setminus\Te_*$ taken with an arbitrary order. In order to obtain
(\ref{4.1}) for $Z_i,\, i\geq 1$ consider random variables
$V_i=(\prod_{j\in J_i}X_j)^{\sig_*}$ and form random vectors $Y_i$ which
consist of random monomials $\prod_{l\not\in J_i,\sig_l\in\te}X_l^{\sig_l}$,
so that $Z_i=V_iY_i$. Next, the conditions of Lemma \ref{lem4.2} are
verified relying on Corollary \ref{cor3.3} which enables us to apply
Lemma \ref{lem4.2} in order to
obtain (\ref{4.1}) with $\al=\al_*$ and $k=k_*$. Now, for such $\al$ and
$k$ the condition (\ref{4.2}) follows from Corollary \ref{cor3.3} and the
condition (\ref{4.3}) follows from Lemma \ref{lem4.3} using
Corollary \ref{cor3.3}. Hence, applying Lemma \ref{lem4.1} we derive
the assertion (i) of Theorem \ref{thm2.1}. Since taking the sum of
components of vectors is a particular case of a linear map the assertion
(ii) of Theorem \ref{thm2.1} follows from (i), Lemma \ref{l5.1} and the
following observation.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem4.4} (see Proposition 7.3 of \cite{Re}) Suppose
that a random $m$-dimensional vector
$Z$ satisfies (\ref{4.4}) for some measure $\nu$ on $S^{m-1}$ with
$\nu(S^{m-1})>0$ and any bounded continuous function $W$ satisfying
(\ref{2.1+}). Let $T:R^m\to R^d$, $d\leq m$ be a linear map. Then
$Z'=TZ$ will again satisfy (\ref{4.4}) with $Z',\nu'$ and $d$ in place
of $Z,\nu$ and $m$ where $\nu'$ is defined for any Borel set $\Gam\subset
S^{d-1}$ by
\[
\nu'(\Gam)=\int_{S^{m-1}}{\bf 1}_\Gam(\frac {Ts}{|Ts|})|Ts|^\al\nu(ds).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The result follows considering bounded continuous functions
$\tilde W$ on $R^d$ which satisfy (\ref{2.1+}) while observing that $W(x)
=\tilde W(Tx)$ is a bounded continuous function on $R^m$ satisfying
(\ref{2.1+}) to which we can apply (\ref{4.4}).
\end{proof}
\section{Limit theorem in the $\ell$-dependence case}\label{sec5}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
In this section we will prove Theorem \ref{thm2.3}. We are dealing here
with the sums
\begin{equation}\label{5.1}
S_N(\te,t)=\sum_{1\leq n\leq Nt}g_\te(X_n,X_{n+1},...,X_{n+\ell-1}),\,
\te\in\Te
\end{equation}
containing the summands which form a stationary $\ell$-dependent sequence.
By this reason our proof will rely on the following result which appears
in \cite{TK} as Corollary 1.4.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop5.1} Let $\{ Z_n\}$ be a stationary
$\ell$-dependent sequence with values in $R^d$ which satisfies (\ref{4.1})
and such that for any $j=2,3,...,\ell$ and $\del>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{5.2}
\lim_{N\to\infty}NP\{ |Z_1|>\del b_N\,\,\mbox{and}\,\, |Z_j|>\del b_N\}=0
\end{equation}
where $b_N=N^{\frac 1\al}(\frac {\ln N}\al)^{\frac k\al}$. Set $a_N=
E(\frac {b_N^2Z_1}{b_N^2+|Z_1|^2})$. Then the process
\begin{equation}\label{5.3}
\Up_N(t)=\frac 1{b_N}(\sum_{1\leq n\leq Nt}Z_n-Nta_N)
\end{equation}
weakly converges in the $J_1$ topology on $D([0,T],\, R^d)$ to an $\al$-stable
L\' evy process with the same L\' evy measure as $Z_1$.
\end{proposition}
Actually, the identification of the limiting L\' evy measure is not stated
explicitly in Corollary 1.4 of \cite{TK} but this follows from the proof there.
In Appendix we will exhibit a more general result for the $\ell$-dependent
stationary sequences which will yield either convergence in the $J_1$ topology
or only of finite dimensional distributions depending on whether the condition (\ref{5.2})
is assumed or not and we will describe in both cases limiting L\' evy measures. We will
give a direct proof there unlike Corollary 1.4 of \cite{TK} which follows from a more
general result whose proof relies on the point processes machinery.
Observe that the one dimensional version of Proposition \ref{prop5.1} is
applicable to each sum $S_N(\te,t),\,\te\in\Te_*$ in (\ref{5.1}). Indeed,
each $g_\te,\te\in\Te_*$ has the form
\begin{equation}\label{5.4}
g_\te(x_1,...,x_\ell)=(\prod_{i=1}^{p_*}x_{j_i}^{\sig_*})f_\te(x_{p_*+1},...,
x_\ell)
\end{equation}
where $J(\te)=(j_1,j_2,...,j_{{p_*}})$ and $f_\te$ is a monomial in
complementary to $x_{j_1},...,x_{j_{p_*}}$ variables rised to powers
lower than $\sig_*$. Then for $n_1\ne n_2$ we can apply Lemma \ref{lem4.3}
setting there $Y=g_\te(X_{n_1},X_{n_1+1},...,X_{n_1+\ell-1})$,
$Z=g_\te(X_{n_2},X_{n_2+1},...,X_{n_2+\ell-1})$ and defining $V_2$ as
the common part of the products $\prod_{i=1}^{p_*}X^{\sig_*}_{n_1+j_i-1}$
and $\prod_{i=1}^{p_*}X^{\sig_*}_{n_2+j_i-1}$ (taking $V_2=1$ if these
products do not have a common part). This will yield the condition
(\ref{5.2}) for the (scalar) sequence $Z_n=g_\te(X_n,X_{n+1},...,
X_{n+\ell-1})$.
The main problem in application of Proposition \ref{prop5.1} to the
vector sums $\{ S_N(\te,t),\,\te\in\Te\}$ is that, in general, we may have pairs
of large (vector) summands there so that the condition (\ref{5.2}) will
not hold true. Indeed, consider a simple example with $F(x_1,x_2)=x_1+x_2$
and $q_1(n)=n,\, q_2(n)=n+1$ so that $\te_1=(1,0),\,\te_2=(0,1)$ and
$g_{\te_i}(x_1,x_2)=x_i,\, i=1,2$. Then both vectors $Z_n=
(g_{\te_1}(X_n,X_{n+1}))=(X_n,X_{n+1})$ and $Z_{n+1}=(X_{n+1},X_{n+2})$
may be large in norm if $|X_{n+1}|$ is large. In other words,
the probability
$P\{ |Z_1|>\del b_N,\, |Z_2|>\del b_N\}$ may be of the same order as
$P\{ |X_1|>\del b_N\}$ which is of order $1/N$. We observe that in this
situation there is no weak convergence of the process $\Up_N$ from
(\ref{5.3}) in the $J_1$ topology. Indeed, if this convergence would take
place then also the process $\xi_N(t)=b_N^{-1}\sum_{1\leq n\leq Nt}
(X_n+X_{n+1})$ would weakly converge in the $J_1$ topology which is
false as shown in \cite{AT}.
In order to adjust our sums to requirements of Proposition \ref{prop5.1}
we will perform a rearrangement procedure which will produce new sums
$\cS_N(\te,t)$ not much different from $S_N(\te,t)$ where large pairs
of summands can emerge only with negligible probability. In the above
simple example we will set $\cZ_n=(X_{n+1},X_{n+1})$ for $n\geq 2$
and the latter vector sequence will satisfy the conditions of
Proposition \ref{prop5.1}. This yields the convergence in the $J_1$
topology of the process $\tilde\Up_N(t)$ obtained from $\Up_N(t)$ by
replacing $Z_n$ by $\cZ_n$ but the estimate
\[
|\sum_{1\leq n\leq Nt}Z_n-\sum_{2\leq n\leq Nt}\cZ_n|\leq |X_1|
+|X_{[Nt]}|
\]
does not enable us to obtain convergence of $\Up_N$ in the $J_1$
topology but only provide weak convergence of finite dimensional
distributions. In Appendix we will exhibit an alternative approach which
will yield directly convergence of finite dimensional distributions without the
condition (\ref{5.2}) as required in Theorem \ref{thm2.3}(i) and the rearrangement
which is special for the polynomial setup here will not be used there.
In order to deal with the general case we consider the disjoint subsets
$\Psi_1,\Psi_2,...,\Psi_r$ of $\Te_*$ which are not singletons and
such that for each pair $\te_1,\te_2\in\Psi_i$ the sets $J(\te_1)=
(i_1,...,i_{p_*})$ and $J(\te_2)=(j_1,...,j_{p_*})$ have the differences
$j_l-i_l,\, l=1,...,p_*$ equal to a constant independent of $l$. If
there are no such (non singleton) subsets of $\Te_*$ then we are in the
circumstances of the second part of Theorem \ref{thm2.3} where there is
no need in a rearrangement applying directly Proposition \ref{prop5.1}
and this case will be discussed later on. Thus, we assume now that such
subsets exist. In each $\Psi_i,\, i=1,...,r$ choose $\te_i$ such that
$J(\te_i)=(j_{i1},j_{i2},...,j_{ip_*})$ has the maximal first index
$j_{i1}$ where we set the order $j_{i1}<j_{i2}<...<j_{ip_*}$ in
$J(\te_i)$. Then there exist integers $0=a_{i1}<a_{i2}<...<a_{iz_i}
<j_{i1}$ such that $\Psi_i=\{\te_{i1},\te_{i2},...,\te_{iz_i}\}$
and $J(\te_{il})=(j_{i1}-a_{il},j_{i2}-a_{il},...,j_{ip_*}-a_{il})$ for
each $l=1,2,...,z_i$.
The goal of our rearrangement procedure is to
produce new vector summands $\cY_n(\te),\,\te\in\Te_*$ which will
replace the summands $Y_n(\te)=g_\te(X_n,X_{n+1},...,X_{n+\ell-1}),\,
\te\in\Te_*$ in (\ref{5.1}) so that Proposition \ref{prop5.1} could
be applied to the new sum while the difference between these two sums
can be controlled.
If $\te$ does not belong to some $\Psi_i$ (in particular, if $\te\in
\Te\setminus\Te_*$) defined above then we set $\cY_n(\te)=Y_n(\te)$.
Now, suppose that $\te=\te_{il}$ for some $1\leq l\leq z_i$. then for
all $n\geq\ell$ set
\begin{equation}\label{5.5}
\cY_n(\te)=g_{\te}(X_{n+a_{il}},X_{n+a_{il}+1},...,X_{n+a_{il}+\ell-1})=
Y_{n+a_{il}}(\te).
\end{equation}
Let
\begin{equation}\label{5.6}
\cS_N(\te,t)\sum_{\ell\leq n\leq Nt}\cY_n(\te).
\end{equation}
It is easy to see that
\begin{equation}\label{5.7}
|S_N(\te,t)-\cS_N(\te,t)|\leq(\sum_{1\leq n\leq 2\ell}+
\sum_{Nt\leq n\leq Nt+\ell})|g_\te(X_n,X_{n+1},...,X_{n+\ell-1})|.
\end{equation}
Relying on Lemma \ref{lem4.3} it is easy to see that the vector
summands $\cZ_n=(\cY_n(\te),\,\te\in\Te)$ satisfy the condition
(\ref{5.2}) of Proposition \ref{prop5.1} (considered with $\cZ_n$ in
place of $Z_n$), and so as $N\to\infty$ the processes $\Up_N(t),\,
t\in[0,T]$ defined
by (\ref{5.3}) (again, with $\cZ_n$ in place of $Z_n$) weakly converge
in the $J_1$ topology on $D([0,T],\, R^m)$ to an $\al_*$-stable vector
L\' evy
process $\{\Xi(\te,t),\,\te\in\Te\}$, $t\in [0,T]$. The estimate
(\ref{5.7}) enable us to conclude from here that all finite dimensional
distributions of the vector process $\{\Xi_N(\te,t),\,\te\in\Te\}$,
$t\in [0,T]$ weakly converge to the corresponding finite dimensional
distributions of $\{\Xi(\te,t),\,\te\in\Te\}$, $t\in[0,T]$. Clearly,
$\frac 1{b_N}\{\Xi_N(\te,t),\,\te\in\Te\setminus\Te_*\}$ will converge
to zero in probability.
Still, the estimate (\ref{5.7}), in general, does not yield weak
convergence of the vector process $\{\Xi_N(\te,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te\}$
in any of Skorokhod's topologies. Indeed, take $F(x_1,x_2)=x_1-x_2$,
$Z_n=(X_n,-X_{n+1})$ with $X_j$ satisfying (\ref{2.1a}) and define
$\Up_N$ by (\ref{5.3}). The weak convergence of $\Up_N(\cdot)$ as $N\to
\infty$ would imply the weak convergence of the process $\frac 1b_N
(X_{[Nt]}-X_1),\, t\in[0,T]$ which does not converge in any of
Skorokhod's topologies as explained in \cite{AT}.
The above provides the proof of the assertion (i) of Theorem
\ref{thm2.3}. In order to derive the assertion (ii) we observe that
since there exist no non singleton subsets $\Psi_i$ satisfying
conditions of the above proof it follows that already the vector
summands $Z_n=(Y_n(\te),\,\te\in\Te)$ satisfy (\ref{5.2}) of
Proposition \ref{prop5.1}, and so the vector process
$\Up_N(t)=\{\Xi_N(\te,t),\,\te\in\Te\}$, $t\in[0,T]$ weakly converges
in the $J_1$-topology to an $\al_*$-stable L\' evy process $\{\Xi(\te,t),
\,\te\in\Te\}$, $t\in[0,T]$.
In order to prove that the component processes $\Xi(\te,\cdot)$ will
be independent for different $\te$ it suffices to show that the
L\' evy measure of the vector process $\{\Xi(\te,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te\}$
will be concentrated on axes. Relying on Section 4 from \cite{TK} we
conclude that the latter follows if the random vector
$Z=(Y_1(\te),\,\te\in\Te)$ satisfies (\ref{4.4}) with the L\' evy
measure $\nu$ supported on the axes, i.e.
\[
\nu\{ (x_1,...,x_2):\, |x_i|>0\,\,\mbox{and}\,\,|x_j|>0,\, i\ne j\}=0.
\]
The latter will hold true if we show that for any $\te,\tilde\te\in\Te$,
$\te\ne\tilde\te$ and $\del>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{5.8}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^{\al_*}(\ln\rho)^{-k_*}P\{|Y_1(\te)|>\rho\,\,
\mbox{and}\,\,|Y_1(\tilde\te)|>\rho\}=0.
\end{equation}
If $\te,\tilde\te\in\Te_*$ and there exists no integer $r$ such that
$J(\tilde\te)=J(\te)+r$ (in the sense of Theorem \ref{thm2.3}(ii))
then we can represent $Y_1(\te)=V_1V_2$ and $Y_1(\tilde\te)=V_2V_3$
where $V_1,V_2$ and $V_3$ satisfy conditions of Lemma \ref{lem4.3}
and then (\ref{5.8}) follows from there. If, say, $\te\in\Te\setminus
\Te_*$ then (\ref{5.8}) still holds true since
\[
P\{|Y_1(\te)|>\rho\,\, \mbox{and}\,\,|Y_1(\tilde\te)|>\rho\}\leq
P\{|Y_1(\te)|>\rho\}
\]
taking into account that for $\te\in\Te\setminus\Te_*$ the random
variables $Y_1(\te)$ have faster decaying tail probabilities than
for $\te\in\Te_*$.
The assertion
(iii) follows from (i) and (ii) taking into account properties of
weak convergence in the $J_1$ topology. Namely, regarding weak
convergence of finite dimensional distributions of vector processes
it is clear that this remains true also for sums of components of
vectors. Furthermore, if a sequence of $R^d$ curves converges in
the $J_1$-topology then the corresponding time changes are the same
for all $d$-components, and so the same time changes work also for
the sums of components of these curves. \qed
\section{Limit theorem in the arithmetic progression case}\label{sec6}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
Now we turn to the situation where
\begin{eqnarray*}
&S_N(\te,t)=\sum_{1\le n\le Nt}Y_n(\te),\, Y_n(\te)=g_\te(X_n,X_{2n},...,
X_{\ell n}),\, Y_n=\sum_{\te\in\Te}h_\te Y_n(\te)\\
&\mbox{and}\,\, S_N(t)=\sum_{1\le n\le Nt}Y_n=
\sum_{1\le n\le Nt}F(X_n,X_{2n},\ldots, X_{\ell n}).
\end{eqnarray*}
As in \cite{KV2} we consider all primes $p_1,\ldots, p_s$ in $1,2,\ldots,
\ell$. Denote by $\Gamma_1$ the set of numbers $\{p_1^{b_1}\cdots p_s^{b_s}\}$
with $ b_1,\ldots,b_s\ge 0$ and arrange them in the increasing order as
$1=n_1<n_2 <\cdots<n_q<\cdots$. Let ${\bbZ}_0$ be the set of all positive
integers that do not
have $p_1,p_2,\ldots, p_s$ as factors. Then any positive integer
$n\in {\bbZ}_+$
can be written uniquely as a product $n=in_q$ where $i\in {\bbZ}_0$ and $n_q
\in\Gamma_1$. It is not difficult to see (for instance, by the
inclusion-exclusion principle) that
the set ${\bbZ}_0$ has density $\rho=\Pi_{i=1}^s (1-\frac{1}{p_i})$
as a subset of ${\bbZ}_+$. For $i\in {\bbZ}_0 $, we denote by $\Gamma_i$ the
set $ \{in\}$ with $n$ from $\Gamma_1$. Then $\Gamma_i$ are disjoint
and ${\bbZ}_+=\cup_{i\in {\bbZ}_0} \Gamma_i$. If $n\in \Gamma_i $ so is $rn$
for $r\le \ell$. In particular $Y_m$ depends only on the variables $\{X_n\}$
with $n$ in the same $ \Gamma_i$ to which $m$ belongs and the collections
$\{Y_m:\, m\in \Gamma_i\}$ are mutually independent for different values
of $i$. We need the following fact.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem6.1}
Given $\ell$, the set ${\bbZ}_+$ of positive integers can be divided into
$\ell^2+1$ mutually disjoint sets $E_i$ such that
if $r$ and $s$ are two different integers in the same $E_i$ then the two sets
$\{r,2r,\ldots,\ell r\}$ and $\{s,2r,\ldots,\ell s\}$ are disjoint.
In particular for every $i$, $\{Y_r: r\in E_i\}$ are mutually independent.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us construct a graph with ${\bbZ}_+$ as vertices. There is an edge connecting $r$ and $s$, if the two sets $\{r,2r,\ldots, \ell r\}$ and
$\{s,2s,\ldots, \ell s\}$ have a common integer. In other words
$is=jr$ for some $i,j$ between $1$ and $\ell$. For each fixed $r$ the
equation $\frac{r}{s}=\frac{i}{j}$ has at most $\ell^2$ solutions in $i$
and $j$. Hence, the vertices of the graph have
degree at most $\ell^2$. Therefore $\ell^2+1$ colors are enough to make sure
that no two vertices connected by an edge have the same color.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem6.2}
Let $T<\infty$ be fixed. For each $q>1$ and $N$, let ${\bf A}_N^q$ be a
subset of integers from $[1,NT]$ with density $\lim_{N\to\infty}
\frac{|{\bf A}_N^q|}{NT}= \rho_q$ such that $\rho_q\to 0$ as $q\to\infty$.
Then for any $\te\in\Te$,
$$
\limsup_{q\to\infty}\limsup_{N\to\infty}P\big\{\sup_{0\le t\le T}\frac{1}{b_N}
|\sum_{r\in {\bf A}_N^q,\,r\le Nt} (Y_r(\te)-a_N^\te)| \ge \delta\big\}=0
$$
where
\[
a_N^\te=E\big(\frac {b_N^2Y_1(\te)}{b^2_N+Y^2_1(\te)}\big).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We can use Lemma \ref{lem6.1} to split the set ${\bf A}_N^q$ into
$\ell^2+1$ subsets such that when $r$ runs within each subset the random
variables $Y_r(\te)$
are mutually independent. Since it is enough to prove the estimate for each
subset, we can assume that $Y_r(\te)$ are mutually independent for $r\in
{\bf A}_N^q$. For each $Y_r(\te)$ with $\te\in\Te_*$ we have the tail estimate,
$$
\lim_{\rho\to\infty} \rho^{\alpha*} (\ln \rho)^{-k_*}E[W(\frac{Y_r}{T})]=\int
W(x) M(dx)
$$
where
\[
M(dx)=(c_-{\bf 1}_{x<0}+c_+{\bf 1}_{x>0})\frac{dx}{|x|^{1+\frac{\al}{\al_*}}}.
\]
Let $N_q$ be the cardinality of $A^q_N\cap[1,NT]$. If $N_q$ stays bounded
as $N\to\infty$ then the assertion of the lemma is clear. Suppose that
$N_q\to\infty$ as $N\to\infty$. Then relying on standard (functional) stable
limit theorems for i.i.d. random variables (see, for instance, \cite{AG},
\cite{Bi1}, \cite{GK} and \cite{JS}) and properties of the $J_1$ convergence
we conclude that as $N\to\infty$ the quantity $\sup_{0\le t\le T}
\frac{1}{b_{N_q}}|\sum_{r\in {\bf A}_N^q,\,r\le Nt}(Y_r-a_{N_q})|$ will have
a limiting distribution which does not depend on $q$. Now, the lemma follows
from the observation that
$$
\lim_{q\to\infty}\lim_{N\to\infty}\frac{b_{N_q}}{b_N}=0.
$$
\end{proof}
For each integer $q\geq 1$ set
\[
\Xi_N^q(\te,t)=\frac 1{b_N}\sum_{j=1}^q\, \sum_{i\in {\bbZ}_0,\, in_j\le Nt}
(Y_{in_j}(\te)-a^\te_N).
\]
We will need the following result.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem6.3} For each fixed $T<\infty$ and $\ve>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{6.1}
\lim_{q\to\infty}\limsup_{N\to\infty}P\{\sup_{0\le t\le T}|\Xi_N^q (\te,t)-
\Xi_N(\te,t)|\ge\ve\}=0.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since
$$
\Xi_N(\te,t)=\frac{1}{b_N}\sum_{s=1}^\infty\, \sum_{ i\in{\bbZ}_0,\, in_s\le Nt}
(Y_{in_s}(\te)-a_N^\te)
$$
we can write
$$
\Xi_N(\te,t)-\Xi_N^q(\te,t)=\frac{1}{b_N}\sum_{s=q+1}^\infty
\sum_{ i\in{\bbZ}_0,\, in_s \le Nt} (Y_{in_s}(\te)-a_N^\te).
$$
Hence,
\begin{align}
\sup_{0\le t\le T}|\Xi_N(\te,t)-\Xi_N^q(\te,t)|&\le \sup_{1\le n\le NT}
|\sum_{s=q+1}^\infty\, \sum_{ i\in {\bbZ}_0,\, in_s \le n} (Y_{in_s}(\te)-
a_N^\te)|\notag\\
&=\sup_{1\le n\le NT}\frac{1}{b_N}|\sum_{r\in {\bf A}_N^q,\, r\le n}
(Y_r(\te)-a_N^\te)|\label{6.2}
\end{align}
where ${\bf A}_N^q$ is the set of integers in $[1, NT]$ that are divisible by
some $n_{q'}$ with $q'>q$. The set of such integers in the interval $[1, NT]$
will have a proportion at most $\sum_{q'>q}\frac{1}{n_{q'}}=\epsilon_q\to 0$
as $q\to\infty$ since
$$
\sum_q \frac{1}{n_q}=\sum_{b_1,\ldots, b_s\ge 0} \frac{1}{p_1^{b_1}\cdots
p_s^{b_s}}= \prod_{j=1}^s (1-\frac{1}{p_j})^{-1}=\frac{1}{\rho}<\infty.
$$
Now, the result follows from Lemma \ref{lem6.2}.
\end{proof}
We will study first the limiting behavior of $\Xi^q_N$ as $N\to\infty$ in
the $J_1$ topology and then, relying on Lemma \ref{lem6.3}, will let
$q\to\infty$ and obtain weak limits of distributions of $\Xi_N$ required in
Theorem \ref{thm2.4}.
Set $Z_i^{ j ,\theta}=Y_{in_j}(\te)$ so that $Y_{in_j}=\sum_\theta Z_i^{ j ,
\theta}$.
Recalling the notation $\Theta_*=\{\theta: \al(\theta)=\al_*, k(\theta)=k_*\}$
from Section \ref{sec2} we define an equivalence relation in $\Gamma_1\times
\Theta_*$ by declaring $(n_{j_1},\theta_1)\sim(n_{j_2},\theta_2)$ if
$n_{j_1}J(\theta_1)$ and $n_{j_2} J(\theta_2)$ are identical as subsets of
${\bbZ}$ (viewing these as products of a scalar and a vector).
The equivalence classes will be
denoted by $\tau$ and together they form a set $\mathcal T$, a quotient of
$\Gamma_1\times\Theta_*$. The joint distribution of the collection
$\{Z_i^{ j ,\theta}\}$ as $j$ and $\theta$ vary does not depend on $i$.
Let $\cD_q$ be the (finite) set $\{ (n_j,\te):\, j\leq q,\,\te\in\Te\}$
whose cardinality we denote by $m_q$. The vector space $R^{m_q}$ can be
naturally decomposed as
$$
R^{m_q}=\oplus_{\tau\in \mathcal T} V_\tau\oplus U
$$
corresponding to the span of coordinates from the equivalence classes $\tau
\in \mathcal T$ and the span $U$ of the remaining coordinates from
$\mathcal D_q$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem6.4} Let $\bfZ_q$ be the random $m_q$-dimensional
vector $\{ Z_1^{j,\te},\,j\leq q,\,\te\in\Te\}$. Then the limit
\begin{equation}\label{6.3}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^{-\alpha_*}(\ln\rho)^{k_*} EW\big(\frac {\bfZ_q}
{\rho}\big)=\int_{S^{m_q-1}}\int_0^\infty W(su)\nu(ds)\frac{du}{u^{1+\alpha*}}
\end{equation}
exists for any bounded continuous function $W$ satisfying (\ref{2.1+})
and for some measure $\nu$ on the $(m_q-1)$-dimensional sphere $S^{m_q-1}$.
Moreover, $\nu$ is concentrated on
$\cup_{\tau\in \mathcal T}\cdots\{0\}\oplus\{0\}\oplus V_{\tau}\oplus\{0\}
\oplus \cdots$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In view of (\ref{5.4}) we can write for any $(n_{j_1},\te_1)$ and
$(n_{j_2},\te_2)$ with $\te_1,\te_2\in\Te_*$,
\begin{equation}\label{6.4}
g_{\te_i}(X_{n_{j_i}},X_{2n_{j_i}},...,X_{\ell n_{j_i}})=\big(\prod_{u=1}^{p_*}
X^{\sig_*}_{l_u^{(i)}}\big)f_{\te_i}(X_{l^{(i)}_{p_*+1}},...,X_{l^{(i)}_\ell}),
\, i=1,2
\end{equation}
where $n_{j_i}J(\te_i)=(l_1^{(i)},...,l_{p_*}^{(i)})$ while $f_{\te_i}$ is
a monomial containing $X_{l_v}$'s with indexes $l_v$ in $n_{j_i},2n_{j_i},
...,\ell n_{j_i}$ which are different from $l^{(i)}_1,...,l^{(i)}_{p_*}$
and $X_{l_v}$'s
are rised in $f_{\te_i}$ to powers smaller than $\sig_*$. If $(n_{j_1},
\te_1)\sim(n_{j_2},\te_2)$ then $(l_1^{(1)},...,l_{p_*}^{(1)})=
(l_1^{(2)},...,l_{p_*}^{(2)})$, and so for $(n_j,\te)$ within one
equivalence class we are in circumstances of Lemma \ref{lem4.2}. If
$(n_{j_1},\te_1)$ and $(n_{j_2},\te_2)$ are in different equivalence classes
then $(l_1^{(1)},...,l_{p_*}^{(1)})\ne (l_1^{(2)},...,l_{p_*}^{(2)})$ and
we can apply Lemma \ref{lem4.3} with $Y=g_{\te_1}(X_{n_{j_1}},X_{2n_{j_1}},
...,X_{\ell n_{j_1}})$, $Z=g_{\te_2}(X_{n_{j_2}},X_{2n_{j_2}},...,
X_{\ell n_{j_2}})$ and $V_2$ consisting of the common part of the products
$\prod_{u=1}^{p_*}X^{\sig_*}_{l_u^{(1)}}$ and $\prod_{u=1}^{p_*}
X^{\sig_*}_{l_u^{(2)}}$ while setting $V_2=1$ if this common part is empty.
Thus, we arrive at the circumstances of Lemma \ref{lem4.1} and the current
lemma follows from there.
\end{proof}
Now, set
\[
\hat\Xi^{j,\te}_N(t)=\frac 1{b_N}\sum_{i\in\bbZ_0,\, i\leq Nt}(Z^{j,\te}_i
-a^{\te}).
\]
It follows from Lemma \ref{lem6.4} and standard stable limit theorems for
sums of i.i.d. (regularly varying) random vectors (see, for instance,
\cite{Rv} and Section 7.2 in \cite{Re}) that for each $q<\infty$ as
$N\to\infty$ the vector process
\[
\hat\Xi^q_N(t)=\{\hat\Xi_N^{j,\te}(t),\, j\leq q,\,\te\in\Te_*\},\, t\in[0,T]
\]
weakly converges in the $J_1$-topology to an $\al_*$-stable vector L\' evy
process
\[
\hat\Xi^q(t)=\{\hat\Xi^{j,\te}(t),\, j\leq q,\,\te\in\Te_*\},\, t\in[0,T]
\]
while for $\te\in\Te\setminus\Te_*$ the components $\hat\Xi_N^{j,\te}$
converge to $\hat\Xi^{j,\te}\equiv 0$. Moreover, we obtain also from the
last assertion of Lemma \ref{lem6.4} that the vector processes
$\{\hat\Xi^{j,\te},\, (n_j,\te)\in\tau\}$ parametrized by $\tau\in\cT$ are
mutually independent.
Define the vector processes
\[
\tilde\Xi^q_N(t)=\{\hat\Xi^{j,\te}_N(\frac t{n_j}),\, j\leq q,\,
\te\in\Te_*\},\, t\in[0,T].
\]
Since the processes $\hat\Xi_N^{j,\te}$ weakly converge as $N\to\infty$
in $J_1$-topology
to the corresponding processes $\hat\Xi^{j,\te}$ then the processes
$\tilde\Xi^{j,\te}_N( t)=\hat\Xi^{j,\te}_N(\frac t{n_j})$ weakly converge
as $N\to\infty$
to $\tilde\Xi^{j,\te}( t)=\hat\Xi^{j,\te}(\frac t{n_j})$. Moreover, observe
that for a fixed $j$ all processes $\tilde\Xi_N^{j,\te},\,\te\in\Te_*$ are
obtained from the corresponding processes $\hat\Xi^{j,\te}_N,\,\te\in\Te_*$
by the same linear time change, and so we can use for them the same change
of time functions appearing in the definition of the $J_1$-convergence. It
follows that for each $j$ the whole vector process $\tilde\Xi_N^q(j,t)=
\{\tilde\Xi_N^{j,\te}(t),\, \te\in\Te_*\},\, t\in[0,T]$ converges weakly in
the $J_1$-topology to an $\al_*$-stable L\' evy vector process
$\tilde\Xi^q(j,t)=\{\tilde\Xi^{j,\te}(t),\, \te\in\Te_*\},\, t\in[0,T]$.
Next, relying on Corollary \ref{cor7.1} in Appendix we will prove that as
$N\to\infty$ the full vector process $\tilde\Xi^q_N(t),\, t\in[0,T]$ weakly
converges in the $J_1$-topology to the vector process
\[
\tilde\Xi^q(t)=\{\tilde\Xi^{j,\te}(t),\, j\leq q,\,\te\in\Te_*\},
\, t\in[0,T].
\]
In order to do this we have to show that with probability one the
vector components $\tilde\Xi^q(j,t),\, t\in[0,T]$, $j\leq q$
have no (pairwise) simultaneous jumps. Namely, consider $\tilde\Xi^q(i,t)$
and $\tilde\Xi^q(j,t)$ for $j>i$. Set $c=\frac {n_j}{n_i}$. For each
integer $k\geq 0$ and $t\in[n_jc^k,n_jc^{k+1})$ define new vector processes
\[
\Psi_k^q(i,t)=\tilde\Xi^q(i,t)-\tilde\Xi^q(i,c^{k+1})\,\,\mbox{and}\,\,
\Psi_k^q(j,t)=\tilde\Xi^q(j,t)-\tilde\Xi^q(j,c^k).
\]
Since the limiting vector L\' evy process $\hat\Xi^q$ has independent
increments we obtain that the vector processes $\Psi_k^q(i,t)$ and
$\Psi_k^q(j,t)$ are independent L\' evy processes when $t\in[n_jc^k,
n_jc^{k+1}]$, and so almost surely they cannot have simultaneous jumps.
Hence, with probability one the processes
$\tilde\Xi^q(i,t)$ and $\tilde\Xi^q(j,t)$ have no simultaneous jumps
when $t$ runs in $[0,T]$.
Now, from the $J_1$-convergence of the full vector process $\tilde\Xi^q_N$
to $\tilde\Xi^q$ we obtain also by Corollary \ref{cor7.1} that the vector
process $\Xi^q_N=\sum_{j=1}^q\tilde\Xi_N^q(j,\cdot)=\{\Xi^q_N(\te,\cdot),
\,\te\in\Te_*\}$ weakly converges in the $J_1$ topology to the vector
process $\Xi^q=\sum_{j=1}^q\tilde\Xi^q(j,\cdot)=\{\Xi^q(\te,\cdot),
\,\te\in\Te_*\}$ where $\Xi^q(\te,\cdot)=\sum_{j=1}^q\tilde\Xi^{j,\te}$.
It follows from the convergence of vector processes that as $N\to\infty$
the sum process $\xi^q_N(t)=\sum_{\te\in\Te}h_\te\Xi_N^q(\te,t),\, t\in[0,T]$
also converges weakly in the $J_1$ topology to $\xi^q(t)=\sum_{\te\in\Te}
h_\te\Xi^q(\te,t),\, t\in[0,T]$.
Next, we can write
\begin{eqnarray}\label{6.5}
& \Xi^q(\te,t)=\sum_{j=1}^q\hat\Xi^{j,\te}(\frac t{n_j})\\
&=\sum_{j=1}^q\hat\Xi^{j,\te}(\frac t{n_q})+\sum_{j=1}^{q-1}\sum_{i=1}^j
(\hat\Xi^{i,\te}(\frac t{n_j})-\Xi^{i,\te}(\frac t{n_{j+1}})).
\nonumber\end{eqnarray}
Since for each fixed $\te$ the pairs $(i,\te)$ belong for different $i$'s
to different equivalence classes and taking into account that each limiting
L\' evy process $\hat\Xi^{j,\te}$ has independent increments we conclude
that the summands in the right hand side of (\ref{6.5}) are independent.
Hence, the process $\Xi^q(\te,t),\,\te\in\Te_*$ is an $\al_*$-stable L\' evy
process. If all equivalence classes are singletons then the whole limiting
vector process $\hat\Xi^q$ has independent increments and this remains true
for $\Xi^q$, as well, in view of its construction by taking sums of certain
components of $\hat\Xi^q$.
It remains to let $q\to\infty$ and to verify properties of corresponding
limiting processes. Denote by $\cL^{q,\te}_N,\,\cL^{q,\te},\,\cL^{q}_N,\,
\cL^{q},\,\hat\cL^{\te}_N$ and $\cL_N$ the distributions of processes
$\Xi^q_N(\te,\cdot),\,\Xi^q(\te,\cdot),\,\Xi^q_N,\,\Xi^q,\,
\Xi_N(\te,\cdot)$ and $\{\Xi_N(\te,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te_*\}$, respectively,
on the time interval $[0,T]$. Denote by $d$ the Prokhorov distance (see,
for instance, \cite{Bi1} or \cite{JS}) on the corresponding space of
distributions and observe that convergence in this metric is equivalent
here to the weak convergence with respect to the $J_1$ topology. The above
proof yields that for each $\te\in\Te$ and $q\geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{6.6}
\lim_{N\to\infty}d(\cL_N^{q,\te},\cL^{q,\te})=\lim_{N\to\infty}d(\cL^q_N,
\cL^q)=0.
\end{equation}
It is also clear from the corresponding definitions that for each $\te\in\Te$
and $N\geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{6.7}
\lim_{q\to\infty}d(\cL_N^{q,\te},\hat\cL^{\te}_N)=\lim_{q\to\infty}
d(\cL^q_N,\cL_N)=0.
\end{equation}
In addition, it follows from Lemma \ref{lem6.3} that for each $\te\in\Te$,
\begin{equation}\label{6.8}
\lim_{q\to\infty}\limsup_{N\to\infty}d(\cL_N^{q,\te},\hat\cL_N^{\te})=
\lim_{q\to\infty}\limsup_{N\to\infty}d(\cL^q_N,\cL_N)=0.
\end{equation}
By the triangle inequality for any $q,q'\geq 1$,
\[
d(\cL^{q,\te},\cL^{q',\te})\leq d(\cL^{q,\te},\cL^{q,\te}_N)+d(\cL^{q,\te}_N,
\hat\cL_N^{\te})+d(\cL^{q',\te}_N,\hat\cL^{\te}_N)+d(\cL^{q',\te},
\cL^{q',\te}_N)
\]
and
\[
d(\cL^{q},\cL^{q'})\leq d(\cL^{q},\cL^{q}_N)+d(\cL^{q}_N,
\cL_N)+d(\cL^{q'}_N,\cL_N)+d(\cL^{q'},\cL^{q'}_N).
\]
These together with (\ref{6.6})--(\ref{6.8}) yields that
\begin{equation}\label{6.9}
\lim_{q,q'\to\infty}d(\cL^{q,\te},\cL^{q',\te})=\lim_{q,q'\to\infty}
d(\cL^q,\cL^{q'})=0.
\end{equation}
Hence, $\{\cL^{q,\te},\, q\geq 1\}$ and $\{\cL^q,\, q\geq 1\}$ are Cauchy
sequences in the corresponding complete metric spaces, and so there exist
distributions $\hat\cL^\te$ and $\cL$ on the corresponding spaces such that
\begin{equation}\label{6.10}
\lim_{q\to\infty}d(\cL^{q,\te},\hat\cL^{\te})=\lim_{q\to\infty}d(\cL^q,
\cL)=0.
\end{equation}
It follows also from (\ref{6.6})--(\ref{6.8}) that
\begin{equation}\label{6.11}
\lim_{N\to\infty}d(\hat\cL_N^{\te},\hat\cL^{\te})=\lim_{N\to\infty}d(\cL_N,
\cL)=0.
\end{equation}
Let also $\tilde\cL^q_N,\,\tilde\cL^q$ and $\tilde\cL_N$ be distributions of
the sum processes $\xi^q_N(\cdot)=\sum_{\te\in\Te}h_\te\Xi^q_N(\te,\cdot)$,
$\xi^q(\cdot)=\sum_{\te\in\Te}h_\te\Xi^q(\te,\cdot)$ and
$\xi_N(\cdot)=\sum_{\te\in\Te}h_\te\Xi_N(\te,\cdot)$, respectively. Then,
in the same way as above we obtain that there exists a distribution
$\tilde\cL$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{6.12}
\lim_{q\to\infty}d(\tilde\cL^q,\tilde\cL)=\lim_{N\to\infty}d(\tilde\cL_N,
\tilde\cL)=0.
\end{equation}
Let $\Xi(\te,\cdot),\,\{\Xi(\te,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te_*\}$ and $\xi$ be the
processes on the time interval $[0,T]$ having the distributions $\hat\cL^\te,
\,\cL$ and $\tilde\cL$, respectively. Thus, we established the following
weak convergencies in the $J_1$ topology as $N\to\infty$,
\[
\Xi_N(\te,\cdot)\Rightarrow\Xi(\te,\cdot),\,\{\Xi_N(\te,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te_*\}
\Rightarrow\{\Xi(\te,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te_*\}\,\,\mbox{and}\,\,\xi_N
\Rightarrow\xi.
\]
Observe that from convergence of the vector process above it follows that
$\xi(\cdot)=\sum_{\te\in\Te}h_\te\Xi(\te,\cdot)$.
Since for each $q$ the processes $\Xi^q(\te,\cdot)$, $\{\Xi^q(\te,\cdot),
\,\te\in\Te_*\}$ and $\xi^q$ have $\al^*$-stable distributions we derive from
convergence as $q\to\infty$ of characteristic functions of marginal and
finite dimensional distributions of these processes that the limiting
processes $\Xi(\te,\cdot)$, $\{\Xi(\te,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te_*\}$ and $\xi$
must have $\al^*$-stable distributions, as well. Under the conditions of
Theorem \ref{thm2.4}(ii) for each $q$ the processes $\Xi^q(\te,\cdot)$,
$\{\Xi^q(\te,\cdot),\,\te\in\Te_*\}$ and $\xi^q$ have independent increments
and, again, in view of convergence of characteristic functions we see that
the limiting as $q\to\infty$ processes $\Xi(\te,\cdot)$, $\{\Xi(\te,\cdot),\,
\te\in\Te_*\}$ and $\xi$ have independent increments, as well, i.e. they are
L\' evy processes, completing the proof of Theorem \ref{thm2.4}. \qed
\section{Appendix} \label{secA}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
We will start here with a basic property of the $J_1$-convergence.
Let $X$ and $Y$ be two Polish spaces and $D([0,1];X)$ and $D([0,1];Y)$ are
spaces of $X$ valued and $Y$ valued functions
that are right continuous, have left limits at every $t\in [0,1]$ and are,
in addition, left continuous at $1$.
In general, if $x_n(\cdot)\in D([0,1];X)$ and $y_n(\cdot)\in D([0,1];Y)$
converge in $J_1$ topology respectively to $x(t)$ and $y(t)$ then
it does not follow that $z_n(\cdot)=(x_n(\cdot),y_n(\cdot))$ converges to
$z(\cdot)=(x(\cdot),y(\cdot))\in D([0,1];Z)$ where $Z=X\times Y$. It is
possible that $x_n(\cdot)$ and $y_n(\cdot)$ have jumps at two distinct points
$t_n, t^\prime_n$ that tend to a common point $t$. As functions with values
in $Z=X\times Y$, $z_n(t)$ has two jumps that come together and this rules
out convergence in $D([0,1];Z)$. However we have the following
\begin{lemma}\label{lem7.0}
Let $x_n(\cdot)$ and $y_n(\cdot)$ converge in $J_1$ topology to $x(\cdot)$ and
$y(\cdot)$ respectively in $D([0,1];X)$ and $D([0,1];Y)$ . Let $x(\cdot)$ and
$y(\cdot)$ do not have a jump at the same $t$, i.e the sets of discontinuity
points of $x(\cdot)$ and $y(\cdot)$ are disjoint. Then $z_n(\cdot)=
(x_n(\cdot),y_n(\cdot))$ converges in $J_1$ topology to $z(\cdot)=(x(\cdot),
y(\cdot))$ in $D([0,1]; Z)$ where $Z=X\times Y$. In particular if $f:Z\to S$
is a continuous map then $f(x_n(\cdot),y_n(\cdot))$ converges in the $J_1$
topology to $f((x(\cdot),y(\cdot))\in D([0,1];S)$ .
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $x_n(t)$ and $y_n(t)$ converge in the $J_1$ topologies on $X$ and $Y$,
respectively, there are compact
sets $K_X$ and $K_Y$ in $X$ and $Y$ such that
$x_n(t)\in K_X$, and $y_n(t)\in K_Y$ for all $n$ and $t\in [0,1]$. Therefore
$z_n(t)\in K=K_X\times K_Y$ for all $n$ and $t\in [0,1]$. We need to control
uniformly the $D[0,1]$ modulus of continuity $\omega_h(z_n(\cdot))$ of
$z_n(t)=(x_n(t),y_n(t))$ where
$$
\omega_h(z(\cdot))=\sup_{t_1,t_2: |t_1-t_2|\le h}\inf_{\tau\in (t_1,t_2)}
\max [\Delta_{(t_1,\tau)}(z(\cdot)),\Delta_{(\tau,t_2)}(z(\cdot))]
$$
and
$$\Delta_{(a,b)}(z(\cdot))=\sup_{t,s\in (a,b)} d(z(t),z(s))$$
is the oscillation of $z(\cdot)$ in the interval $(a,b)$. We can take
$d(z_1,z_2)=d_1(x_1,x_2)+d_2(y_1,y_2)$ where $d, d_1, d_2$ are the metrics in
$Z,X,Y$ respectively. Then with the obvious definitions of $\Delta_{(a,b)}
(x(\cdot))$ and $\Delta_{(a,b)}(y(\cdot))$,
\begin{align*}
\omega_h(z(\cdot))\le &\sup_{t_1,t_2: |t_1-t_2|\le h}\inf_{\tau\in (t_1,t_2)}
\max [\Delta_{(t_1,\tau)}(x(\cdot)),\Delta_{(\tau,t_2)}(x(\cdot))]\\
&\qquad+ \sup_{t_1,t_2: |t_1-t_2|\le h}\sup_{\tau\in (t_1,t_2)} \max
[\Delta_{(t_1,\tau)}(y(\cdot)),\Delta_{(\tau,t_2)}(y(\cdot))].
\end{align*}
The convergence of $x_n(\cdot)$ and $y_n(\cdot)$ in the corresponding $J_1$
topologies guarantees that
\begin{align*}
\lim_{h\to 0}&\limsup_{n\to \infty}\bigg[\sup_{t_1,t_2: |t_1-t_2|\le h}
\inf_{\tau\in (t_1,t_2)} \max [\Delta_{(t_1,\tau)}(x_n(\cdot)),
\Delta_{(\tau,t_2)}(x_n(\cdot))]\\
&\qquad+ \sup_{t_1,t_2: |t_1-t_2|\le h}\inf_{\tau\in (t_1,t_2)}
\max [\Delta_{(t_1,\tau)}(y_n(\cdot)),\Delta_{(\tau,t_2)}(y_n(\cdot))]\bigg]=0.
\end{align*}
Since the jumps of
$x_n(\cdot)$ and $y_n(\cdot)$ converge individually to the jumps of $x(\cdot)$
and $y(\cdot)$ while $x(\cdot)$ and $y(\cdot)$ do not have any common jumps,
for any $\epsilon >0$ there is a $\delta>0$ such that all the jumps of
$x_n(\cdot)$ and $y_n(\cdot)$ of size at least $\epsilon>0$ are uniformly
separated from one another by some $\delta=\delta(\epsilon)>0$ . We can now
estimate the $D[0,1]$ modulus continuity of $z_n(\cdot)$.
If $h<\delta$ any interval of length $h$ will have at most one
jump of size larger than $\epsilon$. Therefore of the two components
$x_n(\cdot)$ and $y_n(\cdot)$ only one of them can have a jump larger than
$\epsilon$. If $y_n(t)$ does not have a jump of size larger than $\epsilon$
in $(t_1,t_2)$ and $|t_2-t_1|<h$ then
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\sup_{\tau\in (t_1,t_2)} \max [\Delta_{(t_1,\tau)}(y_n(\cdot)),\Delta_{(\tau,
t_2)}(y_n(\cdot))]\le \Delta_{(t_1,t_2)}(y_n(\cdot))\\
&\le 2\inf_{\tau\in (t_1,t_2)} \max [\Delta_{(t_1,\tau)}(y_n(\cdot)),
\Delta_{(\tau,t_2)}(y_n(\cdot))]+\epsilon
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore
$$
\lim_{h\to 0}\limsup_{n\to\infty} \omega_h(z_n(\cdot))=0
$$
and we are done.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor7.1}
(i) If $x^i_n$ converge to $x^i$, $i=1,...,d$ in the $J_1$ topology on
$D([0,1]; X_i)$, where $X_i$ are Polish spaces, and for any pair $i\not=j$
the limits $x^i$ and $x^j$ have no common jumps, i.e
the discontinuity points $U_l=\{t: x^l(t-0)\not= x^l(t\})$ for $l=i$ and $l=j$
are disjoint, then as $n\to\infty$ the $d$-vector functions $\{ x_n^i,\,
i=1,...,d\}$ converge to $\{ x^i,\, i=1,...,d\}$ in the $J_1$ topology of
the product space $D([0,1];\prod^d_{i=1}X_i)$.
(ii) Let $x_n^i$ and $x^i$ satisfy conditions of (i) with $X_i=R^q,\,
i=1,...,d$ for some integer $q\geq 1$. Then $\sum_{i=1}^dx_n^i$ converges
in the $J_1$ topology of $D([0,1];R^q)$ to $\sum_{i=1}^dx^i$.
(iii) Let $\{P_n,\, n\geq 1\}$ be probability measures on $D([0,1];
\prod_{i=1}^dX_i)$, where $X_i, i=1,...,d$ are the same as in (i), and
suppose that the marginals on $D([0,1];X_i),\, i=1,...,d$ of $P_n$'s
converge weakly with respect to the $J_1$ topology while the joint finite
dimensional distributions of $P_n$ converge on $D([0,1];\prod_{i=1}^dX_i)$
to a limit $P$. If $P$ almost surely the components of $d$-vector functions
$(x_1(t),...,x_d(t))$ have no common jumps pairwise then $P_n$ weakly
converges to $P$ as $n\to\infty$ in the $J_1$ topology.
\end{corollary}
While considering real valued random variables in the domain of attraction
of a stable law it is natural to consider tail behavior of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq5.1}
\lim_{T\to\infty} T^\al(\ln T)^{-k} P[\pm X\ge T]=c_\pm.
\end{equation}
If $X$ is $R^d$ valued then a tail behavior similar to the one dimensional
case above will be to require that for every continuous function $f$ on the unit
sphere $S^{d-1}$ the limit
\begin{equation}\label{eq5.2}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^{\alpha} (\ln \rho)^{-k}E\big[{\bf 1}_{|X|\ge \rho}
f\big(\frac{X}{|X|}\big) \big]=\int_{S^{d-1}} f(s)\nu(ds)
\end{equation}
exists where $\nu$ is a finite nonnegative measure on $S^{d-1}$. To make the
connection we need only to think of $S^0$ as
$\pm 1$ and $\nu(\{\pm 1\})=c^\pm$. The following result essentially coincides
with Theorem 3.6 of \cite{Re} but for readers' convenience we provide its
proof here.
\begin{lemma}\label{l5.1} The relation (\ref{eq5.2}) holds true for every
bounded continuous $f$ on $S^{d-1}$ if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{eq5.3}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty} \rho^\al (\ln \rho)^{-k} E[W(\frac{X}{\rho})]=
\int_{S^{d-1}}\int_0^\infty W(sr)\frac{\alpha\nu(ds)\,dr}{r^{1+\alpha}}
\end{equation}
for every $W$ from the space ${\mathcal W}$ of bounded continuous functions
satisfying (\ref{2.1+}).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In (\ref{eq5.2}) we can replace $\rho$ by $\rho z$ with $z>0$, to get
\begin{align}\label{eq5.4}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^{\alpha} (\ln \rho)^{-k}E\big[{\bf 1}_{\frac{|X|}
{\rho}\ge z}f\big(\frac{X}{|X|}\big) \big]&=\frac{1}{z^\al}\int_{S^{d-1}}
f(s)\nu(ds)\notag\\
&=\int_{S^{d-1}} f(s)\nu(ds)\int_z^\infty\frac{\alpha}{u^{1+\alpha}}du
\end{align}
It is now easy to conclude that if $V(r,s)$ is a continuous function of $r>0$
and $s\in S^{d-1}$ and for some $\delta>0$ it is identically $0$ if $r\le
\delta$ then
\begin{align}\label{eq5.5}
\lim_{\rho\to\infty}\rho^{\alpha} (\ln \rho)^{-k}E\big[ V(\frac{|X|}{\rho},
\frac{X}{|X|}) \big]=\int_0^\infty\int_{S^{d-1}} V(u,s)\nu(ds)\frac{\alpha}
{u^{1+\alpha}}du.
\end{align}
We now take $V(r,s)=W(rs)$ and obtain (\ref{eq5.3}). To control the
contribution near $0$ for $W\in\mathcal W$ we denote by $R(x)$
the tail probability $P[|X|\ge x]$ and obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\rho^\alpha (\ln\rho)^{-k} E[W(\frac{X}{\rho}){\bf 1}_{\frac{|X|}{\rho}
\le \delta }]\le C\rho^\alpha (\ln \rho)^{-k} E[(\frac{X^2}{\rho^2})
{\bf 1}_{\frac{|X|}{\rho}|\le \delta}]\\
&=C \rho^{\alpha-2} (\ln \rho)^{-k} E[X^2{\bf 1}_{|X|\le \delta T}]
=-C T^{\alpha-2} (\ln T)^{-k} \int_0^{\delta \rho} x^2 dR(x)\\
&\le C \rho^{\alpha-2} (\ln \rho)^{-k}
\int_0^{\delta \rho} 2\,x\,R(x)\,dx\\
&\le C\rho^{\al-2} (\ln \rho)^{-k}\int_0^{\delta\rho} x (1+x)^{-\alpha}
(\ln (2+x))^kdx\le C\delta^{2-\alpha }
\end{eqnarray*}
is uniformly controlled because $\alpha<2$. Finally to go from
(\ref{eq5.3}) to (\ref{eq5.2}), we take $W(x)={\bf 1}_{[1,\infty]}(x) f(\frac{x}
{|x|})$ which can be justified by approximating ${\bf 1}_{[1,\infty]} $ by
continuous functions.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remA1}
Let $\{X_n\}$ be a sequence of independent and identically distributed random
vectors in $R^d$ that satisfy (\ref{eq5.3}). Let
$$
S_N(t)=\sum_{1\le n\le Nt} X_n
$$
and
\begin{equation}\label{eqA3}
\Xi_N(t)=\frac{1}{b_N}[S_N(t)-Nta_N]
\end{equation}
where the normalizer $b_N$ is given by
$$
b_N=N^{\frac{1}{\al}}(\frac{\ln N}{\al})^{\frac{k}{\al}}
$$
and the centering $a_N$ is given by
$$
a_N=E\big[\frac{b_N^2 X_1}{b_N^2+|X_1|^2}\big].
$$
Then, according to standard limit theorems for sums of independent random
vectors (see, for instance, \cite{Rv} and Section 7.2 in \cite{Re}),
the processes $\Xi_N(t)$ converge in the Skorokhod $J_1$ topology
on $D[[0,T]; R^d]$ to a limiting stable process $\Xi$ with the
characteristic function of the increments $\Xi(t)-\Xi(s)$ given by
\begin{equation}\label{eqA4}
E[e^{i<\xi,\Xi(t)-\Xi(s)>}]=\exp[(t-s)\psi(\xi)]
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align*}
\psi(\xi)&=\int_{R^d\setminus \{0\}} [e^{i<\xi, y>}-1- \frac{i<\xi,y>}
{1+|y|^2}] \mu(dy)\\
&=\int_{S^{d-1}}\int_0^\infty [e^{i<\xi, sr>}-1- \frac{i<\xi,sr>}{1+|r|^2}]
\frac{\nu(ds) dr}{r^{1+\alpha}}
\end{align*}
It follows that if $\nu$ is concentrated on axes then components of the
process $X(t)$ are independent.
The proof relies on the calculation
$$
\lim_{N\to\infty} N\ln [E[e^{i<\xi, X^\prime_N>}]]=\psi(\xi)
$$
where $X^\prime_N=\frac{1}{b_N}[X_1-a_N]$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{remA2}
The basic assumptions involved in proving the convergence to the stable
process with independent increments is independence of the random variables,
a common distribution with the correct tail behavior that puts them in the
domain of attraction of the stable distribution with L\'{e}vy measure
$\frac{\nu(ds)dr}{r^{1+\alpha}}$ on $R^d$. It is possible that we have a
random vector in which two components are not independent but in the limiting
distribution they become independent.
If the L\'{e}vy measure is $\frac{\nu (ds)dr}{r^{1+\alpha}}$, then for $R^d$
to split as a sum $\oplus V_j$ with components of the random vector
corresponding to different $V_j$ being
mutually independent it is necessary and sufficient that $\nu$ is supported
on the union of the subspaces $V_j$. In other words $\nu[ |x_j|>0, |x_{j'}|>0]
=0 $ where $x=\sum x_j$ is the natural decomposition of $x$
into components from $\{V_j\}$. This requires that
\[
\lim_{\rho\to\infty} \rho^{\al}(\ln\rho)^{-k} P\{|X_{1j}|>\rho, |X_{1j'}|>
\rho\}=0
\]
for any $j\ne j'$ where $X_1=(X_{11},X_{12},...,X_{1d})$ and $X_1$ is the same
as in Remark \ref{remA1}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{remA3} Let $\{ X_n\}$ be as in Remark \ref{remA1} and
$T$ be a linear map $R^d\to R^m$. Then the process
$$
Y_N(t)=T\Xi_N(t)=\sum_{1\le n\le Nt} \frac{1}{b_N}(TX_n-Ta_N)
$$
will, after normalization, converge to $Y(t)=T\Xi(t)$, a process with
independent increments given by
$$
E[e^{i<\xi',Y(t)-Y(s)}]=\exp[(t-s)[i <\gamma, \xi'>+\psi'(\xi') ]]
$$
where
$$
\psi^\prime(\xi^\prime)=\int_{R^m\setminus \{0\}} [e^{i<\xi', s'r>}-1-
\frac{i<\xi',sr>}{1+|r|^2}] \frac{\nu'(ds') dr}{r^{1+\alpha}}
$$
and
$$
\gamma'=\int_{R^d} \bigg[\frac{T(sr)} {1+|T(sr)|^2} - \frac{T(sr)} {1+|r|^2}
\bigg] \frac{\nu(ds) dr}{r^{1+\alpha}}.
$$
The amount by which the process needs centering is only unique up to a
constant and this requires us to make the adjustment with the term $\gamma^
\prime t$ which is the difference between two possibly infinite terms.
It is not hard
to see that as $N\to\infty$, $b_N\to\infty$ and by the bounded convergence
theorem, $\frac{a_N}{b_N}\to 0$.
\end{remark}
In Section \ref{sec5} we proved convergence of the finite dimensional distributions to a stable L\'{e}vy process, by appealing to \cite{TK}.
This required a rearrangement of the monomial terms, that make
up the polynomial. The new process converged in $J_1$ topology. If condition
(\ref{A3}) below
were satisfied then the rearrangement was not needed and the original process
converged in the $J_1$ topology. We provide here
an alternate proof that does not require this modification, but yields
directly finite dimensional convergence for stationary $\ell$ dependent
sums as well as convergence in $J_1$ topology under the additional assumption
(\ref{A3}).
\medskip
Let $H$ be a finite dimensional Euclidean space and $\{X_i,\, i\geq 1\}$ be
a stationary sequence of $H$ valued random variables that are $\ell$-dependent
and have regularly varying heavy tails with an index
$\al\in(0,2)$ and a L\' evy measure $M$, i.e. (\ref{eq5.2}) holds true with
$X=X_1$ and $\nu=M$. We will assume that for $d=2\ell-1$ and all $f\in
{\mathcal W}(H^d)$,
\begin{equation}\label{A1}
\lim_{N\to\infty} N E[ f(\frac{X_1}{b_N},\ldots, \frac{X_d}{b_N})]=\int_{H^d}
f(x_1,\ldots,x_d) M^d (dx).
\end{equation}
Observe that when the stationary $\ell$-dependent sequence of random vectors
above is obtained in the framework of Theorem \ref{thm2.3} then relying on
Lemma \ref{lem4.1} and Corollary \ref{cor4.3+} we see that the condition
(\ref{A1}) is automatically satisfied.
\begin{lemma} Suppose that (\ref{A1}) holds true.
Then for any integer $k\geq 1$ the limit
\begin{equation}\label{A1+}
\lim_{N\to\infty} N E[ f(\frac{X_1}{b_N},\ldots, \frac{X_k}{b_N})]=\int_{H^d}
f(x_1,\ldots,x_k) M^k (dx)
\end{equation}
exists and $M^k$ can be computed from $M^d$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If for $k>d$ the limits do not exist then because of stationarity we can
always select a subsequence such that the limits exist for all values of $k$
and $f\in {\mathcal W}(H^k)$
and we will continue to denote
corresponding limiting measures by $M^k$. If we can recover $M^k$ from $M^d$, then all subsequences will have the same limit and hence the limit as $N\to\infty$ will exist. For $-\infty<a\le b<\infty$ with $b-a\le 2\ell-2$, $J=\{i: a\le i\le b\}$ will be of size at most $2\ell-1$ and the limits $M^J$ on $H^J$ will exist and be translation invariant. For any partition of $J$ into
disjoint subsets $A$ and $B$ we can write $H^J\backslash \{0\}$ as the disjoint union
$$
H^J\backslash \{0\}=\cup_{ A \in {\mathcal A}(J)}H^J_A
$$
where ${\mathcal A}(J)=\{ A:\, (A,B)\in{\mathcal P}(J)\}$ and ${\mathcal P}(J)$ is the set of partitions with nonempty $A$ and
$$
H^J_A=\{x\in H^J: x_i\not=0\ \forall \ i\in A;\ x_i=0\ \forall i\in B\}.
$$
We can write
$M^J=\sum_{A\in{\mathcal A}(J)}M^J_A$, where
$M^J_A$ is the restriction of $M^J$ to $H^J_A$. By the $\ell$ dependence we
obtain that if
$|i-j|\ge \ell$ then for any $\delta>0$
$$
\lim_{N\to\infty} N P[|X_i|\ge \delta b_N, |X_j|\ge \delta b_N ]=0
$$
which in turn implies that $M^J[ x_i\not=0, x_j\not=0]=0$ whenever $i,j\in J$
and $|i-j|\ge \ell$. Any set $A\in\mathcal A(J)$
can be ordered $a_1<a_2<\ldots a_r$ and integers $r$, and $\sigma_i=
a_{i+1}-a_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,r-1$ determine $A$ up to a translation. Set
$sp(A)=1+\sigma_1+\cdots+\sigma_r=a_r-a_1+1$.
Then $M^J_A=0$ unless $sp(A)\le \ell$. For any $A$ consider the extended
interval
${\widehat A}=\{a_r-\ell+1\le i\le a_1+\ell-1\}$. It is the set of integers
$j$ such that
$|j-i|\le \ell-1$ for all $i\in A$. In particular $M^J_A$ is determined by
$M^{\widehat A}_A$ if $J\supset \widehat A$.
We write
$$
M^J=\sum_{A\in{\mathcal A}(J)}M^J_A=\sum_{A\in{\mathcal A}(J)\atop {\widehat A}
\subset J}M^J_A+\sum_{A\in{\mathcal A}(J)\atop {\widehat A}\not\subset J}M^J_A.
$$
Since $M^J$ determines $M^J_A$ it determines also $M^{\widehat A}_A$ if
${\widehat A}\subset J$.
If ${\widehat A}\not\subset J$ we can replace $J$ by $I=J\cup {\widehat A}$
and
$$
M^J_A=\sum_{B\supset A} M^I_B=\sum_{B\supset A} M^{\widehat B}_B
$$
Clearly, $M^{\widehat B}_B=0$ unless $sp(B)\le \ell$ and so $sp(\widehat B)
\le 2\ell-1$. By translation invariance all these measures are determined by
$M^{2\ell-1}$.
\end{proof}
Sets with $sp(A)\le \ell$ can be characterized by $r$ and $a_1<a_2
\ldots<a_r$ with $a_r-a_1\le \ell-1$ and up to a translation by $r$ and
$\sigma_i\ge 1 $ for $i=1,\ldots ,r-1$ with $\sum_{i=1}^{r-1}\sigma_i\le 1$.
We map $H^{\widehat A}$ into $H$ by $x=\sum_{i\in {\widehat A}} x_i$ and the
push forward of the measure $M^{\widehat A}_A$ is denoted by $M^{r,
\{\sigma_i\}}$ on $H$. Let
\begin{equation}\label{A4}
M^\ast=\sum_{r,\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_r} M^{r,\{\sigma_i\}}.
\end{equation}
For each $r,\{\sigma_i\}$ we set
$$
\gamma_{r,\{\sigma_i\}}=\int_{H^{\widehat A} }\big[\frac{\sum_{i\in A} x_i}
{1+|\sum_{i\in A} x_i|^2}-\sum _{i\in A} \frac{x_i}{1+|x_i|^2}\big]
M^{\widehat A}_A( dx)
$$
and let
$$
\gamma=\sum_{r,\{\sigma_i\}} \gamma_{r,\{\sigma_i\}}.
$$
We note that $\gamma_{1,\{\sigma_i\}}=0$ because $A$ contains only one integer.
\begin{theorem}
Under the condition (\ref{A1}) the finite dimensional distributions of the
process
\begin{equation}\label{A2}
\xi_N(t)=\sum_{1\le i\le Nt}\frac{1}{b_N} [X_i-a_N]
\end{equation}
converge weakly to those of a stable process with the logarithm of its
characteristic function at time $t$ given by
\begin{equation}\label{A8}
\log \psi_t(u)=it\langle \gam ,u\rangle+t\int_H [e^{i\langle u,x \rangle}-1-
\frac{i\langle u, x\rangle}{1+\|x\|^2} ]M^\ast(dx)
\end{equation}
where $M^\ast$ is computed from $M^d$ as in (\ref{A4}). In addition,
if for all $i\not= j$
\begin{equation}\label{A3}
\lim_{N\to\infty} N P[|X_i|\ge \delta b_N, |X_j|\ge \delta b_N ]=0
\end{equation}
then there is no need in the assumption (\ref{A1}) as (\ref{A1+})
automatically holds true for any integer $k\geq 1$ and the weak convergence
as $N\to\infty$ of the processes $\xi_N$
takes place in the $J_1$ topology. Furthermore, in the latter case $M^*=M$.
\end{theorem}
Note that since $\frac{a_N}{b_N}\to 0$ as $N\to\infty$, (\ref{A3}) is
equivalent to
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{N\to\infty} N P[|X_i-a_N|\ge \delta b_N, |X_j-a_N|\ge \delta b_N ]=0
\end{equation*}
\begin{proof}
Let $k$ be an integer that will eventually get large. To exploit $\ell$
dependence we want to sum over blocks of size $k$ and leave gaps of size
$\ell-1$. We divide the set of positive integers into blocks of size
$k+\ell-1$. $B(r)=\{i: (r-1)(k+\ell-1)+1\le i\le (r-1)(k+\ell-1)\}$. Each
$B(r)$ consists of the initial segment $B^+(r)$ of length $k$ and the gap
$B^-(r)$ of size $\ell-1$.
$Z^+=\cup_r B^+(r)$ and $Z^-(r)=\cup_r B^-(r)$.
We define
$$
\xi^k_N(t)=\frac{1}{b_N}\sum_{1\le i\le Nt\atop i\in Z^+ }[X_i-a_N]
$$
and
$$
\eta^k_N(t)=\frac{1}{b_N}\sum_{1\le i\le Nt\atop i\in Z^- }[X_i-a_N]
$$
so that $\xi_N(t)=\xi^k_N(t)+\eta_N^k(t)$. It follows from Lemma \ref{lem6.2}
considered with
$X_i$'s in place of $Y_i(\theta)$'s (as the proof in this lemma does not rely
on a specific monomial form of summands there) that for any $\epsilon>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{A7}
\lim_{k\to\infty} \limsup_{N\to\infty}P[\sup_{0\le t\le T} |\eta_N^k(t)|\ge
\epsilon]=0
\end{equation}
It is enough to show that for fixed $k$ the limit theorem is valid for
$\xi_N^k(t)$ as $N\to\infty$. We can then let $k\to\infty$ similarly to the
end of Section \ref{sec6}.
We denote the block sums by $Y_i=\sum_{j\in B^+(i)} X_j$ and observe that
$Y_1, Y_2,...$ are
i.i.d. by the $\ell$-dependence and stationarity. Then
\begin{equation}\label{A6}
\xi_N^k(t)=\frac{1}{b_N}\sum_{j: j(k+\ell-1)\le Nt} [Y_j-ka_N]+\frac{1}{b_N}
\sum_{i\in I(t)}[X_i-a_N]=\zeta^k_N(t)+R^k_N(t)
\end{equation}
where $I(t)$ is an incomplete block at the end. If we want to show convergence of finite dimensional distributions to the L\'{e}vy process given by (\ref{A4}) we need to show that
$$
\lim_{k\to\infty}\lim_{N\to\infty} \frac{N}{k}E[f(\frac {X_1+\cdots+X_k }{b_N})]=\int_H f(x) M^\ast(dx).
$$
In order to complete the proof of finite dimensional convergence we need to
check only that for each fixed $t$ the second term in (\ref{A6}) is
negligible in probability. Since $k$ is fixed and $N\to\infty$ this is obvious. The tails behavior of $\frac{X_1+\cdots+X_k}{b_N}$ is given by the image of $M^k$ by the map $x_1+x_2+\cdots+x_k\to x$ of $H^k\to H$.
Since $M^k=\sum_A M^k_A$ and they are $0$ unless $sp(A)\le \ell$, averaging
over translations of $A$, ignoring a few terms at the ends, produces as
$k\to\infty$, $M^\ast$ for the L\'{e}vy measure. The effect of the gap is a
factor of $\frac{k}{k+\ell-1}$
that multiplies $M^\ast$ which tends to $1$ as $k\to\infty$. Any partial
block consists of a sum of at most $k$ terms of $\frac{X_i}{b_N}$ and is
negligible for large $N$. So is $\frac{a_N}{b_N}$.
Next, we need to verify the centering. We use the truncated mean
$\frac{x}{1+|x|^2}$
which then appears in the representation as a counter term in the integrand
\begin{equation}\label{A21}
\int\big[e^{i<\xi,x>}-1-\sum_j \frac{ i\,\xi_j\,x_j}{1+|x_j|^2}\big]
M^{\widehat A}_A(dx)
\end{equation}
But when we push forward the measure $M^{\widehat A}$ from $H^{\widehat A}
\to H$ by taking the sum $y=\sum_{i\in A} x_i$ we end up with
\begin{align}
\int\big[e^{i\,\xi\,y}&-1- \frac{ i\,\xi\,y}{1+|y|^2}\big] M^{r,
\{\sigma_i\}}(dy)\notag\\
\qquad&=\int \big[e^{i\,\xi\,y}-1-\frac{ i\,\xi\,\sum_i x_i}{1+
|\sum_i x_i|^2}\big] M^{\widehat A}_A(dx)\label{A22}
\end{align}
The difference between the two counter terms in (\ref{A21}) and (\ref{A22})
is $\gamma_{r,\{\sigma_i\}}$ and it adds up to
$$
\gamma=\sum_{r,\{\sigma_i\}}\gamma_{r,\{\sigma_i\}}
$$
which appears outside of the integral in (\ref{A8}) and does not influence
the limiting measure $M^*$.
Now, if the condition (\ref{A3}) is satisfied then convergence in the $J_1$
topology follows from Proposition \ref{prop5.1} obtained in \cite{TK} as a
corollary of a more general result but we will still give an alternative
direct proof below. Since convergence of finite dimensional distributions
was already obtained above it remains to establish tightness of the processes
$\xi_N^k,\, N\geq 1$ and the conclusion of the proof is similar to Section
\ref{sec6} by letting $k\to\infty$. Observe though that the convergence of
finite dimensional distributions was established above under the condition
(\ref{A1}) while we claim that (\ref{A3}) already implies (\ref{A1}),
and so we discuss this issue first.
Set $m=$dim$H$ and let $Z_i=(X_j,\, j\in B^+(i))$ be $mk$-dimensional random
vectors whose $m$-dimensional components are $X_j$'s and their sum amounts to
$Y_i$. The random vectors $Z_i,\, i=1,2,...$ are i.i.d. and in view of
(\ref{A3}) we conclude by Lemma \ref{lem4.1} that they have regularly varying
tails and, in particular, that (\ref{A1}) holds true. Thus by \cite{Rv}
(or by Section 7.2 in \cite{Re}) the vector process
\[
\Psi^k_N(t)=\frac 1b_N\sum_{i:\, i(k+\ell-1)\leq Nt}\big (X_j-a_N,\, j\in
B^+(i)\big)
\]
converges weakly in the $J_1$ topology as $N\to\infty$ to a vector L\' evy
process. Considering the linear map $(x_1,...,x_k)\longrightarrow x_1+\cdots
+x_k$ of $H^k$ to $H$ we see by Remark \ref{remA3} that
\[
\zeta^k_N(t)=\frac 1{b_N}\sum_{i:\, i(k+\ell-)\leq Nt}(Y_i-ka_N)
\]
also converges weakly in the $J_1$ topology as $N\to\infty$ to a corresponding
L\' evy process which implies also tightness of the sequence of processes
$\{\zeta^k_N,\, N\geq 1\}$.
Now, we just need to make sure that the summation that has been carried out
over blocks $Y=X_1+\cdots+X_k$ will still allow us to derive tightness in
the $J_1$ topology of the processes $\xi_N^k$ which amounts to boundedness
and modulus of continuity estimates (see, for instance,
\cite{JS}, Theorem 3.21 in Ch.VI). The $J_1$ tightness of processes
$\{\zeta^k_N,\, N\geq 1\}$ explained above yields estimates of $D[0,T]$
modulus of continuity of these processes in the following form.
For any $\epsilon>0,\eta>0$, there is a $\theta>0$ and a set $\Delta(N,\theta,
\epsilon)$ such that
$$
\limsup_{N\to\infty} P[\Delta(N, \theta,\epsilon)]<\eta
$$
and on the complement $[\Delta(N,\theta,\epsilon)]^c$, given any $u,v$ with
$|u-v|<\theta$, either
\begin{equation}\label{A11}
\sup_{\frac{Nu}{k_\ell}\le j\le\frac{Nv}{k_\ell}}|\frac{1}{b_N}\sum_{\frac{Nu}
{k_\ell}\le r \le j} (Y_r-ka_N)|<\epsilon
\end{equation}
or there is an integer $q$ such that $Nu\le q\le Nv$ and both
\begin{equation}\label{A12}
\sup_{\frac{Nu}{k_\ell}\le j\le q-1}|\frac{1}{b_N}\sum_{\frac{Nu}{k_\ell}
\le r \le j} (Y_r-ka_N)|<\epsilon
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{A13}
\sup_{q+1\le j\le \frac{Nv}{k_\ell}}|\frac{1}{b_N}\sum_{q+1\le r \le j}
(Y_r-ka_N)|<\epsilon
\end{equation}
where for brevity we set $k_\ell=k+\ell-1$.
We need a similar estimate for $\xi^k_N(t)$ the process of partial sums
of $\{\frac{1}{b_N}[X_i-a_N]\}$.
From (\ref{A3}), we can assume that for any $\eta>0,\delta>0$, there is a
$\theta>0$ such that
$$
\limsup_{N\to\infty} P[F(N,\theta,\delta)]<\eta
$$
where
$$
F(N,\theta,\delta)=\cup_{i,j:|i-j|\le N\theta}\{||X_i-a_N]\ge \delta b_N\ \&\
|X_j-a_N|\ge \delta b_N\}.
$$
Suppose $Y=X_1+\cdots X_k$ is the sum over a block. On $[F_{N,\theta,
\delta}]^c$,
if some $|X_i-a_N|\ge \delta b_N$, then $|X_j-a_N|\le \delta b_N $ for
$j\not=i$ and therefore
$$
|X_i-a_N|\le |Y-ka_N|+\sum_{j: j\not=i} |X_j-a_N|\le |Y-ka_N|+(k-1)\delta b_N
$$
In particular, if $ |Y-ka_N|\le \epsilon b_N$ then $\sup_{1\le i\le k}|X_i-a_N|
\le ((k-1) \delta+\epsilon) b_N$. On the other hand, if $ |Y-ka_N|\ge \epsilon
b_N$ then $|X_i-a_N|\ge \frac{\epsilon}{k} b_N$ for some $i$. If $\delta\le
\frac{\epsilon}{k}$ then $|X_i-a_N|\ge \delta b_N$ and on $[F(N,\theta,
\delta)]^c$, for $j\not=i$, $|X_j-a_N|\le \delta b_N$.
Now we can estimate the $D[0,T]$ modulus of continuity of the $\xi^k_N$
process. Let $\theta $ be small enough and $|i-j|<N\theta$. Then there are
blocks $B^+(r_i)$ and $B^+(r_j)$ to which $i$ and
$j$ belong. We consider the rescaled partial sums of the process $Y_r$ in the
interval $r_i\le r \le r_j$.
We restrict ourselves to the set $[\Delta(N,\theta,\epsilon)]^c$. Suppose the
alternative (\ref{A11}) holds. In particular $|Y_r-ka_N|\le \epsilon b_N $ for
every $r$ in the range. Any $X_q$
belonging to any of the blocks will satisfy $\frac{1}{b_N}|X_q-a_N|\le
(\epsilon+(k-1)\delta)$. Therefore the analog of (\ref{A11}) holds and
\begin{equation}\label{A14}
\sup_{i \le q\le j}|\frac{1}{b_N}\sum_{i\le r \le q} (X_q-a_N)|<\epsilon+k
(\epsilon+(k-1)\delta)=f_k(\epsilon,\delta)
\end{equation}
which goes to $0$ with $\epsilon$ and $\delta$.
Suppose the alternatives (\ref{A12}) and (\ref{A13}) hold. This provides us a
block $B^+(q)$. Suppose $\frac{1}{b_N}|Y_q-ka_N|<\epsilon$ we are in the
previous situation of (\ref{A11})
with $3\epsilon$ replacing $\epsilon$. If $\frac{1}{b_N}|Y_q-ka_N|>\epsilon$
and $\delta<\frac{\epsilon}{k}$, there is a $q\prime$ in the block with
$\frac{1}{b_N}|X^\prime_q-a_N|\ge \delta b_N$. On $[F(N,\theta,\delta)]^c$,
for any $q^{\prime\prime}\not= q^\prime$ in $B^+(q)$,
$\frac{1}{b_N}|X^{\prime\prime}_q-a_N|\le \delta b_N$, and combined with
(\ref{A12}) and (\ref{A13}) this proved the modulus of continuity estimate for
the process $\xi^k_N(\cdot)$ in the $J_1$ topology. Now the tightness follows
(see Theorem 3.21, Ch.VI in \cite{JS})
since we obtain also uniform boundedness in probability of processes $\xi^k_N$
from the corresponding result for normalized sums $\zeta^k_N$ of independent
blocks together with the above estimates.
As mentioned above, letting $k\to\infty$ similarly to the end of Section
\ref{sec6} we obtain weak convergence in the $J_1$ topology of processes
$\xi_N$ to a L\' evy process with the measure $M^*$. Finally, we observe
that under the condition (\ref{A3}) the right hand side of (\ref{A4})
contains only $r=1$, and so $M^*=M$, completing the proof.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
We consider regularity for weak solutions to the linear parabolic system
\begin{equation}\label{ParabolicSystem}
{\bf u}_t = \text{div}(a(x,t)D{\bf u}).
\end{equation}
Here ${\bf u} : \mathbb{R}^n \times (-\infty, 0) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^m$, and $a = [a^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}(x,t)]_{\alpha,\,\beta \leq m}^{i,\,j \leq n}$
are bounded measurable coefficients satisfying the uniform ellipticity condition
\begin{equation}\label{Ellipticity}
\lambda |p|^2 \leq a^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}(x,t)p^{\alpha}_ip^{\beta}_j \leq \Lambda |p|^2
\end{equation}
for some positive constants $\lambda,\,\Lambda$, and for all $p \in M^{m \times n}$ and all $(x,t)$.
By a weak solution we mean a map ${\bf u} \in L^2_{loc}(\mathbb{R}^n \times (-\infty,0))$ with
$D{\bf u} \in L^2_{loc}(\mathbb{R}^n \times (-\infty,0))$ that solves (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) in the sense of distributions.
In coordinates one writes ${\bf u} = (u^1,...,u^m)$, and the system (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) is $u^{\alpha}_t = \partial_i( a^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}(x,t)u^{\beta}_j).$
Regularity results for (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) are important for the study of gradient flows in the calculus of variations. The gradient flow ${\bf v}$ of
a functional with a smooth, uniformly convex integrand depending only on the gradient solves the system
\begin{equation}\label{GradientSystem}
{\bf v}_t = \text{div}(B(D{\bf v})),
\end{equation}
where $B$ is a smooth uniformly monotone operator. The classical approach to regularity is to
differentiate (\ref{GradientSystem}) and treat the problem as a linear system for the derivatives of ${\bf v}$ with bounded measurable coefficients.
Morrey \cite{Mo} showed that {\it stationary} solutions to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) are continuous in the case $n = 2$.
This follows from a higher-integrability result for the gradient. Solutions to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) are also continuous
in the scalar case $m = 1$ by classical results of De Giorgi \cite{DG1} and Nash \cite{Na}. As a consequence, solutions to (\ref{GradientSystem}) are smooth in these cases.
Solutions to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) can be discontinuous in the case $n = m \geq 3$, by well-known examples of De Giorgi \cite{DG2} and Giusti-Miranda \cite{GM}.
Ne\v{c}as and \v{S}ver\'{a}k \cite{NS} showed that time-dependent solutions to (\ref{GradientSystem}) are also smooth in the case $n = 2$.
However, in contrast with the scalar case and the planar elliptic case, the argument does not rely on continuity of solutions to the linearized problem. In fact, the question
of continuity of solutions to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) in the case $n = 2$ remained open (stated e.g. in \cite{SJ} and \cite{JS}).
The purpose of this paper is to answer this question with a counterexample to regularity. Our main theorem is:
\begin{thm}\label{main}
There exist a map
$${\bf u} : \mathbb{R}^2 \times (-\infty, 0] \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2$$
that is smooth for $t < 0$ and Lipschitz up to $t = 0$ away from $(0,0)$, and a bounded matrix field
$$a : \mathbb{R}^2 \times (-\infty, 0] \rightarrow \text{Sym}_{M^{2 \times 2} \times M^{2 \times 2}}$$
satisfying (\ref{Ellipticity}), that is smooth for $t < 0$ and discontinuous at $(0,0)$,
such that ${\bf u}$ solves (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) in $\mathbb{R}^2 \times (-\infty, 0)$ with coefficients $a(x,t)$, and ${\bf u}(\cdot, 0)$ is discontinuous.
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}\label{unboundedmain}
The example ${\bf u}$ in Theorem \ref{main} can in fact blow up in $L^{\infty}$.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
One can extend to times $t \geq 0$ by e.g. keeping $a(x,t) = a(x,0)$ for $t > 0$, and solving the system with the initial data
${\bf u}(\cdot , 0)$. In this way one obtains a global (in space and time) weak solution that develops an interior discontinuity at $(0,0)$ which instantly
disappears.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
For the system (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) there is a higher-integrability estimate for the spatial gradient in parabolic cylinders (see e.g. \cite{C}). In the case $n = 2$
this estimate implies that solutions are continuous in space at almost every time (which is not true when $n \geq 3$), but it does not rule out singularity formation.
\end{rem}
As a result of Theorem \ref{main}, one cannot rely on a continuity result at the linear level to prove regularity for (\ref{GradientSystem}) in the plane.
One might instead hope to use that the derivatives of gradient flows solve quasilinear systems with the special structure
\begin{equation}\label{QuasilinearSystem}
{\bf u}_t = \text{div}(a({\bf u})D{\bf u}),
\end{equation}
where $a^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}$ are smooth functions on $\mathbb{R}^m$ satisfying (\ref{Ellipticity}).
Our second result is an example of finite-time discontinuity from smooth data for the system (\ref{QuasilinearSystem}) in the case $n = 2, \, m = 4$:
\begin{thm}\label{nonlinearmain}
There exist a map
$${\bf u} : \mathbb{R}^2 \times (-\infty, 0] \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^4$$
that is smooth for $t < 0$ and Lipschitz up to $t = 0$ away from $(0,0)$, and a smooth, bounded matrix field
$$a : \mathbb{R}^4 \rightarrow \text{Sym}_{M^{4 \times 2} \times M^{4 \times 2}}$$
satisfying (\ref{Ellipticity}),
such that ${\bf u}$ solves (\ref{QuasilinearSystem}) in $\mathbb{R}^2 \times (-\infty, 0)$ with coefficients $a({\bf u})$, and ${\bf u}(\cdot, 0)$ is discontinuous.
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}
The coefficients of the Giusti-Miranda example \cite{GM} can be written as smooth functions of ${\bf u}$, giving a discontinuous example in the case $n \geq 3$.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
It would be interesting to construct an example of finite time discontinuity from smooth data for (\ref{QuasilinearSystem}) in the case $n = m = 2$.
\end{rem}
Our examples show that parabolic systems in the plane behave differently than elliptic systems. They also show that the classical approach to proving regularity
for (\ref{GradientSystem}) in two dimensions fails. In \cite{NS} the authors instead prove a higher-integrability estimate for solutions of (\ref{ParabolicSystem}), and apply it to ${\bf v}_t$.
One can then treat (\ref{GradientSystem}) as an elliptic system for each fixed time.
Similar ideas were used to show the continuity of solutions to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) in two dimensions when the coefficients are Lipschitz in space or in time
(see \cite{JS}).
The stationary examples of De Giorgi and Giusti-Miranda are discontinuous on the cylindrical set $\{x = 0\}$. Examples of finite time discontinuity from smooth data for (\ref{ParabolicSystem})
were constructed in the case $n = m \geq 3$ by Star\'{a}, John and Mal\'{y} in \cite{SJM}, and refined
by Star\'{a} and John in \cite{SJ}. In these examples, the data and coefficients are a small perturbation from those of the De Giorgi example.
The data in our examples are also a perturbation of the De Giorgi example, but due to low-dimensionality we need to take a different approach to constructing the coefficients,
and also to make a more careful perturbation. To prove Theorem \ref{main} we search for a solution of the form ${\bf u} = {\bf U}(x/\sqrt{-t})$. This reduces
the problem to finding a nontrivial global, bounded solution to an elliptic system. Our approach is to construct a pair of functions that solve the analogous scalar equation away from an annulus,
where the error in the equation is small. This pair defines a map that solves a decoupled system away from the annulus.
We then couple the equations so that the system is solved globally.
\begin{rem}\label{LiouvilleRemark}
An important feature of our example is that $|{\bf U}|$ is not radially increasing, unlike in the higher-dimensional examples.
In fact, such examples do not exist in the plane. In Section \ref{Appendix} we prove a Liouville theorem in two dimensions for self-similar solutions
with radially increasing modulus (see Theorem \ref{Liouville}).
\end{rem}
Our remaining examples are modifications of the construction described above.
To obtain a solution to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) with $L^{\infty}$ blowup we instead search for solutions invariant under rescalings that fix $-\epsilon$-homogeneous maps.
Because $|{\bf u}|$ is not radially increasing in our first example (which is guaranteed by the Liouville theorem mentioned in Remark \ref{LiouvilleRemark}),
we can not write the coefficients as functions of ${\bf u}$ (see Remark \ref{UDependence}).
To prove Theorem \ref{nonlinearmain} we go to higher codimension.
We take a solution $\tilde{\bf u}$ to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) that is similar to ${\bf u}$, such that the map $|x| \rightarrow (|{\bf u}|,\,|\tilde{\bf u}|)$ is injective.
The pair $({\bf u}, \, \tilde{\bf u})$ solves a uniformly parabolic system in the case $n = 2,\, m = 4$, and we can write the coefficients as smooth functions of $({\bf u},\,\tilde{\bf u})$.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{Reduction} we reduce Theorem \ref{main} to finding a global, bounded solution ${\bf U}$ to an elliptic system by searching for solutions
that are invariant under parabolic scaling.
In Section \ref{BuildingBlock} we construct a function that solves the analogous elliptic equation away from an annulus.
Using this function we define ${\bf U}$ and diagonal coefficients so that ${\bf U}$ solves the desired (decoupled) system away from the annulus.
In Section \ref{Coupling} we construct off-diagonal coefficients that couple the equations so that ${\bf U}$ solves the system globally, and we verify that the resulting matrix field is uniformly elliptic.
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{main}.
In Section \ref{Unbounded} we modify this construction to obtain an example with $L^{\infty}$ blowup.
In Section \ref{QuasilinearStructure} we prove Theorem \ref{nonlinearmain}.
Finally, in Section \ref{Appendix} we prove a Liouville theorem indicating why $|{\bf U}|$ can not be radially increasing
in two dimensions.
\section{Reduction}\label{Reduction}
We first reduce the problem to
finding a global bounded solution to an elliptic system by searching for solutions that are invariant under the parabolic scaling
$(x,t) \rightarrow (\lambda x, \lambda^2 t)$.
\begin{prop}\label{EllipticReduction}
Assume that ${\bf U} : \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^m$ is a non-constant, bounded, smooth solution to the system
\begin{equation}\label{StationarySystem}
\text{div}(A(x)D{\bf U}) = \frac{1}{2}D{\bf U} \cdot x,
\end{equation}
where $A = A^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}(x)$
are smooth, uniformly elliptic coefficients. If we take
$${\bf u}(x,t) := {\bf U}\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt{-t}}\right), \quad a(x,t) = A\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt{-t}}\right),$$
then ${\bf u}$ solves (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) on $\mathbb{R}^n \times (-\infty, 0)$ with the coefficients $a(x,t)$.
Furthermore, if ${\bf U}$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{BoundaryConditions}
|D{\bf U}(x)| = O(|x|^{-1}), \quad |D{\bf U} \cdot x| = O(|x|^{-2}),
\end{equation}
then ${\bf u}$ is smooth for $t < 0$ and Lipschitz up to $t = 0$ away from $(0,0)$, and is discontinuous at $(0,0)$.
\end{prop}
The proof is a straightforward computation.
\begin{rem}
To produce an example with $L^{\infty}$ blowup we instead search for solutions of the form $(-t)^{-\epsilon/2}{\bf U}(x/\sqrt{-t})$, where
${\bf U}$ satisfies estimates analogous to (\ref{BoundaryConditions}) at infinity (see Section \ref{Unbounded}).
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}\label{QuasilinearReduction}
Likewise, if ${\bf U}$ solves $\text{div}(A({\bf U})D{\bf U}) = \frac{1}{2}D{\bf U} \cdot x$ where $A$ are smooth uniformly elliptic coefficients on $\mathbb{R}^m$, then ${\bf u}(x,t) = {\bf U}\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt{-t}}\right)$
solves (\ref{QuasilinearSystem}) on $\mathbb{R}^n \times (-\infty, 0)$ with coefficients $a({\bf u}) = A({\bf U})$.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}\label{ReductionLiouville}
The problem of finding self-similar singular solutions to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) thus boils down to proving or disproving a Liouville theorem
for the system (\ref{StationarySystem}).
In Section \ref{Appendix} we verify the Liouville theorem in the case that $|{\bf U}|$ is radially increasing and $n = 2$.
\end{rem}
\section{Scalar Building Block}\label{BuildingBlock}
We now construct a smooth function $u : \mathbb{R}^2 \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ and a smooth, uniformly elliptic matrix
field $M: \mathbb{R}^2 \rightarrow \text{Sym}_{2 \times 2}$ such that $u$ solves
\begin{equation}\label{ScalarEquation}
\frac{1}{2}\nabla u \cdot x - \text{div}(M\nabla u) = 0
\end{equation}
away from an annulus, where the expression on the left side is small.
For $x$ in the plane, we denote $|x|$ by $r$ and the unit radial and tangential vectors $\nu$ and $\tau$ by
$$\nu = \frac{x}{r}, \quad \tau = \frac{x^{\perp}}{r}$$
away from the origin, where $x^{\perp}$ is the counterclockwise rotation of $x$ by $\frac{\pi}{2}$. Observe that
\begin{equation}\label{DivZero}
\text{div}\left(\frac{\nu}{r}\right) = \text{div}\left(\frac{\tau}{r}\right) = 0
\end{equation}
away from the origin, since they are the gradients of harmonic functions.
Now let
$$u = \varphi(r)\cos(\theta)$$
and
$$M = f(r)\nu \otimes \nu + h(r) \tau \otimes \tau$$
for some $\varphi$ and positive bounded $f,\, h$ to be chosen. The left side of Equation (\ref{ScalarEquation}) can be written $$E(r)\cos\theta,$$ where
\begin{equation}\label{EquationDeficit}
E(r) := \frac{1}{2}r\varphi' + \frac{h\varphi}{r^2} - \frac{(r\varphi'f)'}{r}.
\end{equation}
This follows from a short computation using (\ref{DivZero}) and that
$$\nabla u = r\varphi'(r) \cos\theta \, \frac{\nu}{r} - \varphi(r) \sin\theta \, \frac{\tau}{r}.$$
\subsection{Definition of $\varphi$}
Define
$$\varphi_1 = \frac{r}{\sqrt{1 + r^2}}, \quad \varphi_2 = 1 + \frac{1}{2r^2}.$$
Let $\xi$ be a smooth, non-increasing function that is $1$ to the left of zero and $0$ to the right of one. For some $R_0$ large to be chosen let
$$\varphi(r) = \xi\left(\frac{r-R_0}{R_0}\right)\varphi_1 + \left(1-\xi\left(\frac{r-R_0}{R_0}\right)\right)\varphi_2$$
(See Figure \ref{phi_construction}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{phi_construction.pdf}
\caption{The function $\varphi$ smoothly connects $\varphi_1$ and $\varphi_2$ on $[R_0,\,2R_0]$, and satisfies
the estimates $|\varphi'| < Cr^{-3},\,|\varphi''| < Cr^{-4}$.}
\label{phi_construction}
\end{figure}
The following estimates are easy to verify:
\begin{equation}\label{phiEstimate}
\varphi'(r) \leq Cr^{-3}, \quad \varphi''(r) \leq Cr^{-4}.
\end{equation}
(Here and below $C$ denotes a universal constant independent of $R_0$).
\begin{rem}
The motivation for our choice of $\varphi$ is as follows. We want $u$ to look $0$-homogeneous for $r$ large, so the angular derivatives dominate and one has
$\Delta u \sim -r^{-2}u$. Thus, solving the heat equation
with initial data $u$ is compatible with ``squeezing'' by parabolic rescaling if $\varphi$ is decreasing at the rate $r \varphi' \sim -r^{-2}$.
One can solve the equation $E(r) = 0$ where $\varphi' > 0$ by letting the coefficient $f$ grow large (see below),
but near the circle $\{\varphi' = 0\}$ the function $u$ can not solve the desired equation by the maximum principle.
\end{rem}
\subsection{Definition of $f$ and $h$}
For $r < R_0$ we can solve the equation $E(r) = 0$
by keeping $h$ bounded and allowing $f$ to grow. Taking $h = 1/2$ for $r < R_0$ and solving $E(r) = 0$ for $f$ gives the function
\begin{align*}
f_0(r) &= \frac{(1 + r^2)^{3/2}}{2}\,\frac{1}{r} \int_0^r \frac{1 + 2s^2}{(1 + s^2)^{3/2}} \,ds \\
&= \frac{(1+r^2)^{3/2}}{r}\log((1+r^2)^{1/2} + r) - \frac{1}{2}(1 + r^2).
\end{align*}
It is straightforward to check that $f_0$ is strictly positive and locally bounded, and that the expansion of $f_0$ around $0$ has only even powers of $r$ (so its even reflection is smooth).
Furthermore, $f_0$ has the asymptotics
\begin{equation}\label{fEstimates}
R^2 \log R \leq f_0(R) \leq 2R^2\log R, \quad R > R_0
\end{equation}
for $R_0$ sufficiently large. We take
$$f(r) := f_0(r)\xi(r - R_0) + (1-\xi(r-R_0))f_0(R_0)$$
(see Figure \ref{f_construction}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{f_construction.pdf}
\caption{The function $f$ increases from $1/2$ to $\sim R_0^2\log R_0$ on $[0,R_0]$, then remains constant.}
\label{f_construction}
\end{figure}
Now define
$$h_0 := 1/2, \quad \quad h_1 := \frac{1}{\varphi}\left(\frac{1}{2} + \frac{2f(R_0)}{r^2}\right).$$
One checks using the definition of $f$ and $\varphi$ that for $r > 2R_0$, one has $E(r) = 0$ by taking $h = h_1$. We define
$$h(r) = \xi(r - 2R_0)h_0 + (1-\xi(r-2R_0))h_1$$
(see Figure \ref{h_construction}). Note that $h$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{hEstimate}
1/2 \leq h \leq C\log R_0.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{h_construction.pdf}
\caption{The function $h$ is close to $1/2$ most of the time, with a bump near $2R_0$ so the equation is solved for $r > 2R_0 + 1$.}
\label{h_construction}
\end{figure}
With these choices of $f,\,h$, we have that
$$E(r) = 0, \quad r \in [R_0, \, 2R_0 + 1].$$
By the estimates (\ref{phiEstimate}), (\ref{fEstimates}) and (\ref{hEstimate}), in the remaining annulus we have
\begin{equation}\label{DeficitEstimate}
|E(r)| \leq C\left(\frac{\log R_0}{r^2} + \frac{R_0^2\log R_0}{r^4}\right) \, \chi_{[R_0,\,2R_0 + 1]} < CR_0^{-2}\log R_0 \, \chi_{[R_0, \,2R_0 + 1]}
\end{equation}
(see Figure \ref{E_Deficit}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{E_Deficit.pdf}
\caption{The error in the equation is supported in $[R_0,\, 2R_0 + 1]$ and is of order $R_0^{-2}\log R_0.$}
\label{E_Deficit}
\end{figure}
Furthermore, one checks for $r < R_0$ that
$$M = \frac{1}{2} I + \beta(r) x \otimes x$$
where $\beta(|x|) = \frac{f(|x|) - 1/2}{|x|^2}$ is a smooth function on $B_{R_0}$. Thus,
$M$ is smooth, bounded and uniformly elliptic on $\mathbb{R}^2$ with eigenvalues between $\frac{1}{2}$ and $CR_0^2\log R_0$.
\subsection{Definition of ${\bf U}$}
We define the components of ${\bf U}$ by $u$ and a rotation of $u$:
$${\bf U} = (u^1,\,u^2) = (\varphi(r)\cos\theta, \, \varphi(r)\sin\theta) = \varphi(r)\nu.$$
Using the estimates (\ref{phiEstimate}) for $\varphi$ one verifies that
\begin{equation}\label{UEstimates}
|D{\bf U}| = O(r^{-1}), \quad |D{\bf U} \cdot x| = O(r^{-2})
\end{equation}
as desired.
Furthermore, taking $B_{11} = B_{22} = M$ and $B_{12} = B_{21} = 0$, by construction and the rotation invariance of $M$ the map ${\bf U}$ solves the equation
$$\frac{1}{2}D{\bf U} \cdot x - \text{div}(BD{\bf U}) = E(r)\nu.$$
In the next section we will perturb $B_{12}$ and $B_{21}$ so that the system is solved globally and the coefficients remain uniformly elliptic.
\section{Coupling the Equations}\label{Coupling}
By the analysis above, if we take $A_{11} = A_{22} = M$ and $A_{12} = A_{21} = 0$, then
the map ${\bf U}$ solves the desired elliptic equation (\ref{StationarySystem}) away from the annulus $R_0 < r < 2 R_0 + 1$.
We now couple the equations in this region. We will use that $f(r)$ is large in the annulus to
conclude that the resulting coefficient matrix $A$ is uniformly elliptic.
Since $u^2$ is a rotation of $u^1$ is natural to look for coupling coefficients that are rotations. Let $A_{12}$ be the ``corrector'' matrix field
$$A_{12} = \eta(r) \left(\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1 \\
-1 & 0
\end{array}\right).$$
One computes
$$\text{div}(A_{12} \nabla u^2) = \frac{\eta'\varphi}{r}\cos\theta.$$
Thus, to solve the equation (\ref{StationarySystem}) we need to take
$$\eta(r) := \int_0^r \frac{tE(t)}{\varphi(t)}\,dt.$$
With this choice of $\eta$, the desired equation
$$\text{div}(A_{11}\nabla u^1 + A_{12}\nabla u^2) = \frac{1}{2}\nabla u^1 \cdot x$$
is solved, and by the estimate (\ref{DeficitEstimate}) we have
\begin{equation}\label{CorrectorEstimate}
|\eta(r)| \leq C\log R_0 \, \chi_{\{r > R_0\}}
\end{equation}
(see Figure \ref{corrector}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{corrector.pdf}
\caption{The corrector $\eta$ is zero to the left of $R_0$ and constant to the right of $2R_0+1$, with $|\eta|$ of order $\log R_0$.}
\label{corrector}
\end{figure}
Finally, we define the remaining corrector $A_{21}$ by
$$A_{21} = -A_{12},$$
so that the equation holds in the second component.
In conclusion, we constructed a coefficient matrix $A$ and a map ${\bf U}$ solving the system (\ref{StationarySystem}). With respect to the coordinate system
$$(\nu,0),\, (\tau,0), \, (0,\nu), \,(0,\tau)$$
(where $(v,w)$ denotes the $2 \times 2$ matrix with first row $v$ and second row $w$) one writes
$$ A =
\left(\begin{array}{cc|cc}
f & 0 & 0 & \eta \\
0 & h & -\eta & 0 \\
\hline
0 & -\eta & f & 0 \\
\eta & 0 & 0 & h \\
\end{array}\right)(r).
$$
For $r < R_0$ one has $\eta = 0$ and the equations are decoupled. For $r > R_0$ large we examine the characteristic polynomial
$$P(\lambda) = \left[(\lambda -f)(\lambda - h) - \eta^2\right]^2.$$
Using the estimates (\ref{fEstimates}), (\ref{hEstimate}) and (\ref{CorrectorEstimate})
one sees that, for $\lambda \leq 0$, we have $P(\lambda) > 0$, verifying uniform ellipticity and completing the example:
\begin{proof}[{\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{main}}]
The map ${\bf U}$ and matrix field $A$ satisfy the hypotheses of Proposition \ref{EllipticReduction} by construction and estimate (\ref{UEstimates}).
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{UDependence}
It is not hard to write $f$ as a smooth function of $\varphi$ and $h$ as a Lipschitz function of $\varphi$. However, on the circle $\{\varphi' = 0\}$, one computes that $E > 0$. (Indeed, the error
must be nonzero there by the maximum principle). It follows that
$\eta$ is not a function of $\varphi$. In particular, the coefficients cannot be written as functions of ${\bf U}$. We overcome this in Section \ref{QuasilinearStructure} by going to higher codimension.
\end{rem}
\section{Unbounded Singularity}\label{Unbounded}
In this section we modify the construction from the previous section to produce an example with $L^{\infty}$ blowup at $(0,0)$.
The construction follows the same lines, so we just sketch the key steps. For simplicity we use the same notation as above.
\vspace{2mm}
{\bf Reduction to Elliptic System.}
We search for solutions of the form
$${\bf u}(x,t) = \frac{1}{(-t)^{\epsilon/2}}{\bf U}\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt{-t}}\right)$$
for some $\epsilon > 0$, with coefficients
$$a(x,t) = A\left(\frac{x}{\sqrt{-t}}\right).$$
The idea is that this rescaling fixes $-\epsilon$-homogeneous functions rather than $0$-homogeneous functions.
This reduces the problem to finding a nontrivial smooth, global bounded solution ${\bf U}$ to the elliptic system
\begin{equation}\label{UnboundedStationarySystem}
\text{div}(AD{\bf U}) = \frac{1}{2}(D{\bf U} \cdot x + \epsilon {\bf U}),
\end{equation}
where $A(x)$ are smooth uniformly elliptic coefficients and ${\bf U}$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{UnboundedDesiredEstimates}
|D{\bf U}| = O(|x|^{-1-\epsilon}), \quad |D{\bf U} \cdot x + \epsilon{\bf U}| = O(|x|^{-2-\epsilon}).
\end{equation}
One checks that if ${\bf U}$ satisfies these conditions, then ${\bf u}$ is smooth for $t < 0$ and Lipschitz up to $t = 0$ away from $(0,0)$ and
$\|{\bf u}(\cdot ,t)\|_{L^{\infty}(B_1)}$ blows up at the rate $(-t)^{-\epsilon/2}$.
\begin{rem}
In fact, we will choose ${\bf U}$ to be asymptotically homogeneous of degree $-\epsilon$, so that ${\bf u}(\cdot ,0)$ is homogeneous of degree $-\epsilon$.
\end{rem}
\vspace{2mm}
{\bf Scalar Building Block.} We will again build ${\bf U}$ out of a scalar function $u$ that solves the elliptic equation
$$\text{div}(M \nabla u) = \frac{1}{2} (\nabla u \cdot x + \epsilon u)$$
away from an annulus. Take
$$u = \varphi(r)\cos\theta, \quad M = f(r) \nu \otimes \nu + h(r) \tau \otimes \tau.$$
In this case we have
$$\frac{1}{2}(\nabla u \cdot x + \epsilon u) - \text{div}(M\nabla u) = E(r)\cos\theta$$
with
$$E(r) := \frac{1}{2}(r\varphi' + \epsilon \varphi) + \frac{h\varphi}{r^2} - \frac{(r\varphi'f)'}{r}.$$
\vspace{2mm}
{\bf Definition of $\varphi$.}
We take $\varphi = \varphi_1$ (the same as above) for $r < R_0$ large, and for $r > 2R_0$ we define
$$\varphi(r) = \varphi_3(r) := r^{-\epsilon} + \frac{1}{2}r^{-\epsilon-2}.$$
Note that for $\epsilon = 0$ this reduces to what we have above. Take
$$\epsilon = \frac{1}{R_0^2\log R_0}.$$
Then in the interval $[R_0, \, 2R_0]$ one verifies
$$|\varphi_3'| < CR_0^{-3}, \quad |\varphi_3''| < CR_0^{-4}.$$
Furthermore, since $1- R_0^{-\epsilon} \leq C \epsilon \log R_0 \leq C R_0^{-2}$, we can take $\varphi$ to be a smooth
gluing of $\varphi_1$ to $\varphi_3$ in $[R_0,\,2R_0]$ so that same estimates as above hold in the corrector region:
\begin{equation}\label{UnboundedPhiEstimate}
|\varphi'| < \frac{C}{R_0^3}, \quad |\varphi''| < \frac{C}{R_0^4} \quad \text{ for } R_0 \leq r \leq 2R_0.
\end{equation}
\vspace{2mm}
{\bf Construction of $f$ and $h$.}
Take $h = 1/2$ for $r < R_0$ and solve $E(r) = 0$ for a function $f_0$. Then $f_0(|x|)$ is positive and smooth for $|x| < R_0$ with the asymptotics
\begin{equation}\label{UnboundedfEstimate}
f_0(R_0) \sim R_0^2 \log R_0 + \epsilon R_0^4 \sim R_0^2 \log R_0.
\end{equation}
(Here $\sim$ denotes equivalence up to multiplying by constants independent of $R_0$).
Define $f$ to be a gluing of $f_0$ to $f_0(R_0)$ between $R_0$ and $R_0 + 1$ as above.
We again choose $h$ so that $E(r) = 0$ for $r > 2R_0 + 1$. The error in $\{r > 2R_0\}$ is
$$E(r) = r^{-2-\epsilon}\left(-\frac{1}{2} + \left(1 + \frac{1}{2}r^{-2}\right)h - f(R_0)\left(\epsilon^2 + \frac{(2+\epsilon)^2}{2}r^{-2}\right)\right).$$
So we define $h$ in $\{r > 2R_0 + 1\}$ by
$$(1 + r^{-2}/2)h(r) = \frac{1}{2} + f(R_0)\left(\epsilon^2 + \frac{(2+\epsilon)^2}{2}r^{-2}\right),$$
and glue it to $1/2$ for $r < 2R_0$. This gives
\begin{equation}\label{UnboundedhEstimate}
\frac{1}{2} \leq h \leq C\log R_0,
\end{equation}
with $h$ asymptotically close to $1/2$ and with a bump of size $\log R_0$ near $2R_0$.
\vspace{2mm}
{\bf Definition of ${\bf U}$.} We again let
$${\bf U} = \varphi(r)\nu.$$
One checks using the definition of $\varphi$ that the derivatives of ${\bf U}$ satisfy the desired estimates (\ref{UnboundedDesiredEstimates}).
If we take $B_{11} = B_{22} = M$ and $B_{12} = B_{21} = 0$ then ${\bf U}$ solves
$$\frac{1}{2}(D{\bf U} \cdot x + \epsilon {\bf U}) - \text{div}(BD{\bf U}) = E(r)\nu,$$
and using the estimates (\ref{UnboundedPhiEstimate}), (\ref{UnboundedfEstimate}) and (\ref{UnboundedhEstimate}) we conclude that the error is estimated by
\begin{equation}\label{UnboundedErrorEstimate}
|E(r)| \leq C\frac{\log R_0}{R_0^2} \, \chi_{[R_0, \, 2R_0+1]}.
\end{equation}
\vspace{2mm}
{\bf Coupling the equations.}
Let $A_{11} = M$ and again take
$$A_{12} = \eta(r) \left(\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1 \\
-1 & 0
\end{array}\right).$$
To solve the desired equation
$$\text{div}(A_{11}\nabla u^1 + A_{12} \nabla u^2) = \frac{1}{2}(\nabla u^1 \cdot x + \epsilon u^1)$$
we again need
$$\frac{\eta'\varphi}{r} = E(r).$$
Integrating and using (\ref{UnboundedErrorEstimate}) we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{UnboundedCorrectorEstimate}
|\eta| \leq C\log R_0 \, \chi_{\{r > R_0\}}.
\end{equation}
Taking $A_{22} = M$ and $A_{21} = -A_{12}$ one verifies that the desired system (\ref{UnboundedStationarySystem}) is also solved in the second component.
Finally, the resulting matrix $A$ is smooth, and the estimates (\ref{UnboundedfEstimate}), (\ref{UnboundedhEstimate}) and (\ref{UnboundedCorrectorEstimate})
give that $A$ is positive, completing the example.
\begin{rem}
In the above construction we see that $\|u(\cdot, t)\|_{L^{\infty}(B_1)}$ blows up at the rate
$(-t)^{-\frac{1}{2}R_0^{-2}(\log R_0)^{-1}}.$ A natural question is how quickly a solution to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) in two dimensions can blow up in $L^{\infty}$
from smooth data, i.e. how large one can take $\epsilon$.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
We remark that our examples are smooth for $t < 0$. In \cite{SJ} the authors construct an example with finite time blowup in the case
$n = m \geq 3$ that is H\"{o}lder continuous, but not smooth, for $t < 0$.
\end{rem}
\section{An Example for Quasilinear Structure}\label{QuasilinearStructure}
In this section we construct a solution to the quasilinear problem (\ref{QuasilinearSystem}) that develops an interior discontinuity in finite time from smooth data.
We will construct a smooth, bounded map ${\bf W} : \mathbb{R}^2 \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^4$ and smooth matrix field $A({\bf W})$
satisfying the hypotheses in Remark \ref{QuasilinearReduction}, and the estimates (\ref{BoundaryConditions}).
\subsection{Construction of {\bf W}}
Let ${\bf U}$ be the map constructed in Section \ref{BuildingBlock}.
Recall that ${\bf U} = \varphi(r)\nu$ where $\varphi(r)$ smoothly connects $\varphi_1$ to $\varphi_2$ in the interval $[R_0,\,2R_0]$.
We let $\tilde{\bf U} = \tilde{\varphi}(r)\nu$ where $\tilde{\varphi}$ is a similar function that transitions in the interval $[3R_0,\,4R_0]$:
$$\tilde{\varphi}(r) = \xi\left(\frac{r-3R_0}{R_0}\right)\varphi_1 + \left(1-\xi\left(\frac{r-3R_0}{R_0}\right)\right)\varphi_2.$$
We define
$${\bf W} = ({\bf U},\, \tilde{\bf U}).$$
\subsection{Construction of the Coefficients}
Construct $\tilde{f},\,\tilde{h}$ and $\tilde{\eta}$ in the exact same way as in Sections \ref{BuildingBlock} and \ref{Coupling}, for the function $\tilde{\varphi}$. We take
$$ A_0 =
\left(\begin{array}{cc|cc|cc|cc}
f & 0 & 0 & \eta & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & h & -\eta & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\hline
0 & -\eta & f & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\eta & 0 & 0 & h & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\hline
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \tilde{f} & 0 & 0 & \tilde{\eta} \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \tilde{h} & -\tilde{\eta} & 0 \\
\hline
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -\tilde{\eta} & \tilde{f} & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \tilde{\eta} & 0 & 0 & \tilde{h}
\end{array}\right)(r)
$$
with respect to the coordinate system
$$(\nu,0,0,0),\, (\tau,0,0,0),\, (0,\nu,0,0),\, (0,\tau,0,0),...,(0,0,0,\tau),$$
where $(v,w,x,y)$ denotes the $4 \times 2$ matrix with rows $v,\,w,\,x$ and $y$.
Then $A_0$ is smooth and uniformly elliptic. (Indeed, the top left and lower right blocks are uniformly elliptic by the computations in Section \ref{Coupling}). Furthermore, we have
$$\text{div}(A_0(x)D{\bf W}) = \frac{1}{2}D{\bf W} \cdot x.$$
\subsection{Showing the Coefficients Depend Smoothly on ${\bf W}$}
We show that $A_0(x)$ can be written as $A({\bf W})$ for a uniformly elliptic, smooth matrix field $A$ on $\mathbb{R}^4$.
Let $\Gamma \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be the image $(\varphi,\tilde{\varphi})((0,\infty))$. Then $\Gamma$ is a smooth embedded curve consisting of two
segments on the diagonal $\theta = \frac{\pi}{4}$ connected by a short piece below the diagonal (see Figure \ref{Gamma}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{Gamma.pdf}
\caption{The image of $(\varphi,\, \tilde{\varphi})$ is a smooth embedded curve $\Gamma$.}
\label{Gamma}
\end{figure}
Define smooth functions $N$ and $H$ on $\Gamma$ by
$$N(\varphi(r), \,\tilde{\varphi}(r)) = \eta(r), \quad H(\varphi(r),\,\tilde{\varphi}(r)) = h(r).$$
Also, let
$$F(\varphi(r)) = f(r)$$
be a function on $[0, \max \varphi]$.
This definition makes sense because $f(r)$ is constant where $\varphi(r) \geq 1- \delta$ for some small $\delta$ (after possibly making $f$ transition to constant faster near $r = R_0$). One can extend
$F$ to a smooth, positive, bounded, even function $\mathcal{F}$ on $\mathbb{R}$ by letting $\mathcal{F}(s) = f(R_0)$ for $s \geq 1$, and by noticing that the expansion of $f$ near the origin has only even powers.
By construction we have that $N = 0$ on $\Gamma$ except for in a small square $Q_{\bar{\delta}}(1,1)$ of side length $2\bar{\delta}$ centered at $(1,1)$ (here $\bar{\delta}$ is of order $R_0^{-2}$).
Furthermore, $\mathcal{F}(x)$ is of order $R_0^2\log R_0$ for $(x,y) \in Q_{\bar{\delta}(1,1)}$. Note that $N$ is constant very close to $(1,1)$ on $\Gamma$. Extend $N$ to a smooth function $\mathcal{N}(x,y)$ on the positive quadrant that
is less than order $\log R_0$ in $Q_{\bar{\delta}}(1,1)$ and vanishes outside of $Q_{\bar{\delta}(1,1)}$.
Next, we observe that $H = 1/2$ on $\Gamma$ away from $Q_{\bar{\delta}}$, and that near $(1,1)$ we have by construction that $H$ agrees with the function $4f(R_0) - \frac{4 f(R_0) - 1/2}{x}$. Extend $H$ to a smooth
function $\mathcal{H}$ on the positive quadrant that is identically $1/2$ away from $Q_{\bar{\delta}}$, and at least $1/3$ in the square.
For $(p,\,q) \in \mathbb{R}^4$, the functions $\mathcal{F}(|p|), \, \mathcal{H}(|p|,\,|q|)$ and $\mathcal{N}(|p|,\,|q|)$ are smooth. Define
$$A_{12}(p,\,q) = -A_{21}(p,\,q) = \mathcal{N}(|p|,\,|q|) \left(\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1 \\
-1 & 0
\end{array}\right),$$
and
\begin{align*}
A_{11}(p,\,q) = A_{22}(p,\,q) &= \mathcal{F}(|p|) \frac{p \otimes p}{|p|^2} + \mathcal{H}(|p|,|q|) \frac{p^{\perp} \otimes p^{\perp}}{|p|^2} \\
&= \frac{1}{2} I + (\mathcal{F}-1/2)(|p|)\frac{p \otimes p}{|p|^2} + (\mathcal{H}-1/2)(|p|,|q|) \frac{p^{\perp} \otimes p^{\perp}}{|p|^2}.
\end{align*}
Then $A^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}|_{\alpha,\,\beta \leq 2}$ is a smooth, bounded, uniformly elliptic matrix field on $\mathbb{R}^4$. Indeed, $\mathcal{H} - 1/2$ is zero except for $(|p|,\,|q|)$ near $(1,1)$ and is larger than $-1/6$, and
$\mathcal{F} - 1/2$ is a smooth positive bounded function that vanishes on $\{p = 0\}$ and is of order $R_0^2 \log R_0$ where $\mathcal{N}$ is of order $\log R_0$.
Finally, it is clear from the definitions of $\mathcal{F},\, \mathcal{H}$ and $\mathcal{N}$ that $A^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}({\bf W}(x))|_{\alpha,\,\beta \leq 2}$ agree with the same components of $A_0(x)$.
Using a very similar procedure with $\tilde{f},\,\tilde{h}$ and $\tilde{\eta}$, one can also define uniformly elliptic smooth coefficients $A^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}|_{\alpha,\,\beta \geq 3}$ on $\mathbb{R}^4$ so that
$A^{ij}_{\alpha\beta}({\bf W}(x))|_{\alpha,\,\beta \geq 3}$ agree with the same components of $A_0(x)$.
Taking the remaining coefficients to be zero completes the construction.
\begin{proof}[{\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{nonlinearmain}}]
We have constructed a smooth bounded map ${\bf W} : \mathbb{R}^2 \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^4$ and smooth uniformly elliptic coefficients $A$ on $\mathbb{R}^4$ verifying the hypotheses in Remark \ref{QuasilinearReduction} and
the estimates (\ref{BoundaryConditions}).
\end{proof}
\section{Liouville Theorem}\label{Appendix}
In the final section we prove a Liouville theorem showing why $|{\bf U}|$ can not be radially increasing in two dimensions.
\begin{thm}\label{Liouville}
Any global, bounded solution ${\bf U} : \mathbb{R}^2 \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^m$ to the uniformly elliptic system
$$\text{div}(A(x)D{\bf U}) = f(x)D{\bf U} \cdot x$$
such that $f \geq 0$ and $|{\bf U}|$ is radially increasing is constant.
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}
The examples of Giusti-Miranda \cite{GM} and Star\`{a}-John \cite{SJ} show that the condition $n = 2$ is necessary.
\end{rem}
\begin{proof}
The key observation is that, since $|{\bf U}|$ is radially increasing, we have
$$0 \leq \frac{1}{2}f(x)\nabla |{\bf U}|^2 \cdot x = f(x) {\bf U} \cdot (D{\bf U} \cdot x).$$
In particular,
$$0 \leq \text{div}(AD{\bf U}) \cdot {\bf U}\psi^2$$
for any compactly supported $H^1$ function $\psi$. Integrating by parts and using uniform ellipticity one obtains the Caccioppoli inequality
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |D{\bf U}|^2\psi^2\,dx \leq C\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |{\bf U}|^2|\nabla \psi|^2\,dx.$$
Since ${\bf U}$ is bounded we thus have
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |D{\bf U}|^2\psi^2\,dx \leq C \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla \psi|^2\,dx.$$
Taking $\psi = 1$ in $B_1$, zero outside of $B_R$, and
$$\psi = 1-\frac{\log r}{\log R} \quad \text{ for } 1 \leq r \leq R$$
the above inequality becomes
$$\int_{B_1} |D{\bf U}|^2\,dx \leq \frac{C}{\log R}.$$
Taking $R \rightarrow \infty$ we conclude that ${\bf U}$ is constant in $B_1$, and by a simple scaling argument that ${\bf U}$ is constant globally.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
By inspection of the proof, a Liouville theorem holds for any uniformly elliptic system in two dimensions of the form
$$\text{div}(A(x)D{\bf U}) = {\bf V} + g(|x|) D{\bf U} \cdot x^{\perp}$$
such that ${\bf V} \cdot {\bf U} \geq 0$. Indeed, after taking the dot product with ${\bf U}$, the last term becomes an angular derivative of $|{\bf U}|^2$,
which disappears when we multiply by a radially symmetric cutoff and integrate.
Such systems arise by searching for self-similar solutions to (\ref{ParabolicSystem}) with radially increasing modulus, that are invariant under rescalings
that e.g. fix $-\epsilon$-homogeneous maps (giving the term ${\bf V} = \frac{1}{2}(D{\bf U} \cdot x + \epsilon {\bf U})$) or have ``spiraling'' behavior (giving a
term involving the angular derivative of ${\bf U}$).
\end{rem}
\section*{Acknowledgment}
This work was supported by NSF grant DMS-1501152. I thank A. Figalli and A. Vasseur for discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
Let $M$ be a contact manifold with contact distribution~$H$. Necessarily, the
dimension of $M$ is odd. The $3$-dimensional case is special and we shall often
concentrate our discussion on this case. For example, as observed
in~\cite{fgv}, the notion of a sub-Riemannian structure in this case coincides
with Webster's notion of a pseudo-Hermitian structure~\cite{w}. {From} this
point of view, there is the well-known Tanaka-Webster connection~\cite{t,w}, a
canonically defined affine connection on pseudo-Hermitian manifolds in all
dimensions but, in particular, on sub-Riemannian manifolds in dimension~$3$. We
shall discuss this connection in detail~\S\ref{others} and compare it with what
we constructed earlier in~\S\ref{ours}. There is yet another natural connection
for sub-Riemannian contact structures due to Morimoto~\cite{m}. In contrast to
the canonical connection we construct in~\S\ref{ours}, this one requires
`constant symbol,' which is however a vacuous condition in dimension~$3$.
We admit right away that our aim here is not to discuss `the equivalence
problem' for sub-Riemannian contact structures in the sense of Cartan nor study
`Jacobi curves' in sub-Riemannian geometry the sense of Agrachev and
Zelenko~\cite{az}. Instead, our more modest aim is to discuss and construct
connections and partial connections (where, in the first instance, one
differentiates only the $H$-directions) as an invariant calculus in
sub-Riemannian contact geometry, closely mimicking the construction of the
Levi-Civita connection in the Riemannian setting.
\section{Generalities on contact manifolds}
Let $M$ be a smooth manifold with tangent bundle $TM\to M$ and suppose
$H\subset TM$ is a codimension~$1$ smooth subbundle. Equivalently, and this is
our preferred point of view, we are given a smooth line subbundle
$L\subset\Wedge^1$, where $\Wedge^1=T^*M$ is the bundle of $1$-forms on~$M$.
Thus, we have dual exact sequences
$$0\to H \to TM \to L^*\to 0$$
and
\begin{equation}\label{L}0\to L\to\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^1\to 0.\end{equation}
\subsection{The Levi form}
The sequence (\ref{L}) induces a short exact sequence
$$0\to \Wedge_H^1\otimes L\to\Wedge^2\to\Wedge_H^2\to 0,$$
where $\Wedge^2_H=\Wedge^2(\Wedge_H^1)$ and we may now consider the diagram
$$\begin{array}{ccccccccc}
0&\to&L&\to&\Wedge^1&\to&\Wedge_H^1&\to&0\\
&&&&{\scriptstyle d}\!\downarrow\phantom{d}\\
0&\to&\!\!\Wedge_H^1\otimes L\!\!&\to&\Wedge^2&\to&\Wedge_H^2&\to&0,
\end{array}$$
where $d:\Wedge^1\to\Wedge^2$ is the exterior derivative. {From} the Leibniz
rule, it follows that the composition
$$L\to\Wedge^1\xrightarrow{\,d\,}\Wedge^2\to\Wedge_H^2$$
is a homomorphism of vector bundles.
\begin{defn} This composition ${\mathcal{L}}\in\Gamma(\Wedge_H^2\otimes L^*)$
is called the {\em Levi form\/} of $H$. (It is the obstruction to the
integrability of~$H$.)
\end{defn}
\begin{defn} If ${\mathcal{L}}$ is non-degenerate, then $(M,H)$ is said to be
a {\em contact manifold}. (It follows that $M$ is odd-dimensional.)
\end{defn}
If $\theta\in\Gamma(L)\subset\Gamma(\Wedge^1)$ is nowhere vanishing,
non-degeneracy of the Levi form is equivalent to
$$\theta\wedge(d\theta)^n\equiv
\theta\wedge \underbrace{d\theta\wedge\cdots\wedge d\theta}_n\not=0,$$
where $2n+1$ is the dimension of~$M$.
\begin{defn} On a smooth manifold of dimension $2n+1$, a {\em contact form\/}
is a smooth $1$-form $\theta$ such that $\theta\wedge(d\theta)^n\not=0$.
\end{defn}
\begin{rmk} Some authors define a contact manifold as a smooth manifold
equipped with a contact form. In this article, however, a contact form is an
extra choice.
\end{rmk}
\subsection{Partial connections}
On a contact manifold it is natural to consider differentiation in the contact
directions, i.e.\ along~$H$. According to (\ref{L}), this is equivalent to
considering the composition
$$\Wedge^0\xrightarrow{\,d\,}\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^1,$$
which we denote by $d_H:\Wedge^0\to\Wedge_H^1$. A consequence of the
contact condition is that $H$ is {\em bracket generating\/} and a consequence
of this is that the kernel of $d_H$ consists of locally constant functions.
\begin{rmk}
In~\cite{r} it is shown that $d_H:\Wedge^0\to\Wedge_H^1$, is the first operator
in an invariantly defined locally exact complex, known as the {\em Rumin\/}
complex. It is an effective replacement for the de~Rham complex (see
also~\cite{begn}).
\end{rmk}
\begin{defn} Suppose $M$ is a smooth contact manifold and $V$ is a smooth
vector bundle on~$M$. A {\em partial connection} on $V$ is a differential
operator
$$\nabla_H:V\to\Wedge_H^1\otimes V\quad\mbox{s.t.}\enskip
\nabla_H(f\sigma)=f\nabla_H\sigma + d_H\!f\otimes\sigma,$$
for all $f\in\Gamma(\Wedge^0)$ and $\sigma\in\Gamma(E)$.
\end{defn}
\begin{rmk}A partial connection determines a differential operator
$$\nabla_H:\Wedge^1\otimes V\to\Wedge_H^2\otimes V$$
characterised by
$$\nabla_H(\omega\otimes\sigma)=
d_H\omega\otimes\sigma-\omega_H\wedge\nabla_H\sigma,$$
where $d_H:\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^2$ is the composition
$\Wedge^1\xrightarrow{\,d\,}\Wedge^2\to\Wedge_H^2$ and
$\omega_H$ the image of $\omega$ under the projection
$\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^1$.
\end{rmk}
In fact, a partial connection on any bundle on any contact manifold may be
promoted to a full connection as follows. The Levi form
${\mathcal{L}}:L\to\Wedge_H^2$ is non-degenerate and so has
an `inverse' ${\mathcal{L}}^{-1}:\Wedge_H^2\to L$ (defined on all of
$\Wedge_H^2$ and an inverse on the range of~${\mathcal{L}}$).
\begin{prop}\label{promotion}
A partial connection $\nabla_H$ on $V$ uniquely determines a connection
$\nabla$ on $V$ with the following two properties.
\begin{itemize}
\item the composition
$V\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}\Wedge^1\otimes V\to\Wedge_H^1\otimes V$ agrees
with~$\nabla_H$,
\item the composition
$V\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}\Wedge^1\otimes V\xrightarrow{\,\nabla_H}
\Wedge_H^2\otimes V\xrightarrow{\,{\mathcal{L}}^{-1}\otimes{\mathrm{Id}}\,}
L\otimes V$ vanishes.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} See~\cite[Proposition~3.5]{eg}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Partial torsion}
Suppose $\nabla_H:\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge^1$ is a partial connection
on the cotangent bundle. Then we have two linear differential operators between
the same bundles, namely
\begin{equation}\label{two_operators}\begin{array}{rl}
\bullet&d_H:\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^2,\\
\bullet&\mbox{the composition }
\Wedge^1\xrightarrow{\,\nabla_H\,}\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge^1\to
\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge_H^1\to\Wedge_H^2,
\end{array}\end{equation}
both of which satisfy a Leibniz rule, e.g.
$$d_H(f\omega)=fd_H\omega+d_H\!f\wedge\omega_H.$$
\begin{defn}The difference between the two differential operators in
(\ref{two_operators}) is called the {\em partial torsion\/} $\tau_H$
of~$\nabla_H$. The Leibniz rule implies that it is a homomorphism of bundles,
equivalently $\tau_H\in\Gamma(\Wedge_H^2\otimes TM)$.
\end{defn}
\begin{rmk}
If $\nabla_H$ preserves $L$, then the projection of $\tau_H$ to
$\Wedge_H^2\otimes L^*$ is the Levi form ${\mathcal{L}}$ of~$H$.
\end{rmk}
\begin{lemma}\label{remove_partial_torsion}
On any smooth contact manifold, there are partial connections on $\Wedge^1$
with vanishing partial torsion.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By partition of unity one can choose a partial connection
$\nabla_H$ on $\Wedge^1$ and then the general such partial connection is of
the form $\nabla_H-\Gamma_H$ for an arbitrary homomorphism
$\Gamma_H:\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge^1$. The partial torsion $\tau_H$
of $\nabla_H$ is then modified by the composition
$\Wedge^1\xrightarrow{\,\Gamma_H\,}\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^2$
and so we may always adopt such a modification to ensure that $\nabla_H$ is
partially torsion-free, as required.\end{proof}
\begin{rmk}The remaining freedom in choosing a partially torsion-free
connection on $\Wedge^1$ is $\nabla_H\mapsto\nabla_H-\Gamma_H$, where
$$\Gamma_H:\Wedge^1\to\ker:\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^2$$
is arbitrary.\end{rmk}
Now let us suppose that $\theta\in\Gamma(L)$ is nowhere vanishing. Such a
contact form may be used to effect a number of normalisations. Firstly, the
line bundle $L$ is trivialised. Secondly, a vector field $T$, called the {\em
Reeb\/} field, may be uniquely characterised by
\begin{equation}\label{reeb}T\;\rule{5pt}{.3pt}\rule{.3pt}{7pt}\;\theta=1\qquad T\;\rule{5pt}{.3pt}\rule{.3pt}{7pt}\; d\theta=0.
\end{equation}
Consequently, the short exact sequence (\ref{L}) splits and we may write
\begin{equation}\label{splitting}\Wedge^1=\begin{array}{c}\Wedge_H^1\\ \oplus\\
\Wedge^0\end{array}\enskip\mbox{by means of}\quad\omega\mapsto
\left[\begin{array}{c}\omega_H\\ T\;\rule{5pt}{.3pt}\rule{.3pt}{7pt}\;\omega\end{array}\right].
\end{equation}
Equivalently, we may identify $\Wedge_H^1$ as a subbundle of $\Wedge^1$ by
means of
$$\Wedge_H^1=
\ker:\Wedge^1\xrightarrow{\,T\;\rule{3pt}{.3pt}\rule{.3pt}{5pt}\;\underbar{\enskip}\,}\Wedge^0$$
and $\Wedge_H^2$ as a subbundle of $\Wedge^2$ by means of
$$\Wedge_H^2=
\ker:\Wedge^2\xrightarrow{\,T\;\rule{3pt}{.3pt}\rule{.3pt}{5pt}\;\underbar{\enskip}\,}\Wedge^1.$$
In particular, the $2$-form $d\theta$ may be viewed as a section of
$\Wedge_H^2$. It coincides with the image of $\theta$ under the Levi form
${\mathcal{L}}:L\to\Wedge_H^2$. Thus, in the presence of a contact form
$\theta$, we obtain a non-degenerate $2$-form
$\Omega\equiv d\theta\in\Gamma(\Wedge_H^2)$ on the contact distribution~$H$. In
any case, we may use the splitting (\ref{splitting}) to insist that a partial
connection on $\Wedge^1$ have the form
\begin{equation}\label{we_insist}
\Wedge^1=\begin{array}{c}\Wedge_H^1\\ \oplus\\
\Wedge^0\end{array}\ni
\left[\begin{array}{c}\sigma\\ \rho\end{array}\right]
\stackrel{\nabla_H}{\longmapsto}
\left[\begin{array}{c}D_H\sigma+\Omega\rho\\
d_H\rho\end{array}\right]\in\begin{array}{c}\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge_H^1\\
\oplus\\ \Wedge_H^1\end{array},\end{equation}
where $D_H:\Wedge_H^1\to\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge_H^1$ is a partial connection
on~$\Wedge_H^1$. The form of $\nabla_H$ ensures that its partial torsion lies
in~$\Wedge_H^2\otimes H$. Therefore, if we argue as in the proof of
Lemma~\ref{remove_partial_torsion} to remove the remaining partial torsion,
then we have shown the following:
\begin{prop}\label{contact_to_the_max}If a contact form $\theta$ is
used to split the $1$-forms as
$$\Wedge^1=\Wedge_H^1\oplus\Wedge^0,$$
then we may find partial connections on $\Wedge^1$ of the form
\eqref{we_insist} and free from partial torsion. The remaining freedom in
choosing such connections is
$$\textstyle D_H\mapsto D_H-\Gamma_H\quad\mbox{for}\quad
\Gamma_H:\Wedge_H^1\to\bigodot^2\!\Wedge_H^1$$
an arbitrary homomorphism.\end{prop}
\begin{rmk}The connection dual to (\ref{we_insist}) has the form
$$TM=\begin{array}{c}\Wedge^0\\ \oplus\\ H\end{array}\ni
\left[\begin{array}{c}\lambda\\ X\end{array}\right]
\stackrel{\nabla_H}{\longmapsto}
\left[\begin{array}{c}d_H\lambda+X\;\rule{5pt}{.3pt}\rule{.3pt}{7pt}\;\Omega\\ D_HX\end{array}\right].$$
In particular, it follows that
$$\begin{array}{c}\Wedge^0\\ \oplus\\ H\end{array}\ni
\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right]
\stackrel{\nabla_H}{\longmapsto}
\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\ 0\end{array}\right]\quad\mbox{and}\quad
\begin{array}{c}\Wedge_H^1\\ \oplus\\
\Wedge^0\end{array}\ni
\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right]
\stackrel{\nabla_H}{\longmapsto}
\left[\begin{array}{c}\Omega\\ 0
\end{array}\right].$$
Evidently, these two conditions are sufficient to guarantee that a partial
connection on $\Wedge^1$ have the form (\ref{we_insist}) and
Proposition~\ref{contact_to_the_max} may be invariantly reformulated as
follows.
\end{rmk}
\begin{thm}\label{contact_theorem}
If $\theta$ is a contact form with associated Reeb field~$T$, then
we may find partial connections on the (co-)tangent bundle such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $\nabla_HT=0$,
\item $\nabla_H\theta=(d\theta)_H$,
\item $\nabla_H$ is free from partial torsion,
\end{itemize}
where $(d\theta)_H$ is the image of $d\theta$ under the composition
$$\Wedge^2\hookrightarrow\Wedge^1\otimes\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge^1.$$
The freedom in choosing such a partial connection lies in
$\Gamma(\bigodot^2\!\Wedge_H^1\otimes H)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk} Theorem~\ref{contact_theorem} bears a striking similarity to the
usual story for connections on the (co-)tangent bundle in which torsion-free
connections are free up to $\Gamma(\bigodot^2\!\Wedge^1\otimes TM)$. This
appealing feature is one of our reasons for advocating the construction in
this article.
\end{rmk}
\section{Sub-Riemannian contact geometry}
A sub-Riemannian contact structure on a smooth manifold $M$ is a contact
distribution $H\subset TM$ equipped with a positive-definite symmetric form
$g:\bigodot^2\!H\to{\mathbb{R}}$. We do not suppose any particular
compatibility between $g$ and the Levi form.
For any chosen contact form
$\theta\in\Gamma(L)\subset\Gamma(\Wedge^1)$, however, we can chose a local
co-frame for $H$ in which $g\in\Gamma(\bigodot^2\!\Wedge_H^1)$ and
$\Omega=d\theta\in\Gamma(\Wedge_H^2)$ are simultaneously represented by the
matrices
\begin{equation}\label{lovely_co-frame}
\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}
1&0&\cdots&0&0\\
0&1&\cdots&0&0\\
\vdots&\vdots&\mbox{\Large${\mathrm{Id}}$}&\vdots&\vdots\\
0&0&\cdots&1&0\\
0&0&\cdots&0&1
\end{array}\right]\quad\mbox{and}\quad
\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}
0&\lambda_1&\cdots&0&0\\
\!-\lambda_1\!&0&\cdots&0&0\\
\vdots&\vdots&\mbox{\Large$\!\ddots\!$}&\vdots&\vdots\\
0&0&\cdots&0&\lambda_n\\
0&0&\cdots&\!-\lambda_n\!&0
\end{array}\right],\end{equation}
respectively.
\begin{prop}\label{normalise_theta}
Locally, we can always choose a contact form $\theta$ so that
$$\|\Omega\|^2=2n,\quad\mbox{equivalently}\quad
\lambda_1{}^2+\cdots+\lambda_n{}^2=n.$$
With this normalisation $\theta$ is then determined up to sign.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} Replacing $\theta$ by $\hat\theta=\lambda\theta$, for $\lambda$ a
nowhere vanishing smooth function, gives
$d\hat\theta=\lambda d\theta+d\lambda\wedge\theta$ but, since $\theta$
vanishes on~$H$, as far as $\Wedge_H^2$ is concerned we find that
$\hat\Omega=\lambda\Omega$. The stated normalisation and freedom are clear.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk} If $M$ is three-dimensional, this normalisation asserts that
$\lambda_1=\pm1$ and a choice of sign corresponds to a choice of orientation
for~$H$. In this case, we may define an endomorphism $J:H\to H$ by
$$g(JX,Y)=\Omega(X,Y),\quad\forall\;X,Y\in H$$
and our normalisation asserts that $J^2=-{\mathrm{Id}}$. Thus, we have obtained
a CR structure. Conversely, every {\em pseudo-Hermitian\/} structure in the
sense of Webster~\cite{w} arises in this way. More precisely, we have shown
the following (as already noted in~\cite{fgv}).
\end{rmk}
\begin{prop}\label{3D} In three dimensions, an oriented sub-Riemannian
\mbox{contact}
structure is equivalent to a CR structure with a choice of contact form.
\end{prop}
\begin{rmk}
Without the contact form, a three-dimensional CR structure coincides with an
oriented `sub-conformal' contact structure (as in~\cite{fgv}).
\end{rmk}
\section{Construction of the partial connection}\label{ours}
The existence and uniqueness of the Levi-Civita connection in Riemannian
geometry is based on the algebraic fact that, for any finite-dimensional vector
space~$V$, the composition
\begin{equation}\label{algebra}
\textstyle\bigodot^2\!V\otimes V\hookrightarrow V\otimes V\otimes V
\xrightarrow{\,
\underbar{\enskip}\otimes\underbar{\enskip}\odot\underbar{\enskip}\,}
V\otimes\bigodot^2\!V\end{equation}
is an isomorphism. The same algebra underlies the following construction.
\begin{thm}\label{mainthm}
On any sub-Riemannian contact manifold, there is a
unique partial connection $\nabla_H:\Wedge^1\to\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge^1$ with
the following properties.
\begin{itemize}
\item $\nabla_HT=0$,
\item $\nabla_H\theta=(d\theta)_H$,
\item $\nabla_H$ is free from partial torsion,
\item $\nabla_Hg=0$,
\end{itemize}
where $\theta$ is any local contact form normalised as in
Proposition~\ref{normalise_theta} and $T$ is its associated Reeb field.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The only freedom in $\theta$ is to change its sign. Evidently, such a change
respects the characterising properties of~$\nabla_H$ so it suffices to work
locally, choose~$\theta$, and employ Theorem~\ref{contact_theorem} to find a
global connection with the first three of our required properties and with
remaining freedom
$$\nabla_H\mapsto\hat\nabla_H=\nabla_H-\Gamma_H,$$
for $\Gamma_H\in\Gamma(\bigodot^2\!\Wedge_H^1\otimes H)$. If we use the
sub-Riemannian metric $g$ to identify $H$ with its dual~$\Wedge_H^1$, and
write $\sigma:\bigodot^2\!\Wedge_H^1\otimes\Wedge_H^1
\mapsisoto\Wedge_H^1\otimes\bigodot^2\!\Wedge_H^1$ for the
isomorphism~(\ref{algebra}), then
$$\hat\nabla_Hg=\nabla_Hg-2\sigma\Gamma_H$$
and so $\hat\nabla_Hg=0$ if and only if
$\Gamma_H=\frac12\sigma^{-1}\nabla_Hg$, which shows both existence and
uniqueness from our final requirement.
\end{proof}
\section{Other constructions}\label{others}
As noted in~\cite{fgv} and echoed in Proposition~\ref{3D}, sub-Riemannian
geometry in dimension 3 coincides with Webster's pseudo-Hermitian
geometry~\cite{w}. For completeness, we briefly recount the story in
higher dimensions as follows.
\begin{defn} Suppose $M$ is a smooth manifold of dimension $2n+1$. An
{\em almost CR structure\/} on $M$ is a vector sub-bundle $H\subset TM$ of rank
$2n$ with an endomorphism $J:H\to H$ such that $J^2=-{\mathrm{Id}}$.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}
An almost CR structure is said to be {\em non-degenerate\/} if $H$ is a contact
distribution.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn} An almost CR structure is said to be {\em partially integrable\/}
if and only if the $L^*$-valued form
${\mathcal{L}}(X,JY)$ on $H$ is symmetric.
Equivalently, for any contact form, the ${\mathbb{C}}$-valued form
$$\Omega(X,JY)-i\Omega(X,Y)$$
on $H$ is Hermitian (and, in this case, non-degeneracy of the CR structure is
equivalent to non-degeneracy of this Hermitian form).
\end{defn}
It is observed in~\cite[p.~414]{cs} that partial integrability is implied by
the more usual condition of integrability, which may be defined as follows.
\begin{defn}
An almost CR structure is said to be {\em integrable\/} if and only if
$[H^{0,1},H^{0,1}]\subseteq H^{0,1}$ where $H^{0,1}=\{X\in{\mathbb{C}}H\mbox{
s.t.\ }JX+iX=0\}$. Evidently, this condition is vacuous in three dimensions
(for then $H^{0,1}$ is a line bundle). A {\em CR structure\/} is an integrable
almost CR structure.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}
A {\em pseudo-Hermitian\/} structure is a CR structure equipped with a choice
of contact form. Such a structure is said to be {\em strictly pseudo-convex\/}
if and only if the corresponding symmetric form $\Omega(X,JY)$ on $H$ is
positive-definite.
\end{defn}
\begin{prop} Always,
$$\begin{array}{l}
\{\mbox{strictly pseudo-convex pseudo-Hermitian structures}\}\\
\hspace{100pt}\subseteq\{\mbox{oriented sub-Riemannian contact structures}\}
\end{array}$$
with equality in $3$ dimensions.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} Using $\Omega(X,JY)$ as a sub-Riemannian metric and using $J$ to
orient~$H$, it is clear in the co-frames (\ref{lovely_co-frame}) that CR
geometry corresponds exactly to the case $\lambda_1=\cdots=\lambda_n=1$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The Tanaka-Webster connection} Since it is only in $3$ dimensions
that pseudo-Hermitian geometry coincides with sub-Riemannian geometry, we shall
confine our discussion to this case. The construction~\cite{t,w} of this
canonical connection, written from the sub-Riemannian point of view, is as
follows. Choose, a local co-frame $\theta,e_1,e_2$ on $M$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{choose_co-frame}
d\theta=e_1\wedge e_2\quad\mbox{and}\quad Je_2=e_1.\end{equation}
Notice that such a co-frame is determined up to
\begin{equation}\label{change_of_frame}
\left[\begin{array}{c}e_1\\ e_2\end{array}\right]\longmapsto
\left[\begin{array}{c}\hat e_1\\ \hat e_2\end{array}\right]=
\left[\begin{array}{cc}\cos\phi&-\sin\phi\\ \sin\phi&\cos\phi\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{c}e_1\\ e_2\end{array}\right]\end{equation}
for an arbitrary smooth function~$\phi$.
\begin{lemma} There is a smooth $1$-form $\omega$ and smooth functions $A$ and
$B$ uniquely characterised by
\begin{equation}\label{structure_equations}
\begin{array}{rcl}de_1&=&\omega\wedge e_2+A\theta\wedge e_1+B\theta\wedge e_2\\
de_2 &=&-\omega\wedge e_1+B\theta\wedge e_1-A\theta\wedge e_2
\end{array}\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} At each point, there are seemingly $6$ equations here for $5$
unknowns, namely the $3$ coefficients of $\omega$ together with $A$ and~$B$.
However, there is one relation namely
$$0=d^2\theta=d(e_1\wedge e_2)=de_1\wedge e_2-de_2\wedge e_1,$$
which is exactly as required by the right hand side
of~(\ref{structure_equations}).
\end{proof}
Notice that if we change our co-frame according to (\ref{change_of_frame}),
then
$$\begin{array}{rcl}d\hat e_1&=&\hat\omega\wedge\hat e_2+
\hat A\theta\wedge\hat e_1+\hat B\theta\wedge\hat e_2\\
d\hat e_2 &=&-\hat\omega\wedge\hat e_1+
\hat B\theta\wedge\hat e_1-\hat A\theta\wedge\hat e_2,
\end{array}$$
where
\begin{equation}\label{resulting_changes}
\hat\omega=\omega-d\phi\enskip\mbox{ and}\enskip
\left[\begin{array}{c}\hat A\\ \hat B\end{array}\right]=
\left[\begin{array}{cc}\cos2\phi&-\sin2\phi\\
\sin2\phi&\cos2\phi\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{c}A\\ B\end{array}\right].\end{equation}
\begin{thm}[Tanaka-Webster] The connection on $\Wedge^1$ given by
\begin{equation}\label{tanaka-webster_in_our_co-frame}
\nabla\theta=0,\qquad\nabla e_1=\omega\otimes e_2,\qquad
\nabla e_2=-\omega\otimes e_1\end{equation}
in any chosen co-frame, does not depend on this choice.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}There is no choice in~$\theta$. Otherwise, the required invariance
follows by straightforward computation from $\hat\omega=\omega-d\phi$.
\end{proof}
We shall now use the co-frame $\theta,e_1,e_2$ and its structure equations
(\ref{structure_equations}) to
\begin{itemize}
\item compute the torsion of the Tanaka-Webster connection,
\item compute the curvature of the Tanaka-Webster connection,
\item compute the partial connection of Theorem~\ref{mainthm},
\item promote it to a full connection via Proposition~\ref{promotion},
\item and compare these two connections.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Tanaka-Webster torsion}
The torsion of any connection on $\Wedge^1$ is the difference
between $d:\Wedge^1\to\Wedge^2$ and the composition
$\Wedge^1\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}\Wedge^1\otimes\Wedge^1\to\Wedge^2$.
According to (\ref{structure_equations}), for the Tanaka-Webster connection,
this is
$$\theta\mapsto e_1\wedge e_2,\qquad
e_1\mapsto A\theta\wedge e_1+B\theta\wedge e_2,\qquad
e_2\mapsto B\theta\wedge e_1-A\theta\wedge e_2,$$
the first of which is just the Levi form and the rest may be written as
\begin{equation}\label{tanaka-webster_torsion}
\left[\begin{array}{c}e_1\\ e_2\end{array}\right]\longmapsto
\theta\wedge\left[\begin{array}{cc}A&B\\ B&\!-A\!\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{c}e_1\\ e_2\end{array}\right].\end{equation}
Its invariance under change of co-frame (\ref{change_of_frame}) is equivalent
to the second part of~(\ref{resulting_changes}), which, for
these purposes may be better rewritten as
$$\left[\begin{array}{cc}\hat A&\hat B\\
\hat B&\!-\hat A\!\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{cc}\cos\phi&-\sin\phi\\
\sin\phi&\cos\phi\end{array}\right]=
\left[\begin{array}{cc}\cos\phi&-\sin\phi\\
\sin\phi&\cos\phi\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{cc}A&B\\ B&\!-A\!\end{array}\right].$$
In the standard expositions, the torsion is usually presented as a
complex-valued quantity, equivalent to $A+iB$.
\subsubsection{Tanaka-Webster curvature}
The curvature of a general connection $E\to\Wedge^1\otimes E$ is the
composition $E\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}\Wedge^1\otimes E
\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}\Wedge^2\otimes E$ where
$$\nabla(\alpha\otimes\sigma)=d\alpha\otimes\sigma-\alpha\wedge\nabla\sigma
\quad\mbox{characterises}\quad\nabla:\Wedge^1\otimes E\to\Wedge^2\otimes E.$$
Therefore, we may compute, according to (\ref{tanaka-webster_in_our_co-frame}),
that
$$\begin{array}{rcccccl}
\theta&\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}&0\\
e_1&\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}&\omega\otimes e_2&\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}&
d\omega\otimes e_2-\omega\wedge(-\omega\otimes e_1)&=&d\omega\otimes e_2\\
e_2&\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}&-\omega\otimes e_1&\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}&
-d\omega\otimes e_1+\omega\wedge(\omega\otimes e_2)&=&-d\omega\otimes e_1
\end{array}$$
In other words, the curvature is determined by $d\omega$. Its invariance is
clear from the first equation of~(\ref{resulting_changes}). In fact, the
curvature provides only one new scalar quantity, namely $d\omega\wedge\theta$,
since $d\omega\wedge e_1$ and $d\omega\wedge e_2$ may be determined in terms of
the torsion by differentiating the structure
equations~(\ref{structure_equations}). It is traditionally captured by the
real-valued function $R$ determined by
\begin{equation}\label{tanaka-webster_curvature}
d\omega\wedge\theta=R\,\theta\wedge e_1\wedge e_2.\end{equation}
\subsection{The partial connection}
The same co-frame (\ref{choose_co-frame}) may also be used to compute the
partial connection. The characterising properties (\ref{reeb}) of the Reeb
field $T$ show that it is, equivalently, determined by
$$T\;\rule{5pt}{.3pt}\rule{.3pt}{7pt}\;\theta=1\qquad T\;\rule{5pt}{.3pt}\rule{.3pt}{7pt}\; e_1=0\qquad T\;\rule{5pt}{.3pt}\rule{.3pt}{7pt}\; e_2=0$$
whence the co-frame $\{\theta,e_1,e_2\}$ is compatible with the splitting
(\ref{splitting}). More specifically $\{e_1,e_2\}$ spans
$\Wedge_H^1\hookrightarrow\Lambda^1$ and $\theta$ trivialises
$L\subset\Wedge^1$. Therefore, if we consider the partial connection $\nabla_H$
on $\Wedge^1$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{our_partial_connection_in_three_dimensions}
\textstyle \nabla_H\theta=e_1\otimes e_2-e_2\otimes e_1\quad
\nabla_He_1=\omega_H\otimes e_2\quad \nabla_He_2=-\omega_H\otimes e_1,
\end{equation}
where $\omega$ is defined by (\ref{structure_equations}) and $\omega_H$ is its
image in $\Wedge_H^1$, then we ensure that
it has the form (\ref{we_insist}) and is free from partial torsion, as required
by Theorem~\ref{mainthm}. Finally,
$$\begin{array}{l}
\nabla_H(e_1\otimes e_1+e_2\otimes e_2)\\
\qquad{}=\omega_H\otimes e_2\otimes e_1+\omega_H\otimes e_1\otimes e_2
-\omega_H\otimes e_1\otimes e_2-\omega_H\otimes e_2\otimes e_1=0\end{array}$$
and all characterising properties of Theorem~\ref{mainthm} are satisfied. Thus,
apart from a minor modification whereby $\nabla_H\theta=d\theta$ replaces
$\nabla\theta=0$, the partial connection of Theorem~\ref{mainthm} is induced by
the Tanaka-Webster connection.
\subsubsection{Promotion of the partial connection}
We shall now take the partial connection defined by
(\ref{our_partial_connection_in_three_dimensions}) and promote it to a full
connection on $\Wedge^1$ in line with Proposition~\ref{promotion}. The general
lift of (\ref{our_partial_connection_in_three_dimensions}) to a full connection
is defined by
$$\begin{array}{ccl}
\nabla\theta&=&\theta\otimes\alpha+e_1\otimes e_2-e_2\otimes e_1\\
\nabla e_1&=&\theta\otimes\beta+\omega\otimes e_2\\
\nabla e_2&=&\theta\otimes\gamma-\omega\otimes e_1
\end{array}$$
for $1$-forms $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ and if we now compute the composition
$$\Wedge^1\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}\Wedge^1\otimes\Wedge^1
\xrightarrow{\,\nabla\,}\Wedge^2\otimes\Wedge^1\longrightarrow
\Wedge_H^2\otimes\Wedge^1$$
for this lift, we find that
$$\textstyle\theta\mapsto
e_1\wedge e_2\otimes\alpha
+(de_1+e_2\wedge\omega)_H\otimes e_2
-(de_2-e_1\wedge\omega)_H\otimes e_1
=e_1\wedge e_2\otimes\alpha$$
in accordance with~(\ref{structure_equations}), and then
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
e_1&\mapsto&
e_1\wedge e_2\otimes\beta+(d\omega)_H\otimes e_2\\
e_2&\mapsto&
e_1\wedge e_2\otimes\gamma-(d\omega)_H\otimes e_1.
\end{array}$$
Therefore, we are obliged to take $\alpha=0$ and
$$\beta=-Re_2\quad\mbox{and}\quad\gamma=Re_1,$$
where $(d\omega)_H=R\,e_1\wedge e_2$. In summary, our promoted connection is
given by
\begin{equation}\label{our_promoted_connection}
\begin{array}{ccl}
\nabla\theta&=&e_1\otimes e_2-e_2\otimes e_1\\
\nabla e_1&=&(\omega-R\,\theta)\otimes e_2\\
\nabla e_2&=&(R\,\theta-\omega)\otimes e_1
\end{array}\end{equation}
where $R$ is the Tanaka-Webster curvature determined
by~(\ref{tanaka-webster_curvature}).
\subsection{Comparison}
We may compare the promoted connection~(\ref{our_promoted_connection}) with
Tanaka-Webster. {From} (\ref{tanaka-webster_in_our_co-frame}) and
(\ref{choose_co-frame}) we find
that their difference tensor, as a homomorphism
$\Wedge^1\to\Wedge^1\otimes\Wedge^1$, is given by
$$\Wedge^1=\begin{array}{c}\Lambda_H^1\\ \oplus\\ \Wedge^0\end{array}
\ni\left[\begin{array}c\sigma\\ \rho\end{array}\right]\mapsto
\left[\begin{array}c
R\,\theta\otimes J\sigma+\Omega\rho\\ 0\end{array}\right],$$
where $R$ is the Webster-Tanaka curvature~(\ref{tanaka-webster_curvature}) and
the $1$-forms are split by the Reeb field corresponding
to~$\theta$.
\begin{rmk}
Recall that the two basic invariants of pseudo-Hermitian geometry are the
torsion (\ref{tanaka-webster_torsion}) and
curvature~(\ref{tanaka-webster_curvature}). Finally, we remark that if we
compute the full torsion of our promoted
connection~(\ref{our_promoted_connection}), then we find $\theta\mapsto 0$ and
$$\left[\begin{array}{c}e_1\\ e_2\end{array}\right]\longmapsto
\theta\wedge\left[\begin{array}{cc}A&B+R\\ B-R&\!-A\!\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{c}e_1\\ e_2\end{array}\right].$$
In this formula we see the basic invariants appearing together.\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
For any strictly pseudo-convex pseudo-Hermitian structure (in any dimension)
there is, apart from the Tanaka--Webster connection, yet another canonical
affine connection, namely the associated Weyl connection defined as in
\cite{cs}. As partial connections on $\Wedge^1$ they coincide, but as full
connections they differ as computed in \cite[Theorem 5.2.13]{cs}. In dimension
$3$ their difference tensor is simply a constant multiple of
$$\left[\begin{array}c\sigma\\ \rho\end{array}\right]\mapsto
\left[\begin{array}c
R\,\theta\otimes J\sigma\\ 0\end{array}\right].$$
\end{rmk}
|
\section{Introduction}
Academic publishers of all types claim that they add value to scholarly communications by coordinating
reviews and contributing and enhancing text during publication. These contributions come at a
considerable cost: U.S. academic libraries paid $\$1.7$ billion for serial subscriptions in $2008$
alone and this number continues to rise. Library budgets, in contrast, are flat and not able to keep
pace with serial price inflation. Several institutions have therefore discontinued or significantly
scaled back their subscription agreements with commercial publishers such as Elsevier and
Wiley-Blackwell. At the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), we have investigated the
publishers' value proposition by conducting a comparative study of pre-print papers and their final
published counterparts. We have two working assumptions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If the publishers' argument is valid, the text of a pre-print paper should vary measurably from
its corresponding final published version.
\item By applying standard similarity measures, we should be able to detect and quantify such
differences.
\end{enumerate}
In this paper we present our preliminary results based on pre-print publications from arXiv.org and
their final published counterparts obtained through subscriptions held by the UCLA Library. After
matching papers via their digital object identifiers (DOIs), we applied comparative analytics and
evaluated the textual similarities of components of the papers such as the title, abstract, and
body. Our analysis revealed that the text contents of the papers in our test data set generally
changed very little from their pre-print to final published versions; these results suggest that
the vast majority of final published papers are largely indistinguishable from their pre-print
versions. This work contributes empirical indicators to discussions of the value that academic
publishers add to scholarly communication and therefore can influence libraries' economic decisions
regarding access to scholarly publications.
\section{Global Trends in Scientific and Scholarly Publishing}
There are several global trends that are relevant and situate the focus of this research. The first
is the steady rise in both cost and scope of the global science, technology and medicine (STM)
publishing market. According to Michael Mabe and Mark Ware in their STM Report
$2015$ \cite{ware:stmreport}, the global STM market in $2013$ was $\$25.2$ billion annually,
with $40\%$ of this from journals ($\$10$ billion) and $68\%-75\%$ coming directly out of library
budgets. Other relevant trends are the growing global research corpus \cite{bornmann:2015growth},
the steady rise in research funding \cite{ucla:accountability}, and the corresponding recent increase
in open access publishing \cite{bjork:megajournals}. One longstanding yet infrequently mentioned
factor is the critical contribution of faculty and researchers to the creation and establishment
of journal content that is then licensed back to libraries to serve students, faculty
and researchers. For example, a $2015$ Elsevier study (reported in \cite{ucla:accountability})
conducted for the University of California (UC) system showed that UC research publications
accounted for $8.3\%$ of all research publications in the United States between $2009$ and
$2013$ \textit{and the UC libraries purchased all of that research back from Elsevier}.
\subsection{The Price of Knowledge}
While there are many facets to the costs of knowledge, the pricing of published scholarly
literature is one primary component. Prices set by publishers are meant to maximize profit and
therefore are determined not by actual costs, but by what the market will bear. According to the
National Association of State Budget Officers, $24$ states in the U.S. had budgets in $2013$ with
lower general fund expenditures in $FY13$ than just prior to the global recession in
$2008$ \cite{budget:fy14}. Nearly half of the states therefore had not returned to pre-recession
levels of revenue and spending.
\subsection{Rise in Open Access Publications }
Over the last several years there has been a significant increase in open access publishing and
publications in STM. Some of this increase can be traced to recent U.S. federal guidelines and
other funder policies that require open access publication. Examples include such policies at the
National Institutes of Health, the Wellcome Trust, and the Howard Hughes Medical Center.
Bo-Christer Bj{\"o}rk et al. \cite{bjork:openaccess} found that in $2009$, approximately $25\%$
of science papers were open access. By $2015$, another study by Hammid R. Jamali and Maijid
Nabavi \cite{jamali:openaccess} found that $61.1\%$ of journal articles were freely available
online via open access.
\subsection{Pre-print versus Final Published Versions and the Role of Publishers}
In this study, we compared paper pre-prints from arXiv.org to the corresponding final published
versions of the papers. For comparison, the annual budget for arXiv.org is set at $\$826,000$
for $2013-2017$. While it is not possible to determine the precise corresponding costs for
commercial publishing, the National Center for Education Statistics $2013$ found that the market
for English language STM journals was approximately $\$10$ billion dollars annually. It therefore
seems safe to say that the costs for commercial publishing are orders of magnitude larger than the
costs for an organization such as arXiv.org.
Michael Mabe \cite{mabe:ermh} describes the publishers' various roles as including, but not limited
to entrepreneurship, copyediting, tagging, marketing, distribution, and e-hosting. The focus of
the study presented here is on the publishers' contributions to the content of the materials they
publish (specifically copyediting and other enhancements to the text) and how and to
what extent, if at all, the content changes from the pre-print to the final published version of
a publication.
\section{Data Gathering}
Comparing pre-prints to final published versions of a significant corpus of scholarly articles
required obtaining the contents of both versions of each article in a format that could be analyzed
as full text and parsed into component sections (title, abstract, body) for more detailed comparisons.
The most accessible source of such materials proved to be \texttt{arXiv.org}, an open-access digital
repository owned and operated by Cornell University and supported by a consortium of institutions.
At the time of writing, arXiv.org hosts over $1.1$ million academic pre-prints, most written in fields
of physics and mathematics and uploaded by their authors to the site within the past $20$ years. The
scope of arXiv.org also enabled us to identify and obtain a sufficiently large comparison corpus of
corresponding final published versions in scholarly journals to which our institution has access via
subscription.
\subsection{arXiv.org Corpus}
Gathering pre-print texts from arXiv.org proceeded via established public interfaces for machine
access to the site data, respecting their discouragement of indiscriminate automated
downloads.\footnote{\url{https://arxiv.org/help/robots}}
We first downloaded metadata records for all articles available from arXiv.org through February
of $2015$ via the site's Open Archives Initiatives Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH)
interface.\footnote{\url{http://export.arxiv.org/oai2?verb=Identify}} We received $1,015,440$
records in all, which provided standard Dublin Core metadata for each article, including its title
and authors, as well as other useful data for subsequent analysis, such as the paper's disciplinary
category within arXiv.org and the upload dates of its versions (if the authors submitted more than
one version). The metadata also contained the text of the abstract for most articles. Because the
abstracts as well as the article titles often contained text formatting markup, however, we
preferred to use instances of these texts that we derived from other sources, such as the PDF version
of the paper, for comparison purposes (see below).
arXiv.org's OAI-PMH metadata record for each article contains a field for a DOI, which we used as
the key to match pre-print versions of articles to their final published versions. arXiv.org does
not require DOIs for submitted papers, but authors may provide them voluntarily. $452,017$ article
records in our initial metadata set ($44.5\%$) contained a DOI. Working under the assumption that
the DOIs are correct and sufficient to identify the final published version of each article, we
then queried the publisher-supported CrossRef citation linking service
service\footnote{\url{https://github.com/CrossRef/rest-api-doc/blob/master/rest_api.md}} to
determine whether the full text of the corresponding published article would be available for
download via UCLA's institutional journal subscriptions.
To begin accumulating full articles for text comparison, we downloaded PDFs of every pre-print
article from arXiv.org with a DOI that could be matched to a full-text published version
accessible through subscriptions held by the UCLA Library.
Our initial query indicated that up to $12,666$ final published versions would be accessible in
this manner.
The main reason why this number is fairly low is that, at the time of writing, the above mentioned
CrossRef API is still in its early stages and only few publishers have agreed to making their
articles available for text and data mining via the API.
However, while this represented a very small proportion of all papers with DOI-associated pre-prints
stored in arXiv.org, the resulting collection nevertheless proved sufficient for a detailed
comparative analysis.
The downloads of pre-prints took place via arXiv.org's bulk data access service, which facilitates
the transfer of large numbers of articles as PDFs or as text markup source files and images,
packaged into .tar archives, from an Amazon S3 account. Bandwidth fees are paid by the requesting
party.\footnote{\url{https://arxiv.org/help/bulk_data_s3}} This approach only yields the most
recent uploaded version of each pre-print article, however, so for analyses involving earlier
uploaded versions of pre-print articles, we relied upon targeted downloads of earlier article
versions via arXiv.org's public web interface.
\subsection{Corpus of Matched Articles}
Obtaining the final published versions of articles involved querying the CrossRef API to find a
full-text download URL for a given DOI. Most of the downloaded files ($96$\%) arrived in one of
a few standard XML markup formats; the rest were in PDF format. Due to missing or incomplete target
files, $464$ of the downloads failed entirely, leaving us with $12,202$ published versions for
comparison. The markup of the XML files contained, in addition to the full text, metadata entries
from the publisher. Examination of this data revealed that the vast majority ($99\%$) of articles
were published between $2003$ and $2015$. This time range intuitively makes sense as DOIs did not
find widespread adoption with commercial publishers until the early $2000s$. The data also shows
that most of the obtained published versions ($96$\%) were published by Elsevier.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.17]{arxiv_categories}
\caption{arXiv.org categories of matched articles}
\label{fig:arxiv_categories}
\end{figure}
The disciplines of articles in arXiv.org are dominated by physics, mathematics, statistics, and
computer science. It is therefore not surprising to find a very similar distribution of categories
in our corpus of matched articles as shown in Figure \ref{fig:arxiv_categories}.
\subsection{Data Preparation}
For this study, we compared the texts of the titles, abstracts, and body sections of the pre-print
and final published version of each paper in our data set. Being able to generate these sections
for most downloaded papers therefore was a precondition of this analysis.
All of the pre-print versions and a small minority of final published papers were downloaded in
PDF format. To identify and extract the sections of these papers, we used the
GROBID\footnote{\url{https://github.com/kermitt2/grobid}} library, which employs trained conditional
random field machine learning algorithms to segment structured scholarly texts, including article
PDFs, into XML-encoded text.
The markup tags of the final published papers downloaded in XML format usually identified quite
plainly their primary sections. A small proportion of such papers, however, did not contain a
demarcated body section in the XML and instead only provided the full text of the papers. Although
it is possible to segment these texts further via automatic scholarly information extraction tools
such as ParsCit,\footnote{\url{http://aye.comp.nus.edu.sg/parsCit/}} which use trained conditional
random field models to detect sections probabilistically, for the present study we elected simply
to omit the body sections of this small number of papers from the comparison analysis.
As noted above, the GROBID software used to segment the PDF papers was probabilistic in its approach,
and although it was generally quite effective, it was not able to isolate all sections (title,
abstract, body) for approximately $10-20$\% of the papers in our data set. This situation, combined
with the aforementioned irregularities in the XML of a similar proportion of final published papers,
meant that the number of corresponding texts for comparison varied considerably by section. Thus,
for our primary comparison of the latest pre-print version uploaded to arXiv.org to its final
published version, we were able to compare directly $10,900$ titles and abstract sections, and
$9,399$ body sections.
The large variations in formatting of the references sections (also called the ``tail'') as extracted
from the raw downloaded XML and the parsed PDFs, however, precluded a systematic comparison of that
section. We leave such an analysis for future work. A further consequence of our text-only analysis
was that the contents of images were ignored entirely, although figure captions and the text contents
of tables usually could be compared effectively.
\section{Analytical Methods} \label{subsec:txt_comp_meth}
We applied several text comparison algorithms to the corresponding sections of the pre-print and
final published versions of papers in our test data set. These algorithms, described in detail below,
were selected to quantify different notions of ``similarity'' between texts. When possible, we
normalized the output values of each algorithm to lie between $1$ and $0$, with $1$ indicating that
the texts were effectively identical, and $0$ indicating complete dissimilarity. Different algorithms
necessarily measured any apparent degree of dissimilarity in different ways, so the outputs of the
algorithms cannot be compared directly, but it is nonetheless valid to interpret the aggregation
of these results as a general indication of the overall degree of similarity between two texts
along several different axes of comparison.
\subsection{Editorial Changes}
The well-known Levenshtein edit distance metric \cite{levenshtein:edit_distance}
calculates the number of character insertions, deletions, and substitutions necessary to convert one
text into another. It thus provides a useful quantification of the amount of editorial intervention
--- performed either by the authors or the journal editors --- that occurs between the pre-print and
final published version of a paper. Our work used the edit ratio calculation as provided in the
Levenshtein Python C Implementation
Module,\footnote{\url{https://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-Levenshtein/0.11.2}} which subtracts the
edit distance between the two documents from their combined length in characters and divides this
amount by their aggregate length, thereby producing a value between $1$ (completely similar) and
$0$ (completely dissimilar).
\subsection{Length Similarity}
The degree to which the final published version of a paper is shorter or longer than the pre-print
constitutes a much less involved but nonetheless revealing comparison metric. To calculate this
value, we divided the absolute difference in length between both papers by the length of the longer
paper and subtracted this value from $1$. Therefore, two papers of the same length will receive a
similarity score of $1$; this similarity score is $0.5$ if one paper is twice as long as the other,
and so on. It is also possible to incorporate the polarity of this change by adding the length
ratio to $0$ if the final version is longer, and subtracting it from $0$ if the pre-print is longer.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{title_histogram}
\caption{Comparison results for titles}
\label{fig:title_histo}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{String Similarity}
Two other fairly straightforward, low-level metrics of string similarity that we applied to the paper
comparisons were the Jaccard and S\o rensen indices, which consider only the sets of unique characters
that appear in each text. The S\o rensen similarity \cite{sorensen:index} was calculated by doubling
the number of unique characters shared between both texts (the intersection) and dividing this by
the combined sizes of both texts' unique character sets.
The Jaccard similarity calculation \cite{jaccard:index} is the size of the intersection (see above)
divided by the total number of unique characters appearing in either the pre-print or final published
version (the union).
Implementations of both algorithms were provided by the standard Python string distance
package.\footnote{\url{https://pypi.python.org/pypi/Distance/}}
\subsection{Semantic Similarity}
Comparing overall lengths, shared character sets, and even edit distances between texts does not
necessarily indicate the degree to which the meaning of the texts --- that is, their semantic
content --- actually has changed from one version to another. To estimate this admittedly more
subjective notion of similarity, we calculated the pairwise cosine similarity between the pre-print
and final published texts. Cosine similarity can be described intuitively as a measurement of how
often significant words occur in similar quantities in both texts, normalized by the lengths of
both documents \cite{pang:introdm}. The actual procedure used for this study involved removing
common English ``stopwords'' from each document, then applying the Porter stemming
algorithm \cite{porter:algo} to remove suffixes and thereby merge closely related words, before
finally applying the pairwise cosine similarity algorithm implemented in the Python scikit-learn
machine learning package\footnote{\url{http://scikit-learn.org/stable/}} to the resulting term
frequency lists. Because this implementation calculates only the similarity between two documents
considered in isolation, instead of within the context of a larger corpus, it uses raw term counts,
rather than term-frequency/inverse document frequency (TF-IDF) weights.
\section{Experiment Results}
We calculated the similarity metrics described above for each pair of corresponding pre-print and
final published papers in our data set, comparing titles, abstracts, and body sections when available.
From the results of these calculations, we generated visualizations of the similarity distributions
for each metric. Subsequent examinations and analyses of these distributions provided novel insights
into the question of how and to what degree the text contents of scientific papers may change from
their pre-print instantiations to the final published version. Because each section of a publication
differs in its purpose and characteristics (e.g., length, standard formatting) and each metric
addresses the notion of similarity from a different perspective, we present the results of our
comparisons per section (title, abstract, and body), subdivided by comparison metric.
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{abstract_histogram}
\caption{Comparison results for abstracts}
\label{fig:abstract_histo}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Title Analysis}
First, we analyzed the papers' titles. A title is usually much shorter (fewer characters) than a
paper's abstract and its body. That means that even small changes to the title would have a large
impact on the similarity scores based on length ratio and Levenshtein distance. Titles also often
contain salient keywords describing the overall topic of the paper. If those keywords were changed,
removed or new ones added, the cosine similarity value would drop.
Figure \ref{fig:title_histo} shows the comparison of results of all five text similarity measures
applied to titles. Since all measures are normalized, they return values between $0$ and $1$. Values
closer to $0$ represent a high degree of dissimilarity and values close to $1$ indicate a very high
level of similarity of the analyzed text. The horizontal x-axis in Figure \ref{fig:title_histo}
shows results aggregated into ten bins. The bin with the largest values between $0.9$ and $1.0$ is
located on the far left of the axis followed by the bin with values between $0.9$ and $0.8$ and so
on. The bin with values between $0$ and $0.1$ can be found on the right end of the x-axis. Each
bin contains five columns, each of which represents one applied similarity measure. A column's
height indicates the number of articles whose title similarity scores fall into the corresponding
bin. The height of a column refers to the left y-axis and is shown in absolute numbers. The red
diamond-shaped point in each column indicates the relative proportion of articles in the entire
corpus that is represented by the corresponding column. The value of a diamond refers to the
right y-axis where the percentage is shown.
Figure \ref{fig:title_histo} shows a dominance of the top bin. The vast majority of titles have a
very high score in all applied similarity measures. Most noticeably, almost $10,000$ titles
(around $90\%$ of all titles) are of very similar length, with a ratio value between $0.9$ and $1$.
The remaining $10\%$ fall into the next bin with values between $0.8$ and $0.9$.
A very similar observation can be made for the Levenshtein distance and the S\o rensen value. About
$70\%$ of those values fall into the top bin and the majority of the remaining values (around $20\%$)
land between $0.8$ and $0.9$.
The cosine similarity is also dominated by values in the top bin (around $70\%$) but the remaining
values are more distributed across the second, third, fourth, and fifth bin.
Just about half of all Jaccard values can be seen in the top bin and most of the remainder is split
between the second ($25\%$) and the third bin ($20\%$). In many cases, this metric is registering
low-level but systematic differences in character use between the pre-print and final published
versions as filtered through the download methods described above: for example, a pre-print may
consistently use em-dashes (--), whereas the published version uses only hyphens (-). This sensitivity
of the Jaccard similarity score to subtle changes in the unique character sets in each text is
apparent for other sections as well.
The results of this comparison, in particular the fact that the majority of values fall between
$0.9$ and $1$, provide very strong indicators that titles of scholarly articles do not change
noticeably between the pre-print and the final published version. Even though
Figure \ref{fig:title_histo} shows a small percentage of titles exhibiting a rather low level of
similarity, with Levenshtein and S\o rensen values between $0.1$ and $0.2$, the overall similarity
of titles is very high.
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{body_histogram}
\caption{Comparison results for body sections}
\label{fig:body_histo}
\end{figure*}
\newpage
\subsection{Abstract Analysis}
The next section we compared was the papers' abstracts. An abstract can be seen as a very short
version of the paper. It often gives a brief summary of the problem statement, the methods applied,
and the achievements of the paper. As such, an abstract usually is longer than the paper's title
(in number of characters) and provides more context. Intuitively, it seems probable that we would
find more editorial changes in longer sections of the pre-print version of an article compared to
its final published version. However, a potentially increased number of editorial changes alone
does not necessarily prove dissimilarity between longer texts. We expect similarity measures based
on semantic features such as cosine similarity to be more reliable here.
Figure \ref{fig:abstract_histo} shows the comparative results for all abstracts. The formatting of
the graph is the same as previously described for Figure \ref{fig:title_histo}. To our surprise,
the figure is dominated by the high frequency of values between $0.9$ and $1$ across all similarity
measures. More than $8,500$ abstracts (about $80\%$) have such scores for their length ratio,
Levenshtein distance, and S\o rensen index. $6\%$ of the remaining length ratio and Levenshtein
distance values as well as $13\%$ of the remaining S\o rensen index values fall between $0.8$ and
$0.9$. The remaining pairs are distributed across all other bins.
The cosine similarity and Jaccard index values are slightly more distributed. About $5,000$ abstracts
($55\%$) fall into the top bin, $20\%$ and $26\%$ into the second, and $10\%$ and $9\%$ into the
third bin, respectively.
Not unlike our observations for titles, the algorithms applied to abstracts predominantly return
values that indicate a very high degree of similarity. Figure \ref{fig:abstract_histo} shows that
more than $90\%$ of abstracts score $0.6$ or higher, regardless of the text similarity measure
applied. It is also worth pointing out that there is no noticeable increased frequency of values
between $0.1$ and $0.2$ as previously seen when comparing titles (Figure \ref{fig:title_histo}).
\subsection{Body Analysis} \label{sec:body_analysis}
The next section we extracted from our corpora of scholarly articles and subjected to the text
similarity measures is the body of the text. This excludes the title, the author(s), the abstract,
and the reference section. This section is, in terms of number of characters, the longest of our
three analyzed sections. We therefore consider scores resulting from algorithms based on editorial
changes to be less informative for this comparison. In particular, a finding such as ``The body
of article $A_2$ contains $10\%$ fewer characters than the body of article $A_1$'' would not provide
any reliable indicators of the similarity between the two articles $A_1$ and $A_2$. Algorithms based
on semantic features, such as the cosine similarity, on the other hand, provide stronger indicators
of the similarity of the compared long texts. More specifically, cosine values are expected to be
rather low for very dissimilar bodies of articles.
The results of this third comparison can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:body_histo}. The height of the
bar representing the cosine similarity is remarkable. Almost $7,500$ body sections of our compared
scholarly articles, which is equivalent to $80\%$ of the entire corpus, have a cosine score that
falls in the top bin with values between $0.9$ and $1$. $14\%$ have a cosine value that falls into
the second and $3\%$ fall into the third bin. Values of the S\o rensen index show a very similar
pattern with $74\%$ in the top bin and $25\%$ in the second. In contrast, only $7\%$ of articles'
bodies have Jaccard index values falling into the top bin. The vast majority of these scores,
$79\%$, are between $0.8$ and $0.9$ and another $13\%$ are between $0.7$ and $0.8$.
It is surprising to see that even the algorithms based on editorial changes provide scores mostly
in the top bins. Of the length ratio scores, $66\%$ fall in the top bin and $23\%$ in the second
bin. The Levenshtein distance shows the opposite proportions: $34\%$ are in the top and $51\%$
belong to the second bin.
The dominance of bars on the left hand side of Figure \ref{fig:body_histo} provides yet more evidence
that pre-print articles of our corpus and their final published version do not exhibit many features
that could distinguish them from each other, neither on the editorial nor on the semantic level.
$95\%$ of all analyzed body sections have a similarity score of $0.7$ or higher in any of the
applied similarity measures.
\subsection{Publication Dates} \label{subsec:pub_dates}
The above results provide strong indicators that there is hardly any noticeable difference between
the pre-print version of a paper and its final published version. However, the results do not show
which version came first. In other words, consider the two possible scenarios:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Papers, after having gone through a rigorous peer review process, are published by a commercial
publisher first and then, as a later step, uploaded to arXiv.org. In this case the results of our
text comparisons described above would not be surprising, as the pre-print versions would merely be
a mirror of the final published ones. There would be no apparent reason to deny publishers all credit
for peer review, copyediting, and the resulting publication quality of the articles.
\item Papers are uploaded to arXiv.org first and later published by a commercial publisher. If this
scenario is dominant, our comparison results would suggest that any changes in the text due to
publisher-initiated copyediting are hardly noticeable.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure*}
\center
\begin{subfigure}[a]{1\textwidth}
\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{title_delta}
\caption{Title deltas}
\label{subfig:title_delta}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[a]{1\textwidth}
\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{abstract_delta}
\caption{Abstract deltas}
\label{subfig:abstract_delta}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[a]{1\textwidth}
\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{body_delta}
\caption{Body deltas}
\label{subfig:body_delta}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Deltas of paper section comparison bins for the five similarity metrics in the legend,
showing the differences in the bin values relative to those in Figures
\ref{fig:title_histo}, \ref{fig:abstract_histo}, and \ref{fig:body_histo}}
\label{fig:deltas}
\end{figure*}
Figure \ref{fig:pub_dates} shows the order of appearance in arXiv.org versus commercial venues for
all articles in our corpus, comparing the publication date of each article's final published version
to the date of its latest upload to arXiv.org. Red bars indicate the amount of articles (absolute
values on the y-axis) that were first upload to arXiv.org, and blue bars stand for articles published
by a commercial publisher before they appeared in arXiv.org. Each pair of bars is binned into a time
range, shown on the x-axis, that indicates approximately how many days passed between the article's
appearance in the indicated first venue and its appearance in the second venue.
Figure \ref{fig:pub_dates} show clear evidence that the vast majority of our articles ($90\%$) were
published in arXiv.org first. Therefore our argument for the second scenario holds. We can only
speculate about the causes of certain time windows' prominence within the distribution, but it may
be related to turn-around times of publishers between submission and eventual publication.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.17]{pub_dates_delta}
\caption{Numbers of articles first appearing in the specified venue, given the date of the last pre-print upload and the commercial publication date, binned by the number of days between them}
\label{fig:pub_dates}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}[ht!]
\center
\caption{Deltas of the proportions of paper titles in the entire corpus that belong to the
specified bins for each comparison metric, giving the differences between the proportional
values (red diamonds) in Figure \ref{fig:title_histo} and those generated when each article's
first uploaded version in arXiv.org is considered (shown in Figure \ref{subfig:title_delta})}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
Measure & Bin $1$ & Bin $2$ & Bin $3$ & Bin $4$ & Bin $5$ & Bin $6$ & Bin $7$ & Bin $8$ & Bin $9$ & Bin $10$ \\ \hline \hline
len& -9.61& 2.37& 45.73& 61.29& 61.29& 20.00& 32.00& 9.52& 10.00& -50.00 \\ \hline
lev& -10.12& -7.04& -4.81& 19.50& 43.04& 72.41& 68.52& 2.60& 3.48& 23.08 \\ \hline
cos& -5.84& 5.36& 5.43& 5.47& 10.15& 20.27& 22.75& 24.87& 21.01& 33.33 \\ \hline
sor& -8.91& -4.70& -3.64& 1.25& 0.00& -3.45& 4.71& 4.17& 2.04& 14.93 \\ \hline
jac& -9.34& -7.62& -4.47& -4.08& -0.66& 7.50& -8.00& 2.82& 4.88& 3.02 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:title_delta}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\center
\caption{Proportional deltas for abstracts (shown in Figure \ref{subfig:abstract_delta})}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
Measure & Bin $1$ & Bin $2$ & Bin $3$ & Bin $4$ & Bin $5$ & Bin $6$ & Bin $7$ & Bin $8$ & Bin $9$ & Bin $10$ \\ \hline \hline
len& -12.87& 58.95& 79.36& 83.23& 51.46& 12.09& 12.36& 3.08& 7.25& -5.13 \\ \hline
lev& -15.08& 49.39& 100.73& 81.43& 74.30& 38.34& 10.49& 14.68& -6.25& -3.64 \\ \hline
cos& -13.86& 6.85& 19.91& 31.66& 30.69& 31.54& 18.84& 15.67& 13.04& -2.17 \\ \hline
sor& -6.63& 17.89& 15.55& 10.53& -1.56& -5.26& 0& 0& 0& 0 \\ \hline
jac& -11.60& 6.55& 15.45& 17.84& 13.62& 8.22& -5.13& 0& 0& 0 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:abstract_delta}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\center
\caption{Proportional deltas for body sections (shown in Figure \ref{subfig:body_delta})}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
Measure & Bin $1$ & Bin $2$ & Bin $3$ & Bin $4$ & Bin $5$ & Bin $6$ & Bin $7$ & Bin $8$ & Bin $9$ & Bin $10$ \\ \hline \hline
len& -17.93& 19.43& 62.58& 90.05& 79.38& 85.11& 60.00& 88.89& 133.33& 0 \\ \hline
lev& -43.14& -4.61& 91.59& 158.65& 183.76& 177.97& 74.42& 83.33& 14.29& 0 \\ \hline
cos& -2.25& 10.62& 10.79& 7.37& -1.64& 10.00& -3.03& 11.11& -4.76& 0 \\ \hline
sor& -2.63& 8.14& 3.85& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0 \\ \hline
jac& -6.90& -1.70& 13.87& 25.00& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:body_delta}
\end{table*}
\section{Versions of Articles from the arXiv.org Corpus}
About $35\%$ of all $1.1$ million papers in arXiv.org have more than one version. A new version is
created when, for example, an author makes a change to the article and re-submits it to arXiv.org.
The evidence of Figure \ref{fig:pub_dates} shows that the majority of the latest versions in
arXiv.org were still uploaded prior to the publication of its final published version in a
commercial venue. However, we were motivated to eliminate all doubt and hence decided to repeat
our comparisons of the text contents of paper titles, abstracts, and body sections using the
earliest versions of the articles from arXiv.org only. The underlying assumption is that those
versions were uploaded to arXiv.org even earlier (if the authors uploaded more than one version)
and hence are even less likely to exhibit changes due to copyediting by a commercial publisher.
It follows, then, that if the comparisons of these earlier pre-print texts to their published
versions show substantially greater divergences, then it is possible that more of these changes
are the result of publisher-initiated copyediting.
Our corpus of pre-print and final published papers matched by their DOIs and available via UCLA's
journal subscriptions exhibits a higher ratio of papers with more than one version in arXiv.org
than is found in the full set of articles available from arXiv.org. $58\%$ of the papers we
compared had more than one version, $39\%$ had exactly two, and $13\%$ had exactly three versions;
whereas only $35\%$ of all articles uploaded to arXiv.org have more than one version. We applied
our five similarity measures (see Section \ref{subsec:txt_comp_meth}) to quantify the similarity
between the first version of all articles and their final published versions. Rather than
repeating the histograms of Figures \ref{fig:title_histo}, \ref{fig:abstract_histo},
and \ref{fig:body_histo}, we show the divergences from these histograms only. Figure \ref{fig:deltas}
displays a positive/negative barplot that represents the differences between our first comparison
and this one.
Figure \ref{subfig:title_delta} depicts the deltas of the title comparisons. The top bin contains
only negative bars, meaning that our second comparison, using the earliest uploaded versions only,
returned fewer similarity scores in that bin. The number of title comparisons in the top bin for
the length ratio, for example, dropped by almost $1,000$ and the number in the top bin for the
Levenshtein ratio dropped by $800$. While these numbers may at first seem dramatic, the bigger
picture shows that the decrease is not that significant. We merely see a $10\%$ drop in the top
bin for length ratio and Levenshtein, a $9\%$ drop for the S\o rensen and Jaccard index, and a
drop of less than $6\%$ for the cosine similarity. The second bin shows positive bars for the
length ratio and cosine similarity, which means that our comparison using the first uploaded
version to arXiv.org returned more values for those measures in this bin relative to our comparison
using the latest uploaded version. The absolute counts for the following bins decrease relative to
our initial comparison, and it is difficult to interpret the corresponding shifts in their
proportional values when they are plotted visually (as red diamonds). We instead detail these
relative changes between our two sets of comparisons in Table \ref{tab:title_delta}.
The numbers for the abstract comparison are fairly similar. Figure \ref{subfig:abstract_delta} shows
a drop for all measures in the top bin and corresponding gains in the following bins. However, the
relative numbers again are not dramatic. Table \ref{tab:abstract_delta} lists all relative differences.
The results for the body comparison are interesting. As shown in Figure \ref{subfig:body_delta},
we observe a $18\%$ drop in length ratio and even a $43\%$ drop in Levenshtein scores for the top
bin. However, cosine scores drop by only $2\%$ in the top bin. Given that in our first body comparison
(see Section \ref{sec:body_analysis}) $80\%$ of cosine scores belonged in the top bin, the drop in this
second body comparison is almost negligible. The detailed list of relative differences can be found in
Table \ref{tab:body_delta}.
These results confirm our initial assessment that very little difference can be found between
pre-print articles and their final published versions. Even more so, these findings strengthen our
argument as they show that the difference between the earliest possible pre-print version and the
final published one seems insignificant, given the similarity measures we applied to our corpus.
\subsection{Publication Dates of Versions}
The scenarios discussed in Section \ref{subsec:pub_dates} with respect to the question of whether
an article was uploaded to arXiv.org before it appeared in a commercial venue are valid for this
comparison as well.
Figure \ref{fig:pub_dates_versions} mirrors the concept of Figure \ref{fig:pub_dates} and
shows the number of earliest pre-print versions uploaded to arXiv.org first in red
and the final published versions appearing first represented by the blue bars.
As expected, the amount of pre-print versions published first increased and now stands at $95\%$
as shown in Figure \ref{fig:pub_dates_versions} (compared to $90\%$ shown in
Figure \ref{fig:pub_dates}). Our argument for the second scenario described above is therefore
strongly supported when considering the earliest uploaded versions of pre-prints.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[scale=0.17]{pub_dates_delta_versions}
\caption{Numbers of articles first appearing in the specified venue, given the date of the first
pre-print upload and the commercial publication date, binned by the number of days between them}
\label{fig:pub_dates_versions}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion and Future Work}
The results outlined in this paper are from a preliminary study on the similarity of pre-print
articles to their final published counterparts. There are many areas where this study could be
improved and enhanced.
One limitation to this work is the focus on arXiv.org as the sole corpus of pre-print articles.
As a result, all of the articles are from a relatively limited slice of the STM domain
--- specifically, physics, mathematics, statistics, and computer science, as shown in
Figure \ref{fig:arxiv_categories}. Expanding this line of experiments to other domains such as the
biological sciences, humanities, social sciences, and economics might return different results,
as the review and editorial practices in other disciplines can vary considerably. As part of our
future work, we are planning to conduct this experiment again with articles from the RePEc.org
corpus (economics) and from bioRxiv.org (biology), for example.
The matching of a pre-print version of an article to its final published version was done by means
of the article's DOI. While this is an obvious choice for a paper identifier, by only relying on
DOIs we very likely missed out on other matching articles. For future experiments, we will include
the paper's title and author(s) in the matching process.
Note also that we could only match articles that we have access to via the UCLA Library's serial
subscriptions. It might be worth expanding the matching process to a collaborating organization
with ideally complementary subscriptions to maximize access to full text articles.
One typical article section we have not analyzed as part of this research is the references section.
Given publishers' claims of adding value to this section of a scholarly article, we are motivated
to see whether we can detect any significant changes between pre-prints and final published versions
there. Similarly, we have not thoroughly investigated changes in the author sections. We anticipate
author movement, such as authors being added, being removed, and having their rank in the list of
authors changed --- although changes in author order due to publishers' name alphabetization
policies must be considered as well. Initial experiments in this domain have proven difficult to
interpret, as author names are provided in varying formats and normalization is not trivial.
Another angle of future work is to investigate the correlation between pre-prints and final
published versions' degree of similarity and measured usage statistics such as download numbers
and the articles' impact factor values. When arguing that the differences between pre-print articles
and their final published versions are insignificant, factoring in usage statistics and
``authority values'' can further inform decisions about spending on serial subscriptions.
\section{Conclusions}
This study is motivated by academic publishers' claims of the value they add to scholarly articles
by copyediting and making further enhancements to the text. We present results from our preliminary
study to investigate the textual similarity of scholarly pre-prints and their final published
counterparts. We apply five different similarity measures to individual extracted sections from the
articles' full text contents and analyze their results. We have shown that, within the boundaries
of our corpus, there are no significant differences in aggregate between pre-prints and their
corresponding final published versions. In addition, the vast majority of pre-prints
($90\%$ - $95\%$) are published by the open access pre-print service first and later by a commercial
publisher. Given the fact of flat or even shrinking library, college, and university budgets, our
findings provide empirical indicators that should inform discussions about commercial publishers'
value proposition in scholarly communication and have the potential to influence higher education
and academic and research libraries' economic decisions regarding access to scholarly publications.
|
\section{Introduction}
Denote by $\mathcal{A}$, the class of all analytic functions $f$ in
${\mathbb D}:=\{z\in \mathbb{C}:|z|<1\}$ of the form
$$ f(z)=z+\sum_{n=2}^\infty a_n z^n.
$$
Denote by $\mathcal{S}$, the class of {\em univalent functions} in $\mathcal{A}$.
Then $|a_2^2-a_3|\le 1$ holds for $f\in \mathcal{S}$, see \cite[Theorem~1.5]{Pom75}.
At the end of 1960's, Zalcman made a conjecture that each $f\in \mathcal{S}$
satisfies the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{Intro-eqn1}
|a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le (n-1)^2, \quad n\ge 2
\end{equation}
with equality for the Koebe function $k(z)=z/(1-z)^2$.
One of the main aims of the Zalcman conjecture was to prove the Bieberbach conjecture: $|a_n|\le n$, for $n\ge 2$, when $f\in \mathcal{S}$,
using the famous Hayman Regularity Theorem (see \cite[Theorem~5.6, pp. 163]{Dur83}).
The Bieberbach conjecture was a challenging open problem for function theorists for several decades and was finally settled by de Branges \cite{deB85} in $1984$.
The problem (\ref{Intro-eqn1}) has been studied for several well-known subclasses of the class $\mathcal{S}$. For example, in \cite{BT86}, Brown and Tsao proved that (\ref{Intro-eqn1}) holds for the class $\mathcal{T}$
of typically real functions and the class $\mathcal{S}^*$ of starlike functions.
In \cite{Ma88}, Ma proved the Zalcman conjecture for the class $\mathcal{K}$ of close-to-convex functions when $n\ge 4$.
Readers can refer to, for instance, \cite{ALP14,Kru95,Kru10,LP14} and references therein for more information on this topic.
A generalized version of Zalcman's inequality, in terms of the so-called
{\em generalized coefficient functional $\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}$}, $\lambda>0$, has been considered in \cite{ALP14,BT86,EV,LP14}.
In \cite{Ma99}, Ma proposed a generalized version of the Zalcman conjecture as follows:
for $f\in \mathcal{S}$,
$$|a_n a_m-a_{n+m-1}|\le (n-1)(m-1) \quad (n,m=2,3,\ldots)
$$
and proved that this holds for starlike functions and univalent functions with
real co-efficients.
In this paper, we establish sharp estimates of the Zalcman conjecture in the form
proposed by Ma in \cite{Ma99} for some subclasses of $\mathcal{S}$. Consequently, we obtain sharp estimates of the results
proved in \cite{EV} for remaining ranges of $\lambda$.
\section{Preliminaries and Main results}
We use the concept of {\em convex hull of a set} in this paper, but mainly for
the set $\mathcal{C}$ of convex functions.
Denote by $co(\mathcal{C})$, the {\em convex hull of $\mathcal{C}$} and its closure is denoted by $\overline{co(\mathcal{C})}$
in the topology of uniform convergence on compact subsets of ${\mathbb D}$.
A function $f \in \mathcal{A}$ is said to be {\em starlike of order $\beta\, (0\le \beta<1)$} if ${\operatorname{Re}\,}\{zf'(z)/f(z)\}>\beta$ and denote the class of starlike functions of order $\beta$ by $\mathcal{S}^*(\beta)$. Similarly, a function $f \in \mathcal{A}$ is said to be {\em convex of order $\beta\, (0\le \beta<1)$} if ${\operatorname{Re}\,}\{1+zf''(z)/f'(z)\}>\beta$ and denote the class of convex functions of order $\beta$ by $\mathcal{C}(\beta)$. Clearly, functions in the classes $\mathcal{S}^*(\beta)$ and $\mathcal{C}(\beta)$ are univalent in ${\mathbb D}$. Moreover $\mathcal{S}^*(0)=\mathcal{S}^*$ and $\mathcal{C}(0)=C$.
A function $f$ is said to be {\em uniformly starlike} in ${\mathbb D}$ if
$f$ is starlike and has the property that for every circular arc $\gamma$ contained
in ${\mathbb D}$, with center $\zeta \in {\mathbb D}$, the arc $f(\gamma)$ is starlike with respect to
$f(\zeta)$. We denote by $\mathcal{UST}$, the class of all uniformly starlike functions.
Similarly, we say a convex function $f$ in ${\mathbb D}$ is {\em uniformly convex} if for each
circular arc $\gamma$ in ${\mathbb D}$ with center $\eta \mbox{ in } {\mathbb D}$, the image arc $f(\gamma)$ is convex. Denote the class of all uniformly convex functions by
$\mathcal{UCV}$, see \cite{Goo91-1,Goo91-2}. We call a function $f\in \mathcal{A}$
is {\em $\nu$-spiral-like of order $\beta, 0\le \beta <1$}, if there is a real number $\nu\,(-\pi/2< \nu<\pi/2)$ such
that ${\operatorname{Re}\,} [e^{i\nu}\{zf'(z)/f(z)\}]>\beta \cos \nu$ for $z\in {\mathbb D}$. We denote by $\mathcal{S}_p^\nu(\beta)$, the class of
$\nu$-spiral-like functions of order $\beta$, see \cite{KO02}.
More literature on spiral-like functions can be found in \cite{AS91,Lib67,MA81}.
Recently, in \cite{EV}, Efraimidis and Vukoti{\'c} have studied the generalized Zalcman
coefficient functional for the subclasses, $\overline{co(\mathcal{C})}$, $\mathcal{R}$ and $H$ of $\mathcal{S}$, where
the classes $\mathcal{R}$ and $H$ are respectively known as {\em the Noshiro-Warschawski
class} and {\em the Hurwitz class}, defined by
$$\mathcal{R}=\{f\in \mathcal{A}:{\operatorname{Re}\,}{f'(z)}>0\}
$$
and
$$H=\left \{f\in \mathcal{A}:f(z)=z+\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}a_n z^n \mbox{ and } \sum_{n=2}^{\infty}n|a_n|\le 1\right \}.
$$
A well-known fact is that
$$H \subset \mathcal{R}\cap \mathcal{S}^* \subseteq \mathcal{S},
$$
where the inclusion relation $H \subset \mathcal{R}$ is explained in \cite{EV}.
Now we recall
\medskip
\noindent
{\bf Theorem~A. }\cite[Theorem~3]{EV} {\em Let $0<\lambda\le 2$. If $f\in \overline{co(C)}$, then
$|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le 1$ for all $n\ge 2$. For any fixed $n$ and $\lambda<2$,
equality holds only for the functions of the following form (and for their rotations):
\begin{equation}\label{eqn-thmA}
f(z)=\sum_{k=1}^{2n-2}m_k \frac{z}{1-e^{i\theta_k}z},
\end{equation}
where $0\le m_k\le 1$, $\theta_k=\frac{(2k+1)\pi}{2n-2}$, and
$$\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}m_{2k}=\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}m_{2k-1}=\frac{1}{2}.
$$}
\medskip
\noindent {\bf Theorem~B. }\cite[Theorem~4]{EV} {\em If $0<\lambda\le 4/3$ and $f\in \mathcal{R}$, then
for all $n\ge 2$ we have
$$|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le \frac{2}{2n-1}.
$$
For $\lambda<4/3$ and for any fixed $n\ge 2$,
equality holds only for the functions of the following form (and for their rotations):
$$F(z)=-z+2\int_0^z \frac{f(t)}{t}dt
$$
where $f(z)$ is given by (\ref{eqn-thmA}).}
\medskip
\noindent
{\bf Theorem~C. }\cite[Theorem~6]{EV}\label{Zac-H}
{\em If $\lambda >0$ and $f\in H$, then for each $n\ge 2$ we have
$$|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le \max \left\{\frac{\lambda}{n^2}, \frac{1}{2n-1}\right\}.
$$
Equality holds if and only if
$$f(z)=
\left \{
\begin{array}{ll}
z+\displaystyle\frac{\alpha}{2n-1}z^{2n-1} & \mbox{ for } \lambda \le \displaystyle\frac{n^2}{2n-1},\\
z+\displaystyle\frac{\alpha}{n}z^n & \mbox{ for }\lambda \ge \displaystyle\frac{n^2}{2n-1},\\
\end{array}
\right.
$$
where $\alpha$ is a complex number such that $|\alpha|=1$.}
\medskip
We intend to extend Theorems A and B in terms of the generalized Zalcman conjecture,
in the form suggested by Ma in \cite{Ma99}, for the classes $\overline{co(C)}$ and $\mathcal{R}(\beta):=\{f\in \mathcal{A}:{\operatorname{Re}\,}{f'(z)}>\beta\}$ respectively, where $\beta\in [0,1)$. Note that $\mathcal{R}=\mathcal{R}(0)$.
\begin{theorem}\label{Zac-coc}
If $f\in \overline{co(C)}$, then
$$|\lambda a_n a_m-a_{n+m-1}|\le \lambda -1,
$$
where $n,m=2,3,\ldots$ and $\lambda \in [2, \infty)$.
Equality holds for the function $l(z)=z/(1-z)$ and its rotations.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}\label{Zac-NW}
If $f\in \mathcal{R}(\beta)$, then
$$|\lambda a_n a_m-a_{n+m-1}|\le \frac{4\lambda(1-\beta)^2}{nm}-\frac{2(1-\beta)}{n+m-1},
$$
where $n,m=2,3,\ldots$ and $\lambda \in \left[\frac{nm}{(1-\beta)(n+m-1)}, \infty\right)$.
Equality holds for the function $m(z)=-2(1-\beta)\ln{(1-z)}-z(1-2\beta)$ and its rotations.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{The class $\mathcal{H}$}
Define the class
$$\mathcal{H}=\left \{f\in \mathcal{A}:f(z)=z+\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}a_n z^n \mbox{ and } \sum_{n=2}^{\infty}r(n) |a_n|\le 1, r(n)> 0 \mbox{ for } n\ge 2\right \}.
$$
Here is a partial list of restrictions on $r(n)$ such that $\mathcal{H}$ is a subclass of
$\mathcal{S}$.
For example,
\begin{itemize}
\item If $r(n)=(n-\beta)/(1-\beta)$, then $\mathcal{H}\subset \mathcal{S}^*(\beta)\subset \mathcal{S}$ \cite{Sil97}. In particular, for $\beta=0$ we have $\mathcal{H}=H$, the Hurwitz class.
\item If $r(n)=n(n-\beta)/(1-\beta)$, then $\mathcal{H}\subset \mathcal{C}(\beta)\subset \mathcal{S}$ \cite{Sil97}.
\item If $r(n)=3n-2$, then $\mathcal{H}\subset \mathcal{UST}\subset \mathcal{S}$ \cite{KC13}.
\item If $r(n)=n(2n-1)$, then $\mathcal{H}\subset \mathcal{UCV}\subset \mathcal{S}$ \cite{KC13}.
\item If $r(n)=n/(1-\beta)$, then $\mathcal{H}\subset \mathcal{R}(\beta)\subset \mathcal{S}$.
\item If $r(n)=1+[(n-1)/(1-\beta)]\sec \nu$, then $\mathcal{H}\subset \mathcal{S}_p^\nu(\beta) \subset \mathcal{S}$ \cite{KO02}.
\end{itemize}
In all these classes $\beta\in [0,1)$.
We now state our main result for the class $\mathcal{H}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{Zac-Hi}
Let $\lambda >0$ and $n=2,3,\ldots$. For $f\in \mathcal{H}$, we have
$$|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le \max \left\{\frac{\lambda}{r(n)^2}, \frac{1}{r(2n-1)}\right\}.
$$
Equality holds if and only if
$$f(z)=
\left \{
\begin{array}{ll}
z+\displaystyle\frac{\alpha}{r(2n-1)}z^{2n-1} & \mbox{ for } \lambda \le \displaystyle\frac{r(n)^2}{r(2n-1)},\\
z+\displaystyle\frac{\alpha}{r(n)}z^n & \mbox{ for }\lambda \ge \displaystyle\frac{r(n)^2}{r(2n-1)},\\
\end{array}
\right.
$$
where $\alpha$ is a complex number such that $|\alpha|=1$.
\end{theorem}
We remark that for the choice $r(n)=n$, Theorem~\ref{Zac-Hi} turns into Theorem~C.
Indeed, our proof is much simpler than the proof of \cite[Theorem~6]{EV}.
\section{Proof of the main results}
This section is devoted to the proof of our main results.
The following lemmas are useful.
\noindent{\bf Lemma~A. }\cite[Lemma~1]{Liv69}\label{lem-pm}
{\em Let $\mu(\theta)$ be a probability measure on $[0,2\pi]$.
Then
$$|b_{n-1} b_{m-1}-b_{n+m-2}|\le 2 \quad\quad (n,m = 2,3,\ldots),
$$
where $b_n=2\int_0^{2\pi}{e^{in{\theta}}{\rm d}\mu({\theta})}$.
}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem1}
Let $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$, $\mu(\theta)$ be a probability measure on $[0,2\pi]$, and for some function $s(n)>0$, write $a_n=s(n) \int_0^{2\pi} {e^{i(n-1){\theta}}{\rm d}\mu({\theta})}=s(n)b_{n-1}/2$ where $b_n$ is same as in Lemma~A. Then
$$|\lambda a_n a_m-a_{n+m-1}|\le \left |\lambda-\frac{2s(n+m-1)}{s(n)s(m)}\right| s(n)s(m)+ s(n+m-1),
$$
for $n,m = 2,3,\ldots$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Putting the values of $a_n,a_m, a_{n+m-1}$ and by using Lemma~A we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&|\lambda a_n a_m-a_{n+m-1}|\\
&=&\left |\left(\lambda-\frac{2s(n+m-1)}{s(n)s(m)}\right)s(n)\frac{b_{n-1}}{2}s(m)\frac{b_{m-1}}{2}-\frac{s(n+m-1)}{2}(b_{n-1}b_{m-1}-b_{n+m-2})\right|\\
&\le& \left |\lambda-\frac{2s(n+m-1)}{s(n)s(m)}\right| s(n)s(m)+ s(n+m-1).
\end{eqnarray*}
The proof of our lemma is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Lemma~\ref{lem1} helps us to estimate the generalized
Zalcman coefficient functional $\lambda a_{n}a_{m}-a_{n+m-1}$
for several classes of functions in $\mathcal{S}$, where
the coefficients $a_n$ are of the form
$s(n) \int_0^{2\pi} {e^{i(n-1){\theta}}{\rm d}\mu({\theta})}$ and
these lead to extremal functions whose series representations are
of the form $z+\sum_{n=2}^\infty s(n)z^n$,
for instance, see \cite{Ma99} and the present paper.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}[\bf Proof of Theorem~\ref{Zac-coc}]
By a well-known result from \cite{BMW71}, there is a unique probability measure $\mu$ on $[0, 2\pi]$, such that
$$f(z)=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{z}{1-e^{i\theta}z}{\rm d}\mu{(\theta)}
$$
for all $f$ in $\overline{co(C)}$. Comparing the $n$-th coefficients of the series
expansion of $f$ and of the geometric series expansion of the right hand side, it can easily be seen that
$$a_n=\int_0^{2\pi}{e^{i(n-1){\theta}}{\rm d}\mu({\theta})}, \quad n\ge2.
$$
From Lemma~\ref{lem1}, we can see that $s(n)=1$ and hence we get
$$|\lambda a_n a_m-a_{n+m-1}|\le |\lambda-2|+1=\lambda-1.
$$
The sharpness can easily be verified using the function $l(z)$ stated in the statement.
\end{proof}
\noindent Putting $m=n$ in Theorem~\ref{Zac-coc}, we get
\begin{corollary}\label{cor1}
If $f\in \overline{co(C)}$, then
$$|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le \lambda -1,
$$
where $n=2,3,\ldots$ and $\lambda \in [2, \infty)$.
Equality holds for the function $l(z)=z/(1-z)$ and its rotations.
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark}
We can also prove Corollary~\ref{cor1} by using the same technique as in \cite{EV}.
Indeed, from the proof of \cite[Theorem~3]{EV} we have
$$|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le (\lambda-2)\int_0^{2\pi} \cos^2((n-1)\theta)
{\rm d}\mu(\theta)+1\le \lambda-1,
$$
where the second inequality follows from the fact that $\cos \theta\le 1$ for $0\le \theta\le 2\pi$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}[\bf Proof of Theorem~\ref{Zac-NW}]
By the Herglotz representation theorem for functions with positive real part \cite[1.9]{Dur83}, there is a unique probability measure $\mu$ on $[0, 2\pi]$ such that
$$\frac{f'(z)-\beta}{1-\beta} =\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{1+e^{i\theta}z}{1-e^{i\theta}z}{\rm d}\mu{(\theta)}
$$
or, equivalently,
$$ 1+\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}{n a_n z^{n-1}}=1+(1-\beta)\sum_{n=2}^{\infty}{2\int_0^{2\pi}e^{in\theta}{\rm d}\mu{(\theta)}z^n}.
$$
Comparing the coefficients, we obtain
$$a_n=\frac{2(1-\beta)}{n}\int_0^{2\pi}{e^{i(n-1){\theta}}{\rm d}\mu({\theta})}, \quad n\ge2.
$$
From Lemma~\ref{lem1}, we can see that $s(n)=2(1-\beta)/n$ and hence we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
|\lambda a_n a_m-a_{n+m-1}|
&\le &\left|\lambda-\frac{nm}{(1-\beta)(n+m-1)}\right|\frac{4(1-\beta)^2}{nm}+\frac{2(1-\beta)}{n+m-1}\\
&=& \frac{4\lambda (1-\beta)^2}{nm}-\frac{2(1-\beta)}{n+m-1}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The sharpness can easily be verified using the given function $m(z)$ stated in the
hypothesis of the theorem.
\end{proof}
In particular when $m=n$, Theorem~\ref{Zac-NW} leads to
\begin{corollary}\label{cor3.4}
If $f\in \mathcal{R}(\beta)$ and $\lambda \in \left[\frac{n^2}{(2n-1)(1-\beta)}, \infty\right)$,
then
$$|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le \frac{4\lambda (1-\beta)^2}{n^2}-\frac{2(1-\beta)}{2n-1},
$$
where $n=2,3,\ldots$.
Equality holds for the function $m(z)=-2(1-\beta)\ln{(1-z)}-z(1-2\beta)$ and its rotations.
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark}\label{R1}
Alternative proof of Corollary~\ref{cor3.4} can be done by the same technique as in \cite{EV}.
Indeed, from the proof of \cite[Theorem~4]{EV} we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|&\le &\left(\frac{4\lambda (1-\beta)^2}{n^2}-\frac{4(1-\beta)}{2n-1}\right) \int_0^{2\pi} \cos^2((n-1)\theta){\rm d}\mu(\theta)+\frac{2(1-\beta)}{2n-1}\\
&\le & \frac{4\lambda (1-\beta)^2}{n^2}-\frac{2(1-\beta)}{2n-1},
\end{eqnarray*}
where the second inequality follows from the fact that $\cos \theta\le 1$ for $0\le \theta\le 2\pi$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{R2}
From Remark~\ref{R1}, it is clear that for $f\in\mathcal{R}(\beta)$ and for $0<\lambda\le 4/3(1-\beta)$,
$$|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le \frac{2(1-\beta)}{2n-1}.
$$
Equality holds for the function $m(z)$ and its rotations.
\end{remark}
To prove the generalized Zalcman problem for
$\mathcal{H}$, we need the following lemma which is in a similar form of \cite[Lemma~5]{EV}.
\begin{lemma}\label{l2}
Let $\lambda >0, n \ge 2, q(n), q(2n-1) > 0$, and consider the triangular region
$$P=\{(u, v)\in \mathbb{R}^2: u, v \ge 0, q(n) u+q(2n-1)v\le 1\}$$
in the $uv$-plane. Then
$$\max_{(u,v)\in P}(\lambda u^2+v)=\max\left\{\frac{\lambda }{q(n)^2}, \frac{1}{q(2n-1)}\right\},
$$
and the maximum attain only at $(u,v)=(0,1/q(2n-1))$ and $(u,v)=(1/q(n),0)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The function $F(u, v)=\lambda u^2+v$ is readily seen to have no critical points,
so its maximum on the compact set $P$ is achieved on the boundary $\partial P$.
Clearly, $F(0, v)\le \frac{1}{q(2n-1)}$ while $F(u, 0)\le \frac{\lambda}{q(n)^2}$.
Finally, on the third piece of the boundary of $P$ we have $q(n) u+q(2n-1) v=1$.
Hence the function $F$ on that piece can be seen as a function of one variable
leading to
$$F(u, v)=g(u)=\lambda u^2+\frac{1-q(n) u}{q(2n-1)}.
$$
Since $g^{\prime\prime}({u})=2\lambda > 0$, the above function cannot achieve its maximum
within the interval $\left[0, \frac{1}{q(n)}\right]$.
Hence, the maximum value can only be achieved at one of the end points of this interval
and since
$$g(0)=\frac{1}{q(2n-1)},\quad g\left(\frac{1}{q(n)}\right)=\frac{\lambda}{q(n)^2},
$$
the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
$Lemma~\ref{l2}$ can also be proved using graphical solution method from Linear Programming Problem.
Since the conditions $u,v\ge 0, \mbox{ and }q(n) u+q(2n-1)v\le 1$ give a convex triangular region with the vertices $(0, 0), (0, 1/q(2n-1)) \mbox { and } (1/q(n), 0)$, by
the graphical solution method, maximum value can only be achieved at one of these vertices.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}[\bf Proof of Theorem~\ref{Zac-Hi}]
By the definition of the class $\mathcal{H}$, the ordered pair $(|a_n|, |a_{2n-1}|)$
belongs to $P$, where $P$ is defined in Lemma~\ref{l2}.
Hence by using Lemma \ref{l2}, we have
$$|\lambda a_n^2-a_{2n-1}|\le \lambda |a_n|^2+|a_{2n-1}|\le \max \left\{\frac{\lambda}{r(n)^2}, \frac{1}{r(2n-1)}\right\}.
$$
It can easily be seen that one way implication is true for the equality.
For the converse part, we must have $r(n)|a_n|+r(2n-1)|a_{2n-1}|=1$.
Together with the definition of $\mathcal{H}$, it follows that the rotated
function must be of the form $f_c(z)=z+A_nz^n+A_{2n-1}z^{2n-1}$,
where, $f_c(z)=\overline{c}f(cz), |c|=1,$ a rotation of a function $f$ in $\mathcal{S}$, $A_n=c^{n-1}a_n$, and similarly $A_{2n-1}=c^{2n-2}a_{2n-1}$.
Further inspection of the case of equality in Lemma \ref{l2} and the values of
$\lambda$ readily yields that one of the coefficients $A_n, A_{2n-1}$ must
be zero and the more precise form of these functions follows immediately.
This completes the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}
\subsection*{Concluding remarks}
The generalized Zalcman conjecture in the form proposed by Ma in \cite{Ma99} is still
open for the classes $\overline{co(C)}$ and $\mathcal{R}(\beta)$ for $0<\lambda<2$ and
$0<\lambda <\frac{nm}{(1-\beta)(n+m-1)}$ respectively. It would also be interesting to
investigate this problem for the class $\mathcal{H}$.
\vskip 1cm
\noindent
{\bf Acknowledgement.} The work of the first author is supported by University
Grants Commission, New Delhi (grant no. F.2-39/2011 (SA-I)).
The authors would like to
thank Prof. S. Ponnusamy for helpful discussions and suggestions in this topic.
|
\section{Introduction}
Recent high-resolution observations by the Interface Region Imaging Spectrograph \citep[e.g.,][]{DePontieu2014a} have provided fascinating new insights into the energetics of the lower solar atmosphere \citep[e.g.,][]{Peter2014,Tian2014a,DePontieu2014b,Hansteen2014,Testa2014}. One new finding is the discovery of absorption lines (singly ionized or neutral) superimposed on the greatly broadened transition region lines \citep{Peter2014}. Such line profiles are typically found in small-scale compact bright regions from slit-jaw images (SJI) taken with the 1400\AA{} and 1330\AA{} filters, and they were suggested to indicate local heating of the photosphere or lower chromosphere to $\sim$8$\times$10$^{4}$ K under the assumption of collisional ionization equilibrium. However, \cite{Judge2015} performed an independent analysis of the same dataset and suggested that these events arise from plasma originally at pressure between $\leqslant$80 and 800 dyne cm$^{-2}$, which places the origin of these events in the low-middle chromosphere or above. In this paper we call these evens IRIS bombs (IBs).
\cite{Peter2014} mentioned that these IBs may be connected to Ellerman bombs (EBs), which were discovered by \cite{Ellerman1917} and characterized as intense short-lived brightening of the extended wings of the H$_{\alpha}$ line at 6563\AA{}. These events were first called "solar hydrogen bombs" and renamed as EBs by \cite{McMath1960}. \cite{Pariat2007} and \cite{SocasNavarro2006} found that EBs can also be observed in the Ca~{\sc{ii}}~8542\AA{} line. Although some studies put the formation layer of EBs in the low chromosphere \citep[e.g.,][]{Schmieder2004,Yang2013}, recent high-resolution observations suggested that EBs are a purely photospheric phenomenon and that they often reveal upright flame morphology in limbward viewing \citep[e.g.,][]{Watanabe2011,Nelson2015}. Recently, \cite{Rutten2013} and \cite{Vissers2015} pointed out that many previously identified EBs are likely "pseudo-EBs", which are the much more ubiquitous facular or network bright points and their brightenings in H$_{\alpha}$ wings are usually not as significant as those of EBs \citep{Watanabe2011}. These "pseudo-EBs" are indicators of deeper-than-normal radiation escape rather than magnetic reconnection. It is suggested that at least some EBs mark anti-parallel reconnection in the photosphere during the emergence of active regions \citep[e.g.,][]{Vissers2013,Reid2016}. Modeling of the H$_{\alpha}$ wing enhancement generally indicates a temperature increase by a few hundred to $\sim$3000 Kelvin in the upper photosphere or lower chromosphere \citep[e.g.,][]{Fang2006,Isobe2007,BelloGonzalez2013,Berlicki2014,Hong2014}. For details about the morphology and properties of EBs, we refer to the reviews of \cite{Georgoulis2002} and \cite{Rutten2013}.
Since EBs are defined from H$_{\alpha}$ observations, simultaneous observations of IRIS and an H$_{\alpha}$ instrument are required to investigate the relationship between IBs and EBs. Using data taken by the Swedish 1-m Solar Telescope \citep[SST,][]{Scharmer2003}, \cite{Vissers2015} studied five EBs and concluded that strong EB activity can indeed produce IB-type spectra. Based on the joint observations between IRIS and the New Solar Telescope\citep[NST,][]{Cao2010} on 2014 July 30, \cite{Kim2015} identified the connection between an obvious IB and a weak EB. Apparently, more coordinated observations between IRIS and H$_{\alpha}$ instruments need to be performed to investigate the relationship between IBs and EBs. This type of observations can also provide important constraint to numerical simulations of magnetic reconnection in the partially ionized lower solar atmosphere \citep[e.g.,][]{Murphy2015,Ni2015}.
Here we use joint observations between IRIS and the Chinese 1-m New Vacuum Solar Telescope \citep[NVST,][] {Liu2014} to examine the possible connection between IBs and EBs. The NVST belongs to a new generation of large and high-technology solar facilities of China and one of the post-focus instruments is the Multi-channel High Resolution Imaging System, including H$_{\alpha}$, G-band, TiO band, Ca~{\sc{ii}}~8542\AA{} and He~{\sc{i}}~10830\AA{} wavelengths \citep{Xu2013}. In the present paper, among the data taken with the NVST, we only report results obtained in the H$_{\alpha}$ channel, of which the central wavelength can be tunable in the range of 6562.8 +/-- 4\AA{} and the full bandpass width is 0.25\AA{}. Our investigation clearly reveals that some IBs are connected to EBs and others are not.
\section{Observations}
\begin{figure*}
\centering {\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f1.eps}} \caption{ (A)-(D) IRIS/SJI 1400\AA{} image, NVST H$_{\alpha}$ core and wing (--1\AA{} and +1\AA{}) images taken around 03:05:38 UT. The dark filamentary structures in the H$_{\alpha}$ wings, especially in the blue wing, are chromospheric spicules which could affect the detection of EBs. (E)-(H) Images of the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1393.755\AA{}~intensity, Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k core and wing (sum of --1.33\AA{} and +1.33\AA{}), and Si~{\sc{iv}}~1393.755\AA{}~line width. (I)-(L) SDO/HMI line-of-sight magnetogram, SDO/AIA 1700\AA{}, 171\AA{} and 193\AA{} images taken around 03:05:38 UT. The white line in each panel indicates the slit location at the corresponding time. Two movies (m1.mov and m2.mov) showing the IRIS, NVST and SDO observations are available online. Ten IBs are indicated by the red arrows in panel (E). } \label{fig.1}
\end{figure*}
The joint IRIS and NVST observations were performed on 2015 May 2. IRIS performed a very large dense raster (175$^{\prime\prime}$ along the slit, 400 raster steps with a step size of $\sim$0.33$^{\prime\prime}$) of the emerging NOAA active region (AR) 12335 from 02:34 UT to 03:36 UT. The pointing coordinate was (--814$^{\prime\prime}$, --222$^{\prime\prime}$), close to the east limb. The data was summed onboard by 2 both spectrally and spatially, leading to a spatial pixel size of $\sim$0.33$^{\prime\prime}$ and a spectral dispersion of $\sim$0.026 \AA{}/$\sim$0.051 \AA{} per pixel in the far/near ultraviolet wavelength bands. The cadence of the spectral observation was $\sim$9.2 seconds, with an exposure time of 8 seconds. Slit-jaw images (SJI) in the 1400\AA{}~(mainly ultraviolet continuum and Si~{\sc{iv}}), 1330\AA{}~(mainly ultraviolet continuum and C~{\sc{ii}}) and 2796\AA{}~(mainly Mg~{\sc{ii}} k) filters were taken with a cadence of $\sim$36.7 seconds for each filter. Dark current subtraction, flat field, geometrical and orbital variation corrections have been applied in the level 2 data used here. The fiducial lines are used to achieve a coalignment between different SJI filters and different spectral windows. The SJI images are internally coaligned by removing the solar rotation effect.
The NVST observation lasted from 01:11 UT to 03:59 UT. We took images of the H$_{\alpha}$ line core, blue wing at --1\AA{} and red wing at +1\AA{} alternately, with a cadence of $\sim$52 seconds for each filter. These images have a spatial pixel size of $\sim$0.167$^{\prime\prime}$ and a field of view of $\sim$153$^{\prime\prime}$$\times$153$^{\prime\prime}$. The data reduction of the dark current and flat field modification was followed by the image reconstruction precess based on the speckle masking method \citep{Weigelt1977,Liu1998}. We rotate the NVST images by 54.28$^{\circ}$ so that the vertical dimension of the images is oriented in the north-south direction, same as the IRIS images. The coalignment between IRIS images and NVST images in different filters is achieved by doing the following: We first build a Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k core image and a wing (sum of --1.33\AA{} and +1.33\AA{}) image from the IRIS spectral data taken at different times. Bright features visible in the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k core/wing image are then compared with the associated bright dynamic features in H$_{\alpha}$ core/wing image sequences.
To investigate the response of IRIS bombs at different temperatures and study the magnetic field structures associated with these bombs, we have also analyzed the data taken by the Atmospheric Imaging Assembly \citep[AIA,][]{Lemen2012} and the Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager \citep[HMI,][]{Scherrer2012} onboard the Solar Dynamics Observatory \citep[SDO,][]{Pesnell2012}. The AIA images were taken with a cadence of 12 seconds in the 171\AA{} and 193\AA{} passbands and 24 seconds in the 1700\AA{} passband. The cadence of the line-of-sight magnetograms taken by HMI is 45 seconds. The pixel sizes of the AIA and HMI images are $\sim$0.613$^{\prime\prime}$ and $\sim$0.504$^{\prime\prime}$, respectively. We coalign the AIA 1700\AA{}~(mainly ultraviolet continuum formed around the temperature minimum) and IRIS 1400\AA{}~images by checking locations of the commonly observed sunspots and some bright features. The AIA 171\AA{} and 193\AA{} images should then be automatically aligned with the IRIS images since AIA images in different passbands are automatically coaligned after applying the standard SolarSoft (SSW) routine aia\_prep.pro. The coalignment between HMI magnetograms and IRIS images is achieved by matching the bright network lanes in 1400\AA{}~images and the flux concentrations in magnetograms immediately outside the AR.
Figure~\ref{fig.1} presents the IRIS/SJI 1400\AA{} image, NVST H$_{\alpha}$ core and wing images, HMI magnetogram, AIA 1700\AA{}, 171\AA{} and 193\AA{} images taken around 03:05:38 UT. Also shown are the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k core and wing images, as well as the intensity and line width images obtained by applying a single Gaussian fit to the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1393.755\AA{}~line profiles. The region shown here represents only part of the full field of view of IRIS. Time sequences of these images are presented in two online movies. To demonstrate the good coalignment of images taken by different instruments, contours of the AIA 1700\AA{} images are also overplotted in one movie.
\begin{figure*}
\centering {\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f2.eps}} \caption{ Similar to Figure~\ref{fig.1} but only a small region enclosing four IBs is shown. Locations of the IBs are marked by overplotting contours of the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1393.755\AA{}~peak intensity. The white line in each panel indicates the slit location at the time 03:07:28 UT. A movie (m3.mov) showing the IRIS, NVST and SDO observations is available online. } \label{fig.2}
\end{figure*}
To take a closer look at a few IBs we also show only a small region around the coordinate of (--817$^{\prime\prime}$, --216$^{\prime\prime}$) in Figure~\ref{fig.2} and the associated online movie. Four IBs have been identified in this region (see below). The online movie reveals some dark filamentary structures in the H$_{\alpha}$ wings, especially in the blue wing. As we will show below, these long structures are presumably chromospheric spicules and they could affect the detection of EBs.
\section{Results and Discussion}
\subsection{Identification of IRIS bombs}
We identify IBs based mainly on the far ultraviolet spectra. We first select all substantial and compact brightenings in the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1393.755\AA{}~intensity image. Line profiles in these brightenings are then inspected. IBs are defined as those brightenings with chromospheric absorption lines superimposed on greatly broadened and enhanced non-Gaussian profiles of transition region lines (e.g., Si~{\sc{iv}} and C~{\sc{ii}}). The absorption feature needs to be obvious for at least the Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1393.330\AA{} and 1335.203\AA{} lines. Based on this criterion, we have identified ten IBs sampled by the slit and their locations are indicated in Figure~\ref{fig.1}(E).
\begin{figure*}
\centering {\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f3.eps}} \caption{ IRIS, NVST and SDO images showing a 7$^{\prime\prime}$$\times$7$^{\prime\prime}$region enclosing each identified IB. Locations of the IBs are marked by overplotting contours of the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1393.755\AA{}~peak intensity. The observing times of the IRIS/SJI, NVST and SDO images are also marked in corresponding panels. The red crosses shown in the Si~{\sc{iv}}~intensity images indicate the locations where the line profiles presented in Figures~\ref{fig.4}--\ref{fig.9} are obtained. } \label{fig.3}
\end{figure*}
Figure~\ref{fig.3} presents images of the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1393.755\AA{}~intensity and line width, Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k core and wing, SJI 1400\AA{}, 1330\AA{} and 2796\AA{}, H$_{\alpha}$ core and wings, line of sight component of the photospheric magnetic field, AIA 1700\AA{}, 171\AA{} and 193\AA{} in a small region enclosing each identified IB. We can see that all IBs are associated with enhanced line width of the Si~{\sc{iv}}~line. IBs are also clearly observed in both the SJI 1400\AA{} and 1330\AA{} images, which can be understood since the Si~{\sc{iv}} and C~{\sc{ii}} lines are usually greatly enhanced in IBs. Signatures of IBs are less obvious in the SJI 2796\AA{} images, suggesting that the Mg~{\sc{ii}} k line does not always have a relevant response.
The four IBs identified by \cite{Peter2014} are all associated with mixed magnetic field polarities and at least one of them show clear signature of flux cancelation during the observation. \cite{Vissers2015} also found association of a few IBs with strong opposite-polarity fluxes. The HMI data presented in Figure~\ref{fig.3} reveals a similar pattern: most IBs appear to be sitting at the magnetic field polarity inversion lines. This likely suggests energization of these IBs through interaction between strong fluxes with opposite polarities, likely anti-parallel magnetic reconnection. The association with strong opposite-polarity fluxes is not obvious for IBs 5, 8 and 9, which might be consistent with the third of the three scenarios proposed by \cite{Georgoulis2002}. This scenario involves interaction between the emerging vertical fields and preexisting horizontal fields. In this case the line of sight components of the interacting magnetic fluxes are not necessarily opposite in polarity. However, it might also be related to the line of sight effect as the observed region is close to the limb.
We also try to identify possible coronal signatures of IBs from both the IRIS spectra and AIA images. We find no obvious emission of the IBs in both the Fe~{\sc{xii}}~1349.38\AA{} and Fe~{\sc{xxi}}~1354.08\AA{} lines (not shown here). We realize that both lines are forbidden lines, so that the absence of these lines might be caused by the large density in the source regions of IBs. However, AIA observations in the 171\AA{} (dominated by emission from Fe~{\sc{ix}}/Fe~{\sc{x}}) and 193\AA{} (dominated by emission from Fe~{\sc{xii}}) passbands also reveal no obvious brightening at locations of most IBs. A possible exception is IB 3, where a very intense loop-like brightening can be identified from both the 171\AA{} and 193\AA{} images. We thus conclude that IBs are generally not heated to coronal temperatures.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f4a.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f4b.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\caption{ Typical IRIS line profiles (black lines) of IBs 1 and 2 in four spectral windows. The blue line profiles represent the reference spectra obtained in a quiet plage region. Rest wavelengths of some lines are indicated by the vertical dotted lines. } \label{fig.4}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f5a.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f5b.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\caption{ Same as Figure~\ref{fig.4} but for IBs 3 and 4. } \label{fig.5}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f6a.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f6b.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\caption{ Same as Figure~\ref{fig.4} but for IBs 5 and 6. } \label{fig.6}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f7a.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f7b.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\caption{ Same as Figure~\ref{fig.4} but for two different positions in IB 7, as marked in Figure~\ref{fig.3}. } \label{fig.7}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f8a.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f8b.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\caption{ Same as Figure~\ref{fig.4} but for IBs 8 and 9. } \label{fig.8}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f9a.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f9b.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.8\textwidth}
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f9c.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\caption{ Same as Figure~\ref{fig.4} but for three different positions in IB 10, as marked in Figure~\ref{fig.3}.} \label{fig.9}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
Typical line profiles of the ten IBs are shown in Figures~\ref{fig.4}--\ref{fig.9}, where the line profiles averaged over a quiet plage region (Solar-X=[--788.5$^{\prime\prime}$ : --775.6$^{\prime\prime}$], Solar-Y=[--222.8$^{\prime\prime}$ : --185.2$^{\prime\prime}$]) are also overplotted for reference. The reference line profiles are also used to perform absolute wavelength calibration. For the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1393.755\AA{}~spectral window, the chromospheric Fe~{\sc{ii}}~1392.817\AA{} and Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1393.330\AA{} lines in the reference spectrum are assumed to have zero Doppler shifts. These cold lines are known to show negligible average velocities in quiet regions. For the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1402.770\AA{}~window, in principle we can assume a zero shift of the S~{\sc{i}}~1401.514\AA{} line. However, this line appears to be weak and also too close to the O~{\sc{iv}}~1401.156\AA{} line. Instead, we calibrate the wavelength for this window by forcing the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1402.770\AA{}~and 1393.755\AA{} lines in the reference spectra to have the same Doppler shift. For the C~{\sc{ii}} window, the Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1335.203\AA{} line is assumed to have zero shift. The wavelength calibration has been confirmed by the similar Doppler shifts of the Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1335.203\AA{} and 1393.330\AA{} absorption lines in the IBs. Absolute wavelength calibration in the Mg~{\sc{ii}} window is much easier since many strong neutral absorption lines are present in the reference spectrum. These neutral lines can be safely assumed to have zero shifts.
As expected, all the IBs show greatly enhanced and broadened profiles of the Si~{\sc{iv}}, C~{\sc{ii}} and Mg~{\sc{ii}} lines, although the Mg~{\sc{ii}} signature appears to be less obvious for some IBs. Obvious enhancement in one or both wings of the Si~{\sc{iv}} lines, which are usually believed to be associated with reconnection outflows \citep[bidirectional jets or unidirectional jets,][]{Innes1997}, can be clearly identified for most bombs. These line profiles are generally similar to those of transition region explosive events (EEs), which are also believed to result from reconnection \citep[e.g.,][]{Dere1989,Innes1997,Chae1998,Madjarska2004,Ning2004,Teriaca2004,Zhang2010,Huang2014,Gupta2015}. The most distinct difference between EEs and IBs may be the formation height: EEs are formed in the transition region, and IBs are formed lower down as suggested by the chromospheric absorption lines. It is also likely that some previously identified EEs are actually IBs. As demonstrated by \cite{Yan2015}, the narrow absorption features in the far ultraviolet spectra of IRIS may not be unambiguously resolved by previous moderate-resolution instruments such as the Solar Ultraviolet Measurements of Emitted Radiation instrument \citep[SUMER,][]{Wilhelm1995} on board the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO). So from spectra taken with these instruments, one can not distinguish between EEs and IBs. We also see obvious absorption features at the cores of the two Si~{\sc{iv}} lines for IBs 4 and 6. The intensity ratio of the two Si~{\sc{iv}} lines is $\sim$1.55 for these two line profiles. This ratio is much smaller than the ratio derived from the reference line profiles, which is 1.93 and close the expected value 2 in optically thin cases. The dip appears to be stronger in the 1393.755\AA{} line. These results suggest that the central absorption feature likely results from self-absorption of the Si~{\sc{iv}} lines rather than bidirectional jets \citep{Yan2015}. It is unclear why the opacity effects become prominent in these IBs.
Some singly ionized absorption lines are clearly superimposed on the enhanced line profiles of Si~{\sc{iv}} and C~{\sc{ii}}. These lines include Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1335.203\AA{}, Fe~{\sc{ii}}~1392.817\AA{}, Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1393.330\AA{}, Fe~{\sc{ii}}~1403.101\AA{} and Fe~{\sc{ii}}~1403.255\AA{}, with the Ni~{\sc{ii}}~lines being the strongest. They are clearly emission lines in the quiet plage region. Under ionization equilibrium these lines are typically formed at a temperature of log ({\it T}/K)$\approx$4.15, in the upper chromosphere. In IBs they generally reveal a blue shift less than 10~km~s$^{-1}$, although a large blue shift of $\sim$20~km~s$^{-1}$ is found for IB 9. It is believed that these absorption lines result from the largely undisturbed upper chromosphere and they suggest the presence of hotter gas (up to the Si~{\sc{iv}} formation temperature $\sim$8$\times$10$^{4}$ K) below the upper chromosphere \citep{Peter2014,Vissers2015}.
The Mg~{\sc{ii}}~2798.809\AA{} line is a self blend of two lines at 2798.754\AA{} and 2798.822\AA{}.
In most observations they appear as absorption lines, but they come into emission above the limb and in energetic phenomena such as flares \citep[e.g.,][]{Tian2015}. \cite{Pereira2015} undertook a forward
modeling study of this line using three-dimensional radiative magnetohydrodynamic (RMHD) models, and found that it changes from absorption to emission when strong heating occurs in
the lower chromosphere. Interestingly, this line shows enhanced wings in all IBs except IBs 1 and 9. The shape of this line is similar to the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k line at 2796.347\AA{} and Mg~{\sc{ii}}~h line at 2803.523\AA{} for most IBs. This feature was also noticed by \cite{Vissers2015}.
\subsection{Connection between IRIS bombs and Ellerman bombs}
We now examine the relationship between IBs and EBs. Since EBs are usually defined from H$_{\alpha}$ images, we first examine possible signatures of IBs in the H$_{\alpha}$ core and wing images taken with NVST. It has already been demonstrated that the NVST H$_{\alpha}$ data can be very useful when studying filaments and dynamic events in the lower solar atmosphere \citep[e.g.,][]{Yang2015a,Yang2015b,Bi2015,Yan2015a,Yan2015b,Xue2016}. The H$_{\alpha}$ data acquired during our joint observation is good enough for the identification of EBs. The contrast on the NVST images appear not constant over time due to the varying seeing condition, which has little effect on our identification of EBs since the H$_{\alpha}$ wing brightenings discussed below are mostly very strong.
From Figure~\ref{fig.3} we find that some IBs appear to be associated with EBs and others are not. IBs 1--4 are clearly not connected to EBs. No obvious brightening can be identified from either the H$_{\alpha}$ wing or core images for IBs 1, 2 and 4. While for IB 3 significant brightening can only be identified from the H$_{\alpha}$ core image. These signatures are not EB signatures. IBs 5, 6 and 7 reveal typical signatures of EBs, which include substantial brightening in both wings of H$_{\alpha}$ and no obvious enhancement in H$_{\alpha}$ line core. The latter suggests that these IBs lie below the chromospheric fibril canopy visible in the H$_{\alpha}$ core images. The wing brightenings clearly exceed those from the much more ubiquitous facular bright points \citep[pseudo-EBs or network bright points,][]{Rutten2013}. We notice that IB 7 reveals as a long bright structure in the Si~{\sc{iv}}~intensity image. Its northern part coincides with significant enhancement in both wings of H$_{\alpha}$. However, only the red wing of H$_{\alpha}$ shows a less prominent enhancement in the southern part. The SJI 1400\AA{} images in the online movies suggest that these two parts might be related to two different brightenings. Despite this possibility, we still regard these two neighboring parts as one IB since they could not be separated in the Si~{\sc{iv}}~intensity image. In the following we select one position at each of the two parts in IB 7 for line profile analysis (positions a and b marked in Figure~\ref{fig.3}). IBs 8, 9 and 10 are possibly EBs. These three IBs all show no obvious core enhancement and clear red wing enhancement. However, the blue wing enhancement is less obvious for IB 8 and not present for IB 9, which may result from the obscuration by spicules. From the online movie associated with Figure~\ref{fig.2}, we see that this is indeed the case for IB 9. The blue wing shows no obvious signature when a spicule is launched nearby. However, the blue wing reveals a significant enhancement after the spicule fades away. No significant blue wing enhancement can be identified for IB 10. We notice that IB 10 is an anemone jet \citep{Shibata2007} revealing an obvious inverted--"Y" morphology (Figure~\ref{fig.2}). The jet reveals as a bright collimated structure in the SJI 1400\AA{} images and a dark one in the H$_{\alpha}$ blue wing images, similar to the quiet-Sun network jets or rapid blueshifted excursions \citep{Tian2014a,Rouppe2015}. We select three positions in IB 10 for detailed analysis of the line profiles: a at the upward jet, b and c at the two legs of the inverted--"Y" structure. The line profiles at positions b and c discussed below suggest that IB 10 is possibly an EB.
\begin{table*}[]
\caption[]{Characteristics of the ten identified IBs, including H$_{\alpha}$ enhancement, intensity ratio of the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1402.770\AA{} and O~{\sc{iv}}~1401.156\AA{} lines, Mg~{\sc{ii}} k \& h enhancement, enhancement of the NUV continuum between the Mg~{\sc{ii}} k \& h lines, superposition of the Mn~{\sc{i}}~2795.640\AA{} absorption line on the greatly enhanced blue wing of Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k, chromospheric absorption lines such as Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1393.330\AA{} and 1335.203\AA{}, brightening in the AIA 1700\AA{} passband, and broadened S~{\sc{i}}~1401.514\AA{} line with a central reversal. For IBs 7 and 10 characteristics at the positions a and b are shown, respectively. These observational signatures indicate that IBs 1--4 are independent of EBs and that IBs 5--10 are likely connected to EBs. }\label{t1}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| p{0.2cm} | p{1.4cm} | p{0.7cm} | p{1.7cm} | p{1.6cm} | p{1.6cm} | p{1.4cm} | p{2.5cm} | p{1.5cm} | }
\hline IB & H$_{\alpha}$ enhancement & Si~{\sc{iv}} /O~{\sc{iv}} & Mg~{\sc{ii}} k \& h enhancement & NUV continuum enhancement? & Mn~{\sc{i}} absorption on Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k wing? & Ni~{\sc{ii}} absorption & AIA 1700\AA{} brightening & S~{\sc{i}} broadened with reversal?\\
\hline
1 & no & 7 & no & no & no & moderate & diffuse, weak & no \\
2 & no & 49 & no & no & no & weak & diffuse, weak & no \\
3 & core & 7 & wings, core & no & no & weak & diffuse, weak & no \\
4 & no & 32 & no & no & no & weak & diffuse, weak& no \\
\hline
5 & wings & 154 & wings & slightly & yes & strong & compact & yes \\
6 & wings & 69 & wings & yes & yes & moderate & compact, strong & yes \\
7 & wings & 498 & wings & yes & yes & strong & compact, strong & yes \\
8 & red wing & 129 & wings & yes & yes & strong & diffuse, weak & no \\
9 & red wing & 143 & wings & yes & no & strong & compact, strong & no \\
10 & red wing & 239 & wings & slightly & yes & moderate & compact, strong & yes \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\cite{Peter2014} found that the O~{\sc{iv}}~1401.156\AA{} and 1399.774\AA{} lines are absent in their four identified IBs. In our data we find that the O~{\sc{iv}}~lines are absent in some IBs but clearly present in other IBs. We have calculated the intensity ratio of the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1402.770\AA{} and O~{\sc{iv}}~1401.156\AA{} lines for each line profile presented in Figures~\ref{fig.4}--\ref{fig.8}, and found that the ratio is larger than 60 for IBs 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 (positions b and c). The absence of the O~{\sc{iv}}~line emission has been previously found in sub-arcsecond bright dots above the sunspots' transition region \citep{Tian2014b} and small-scale brightenings at the footpoints of hot loops \citep{Testa2014}. \cite{Olluri2013} found that non-equilibrium ionization can lead to the absence of the O~{\sc{iv}}~lines. The O~{\sc{iv}}~lines can also be greatly suppressed in the presence of non-Maxwellian electron distributions \citep{Dudik2014}. A third explanation for the absence of these forbidden lines is the dominance of collisional de-excitation from the meta-stable level over radiative decay in a high density environment \citep{Feldman1978,Young2015}. Our result appears to support the third scenario because the absent or weak O~{\sc{iv}}~lines are all found in EB-related IBs or possible EB-related IBs. Since EBs are a pure photospheric phenomenon \citep[e.g.,][]{Watanabe2011}, the density should be very high and likely high enough to suppress the radiative decay. On the other hand, IBs 1--4 are not EBs and the strong O~{\sc{iv}}~lines probably suggest a relatively lower density at the formation height. Since the Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1335.203\AA{} and 1393.330\AA{} absorption lines are also present, these IBs should be located below the upper chromosphere and thus are likely in the lower or middle chromosphere. Using the intensity ratio of the O~{\sc{iv}}~1401.156\AA{} and 1399.774\AA{} lines, we have derived the electron densities of these IBs under the assumption of ionization equilibrium \citep[CHIANTI v7.1,][]{Landi2013}. The derived densities for IBs 1--4 are in the range of log ($N_{e}$/cm$^{-3}$) = 11.2--11.9, which also suggests the formation of these IBs in the chromosphere. Thus, our results are not necessarily inconsistent with \cite{Judge2015}, who placed the origin of IBs in the low-middle chromosphere or above.
The Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and h lines also show distinctly different behavior for the EB-related IBs and other IBs. From Figures~\ref{fig.2} and~\ref{fig.3} we can conclude that these Mg~{\sc{ii}}~lines may also be used to identify EBs. For IBs 5--10, we see significant brightening in the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k wing (--1.33\AA{} and +1.33\AA{} images are similar and thus summed) but no obvious brightening in the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k line core. These IBs are exactly the ones connected or possibly connected to EBs. While for IBs 1, 2 and 4, we could not identify any significant brightening from either the wing or core images of Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k. At the edge of IB 3 brightening are seen from both the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k wing and core images. If we replace Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k by H$_{\alpha}$, these properties would indicate that these events are not EBs, which is exactly what we concluded above. The different Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and h line profiles for these two types of IBs can also be seen from Figures~\ref{fig.4}--\ref{fig.9}, where we generally see significant enhancement of the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~wings and no dramatic change of the line cores for IBs 5--10. The near ultraviolet (NUV) continuum between the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and h lines is also enhanced for IBs 5--10, with the only exception at position b of IB 7. While for IBs 1--4, there is no substantial enhancement of the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~wings beyond $\sim$--1.33\AA{}/+1.33\AA{} from the line cores. In addition, the NUV continuum is even suppressed or only slightly enhanced for these IBs. Since the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and h cores sample the chromospheric fibrils and wings are formed lower down, the different behavior mentioned above confirms that IBs 5--10 are likely also EBs formed in the photosphere and that IBs 1--4 are not. The enhanced NUV continuum in IBs 5--10 also support our argument that these IBs are likely generated in the photosphere. Our finding suggests that the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and h lines may be used similarly to the H$_{\alpha}$ line for the identification and investigation of EBs. This would open a very promising new window for EB studies since the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and h data are routinely acquired in the seeing-free IRIS observations. To elaborate this we plan to perform a more detailed analysis using more coordinated observations between IRIS and NVST in the near future.
We also notice that the chromospheric absorption lines such as Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1393.330\AA{} and 1335.203\AA{}, which are superimposed on the broadened and enhanced wings of the Si~{\sc{iv}} and C~{\sc{ii}} lines, are usually very strong in EB-related IBs. These absorption features are generally much weaker (shallower) for other IBs. This difference may also indicate that the EB-related IBs are formed deeper in the atmosphere, thus experiencing stronger absorption at the wavelengths of these chromospheric line.
Another interesting feature unique to the EB-related IBs is the superposition of the Mn~{\sc{i}}~2795.640\AA{} absorption line on the greatly enhanced blue wing of the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k line. This feature appears to be very obvious for IBs 5, 6, 7 (position a), 8 and 10 (positions b and c). Similarly, we also see the Mn~{\sc{i}}~2799.093\AA{} absorption feature superimposed on the enhanced red wing of the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~2798.809\AA{} line for IBs 5, 7 and 10 (position b). All these IBs are connected or possibly connected to EBs, as we mentioned above. Since the Mn~{\sc{i}}~lines are formed in the upper photosphere, their absorption lines superimposed on the greatly enhanced Mg~{\sc{ii}}~lines suggest the formation of these hot IBs below the cooler upper photosphere. This again supports our argument that these IBs are also EBs. \cite{Vissers2015} also found this feature for a few EBs. Similar to us, they also attributed these absorption lines to the foreground upper-photosphere gas above the EBs. These NUV absorption lines generally have no obvious Doppler shift, although a small blue shift of Mn~{\sc{i}}~2795.640\AA{} appears to be present for IBs 7 (position a) and 8. This confirms that the upper-photosphere gas is generally not impacted by these EB-related IBs, which are a pure photospheric phenomenon.
\begin{figure}
\centering {\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{f10.eps}} \caption{ Typical IRIS line profiles of IBs 5, 6, 7 (position a) and 10 (position b) in the
O~{\sc{i}}~1355.598\AA{} window. The blue line profiles represent the reference spectrum obtained in a quiet plage region. Rest wavelengths of
three lines are indicated by the vertical dotted lines. } \label{fig.10}
\end{figure}
From Figures~\ref{fig.6},~\ref{fig.7} and \ref{fig.9} we see that the shape of the S~{\sc{i}}~1401.514\AA{} line profile is similar to those of Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k, Mg~{\sc{ii}}~h and Mg~{\sc{ii}}~2798.809\AA{} for IBs 5, 6, 7 (position a) and 10 (position b), revealing enhanced wings bridged by a dip at the core. In the quiet plage region, this line is simply a weak emission line and its shape is close to Gaussian. We find that the C~{\sc{i}}~1354.288\AA{} and 1355.844\AA{} lines reveal a similar behavior for these IBs. While the optically thin O~{\sc{i}}~1355.598\AA{} line is still very narrow. Figure~\ref{fig.10} shows the profiles of these lines for IBs 5, 6, 7 (position a) and 10 (position b). For wavelength calibration the O~{\sc{i}}~1355.598\AA{} line in the quiet reference spectrum is assumed to have a zero shift. The dramatic change of the S~{\sc{i}}~and C~{\sc{i}}~line profiles in these EB-related IBs is likely caused by the opacity effect. A recent two-cloud model of \cite{Hong2014} reveals an increase of the optical depths when EBs occur, which may result from direct heating in the lower cloud or illumination by enhanced radiation on the upper cloud. The S~{\sc{i}}~and C~{\sc{i}}~line profiles we report here might be related to these processes.
Finally, from Figure~\ref{fig.3} we notice that the EB-related IBs mostly show strong and compact brightening in AIA 1700\AA{} images. While this is less obvious for other IBs. It seems that IB 8 is not associated with any compact brightening in the AIA 1700\AA{} image shown in Figure~\ref{fig.3}. However, an inspection of the associated online movie suggests that this is because IB 8 was scanned during its decaying phase (at 03:02 UT). In its early phase, at around 02:57 UT, this bomb shows a strong and compact brightening in AIA 1700\AA{}. Since the AIA 1700\AA{} passband samples emission mainly from the upper photosphere, it is not surprising that the chromospheric IBs have little response in the AIA 1700\AA{} passband. We notice that strong EBs have been found to show obvious brightenings in both the 1700\AA{} \citep{Vissers2013} and 1600\AA{} passbands \citep{Qiu2000}, which is consistent with our finding. \cite{Rutten2016} mentioned that the AIA 1700\AA{} and 1600\AA{} channels are also good EB diagnostics because at high temperature they are dominated by the Balmer continuum which shares the H$_{\alpha}$ properties.
We summarize the characteristics of the ten IBs discussed above in Table~\ref{t1}. These observational signatures indicate that IBs 1--4 are independent of EBs and that IBs 5--10 are likely connected to EBs. For IB 7 the characteristics at positions a is shown in the table. As we mentioned above, the northern (around position a) and southern (around position b) parts of IB 7 might be related to two different brightenings in AIA 1700\AA{} images. We find that position a shows all characteristics typical of EB-related IBs. While position b reveals some difference: the NUV continuum is not enhanced and the S~{\sc{i}}~1401.514\AA{} line does not reveal a central reversal. However, the O~{\sc{iv}}~lines are weak and the Mn~{\sc{i}}~2799.093\AA{} absorption feature is superimposed on the enhanced wing of Mg~{\sc{ii}}~2798.809\AA{}. In addition, the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k \& h wings are enhanced, although not as significant as the enhancement at position a. These characteristics suggest that the southern part is also possibly connected to an EB. IB 10 appears to be an anemone jet \citep{Shibata2007}. The characteristics at the footpoints (positions b \& c) of the jet, including the absence of the O~{\sc{iv}}~lines, the superposition of the Mn~{\sc{i}}~absorption lines on the enhanced Mg~{\sc{ii}}~wings, the centrally reversed S~{\sc{i}}~line and the intense AIA 1700\AA{} brightening, suggest that it is likely produced in the photosphere and thus is connected to an EB. These features are absent at the tip of the jet (around position a), consistent with the upward flow location higher up in the atmosphere. In Table~\ref{t1} we only show the characteristics at positions b for IB 10.
Our finding that some IBs are also EBs greatly challenges previous modelings of EBs, which almost unexceptionally predict a temperature increase by only a few hundred to $\sim$3000 Kelvin in the photosphere or lower chromosphere \citep[e.g.,][]{Fang2006,Isobe2007,BelloGonzalez2013,Berlicki2014,Hong2014}. Our observations suggest the need of models which can produce a much stronger temperature increase in the photosphere. A recent numerical simulation by \cite{Ni2015} has predicted heating of the chromospheric plasma to $\sim$8$\times$10$^{4}$ K, which might explain our IBs 1--4. It would be interesting to move the reconnection sites down to the photosphere and investigate the associated heating process. By assuming local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE) for line extinctions during the hot and dense EB onsets, recently \cite{Rutten2016} put the formation of the Si~{\sc{iv}}~lines in a temperature environment of 1--2$\times$10$^{4}$ K. This temperature, although lower than $\sim$8$\times$10$^{4}$ K under the assumption of ionization equilibrium, is still much hotter than that predicted by all non-LTE modeling of EBs.
So far we have concluded that some IBs are connected to EBs and other are not. One may then ask another question: Does every EB correspond to an IB? From our observation it is clear that not all EBs are connected to IBs. It is impossible to examine the IRIS spectra for all EBs since many EBs were not sampled by the IRIS slit. In addition, sometimes the distinction between EBs and magnetic concentrations (network bright points) is not easy due to the varying seeing condition. Nevertheless, a rough examination of the H$_{\alpha}$ wing images suggests that the IRIS slit crossed $\sim$30 possible EBs, among which only six show typical IB-type line profiles. So it seems that only a small fraction of the EBs are heated to IB temperatures. The other EBs appear not efficiently heated, and thus do not show IB signatures in the Si~{\sc{iv}}~lines. We notice that these events usually also display wing enhancement in the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k \& h lines, although for many of them the enhancement appears to be weaker compared to that for IB-related EBs. In the near future we plan to do more coordinated observations between IRIS and NVST, and perform a detailed comparison between the unbinned Mg~{\sc{ii}}~and H$_{\alpha}$ data for EB detection.
\section{Summary}
Using IRIS, NVST, AIA and HMI observations of an emerging AR, we have identified ten IRIS bombs (IBs) and investigated their possible connection to Ellerman bombs (EBs). Seven of these IBs are sitting above the magnetic polarity inversion lines, suggesting that they might result from the interaction between strong magnetic fluxes of opposite polarities. We find that IBs are generally not heated to coronal temperatures.
From the H$_{\alpha}$ images, we find that three IBs are also EBs. Another three IBs are possibly EBs. And the remaining four IBs are obviously not EBs. Considering ionization equilibrium this suggests that EBs can be heated to a temperature of $\sim$8$\times$10$^{4}$ K, one to two orders of magnitude higher than the temperature enhancement predicted from modelings of EBs. According to \cite{Rutten2016}, our result would indicate heating of some EBs to only 1--2$\times$10$^{4}$ K, which is still much hotter than that predicted by all non-LTE modeling of EBs. The EB-related IBs generally reveal the following distinct properties: (1) The O~{\sc{iv}}~1401.156\AA{} and 1399.774\AA{} lines are absent or very weak compared to the Si~{\sc{iv}}~1402.770\AA{} line, likely caused by the high density at the formation height of these IBs. (2) The Mn~{\sc{i}}~2795.640\AA{} and 2799.093\AA{} lines reveal as absorption features superimposed on the greatly enhanced wings of Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and Mg~{\sc{ii}}~2798.809\AA{} lines, suggesting the shielding of these IBs by the upper photosphere. (3) The Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and h lines show intense brightening in the wings extending to the nearby NUV continuum and no dramatic enhancement in the cores, suggesting that these IBs are shielded by the overlying chromospheric fibrilar canopy; (4) Absorption features corresponding to the chromospheric Ni~{\sc{ii}}~1393.330\AA{} and 1335.203\AA{} lines are very deep; (5) Intense and compact brightenings can be identified from images of the AIA 1700\AA{} passband which samples the upper photosphere. All together, these features point to the formation of the EB-related IBs in the photosphere. Other IBs may be formed in the chromosphere.
We also find that the shape of the S~{\sc{i}}~1401.514\AA{}, C~{\sc{i}}~1354.288\AA{} and 1355.844\AA{} line profiles reveal enhanced wings bridged by a central reversal, similar to those of Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k, Mg~{\sc{ii}}~h and Mg~{\sc{ii}}~2798.809\AA{} for some EB-related IBs. This behavior likely indicates an increase of the optical depths, as expected when EBs occur \citep{Hong2014}.
Among the ten identified IBs, we find an anemone jet (IB 10) revealing an obvious inverted--"Y" morphology. The characteristics at the footpoints (positions b \& c) of the jet suggest that it is possibly generated in the photosphere, thus demonstrating that some anemone jets reported by \cite{Shibata2007} may result from magnetic reconnection in the partially ionized photosphere.
Finally, a comparison between the IRIS and NVST data suggests that the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and h lines could be used to investigate EBs similarly to the H$_{\alpha}$ line, which opens a very promising new window for EB studies since the Mg~{\sc{ii}}~k and h data are routinely acquired in the seeing-free IRIS observations.
\begin{acknowledgements}
The H$_{\alpha}$ data used in this paper were obtained with the New Vacuum Solar Telescope in Fuxian Solar Observatory of Yunnan Astronomical Observatory, CAS. IRIS is a NASA small explorer mission developed and operated by LMSAL with mission operations executed at NASA Ames Research center and major contributions to downlink communications funded by ESA and the Norwegian Space Centre. This work was supported by the Recruitment Program of Global Experts of China, NSFC under grants 41574166, 11473064, 41574168 and 41231069, the Specialized Research Fund for State Key Laboratories, and contract 8100002705 from LMSAL to SAO. H.T. and C.M. thank ISSI Bern for the support to the team "Solar UV bursts -- a new insight to magnetic reconnection". We thank Peter Young, Rob Rutten, Hardi Peter, Brigitte Schmieder, Zhong Liu and the anonymous reviewer for helpful discussion and constructive suggestions.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec::conclusion}
We have considered the problem of computation offloading in a multi-access wireless network
by self-interested mobile users for mobile cloud computing, for the case of elastic and non-elastic cloud resources.
We provided a game theoretical formulation of the problem, and showed that in the case of
an elastic cloud a simple algorithm, in which users iteratively improve their allocations,
can be used for computing an equilibrium. We showed that the same algorithm may fail in the case of a
non-elastic cloud, but also showed that an equilibrium always exists, and provided an algorithm for computing an equilibrium
with quadratic complexity. Finally, we provided a bound on the price of anarchy. Simulation results show
that the complexity bound is not tight, and the proposed algorithm scales better than quadratic in terms of the
number of users, and the obtained equilibria provide good system performance.
\section{Equilibria in case of an Elastic Cloud}
\label{sec::elastic}
Recall that under the \emph{elastic} cloud model the cloud computation
capability assigned to user $\varplayer$ is independent of the other players' strategies, $\varcloudcapability_\varplayer=\varcloudcapability$.
Thus, the cost function in the case of offloading can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:offloading_cost_2ee}
\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)=(\vartimeweight_\varplayer+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer)\vardatasize_\varplayer\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector)}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} +
\vartimeweight_\varplayer\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}{\varcloudcapability}.
\end{equation}
We start with formulating an insightful structural result about the best responses of the MUs, which we will use later to prove the existence of NE.
\begin{lemma}
Given the strategy profile $\vardecision_{-\varplayer}$ of the MUs other than $\varplayer$ in the computation offloading game with elastic cloud,
a best reply $\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*}$ of user $\varplayer$ satisfies the following threshold strategy\\
\begin{equation}\label{eq:best_reply}
\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*}=\
\left\{\!\!\! \begin{array}{ll}
0,& \!\!\mbox{ if }
\vartreshold_{\varplayer} \leq \frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} \hspace{0.1cm} \mbox{for} \hspace{0.1cm} \forall \varAP \in \varAPs
\\
\varAP,&
\!\!\mbox{ if } \frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} \leq \min\bigg\{\vartreshold_{\varplayer},\min\limits_{ \varoAP \in \varAPs \setminus \{\varAP\}}
\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}\bigg\}\\
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\vartreshold_{\varplayer}=\frac{\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varenergyconstant_\varplayer+\vartimeweight_\varplayer(\frac{1}{\varusercapability_\varplayer}-\frac{1}{\varcloudcapability})}{\vartimeweight_\varplayer+
\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer}\cdot\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}{\vardatasize_\varplayer}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Based on~(\ref{eq:local_cost_2}),~(\ref{eq:indicator_function}),~(\ref{eq:cost_function}) and~(\ref{eq:offloading_cost_2ee}), the cost of MU $\varplayer$ when choosing $\vardecision_\varplayer$ is
\begin{align}
& \nonumber \varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision_\varplayer, \vardecision_{-\varplayer}) =\varlocalcost_{\varplayer}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varplayer},0) + \displaystyle{\sum_{i=1}^{\varAPsdim}\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecision_\varplayer, \vardecision_{-\varplayer})\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varplayer},\varAP)}\\ \nonumber
& = \big((\frac{\vartimeweight_\varplayer}{\varusercapability_\varplayer}+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varenergyconstant_\varplayer)\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer\big)\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varplayer},0)\\
& +\sum\limits_{i=1}^{\varAPsdim}\big((\vartimeweight_\varplayer+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer)\vardatasize_\varplayer\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} + \vartimeweight_\varplayer\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}{\varcloudcapability}\big)\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varplayer},\varAP). \nonumber
\end{align}
Let us first consider the case that the best reply of MU $\varplayer$ is $\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*}=0$. We then have that
$\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) \leq \varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$ for every AP $\varAP \in \varAPs$, which implies that
\begin{align}
\nonumber (\frac{\vartimeweight_\varplayer}{\varusercapability_\varplayer}+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varenergyconstant_\varplayer)\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer \leq
(\vartimeweight_\varplayer+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer)\vardatasize_\varplayer\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} +
\vartimeweight_\varplayer\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}{\varcloudcapability}.
\end{align}
After algebraic manipulations we obtain\\
\begin{align}
\nonumber \vartreshold_\varplayer \triangleq \frac{\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varenergyconstant_\varplayer+\vartimeweight_\varplayer(\frac{1}{\varusercapability_\varplayer}-\frac{1}{\varcloudcapability})}{\vartimeweight_\varplayer+
\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer}\cdot\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}{\vardatasize_\varplayer} \leq \frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}.
\end{align}
Let us now consider the case when the best reply of MU $\varplayer$ is $\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*}=\varAP$. We then have that $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) \leq \varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$ and
$\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) \leq \varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$ for every AP $\varoAP \in \varAPs\setminus\{\varAP\}$. Following the same reasoning as above, it is easy to see that
$\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) \leq \varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}^{*})$ implies that $\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} \leq \vartreshold_{\varplayer}$.
It is easy to see that $\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})=\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})+1$,
and thus $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}^{*}) \leq \varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}^{*})$ implies that
\begin{align}
\nonumber (\vartimeweight_\varplayer+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer)\vardatasize_\varplayer\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}
\leq
(\vartimeweight_\varplayer+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer)\vardatasize_\varplayer\frac{\varnumberofusers_{\varoAP}(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}
\end{align}
which is equivalent to
\begin{align}
\nonumber \frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} \leq \frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}.
\end{align}
\end{proof}
The above threshold strategy allows players to compute their best and better replies efficiently. In what follows we show
that the computation offloading game with elastic cloud admits a NE, and a NE can be computed by iterative computation of the players' better or best replies, i.e., following an improvement path.
Before we formulate the theorem, let us recall the definition of a generalized ordinal potential from~\cite{Monderer1996124}.
\begin{definition}
A function $\Phi:\times\vardecisionsset_\varplayer\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is a generalized ordinal potential function for the strategic game $<\varplayersset, (\vardecisionsset_\varplayer)_\varplayer, (\varcostfunction_{\varplayer})_\varplayer>$ if for an arbitrary strategy profile $(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$ and for any corresponding improvement step $\vardecision^\prime_\varplayer$ it holds that
\begin{align}
\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision^\prime_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) - &\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) < 0 \Rightarrow \nonumber\\
& \Phi(\vardecision^\prime_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) - \Phi(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) < 0.\nonumber\end{align}
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}
The computation offloading game with elastic cloud admits the generalized ordinal potential function
\begin{equation}\label{eq:potential_function}
\Phi(\vardecisionsvector)= \displaystyle{\sum_{m=1}^{\varAPsdim} \displaystyle{\sum_{n=1}^{\varnumberofusers_m(\vardecisionsvector)}}}
\frac{n}{\varchannelbandwidth_m}
+ \displaystyle{\sum_{s=1}^{\varplayerssetdim}}\vartreshold_{s}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_s,0),
\end{equation}
and hence it possesses a pure strategy Nash equilibrium.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
To prove that $\Phi(\vardecisionsvector)$ is a generalized ordinal potential function, we first show
that $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$
implies $\Phi_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})<\Phi_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$ for a MU $\varplayer$.
According to~(\ref{eq:local_cost_2}),~(\ref{eq:cost_function}) and~(\ref{eq:offloading_cost_2ee}), the condition
$\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$ implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:condition_1}
\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} < \vartreshold_{\varplayer}
\end{equation}
for the strategy profile $(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$ it holds that
\begin{align}
\nonumber \Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) = \!\!\sum\limits_{n=1}^{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}\!\!\frac{n}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}
+\!\!\sum\limits_{m\neq\varAP} \!\!\!\!\sum\limits_{n=1}^{\varnumberofusers_m(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}\!\!\frac{n}{\varchannelbandwidth_m}
+ \!\!\sum\limits_{s\neq\varplayer}\vartreshold_{s}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_s,0),
\end{align}
and for the strategy profile $(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$
\begin{align}
\nonumber \Phi(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) = \!\!\!\!\!\!\sum\limits_{n=1}^{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\frac{n}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}
+\!\!\sum\limits_{m\neq\varAP}\!\!\!\!\! \sum\limits_{n=1}^{\varnumberofusers_m(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\frac{n}{\varchannelbandwidth_m}
+ \vartreshold_\varplayer + \!\!\sum\limits_{s\neq\varplayer}\!\vartreshold_{s}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_s,0).
\end{align}
Since $\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})=\varnumberofusers_\varAP(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})+1$, we obtain
\begin{align}
\nonumber \Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) - \Phi(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) = \frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}-\vartreshold_\varplayer.
\end{align}
It follows from~(\ref{eq:condition_1}) that $\Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) - \Phi(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})<0$.
Similarly, we can show that $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$
implies $\Phi_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})<\Phi_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$.
Second, we show that $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varoAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$
implies $\Phi_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\Phi_{\varplayer}(\varoAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$ for a MU $\varplayer$.
According to~(\ref{eq:cost_function}) and~(\ref{eq:offloading_cost_2ee}), the condition
$\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varoAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$ implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:condition_2}
\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} < \frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\varoAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}
\end{equation}
Let us rewrite $\Phi$ by separating the terms for APs $\varAP$ and $\varoAP$,
\begin{align}
\nonumber \Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) & = \displaystyle{\sum_{n=1}^{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}}\frac{n}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} +
\displaystyle{\sum_{n=1}^{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}}\frac{n}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}\\
& +\displaystyle{\sum_{m\neq\varAP,\varoAP} \displaystyle{\sum_{n=1}^{\varnumberofusers_m}}}\frac{n}{\varchannelbandwidth_m}
+ \displaystyle{\sum_{s\neq\varplayer}}\vartreshold_{s}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_s,0).
\end{align}
Since $\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})=\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})+1$ and $\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})=\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})+1$, we have that
\begin{align}
\nonumber \Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) - \Phi(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})=\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}-
\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}.
\end{align}
It follows from~(\ref{eq:condition_2}) that $\Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) - \Phi(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})<0$, which proves the theorem.
\end{proof}
The existence of a generalized ordinal potential allows us to formulate a simple algorithm for computing a Nash equilibrium by leveraging the fact that
in a game that all improvement paths are finite, i.e., lead to a Nash equilibrium, in a finite strategic game that admits a generalized ordinal potential function~\cite{Monderer1996124}.
\begin{corollary}
\label{th::elastic-fip}
Starting from an arbitrary initial strategy profile, let one MU at a time perform an improvement step iteratively. The algorithm terminates in a NE after a finite number of steps for the computation offloading game with elastic cloud.
\end{corollary}
\section{Equilibria in case of a Non-Elastic Cloud}
\label{sec::non-elastic}
In the case of a non-elastic cloud the computation
capability $\varcloudcapability_\varplayer$ that is assigned to MU $\varplayer$ in the cloud server depends on the other MUs' strategies, and thus the
cost function in case of offloading can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:offloading_cost_2ene}
\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)=(\vartimeweight_\varplayer+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer)\vardatasize_\varplayer\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector)}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP} +
\vartimeweight_\varplayer\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}{\varcloudcapability}\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector).
\end{equation}
A natural question is whether a generalized ordinal potential similar to (\ref{eq:potential_function}) exists in the case of non-elastic cloud,
in which case all improvement paths would be finite. We first show that if we only allow MUs to change between APs, but we do not allow them to start or to stop offloading, then this holds.
\begin{lemma}
\label{th:swapping-finite}
Consider an arbitrary strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector$, and consider that (i) the improvement step $\vardecision^\prime_\varplayer$ of MU $\varplayer\in \varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector)$ is constrained to $\vardecision^\prime_\varplayer\in \varAPs$,
and (ii) MUs $\varplayer\not\in \varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector)$ are not allowed to perform improvement steps.
Then all improvement paths that satisfy constraints (i) and (ii) are finite.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, observe that the set $\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector)$ of offloaders is unchanged during an improvement path with constraints (i) and (ii). For a strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector$ let
vector $\varcostvector(\vardecisionsvector)\in\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}^{\vert \varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector) \vert}$ contain the cost $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecisionsvector)$ for MUs $\varplayer \in \varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector)$ in decreasing order. Let $\vardecisionsvector^\prime=(\vardecision_\varplayer^\prime,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$ be the strategy profile after an improvement step made by MU $\varplayer$ that satisfies constraint (i), and let $\varAP=\vardecision_\varplayer$ and $\varoAP=\vardecision_\varplayer^\prime$.
Since $\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vardecisionsvector)+1}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}<\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector)}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}$ must hold for the change of APs to be an improvement step, we have $\varcostvector(\vardecisionsvector^\prime)\prec_{L}\varcostvector(\vardecisionsvector)$, where $\prec_{L}$ stands for lexicographically smaller. Since $\varcostvector(\vardecisionsvector)$ decreases in the lexiographical sense upon every improvement step, and the number of strategy profiles is finite, the improvement paths must be finite.
\end{proof}
Thus, if MUs can only change between APs, they terminate after a finite number of improvement steps.
Unfortunately, as the following example shows, this is not the case if MUs can decide not to offload, and thus the
algorithm in Corrollary~\ref{th::elastic-fip} cannot be used to compute a NE, even if a NE exists.
\begin{example}
Consider a computation offloading game with non-elastic cloud where $\varplayersset=\{a,b,c,d,e\}$ and $\varAPs=\{1,2,3\}$ as illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:model}.
Figure~\ref{fig::example_cycle} shows a cyclic improvement path starting from the strategy profile $(1,2,1,0,0)$, in which MUs $a$ and $c$ are connected
to AP 1, MU $b$ is connected to AP 2 and MUs $d$ and $e$ perform local computation.
\end{example}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\pgfdeclarelayer{background}
\pgfdeclarelayer{foreground}
\pgfsetlayers{background,main,foreground}
\centering
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzset{
table/.style={
matrix of nodes,
row sep=-\pgflinewidth,
column sep=-\pgflinewidth,
nodes={rectangle,text width=0.7em,align=center},
text depth=1.25ex,
text height=2ex,
nodes in empty cells
},
row 1/.style={nodes={fill=green!10}},
column 1/.style={nodes={fill=green!10,text width=1.6em}},
}
\matrix (mat) [table
{
$\vardecision_\varplayer$ & $\vardecision_a$ & $\vardecision_b$ & $\vardecision_c$ & $\vardecision_d$ & $\vardecision_e$\\
$\vardecisionsvector(0)$ & 1 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
$\vardecisionsvector(1)$ & 1 & 2 & 2 & 0 & 0 \\
$\vardecisionsvector(2)$ & 1 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 0 \\
$\vardecisionsvector(3)$ & 1 & 0 & 2 & 2 & 0 \\
$\vardecisionsvector(4)$ & 1 & 0 & 2 & 2 & 2 \\
$\vardecisionsvector(5)$ & 1 & 0 & 1 & 2 & 2 \\
$\vardecisionsvector(6)$ & 1 & 3 & 1 & 2 & 2 \\
$\vardecisionsvector(7)$ & 1 & 3 & 1 & 2 & 0 \\
$\vardecisionsvector(8)$ & 1 & 3 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
$\vardecisionsvector(9)$ & 1 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
};
\draw
([xshift=-.5\pgflinewidth]mat-1-1.north west) --
([xshift=-.5\pgflinewidth]mat-1-6.north east);
\draw [thick,double]
([xshift=-.5\pgflinewidth]mat-1-1.south west) --
([xshift=-.5\pgflinewidth]mat-1-6.south east);
\draw
([xshift=-.5\pgflinewidth]mat-11-1.south west) --
([xshift=-.5\pgflinewidth]mat-11-6.south east);
\draw
([yshift=.10\pgflinewidth]mat-1-1.north west) --
([yshift=.10\pgflinewidth]mat-11-1.south west);
\draw
([yshift=.10\pgflinewidth]mat-1-6.north east) --
([yshift=.10\pgflinewidth]mat-11-6.south east);
\foreach \x in {2,...,10}
{
\draw
([xshift=-.5\pgflinewidth]mat-\x-1.south west) --
([xshift=-.5\pgflinewidth]mat-\x-6.south east);
}
\foreach \x in {1,...,5}
{
\draw
([yshift=.10\pgflinewidth]mat-1-\x.north east) --
([yshift=.10\pgflinewidth]mat-11-\x.south east);
}
\begin{scope}[shorten >=7pt,shorten <= 7pt]
\draw[->] (mat-2-4.center) -- (mat-3-4.center);
\draw[->] (mat-3-3.center) -- (mat-4-3.center);
\draw[->] (mat-4-5.center) -- (mat-5-5.center);
\draw[->] (mat-5-6.center) -- (mat-6-6.center);
\draw[->] (mat-6-4.center) -- (mat-7-4.center);
\draw[->] (mat-7-3.center) -- (mat-8-3.center);
\draw[->] (mat-8-6.center) -- (mat-9-6.center);
\draw[->] (mat-9-5.center) -- (mat-10-5.center);
\draw[->] (mat-10-3.center) -- (mat-11-3.center);
\end{scope}
\node at ([xshift=3.1cm, yshift=-0.48cm]mat-2-6.east)
{$\scriptstyle {\varchannelbandwidth_2>\varchannelbandwidth_1 \hspace{2.95cm}\footnotesize (1)}$};
\node at ([xshift=3cm, yshift=-0.48cm]mat-3-6.east)
{$\scriptstyle \frac{2}{\varchannelbandwidth_2}(\vartimeweight_b+\varenergyweight_b\varpower_b)\vardatasize_b+
3\vartimeweight_b\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_b}{\varcloudcapability}>\varlocalcost_b\hspace{0.09cm}\footnotesize (2)$};
\node at ([xshift=3cm, yshift=-0.48cm]mat-4-6.east)
{$\scriptstyle \varlocalcost_d>\frac{2}{\varchannelbandwidth_2}(\vartimeweight_d+\varenergyweight_d\varpower_d)\vardatasize_d+
3\vartimeweight_d\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_d}{\varcloudcapability}\hspace{0.08cm}\footnotesize (3)$};
\node at ([xshift=3cm, yshift=-0.48cm]mat-5-6.east)
{$\scriptstyle \varlocalcost_e>\frac{3}{\varchannelbandwidth_2}(\vartimeweight_e+\varenergyweight_e\varpower_e)\vardatasize_e+
4\vartimeweight_e\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_e}{\varcloudcapability}\hspace{0.08cm}\footnotesize (4)$};
\node at ([xshift=3.1cm, yshift=-0.48cm]mat-6-6.east)
{$\scriptstyle \varchannelbandwidth_1>\frac{2}{3}\varchannelbandwidth_2\hspace{2.7cm}\footnotesize (5)$};
\node at ([xshift=3cm, yshift=-0.48cm]mat-7-6.east)
{$\scriptstyle \varlocalcost_b>\frac{1}{\varchannelbandwidth_3}(\vartimeweight_b+\varenergyweight_b\varpower_b)\vardatasize_b+
5\vartimeweight_b\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_b}{\varcloudcapability}\hspace{0.08cm}\footnotesize (6)$};
\node at ([xshift=3cm, yshift=-0.48cm]mat-8-6.east)
{$\scriptstyle \frac{2}{\varchannelbandwidth_2}(\vartimeweight_e+\varenergyweight_e\varpower_e)\vardatasize_e+
5\vartimeweight_e\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_e}{\varcloudcapability}>\varlocalcost_e\hspace{0.08cm}\footnotesize (7)$};
\node at ([xshift=3cm, yshift=-0.48cm]mat-9-6.east)
{$\scriptstyle \frac{1}{\varchannelbandwidth_2}(\vartimeweight_d+\varenergyweight_d\varpower_d)\vardatasize_d+
4\vartimeweight_d\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_d}{\varcloudcapability}>\varlocalcost_d\hspace{0.08cm}\footnotesize (8)$};
\node at ([xshift=3.1cm, yshift=-0.48cm]mat-10-6.east)
{$\scriptstyle \varchannelbandwidth_2>\varchannelbandwidth_3\hspace{2.9cm}\footnotesize (9)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{A cyclic improvement path in a computation offloading game with non-elastic cloud, 3 APs and 5 MUs. Rows correspond to strategy profiles, columns to MUs. An arrow between adjacent rows indicates the MU that performs the improvement step. The cycle consists of 9 improvement steps, and involves some MUs to start and to stop offloading. The inequalities on the right show the condition under which the change of strategy is an improvement step.}
\label{fig::example_cycle}
\end{figure}
Starting from the initial strategy profile $(1,2,1,0,0)$, Player $c$ revises its strategy to AP $2$, which is an improvement step
if $\varchannelbandwidth_2>\varchannelbandwidth_1$, as shown in inequality (1) in the figure.
Observe that after $9$ improvement steps the players reach the initial strategy profile.
For each step the inequality on the right provides the condition for being an improvement. It follows from inequalities (1), (5) and (9) that
$\varchannelbandwidth_2>\varchannelbandwidth_1$, $\varchannelbandwidth_1>\frac{2}{3}\varchannelbandwidth_2$ and
$\varchannelbandwidth_2>\varchannelbandwidth_3$, respectively.
Since,$\frac{1}{\varchannelbandwidth_3}(\vartimeweight_b+\varenergyweight_b\varpower_b)\vardatasize_b+
5\vartimeweight_b\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_b}{\varcloudcapability}>\frac{1}{\varchannelbandwidth_3}(\vartimeweight_b+\varenergyweight_b\varpower_b)\vardatasize_b+
3\vartimeweight_b\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_b}{\varcloudcapability}$ holds, from inequalities (2) and (6) follows that $\varchannelbandwidth_3>\frac{1}{2}\varchannelbandwidth_2$.
Combining inequalities (3) and (8) we have that $\vartimeweight_d\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_d}{\varcloudcapability}>\frac{1}{\varchannelbandwidth_2}(\vartimeweight_d+\varenergyweight_d\varpower_d)\vardatasize_d$.
Similarly, it follows from inequalities (4) and (7) that $\vartimeweight_e\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_e}{\varcloudcapability}>\frac{1}{\varchannelbandwidth_2}(\vartimeweight_e+\varenergyweight_e\varpower_e)\vardatasize_e$.
Given these constraints, an instance of the example can be formulated easily.
An important consequence of the cycle in the improvement path is that the computation offloading game with non-elastic cloud does not allow a potential function, and thus Corollary~\ref{th::elastic-fip} cannot be applied. Yet, as we now show, NE always exist.
\begin{theorem}\label{theo:NE_ene}
The computation offloading game with non-elastic cloud possesses a pure strategy Nash equilibrium.
\end{theorem}
\iffalse
\begin{proof}
For simplicity, consider the following ranking of the APs according to the channel bandwidth that they offer
\begin{align}
\nonumber \varchannelbandwidth_1 \geq \varchannelbandwidth_2 \geq ... \geq \varchannelbandwidth_\varAPsdim.
\end{align}
Now consider the scenario in which users one by one make decisions by playing their best reply strategy, given a strategy profile of the previous users.
More precisely, in every stage of the game, one of the following events can happen: a new user enters the game and plays his best reply strategy given a strategy profile of the previous users,
or one of the users changes his decision according to the best reply strategy.
We assume that the users that offlad their task using the same AP are ranked in the descending order according to the ratio of the size of the computation input data and
the total number of the cycles required to accomplish the computation task. We use the pair $(\varplayer,\varAP)$ to denote the user
that occupies the $\varplayer$'th position in the order defined for AP $\varAP$, i.e. for AP $\varAP$ we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber \frac{\vardatasize_{(1,\varAP)}}{\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(1,\varAP)}} \geq \frac{\vardatasize_{(2,\varAP)}}{\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(2,\varAP)}} \geq ...
\geq \frac{\vardatasize_{(\varnumberofusers_\varAP,\varAP)}}{\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(\varnumberofusers_\varAP,\varAP)}}.
\end{align}
Note that user $(1,\varAP)$ has the biggest incentive to change his strategy among all the other users that are connected to AP $\varAP$, i.e.,
if he does not want to deviate, the other users that are connected to AP $\varAP$ do not want to deviate, too.\\
We now consider an arbitrary stage of the game and we distinguish between two cases: player $\varplayer$ deviates from the strategy to offload the task using AP
$\varAP$ and player $\varplayer$ deviates from his strategy from the strategy to perform the computation locally.
Let us now consider a stage $\vargamestage$, in which user $\varplayer$ enters the game. We now distinguish between two cases:
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item user $\varplayer$ decides to offload the task
$<\!\!\vardatasize_\varplayer,\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer\!\!>$ using the one of the APs and
\item user $\varplayer$ decides to perform the computation locally.
\end{inparaenum}\\
Now we prove that in both cases, (i) and (ii), user $\varplayer$ changes his strategy a finite number of times.
For simplicity, to prove case (i) we consider stage $\vargamestage +t$ in which user $\varplayer$ offloads his task usign AP $\varAP$ and has the largest $\frac{\vardatasize_{\varplayer}}{\varCPUcyclesnumber_{\varplayer}}$
ratio among all users, i.e. $\varplayer$ becomes $(1,\varAP)$ and $\frac{\vardatasize_{(1,\varAP)}}{\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(1,\varAP)}}=\displaystyle{\max_{\varoAP \in \varAPs}}\frac{\vardatasize_{(1,\varoAP)}}{\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(1,\varoAP)}}$.
Furthermore, we assume that
in stage $\vargamestage+t$, user $\varoplayer$ joins to set $\varoffloadset$. We prove that if the best reply of user $\varplayer$ is not to offload using AP $\varAP$ anymore,
then he would change his strategy to the local computing and it would be his final strategy. If user $\varoplayer$ offloads the task using $\varAP$, user $\varplayer$
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}
For simplicity, consider the following ranking of the APs according to the channel bandwidth that they offer:
\begin{align}
\nonumber \varchannelbandwidth_1 \geq \varchannelbandwidth_2 \geq ... \geq \varchannelbandwidth_\varAPsdim.
\end{align}
Now consider the scenario in which users one by one make decisions by playing their best reply strategy, given a strategy profile of the previous users.
More precisely, in every stage of the game, one of the following events can happen: a new user enters the game and plays his best reply strategy given a strategy profile of the previous users,
or one of the users changes his decision according to the best reply strategy.
We assume that users that offload the task using the same AP are ranked and we use the triplet $(\vargamestage,l,\varAP)$ to denote the user
that in stage $\vargamestage$ occupies the $l$'th position in the ranking for AP $\varAP$, i.e.
\begin{align}
\nonumber \frac{\vardatasize_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}}{\varlocalcost_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}} \geq
\frac{\vardatasize_{(\vargamestage,2,\varAP)}}{\varlocalcost_{(\vargamestage,2,\varAP)}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(\vargamestage,2,\varAP)}} \geq ...
\geq \frac{\vardatasize_{(\vargamestage,\varnumberofusers_\varAP,\varAP)}}{\varlocalcost_{(\vargamestage,\varnumberofusers_\varAP,\varAP)},\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(\vargamestage,\varnumberofusers_\varAP,\varAP)}}.
\end{align}
Note that user $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$ has the biggest incentive to change his strategy among all the other users that are connected to AP $\varAP$, i.e.,
if user $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$ does not want to deviate, the other users that are connected to AP $\varAP$ do not want to deviate, too.\\
Without loss of generality, let us consider stage $\vargamestage-1$ in which the current strategy profile is an equilibrium. Furthermore,
let us assume that in stage $\vargamestage$ a new user $\varplayer$ enters the game. If $\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*}(\vargamestage)=0$,
$\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vargamestage)=\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vargamestage-1)$ for every $\varAP \in \varAPs$ and a new strategy profile is an equilibrium, too.
If $\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*}(\vargamestage)=\varAP$, we distinguish between three cases:
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item none of the previous users want to deviate from the current strategy profile,
\item for user $(1,\varAP)$, offloading using AP $\varAP$ is not the best reply strategy anymore,
\item for user $(1,\varoAP)$, $\varoAP \in \varAPs \setminus \{\varAP\}$, offloading using AP $\varoAP$ is not the best reply strategy anymore.
\end{inparaenum} Note, that case (ii) can happen only if $\frac{\vardatasize_{(1,\varAP)}}{\varlocalcost_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}} >
\frac{1}{\varlocalcost_\varplayer}\cdot\frac{\vardatasize_\varplayer}{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}$.\\
For case (i) it is obviuos that a new strategy profile is an equilibrium. Now we show that in the remaining two cases,
the game will converge to an equilibrium, too. Since $\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*}(\vargamestage)=\varAP$, it follows that $\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vargamestage-1)+1}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}\geq
\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vargamestage-1)+1}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}$ for every $\varoAP \in \varAPs \setminus \{\varAP\}$. Therefore, in case (ii) player $(1,\varAP)$ can not decrease his offloading
cost by choosing another AP $\varoAP$ and in the next stage of the game he would change the strategy to the local computing. Hence, $\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vargamestage+1)=\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vargamestage-1)$
would hold for every $\varAP \in \varAPs$, a new strategy profile would be an equilibrium, too.
From case (iii) it follows that if the total number of users that offload is larger than $\displaystyle{\sum_{\varAP \in \varAPs}}\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vargamestage-1)$, the best reply
of user $(1,\varoAP)$ is to perform the computation locally. Therefore, in the next stage of the game, user $(1,\varoAP)$ would change the strategy to the local computing
and since the total number of players that offload would not decrease, he would never have an incentive to deviate from the local computing.
Furthermore, $\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vargamestage+1)=\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vargamestage-1)-1$ would hold and other users would have an oportunity to decrease their cost by connecting to AP $\varoAP$.
If $\exists \varAP \in \varAPs\setminus\{\varoAP\}$ such that
$\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vargamestage+1)}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}>\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vargamestage+1)}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}$, then
users that offload using AP $\varAP$ would have an incentive to connect to AP $\varoAP$. Since the number of APs is finite, an equilibrium will be reached.
If $\exists \varoplayer$ such that $\vardecision_\varoplayer(\vargamestage+1)=0$ and $\varcloudcost_\varoplayer(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varoplayer}(\vargamestage+1))<\varlocalcost_\varoplayer$, user $\varoplayer$ would have
the incentive to offload using AP $\varoAP$. Note that we can consider user $\varoplayer$ as a new user that enters the game with an except that case (ii) can not happen.
Since, the number of APs and the number
of users that perform the local computation are finite, an equilibrium will be reached. Finally, since the total number of users is finite, the game
converges to a Nash equilibrium in which users with larger $\frac{\vardatasize_\varplayer}{\varlocalcost_\varplayer\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}$ ratio prefer to perform the computation locally.
\end{proof}
\fi
\begin{proof}
We use induction in the number $\varplayerssetdim$ of players in order to prove the theorem, and we denote by $\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}=\vargamestage$ the number of MUs that are involved
in the game in induction step $\vargamestage$.
It is clear that for $\varplayerssetdim^{(1)}=1$ there is a NE, in which the only participating MU plays her best reply $\vardecision_\varplayer^*(1)$. Since there
are no other MUs, $\vardecisionsvector^*(1)$ is a NE. Observe that if $\vardecision_\varplayer^*(1)=0$, MU $\varplayer$ would never have an incentive
to deviate from this decision, because the number of players that offload will not decrease as more MUs are added. Otherwise, if MU $\varplayer$ decides to
offload, her best reply is given by $\vardecision_\varplayer^*(1)=\argmax_{\varAP\in\varAPs}\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP$.
Assume now that for $\vargamestage-1 > 0$ there is a NE $\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1)$.
Upon induction step $\vargamestage$ one MU enters the game; we refer to this MU as MU $\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}$.
Let MU $\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}$ play her best reply $\vardecision_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}^*(\vargamestage)$
with respect to the NE strategy profile of the MUs that already participated in induction step $\vargamestage-1$, i.e.,
with respect to $\vardecision_{-\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vargamestage)=\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1)$.
After that, MUs can perform best improvement steps one at a time starting from the strategy profile
$\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage)=(\vardecision_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}^*(\vargamestage),\vardecision_{-\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vargamestage))$,
following the algorithm shown in Figure~\ref{fig:uphase}.
We refer to this as the update phase. In order to prove that there is a NE in induction step $t$, in the following we show that the MUs will perform
a finite number of best improvement steps in the update phase.
Let us define the reluctance to offload via AP $\varAP$ of MU $\varplayer$ in a strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage)$ as
$\varreluctanceratio_\varplayer(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))=\frac{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))}{\varlocalcost_{\varplayer}}$, and let us
rank the MUs that play the same strategy in decreasing order of reluctance.
We use the triplet $(\vargamestage,l,\varAP)$ to index the MU that in step $\vargamestage$ occupies position $l$ in the ranking for AP $\varAP$, i.e.,
$ \varreluctanceratio_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage)) \geq \varreluctanceratio_{(\vargamestage,2,\varAP)}(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))
\geq \ldots \geq \varreluctanceratio_{(\vargamestage,\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage)),\varAP)}(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$.
Note that for AP $\varAP$ it is MU $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$ that can gain most by changing her strategy
among all MUs $\varplayer\in\varoffloaders_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$.
Observe that if $\vardecision^*_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vargamestage)=0$, then
$\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))=\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1))$ for every $\varAP \in \varAPs$ and thus $\vardecisionsvector(t)$ is a NE.
If $\vardecision^*_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vargamestage)=\varAP\in\varAPs$, but none of the MUs want to deviate from their strategy in $\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1)$
then $\vardecisionsvector(t)$ is a NE. Otherwise, we can have one or both of the following:
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item for some MUs $\varplayer\in\varoffloaders_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$ offloading using AP $\varAP$ is not a best reply anymore,
\item for some MUs $\varplayer\in\varoffloaders_\varoAP(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$ for $\varoAP \in \varAPs \setminus \{\varAP\}$, offloading using AP $\varoAP$ is not a best reply anymore.
\end{inparaenum} Let us denote by $\vardeviatorsOtoL$ the set of APs with at least one MU that wants to deviate from her strategy either for (i) or for (ii).
Observe that case (i) can happen only if $\varreluctanceratio_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage)) > \varreluctanceratio_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$,
as otherwise no MU $\varplayer\in\varoffloaders_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$ would be able to gain by changing her strategy from AP $\varAP$.
Now, since $\vardecision_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vargamestage)=\varAP$ it follows that
$\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1))+1}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}\leq
\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1))+1}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}$ for every $\varoAP \in \varAPs \setminus \{\varAP\}$.
Therefore, in case (i) an MU $\varplayer\in\varoffloaders_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$ cannot decrease her offloading cost by choosing another AP $\varoAP$;
as an improvement step she would change her strategy to local computing.
Let now MU $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$ perform an improvement step, and
let us denote the resulting strategy profile by $\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage)$ (Line $4$).
Since MU $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$ changed from AP $\varAP$ to local computation, $\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage))=\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1))$ would hold for every $\varAP \in \varAPs$ and $\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage)$ would be a NE.
Let us now consider case (ii). The only reason why case (ii) could happen is that the number of players that offload was incremented,
i.e., $\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))=\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1))+1$. Thus, the best improvement
of every MU $\varplayer\in\varoffloaders_\varoAP(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$ that wants to deviate would be to perform the computation locally.
Among all MUs that would like to deviate, let us choose the MU with highest reluctance $\varreluctanceratio_\varplayer(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$ (note that this is MU
$(\vargamestage,1,\varoAP)$ for some $\varoAP\not=\varAP$), and let her perform the improvement step, i.e., change to local computation (Lines $9-12$).
Let the resulting strategy profile be $\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage)$.
Due to this improvement step $\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage))=\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1))-1$,
and thus some MUs may be able to decrease their cost by connecting to AP $\varoAP$.
If there is no MU $\varplayer\in\varplayersset\setminus\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage))$ that would like to start offloading,
then there is no more MU that would like to stop offloading either because $\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage))=\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1))-1$.
Otherwise, among all MUs $\varplayer\in\varplayersset\setminus\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage))$ that would like to start offloading,
let MU $\varoplayer$ with highest local computing cost $\varlocalcost_{\varplayer^{\prime}}$ perform an improvement step, i.e., connect to AP $\varoAP$.
We now repeat these steps starting from Line $8$ until no more MU wants to stop offloading. This iteration will stop after a finite number of steps,
as the MU that stops offloading always has higher reluctance than that one that replaces it,
and the number of MUs is finite.
Let $\varoAP$ be the AP that the last MU that stopped offloading was connected to.
If the last MU that stopped offloading was replaced by an MU that did not offload before, then we reached a NE.
Otherwise some MUs may want to change to AP $\varoAP$. By Lemma~\ref{th:swapping-finite} if we only allow MUs to change between APs,
we terminate in a finite number of improvement steps. Now, no MU wants to stop offloading, and
no MU wants to start offloading either, because they did not want to do so before the MUs were allowed to change APs. Hence we reached a NE, which
proves the inductive step.
\iffalse
Now we consider all possible outcomes after updating the strategy of MU
$(\vargamestage,1,\varoAP)$. If $\exists \varAP \in \varAPs\setminus\{\varoAP\}$ such that
$\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime\prime}(\vargamestage))+1}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}>\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime\prime}(\vargamestage))}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}$, then
MUs that offload using AP $\varAP$ would have an incentive to connect to AP $\varoAP$. Note that MU $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)'=\argmax_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}\frac{\vardatasize_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}}
{\varlocalcost_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)}}$ can gain most by connecting to AP $\varoAP$. Furthermore, after connecting MU
$(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)'$ to AP $\varoAP$, only MUs that have lower ratio than
$\frac{\vardatasize_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)'}}{\varlocalcost_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)'}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)'}}$ would choose offloading and consequently only MUs that have lower ratio than
$\frac{\vardatasize_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)'}}{\varlocalcost_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)'}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)'}}$ would change their strategy from offloading to local computing in the
next steps. Therefore, MU $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)'$ would never offload again and since number of MUs that in strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage)$ have
incentive to change their strategy from offloading to local computing is finite, a NE will be reached after a finite number of improvement steps. If there is a MU $\varoplayer$ such that $\vardecision_\varoplayer^{\prime\prime}(\vargamestage)=0$ and
$\varcloudcost_\varoplayer(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varoplayer}^{\prime\prime}(\vargamestage))<\varlocalcost_\varoplayer$, then MU $\varoplayer$ would have an incentive to connect to AP $\varoAP$. Note
that MU $\varoplayer$ can be considered as a MU that enters the game. Therefore, either a NE would be reached after this improvement step or one or both of the cases (i) and (ii) can happen.
Since the number of MUs that can gain more by offloading than by local computing in a strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector^{\prime\prime\prime}(\vargamestage)$, in which $\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime\prime\prime}(\vargamestage))=
\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime\prime}(\vargamestage))$, is finite, a NE would be reached after a finite number of steps. This proves the theorem.
\fi
\iffalse
Since the number of APs is finite, a NE will be reached.
If there is a player $\varplayer$ such that $\vardecision_\varplayer(\vargamestage)=0$ and $\varcloudcost_\varplayer(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varoplayer}(\vargamestage))<\varlocalcost_\varplayer$ then player $\varplayer$ would have
an incentive to offload using AP $\varoAP$.
Note that player $\varplayer$ can be considered as a new player that enters the game in an inductive step, with the constraint that case (i) cannot happen.
Since, the number of APs and the number
of MUs that perform local computation are finite, a NE will be reached after a finite number of improvement steps.
It is important to note that in cases (i) and (ii) when MU $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$
changes her strategy from offloading using AP $\varAP$ to local computing then if
$$\varAP=\displaystyle{\argmax_{\varoAP\in\varAPs}}
\frac{\vardatasize_{(\vargamestage,1,\varoAP)}}{\varlocalcost_{(\vargamestage,1,\varoAP)}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{(\vargamestage,1,\varoAP)}} \;\textrm{or}\; \varAP=\displaystyle{\argmax_{\varoAP\in\varAPs}}
\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varoAP(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varoAP}$$
holds, then MU $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$ would never have an incentive to offload again.
Furthermore, in a NE it is the MUs with larger $\frac{\vardatasize_\varplayer}{\varlocalcost_\varplayer\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}$ ratio that tend to perform the computation locally.
\fi
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[t]
\ruleline{\emph{Update phase}}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\If{ $\varAP \in \vardeviatorsOtoL$}
\State /* Corresponds to case (i) */
\State Let $\varplayer^\prime \gets (\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$
\State Let $\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage)=(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer^\prime}(\vargamestage))$/* Best reply by MU $\varplayer^\prime$ */
\ElsIf{ $\varoAP \in \vardeviatorsOtoL$ }
\State /* Corresponds to case (ii) */
\State Let $\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage)=\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage)$
\While{ $\vardeviatorsOtoL \not = \emptyset$ }
\State $\varoAP \gets \displaystyle{\argmax_{\varoAP^\prime \in \vardeviatorsOtoL}}\varreluctanceratio_{(\vargamestage,1,\varoAP^{\prime})}(\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage))$\\\hfill/* AP with MU with highest reluctance */
\State Let $\varplayer^\prime \gets (\vargamestage,1,\varoAP)$
\State Let $\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage) = (0,\vardecision^\prime_{-\varplayer^\prime}(\vargamestage))$\\\hfill /* Best reply by MU $(\vargamestage,1,\varoAP)$ */
\State $\vardeviatorsLtoO = \{\varplayer | \vardecision^{\prime}_{\varplayer}(\vargamestage)=0,
\varlocalcost_\varplayer \geq \varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varoAP}(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage))\}$
\If{ $\vardeviatorsLtoO \not= \emptyset$ }
\State $\varplayer^\prime \gets \displaystyle{\argmax_{\varplayer \in \vardeviatorsLtoO}} \hspace{0.1cm} \varlocalcost_\varplayer$\\\hfill /*MU with highest local cost*/
\State Let $\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage)=(\varoAP,\vardecision^\prime_{-\varplayer^\prime}(\vargamestage))$\\\hfill /* Best reply by MU $\varplayer^\prime$ */
\State $\vardeviatorsOtoL\!\!=\!\!\{\varoAP \!\!\in\! \varAPs |\exists \varplayer \!\in\! \varoffloaders_\varoAP(\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage)),\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varoAP}(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage)) \!\!\geq\! \varlocalcost_\varplayer\}$
\Else
\State $\vardeviatorsOtoO = \{\varAP | \varAP \in \varAPs \setminus \{\varoAP\},\frac{\varnumberofusers_{\varoAP}(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage))+1}
{\varchannelbandwidth_{\varoAP}}\!\!<\!\!\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage))}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}\}$
\While{$\vardeviatorsOtoO \not = \emptyset$}
\State $\varAP \gets \displaystyle{\argmax_{\varAP^{\prime} \in \vardeviatorsOtoO}}\varreluctanceratio_{(\vargamestage,1,\varAP^{\prime})}(\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage))$\\\hfill /* AP with MU with highest reluctance */
\State Let $\varplayer^\prime \gets (\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$
\State Let $\vardecisionsvector^\prime(\vargamestage)=(\varoAP,\vardecision^\prime_{-\varplayer^\prime}(\vargamestage))$\\\hfill /* Best reply by MU $(\vargamestage,1,\varAP)$ */
\State Let $\varoAP \gets \varAP$
\State $\vardeviatorsOtoO = \{\varAP | \varAP \in \varAPs \setminus \{\varoAP\},\frac{\varnumberofusers_{\varoAP}(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage))+1}
{\varchannelbandwidth_{\varoAP}}\!\!<\!\!\frac{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector^{\prime}(\vargamestage))}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}\}$
\EndWhile
\EndIf
\EndWhile
\EndIf
\end{algorithmic}
\rule{\columnwidth}{0.5pt}
\caption{Pseudo code of the update phase of the distributed algorithm.}\label{fig:uphase}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\end{figure}
As we next show, the above constructive proof provides a low complexity algorithm for computing a Nash equilibrium of the game.
\begin{proposition}
For the computation offloading game with non-elastic cloud, when player $\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}$ enters the game in equilibrium $\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1)$,
a new Nash equilibrium can be computed in $O(\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}+\varAPsdim)$ time.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let us consider inductive step $\vargamestage$ in which MU $\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}$ enters the game. From the proof of Theorem~\ref{theo:NE_ene}
it follows that if $\vardecision^*_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vargamestage)=0$, or if $\vardecision^*_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vargamestage)=\varAP\in\varAPs$
but none of the MUs want to deviate from their strategy in $\vardecisionsvector^*(\vargamestage-1)$, then a NE is reached without any update steps.
If $\vardecision^*_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vargamestage)=\varAP\in\varAPs$ and case (i) happens, a NE is reached after one update step.
Now let us consider that $\vardecision^*_{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}}(\vargamestage)=\varAP\in\varAPs$ and case (ii) happens. Note that from Theorem~\ref{theo:NE_ene}
it follows that case (ii) can happen only if $\varAPsdim>1$.
In what follows we characterize the longest sequences of update steps
that lead to a NE for the case when $\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}$ is even and when it is odd.
If $\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}$ is even, the worst case scenario is when
$|\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector^{*}(\vargamestage-1))|=\lceil\frac{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}-1}{2}\rceil$ and $\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector^{*}(\vargamestage-1))=0$,
in the new strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage)$ every MU $\varplayer\in\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector^{*}(\vargamestage-1))$
wants to change to local computing, and when MU $\varplayer$ with highest reluctance $\varreluctanceratio_\varplayer(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$ changes to local computing, all MUs
$\varplayer\in\varplayersset\setminus\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector^{*}(\vargamestage-1))$, i.e., a total of $\lfloor\frac{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}-1}{2}\rfloor$ MUs
would like to start offloading. In the corresponding sequence of update steps that leads to a NE, in the first $2\lfloor\frac{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}-1}{2}\rfloor+1$
update steps all MUs $\varplayer\in\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector^{*}(\vargamestage-1))$ stop to offload and all MUs $\varplayer\in\varplayersset\setminus\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector^{*}(\vargamestage-1))$
start to offload, and in the next $(\varAPsdim-1)$ update steps $(\varAPsdim-1)$ MUs change between APs.
Therefore, a NE is reached after at most $2\lfloor\frac{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}-1}{2}\rfloor+1+(\varAPsdim-1)$ update steps.
If $\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}$ is odd, the worst case scenario is when $\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector^{*}(\vargamestage-1))=1$,
in the new strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage)$ a total of
$\lfloor\frac{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}-1}{2}\rfloor$ MUs of the $|\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector^{*}(\vargamestage-1))|=\lfloor\frac{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}-1}{2}\rfloor+1$ MUs
that offload want to change to local computing, and when MU $\varplayer$ with highest reluctance $\varreluctanceratio_\varplayer(\vardecisionsvector(\vargamestage))$ changes to local computing, all MUs
$\varplayer\in\varplayersset\setminus\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector^{*}(\vargamestage-1))$, i.e., a total of $\lfloor\frac{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}-1}{2}\rfloor-1$ MUs
would like to start offloading. Following the same reasoning as above, we obtain that a NE is reached after at most
$2(\lfloor\frac{\varplayerssetdim^{(\vargamestage)}-1}{2}\rfloor-1)+1+(\varAPsdim-1)$ update steps.
\end{proof}
Consider now that we add players one at a time, we then obtain the following bound on the complexity of computing a NE.
\begin{corollary}
A Nash equilibrium of the computation offloading game with non-elastic cloud can be computed in $O(\varplayerssetdim^2+\varplayerssetdim\varAPsdim)$ time.
\end{corollary}
So far we have shown that starting from a NE and adding a new player, a new NE can be computed. We now show a similar result for the case
when a player leaves.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theo:NE_depart}
Consider the computation offloading game with non-elastic cloud, and assume the system is in a NE. If an existing player leaves the game and the remaining
players play best replies, they converge to a Nash equilibrium after a finite number of updates.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let us consider that player $\varplayer$ leaves the game, when the system is in a NE.
If the strategy of player $\varplayer$ is to perform local computation, none of the remaining players would be affected when player $\varplayer$ leaves.
If the strategy of player $\varplayer$ is to offload using one of the APs, we can consider player $\varplayer$ as a player that after
changing his strategy from offloading to local computing, would have no incentive to offload again. Recall from the
proof of Theorem~\ref{theo:NE_ene} that when a player changes her strategy from offloading to local computing the game converges to a Nash equilibrium after a finite number of updates.
This proves the theorem.
\end{proof}
Observe that Theorem~\ref{theo:NE_ene} and Theorem \ref{theo:NE_depart} allow for efficient computation of equilibrium system operation if the time between user arrivals and departures
is sufficient to compute a new equilibrium. Furthermore, the computation can be done in a decentralized manner, by letting MUs perform best improvements one at a time. The advantage of such a decentralized
implementation could be that MUs do not have to reveal their parameters.
\section{Introduction}
Mobile handsets are increasingly used for various computationally intensive applications,
including augmented reality, natural language processing, face, gesture and object recognition,
and various forms of user profiling for recommendations~\cite{Hakkarainen2008Ismar,Liu2009Percom}. Executing such computationally intensive applications
on mobile handsets may result in slow response times, and can also be detrimental to battery life, which may limit user acceptance.
Mobile cloud computing has emerged as a promising solution to serve the computational
needs of these computationally intenstive applications, while potentially relieving the battery of the mobile handsets~\cite{Cuervo2010MobiSys,Wen12Infocom}.
In the case of mobile cloud computing the mobile devices offload the computations via a wireless network to a cloud infrastructure,
where the computations are performed, and the result is sent back to the mobile handset. While computation offloading
to general purpose cloud infrastructures, such as Amazon EC2, may not be able to provide sufficiently low response times
for many applications, emerging mobile edge computing resources may provide sufficient computational power close
to the network edge to meet all application requirements~\cite{ETSI2015mec}.
Computation offloading to a mobile edge cloud can significantly increase the computational capability
of individual mobile handsets, but the response times may suffer when many handsets attempt to offload
computations to the cloud simultaneously, on the one hand due to the competition for possibly constrained
edge cloud resources, on the other hand due to contention in the wireless access~\cite{Barbera2013Infocom,Chen2015tpds}.
The problem is even more
complex in the case of a dense deployment of access points, e.g., cellular femtocells or WiFi access points,
when each mobile user can choose among several access points to connect to. Good system performance
in this case requires the coordination of the offloading choices of the indvidual mobile handsets, while respecting
their individual performance objectives, both in terms of response time and energy consumption.
In this paper we consider the problem of resource allocation for computation offloading by self-interested mobile users
to a mobile cloud. The objective of each mobile user is to minimize a
linear combination of its response time and its energy consumption for performing a computational task, by choosing whether or not
to offload through one of many access points. Clearly, the choice of a mobile user affects the cost of other mobile users. If too many
mobile users choose offloading through a particular access point then they will achieve low transmission rate. A low transmission rate would
lead to high data transmission time and a corresponding high energy consumption.
In order to capture the interactions between the choices of the mobile users, in this paper we formulate the computation offloading problem as a non-cooperative game,
and address the existence of self-enforcing resource allocations, i.e., equilibrium allocations, and their computation.
Our contibutions in this paper are threefold. First, we show that if the cloud computing resources scale with the number of mobile users then equilibrium allocations
always exist, and we provide a simple algorithm for computing an equilibrium. Second, we show that if the cloud computing resources do not scale with the number
of mobile users then the same algorithm cannot be used for computing an equilibrium as it may cycle infinitely, but we prove that equilibria exist, and we
provide an algorithm with quadratic complexity in the number of mobile users for computing an equilibrium.
Finally, we provide a bound on the price of anarchy for both models of cloud resources. We provide numerical
results based on extensive simulations to illustrate the computational efficiency of the algorithms and to evaluate the price of anarchy for scenarios of practical interest.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. We present the system model in Section~\ref{sec:model}. We prove equilibrium existence and computability
results for the elastic cloud and non-elastic cloud in Sections~\ref{sec::elastic} and~\ref{sec::non-elastic}, respectively. We provide a bound
on the price of anarchy in Section~\ref{sec::poa} and present numerical
results in Section~\ref{sec::numerical}. Section~\ref{sec::related} discusses related work and Section~\ref{sec::conclusion} concludes the paper.
\section{System Model and Problem Formulation}
\label{sec:model}
We consider a mobile cloud computing system that serves a set $\varplayersset\!\! = \!\!\{1,2,...,\varplayerssetdim\}$ of colocated mobile users (MU).
Each MU has a computationally intensive task to perform, and can decide whether to perform the task locally or to offload the computation to a cloud server.
The computational task is characterized by the size $\vardatasize_\varplayer$ of the input data (e.g., in bytes),
and by the number $\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer$ of the CPU cycles required to perform the computation.
To enable a meaningful analysis, we make the common assumption that the set of MUs does not change during computation offloading, i.e., in
the order of seconds~\cite{Wen12Infocom,Yang:2013:FPE:2479942.2479946,Sardellitti2015tsipn,Iosifidis2013WiOpt}.
\subsection{Communication model}
If the MU decides to offload the computation to the cloud server, it has to transmit $\vardatasize_\varplayer$ amount of data pertaining
to its task to the cloud server through one of a set of access points (APs)
denoted by $\varAPs \!\!=\!\! \{1,2,...,\varAPsdim\}$.
Thus, together with local computing MU $\varplayer$ can choose an action from the set $\vardecisionsset_\varplayer \!\!=\!\! \{0,1,2,...,\varAPsdim\}$,
where $0$ corresponds to local computing, i.e., no offloading.
We denote by $\vardecision_\varplayer\!\in\!\vardecisionsset_\varplayer$ the decision of MU $\varplayer$, and refer to it as her strategy.
We refer to the collection $\vardecisionsvector\!=\!(\vardecision_\varplayer)_{\varplayer\in\varplayersset}$ as a strategy profile, and we denote
by $\vardecisionsset\!=\!\times_{\varplayer \in \varplayersset}\vardecisionsset_\varplayer$ the set of all feasible strategy profiles.
We denote by $\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP$ the bandwidth of AP $\varAP$, and
for a strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector$ we denote by $\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector)$ the number of MUs that use AP $\varAP$ for computation offloading,
and by $\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector)\!\!=\!\!\sum_{\varAP\in\varAPs}\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector)$ the number of MUs that offload.
Similarily, for an AP $\varAP\in\varAPs$ we denote by $\varoffloaders_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector)=\{\varplayer|\vardecision_\varplayer=\varAP\}$ the set of MUs that
offload using AP $\varAP$, and we define the set of offloaders as $\varoffloaders(\vardecisionsvector)=\cup_{\varAP\in\varAPs}\varoffloaders_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector)$.
We consider that the bandwidth $\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP$ of AP $\varAP$ is divided equally among the users that are connecting to it, i.e., the uplink rate
$\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)$ of MU $\varplayer$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)=\frac{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}{\varnumberofusers_\varAP(\vardecisionsvector)}.
\end{equation}
The model of equal bandwidth sharing is reasonable if MUs are colocated, or if the APs implement
fair uplink bandwidth allocation~\cite{Wong2009TWC,Cicalo2015eucnc}.
The uplink rate $\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)$ together with the input data size $\vardatasize_\varplayer$ determines the transmission time $\varcloudtransmissiontime_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)$
of MU $\varplayer$ for offloading
via AP $\varAP$,
\begin{equation}
\varcloudtransmissiontime_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)=\frac{\vardatasize_{\varplayer}}{\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)}.
\end{equation}
To model the energy consumption of the MUs, we assume that MU $\varplayer$ uses a constant transmit power of $\varpower_{\varplayer}$ for sending the data, thus the energy consumption of MU $\varplayer$ for
offloading the input data of size $\vardatasize_{\varplayer}$ via AP $\varAP$ is\\
\begin{equation}
\varcloudtransmissionenergy_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)=\frac{\vardatasize_{\varplayer}\varpower_{\varplayer}}{\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)}.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{system_model.pdf}
\caption{An example of a mobile cloud computing system}
\label{fig:model}
\end{center}
\vspace{-1cm}
\hspace{0.015\textwidth}
\end{figure}
\iffalse
We denote by $\varpower_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}$ the transmission power of user $\varplayer$ when he offloads the computation task to the cloud via AP $\varAP$.
Furthermore, we denote by $\varchannelgain_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}$ the channel gain between the mobile user $\varplayer$ and the AP $\varAP$. We define the power of the background interference
$\varinterferencepower_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}$, that user $\varplayer$ receives when he offloads via AP $\varAP$, as a sum of the noise power $\varinterferencepower_{\varplayer}^{0}$ and the
interference power $\varinterferencepower_{\varplayer}^{1}$
from other mobile device users who transmit but do not involve in the mobile cloud computing, i.e. $\varinterferencepower_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}=\varinterferencepower_{\varplayer}^{0}+
\varinterferencepower_{\varplayer}^{1}$. Given the channel bandwidth $\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP$, the uplink data rate for computation offloading of user $\varplayer$ via AP $\varAP$
can be defined as:
\begin{equation}
\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)=\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP
\log_2 \Big(1+\frac{\varpower_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}\varchannelgain_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}}{\varinterferencepower_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}+
\displaystyle{\sum_{\varoplayer \in \{\varplayersset \setminus \{\varplayer\} | \vardecision_\varoplayer=\varAP\}}}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\varpower_{\varoplayer}^{\varAP}\varchannelgain_{\varoplayer}^{\varAP}} \Big)
\end{equation}
\fi
\subsection{Computation model}
In what follows we introduce our model of the time and energy consumption of performing the computation locally and in the cloud server.
\subsubsection{Local computing}
In the case of local computing data need not be transmitted, but the task has to be processed using local
computing power. We denote by $\varusercapability_\varplayer$ the computational capability of MU $\varplayer$,
and express the time it takes for MU $\varplayer$ to perform the computation task
$<\!\!\vardatasize_\varplayer,\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer\!\!>$ locally by
\begin{equation}
\varlocalcomputingtime_{\varplayer} = \frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_{\varplayer}}{\varusercapability_{\varplayer}}.
\end{equation}
In order to model the energy consumption of local computing we
denote by $\varenergyconstant_\varplayer$ the consumed energy per CPU cycle, thus we obtain
\begin{equation}
\varlocalcomputingenergy_{\varplayer} = \varenergyconstant_{\varplayer}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{\varplayer}.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Cloud computing}
In the case of cloud computing, after the data are transmitted via an AP, processing is done at the cloud server.
We denote the computation capability of the cloud by $\varcloudcapability$, and by $\varcloudcapability_\varplayer$ the computation capability assigned to MU $\varplayer$ by the cloud.
We consider two models of scaling for the computational capability of the cloud. In the \emph{elastic} model each MU that offloads receives $\varcloudcapability_\varplayer=\varcloudcapability$
amount of computing power, which is a resonable assumption for large cloud computing infrastructures.
In the \emph{non-elastic} model an MU that offloads is assigned $\varcloudcapability_\varplayer(\vardecisionsvector)=\varcloudcapability/{\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector)}$ computation capability, i.e., the computing power is shared equally among all MUs that offload, which may be a reasonable model of emerging
mobile edge cloud infrastructures with limited computational power and scaling~\cite{ETSI2015mec}.
Given $\varcloudcapability_\varplayer$ we use a linear model to compute the execution time of a task $<\!\!\vardatasize_\varplayer,\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer\!\!>$ that is offladed by MU $\varplayer$,\\
\begin{equation}
\varcloudcomputingtime_{\varplayer} = \frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_{\varplayer}}{\varcloudcapability_\varplayer}.
\end{equation}
Figure ~\ref{fig:model} shows an example of
a mobile cloud computing system that consists of $\varAPsdim=3$ APs and $\varplayerssetdim=5$ MUs in which MUs $a$ and $c$ offload using AP 1,
MU $b$ offloads using AP 2, and MUs $d$ and $e$ perform the local computation.
\subsection{Cost Model}
We consider that the cost of an MU can be modeled as a linear combination of the time it takes to finish the computation and its energy consumption.
For MU $\varplayer$ we denote by $\varenergyweight_{\varplayer}$ the weight attributed to energy consumption and by $\vartimeweight_{\varplayer}$ the weight
attributed to the time it takes to finish the computation, $0 \leq \varenergyweight_\varplayer< \vartimeweight_\varplayer \leq 1$.
Using these notation, for the case of local computing the cost of MU $\varplayer$ is determined by the local computing time and the corresponing energy consumption,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:local_cost_2}
\varlocalcost_{\varplayer} = \vartimeweight_{\varplayer}\varlocalcomputingtime_{\varplayer} + \varenergyweight_{\varplayer}\varlocalcomputingenergy_{\varplayer} = (\frac{\vartimeweight_\varplayer}{\varusercapability_\varplayer}+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varenergyconstant_\varplayer)\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer.
\end{equation}
For the case of offloading the cost is determined by the transmission time, the corresponding transmit energy, and the computing time in the cloud,
\begin{eqnarray}
\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector) &=& \vartimeweight_{\varplayer}(\varcloudcomputingtime_{\varplayer}+\varcloudtransmissiontime_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)) + \varenergyweight_{\varplayer}\varcloudtransmissionenergy_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)\nonumber\\
&=&(\vartimeweight_\varplayer+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer)\frac{\vardatasize_\varplayer}{\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)} + \vartimeweight_\varplayer\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}{\varcloudcapability_\varplayer}.\label{eq:offloading_cost_2}
\end{eqnarray}
Similar to previous works~\cite{Chen2015tpds,Huang2012twc,Kumar2010Computer}, we do not model the time needed to transmit the results of the computation from the cloud server to the MU, as for typical applications like face and speech recognition, the size of the result of the computation is much smaller than $\vardatasize_\varplayer$.
For notational convenience let us define the indicator function $\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varplayer},\varAP)$ for MU $\varplayer$ as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:indicator_function}
\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varplayer},\varAP)\!=\!
\left\{\!\!\! \begin{array}{ll}
1,& \mbox{ if }
\vardecision_{\varplayer}=\varAP
\\
0,&
\mbox{ otherwise.}\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
We can then express the cost of MU $\varplayer$ in strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector$ as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cost_function}
\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecisionsvector)=
\varlocalcost_{\varplayer} \varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varplayer},0)
+
\sum_{\varAP\in\varAPs} {\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varplayer},\varAP)}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Computation Offloading Game}
We consider that the objective of each MU is to minimize its cost (\ref{eq:cost_function}), i.e., to find a strategy
\begin{equation}
\vardecision^*_\varplayer \in \argmin_{\vardecision_\varplayer\in\vardecisionsset_\varplayer}\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer} ),
\label{eq::best-reply}
\end{equation}
where we use $\vardecision_{-\varplayer}$ to denote the strategies of all MUs except MU $\varplayer$. Clearly, the strategy of an MU influences the cost of the other MUs, and thus we can model the problem as a strategic game $\varthegame=<\varplayersset, (\vardecisionsset_\varplayer)_\varplayer, (\varcostfunction_{\varplayer})_\varplayer>$, in which the players are the MUs. We refer to the game as the \emph{computation offloading game}.
We are interested in whether cost minimizing MUs can reach a strategy profile in which no MU can further decrease her cost through changing her strategy, i.e., a Nash equilibrium of the game $\varthegame$.
\begin{definition}
A Nash equilibrium (NE) of the strategic game $<\!\!\varplayersset, (\vardecisionsset_\varplayer)_\varplayer, (\varcostfunction_{\varplayer})_\varplayer\!\!>$ is a strategy profile $\vardecision^*$ such that
$$
\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision^*_\varplayer,\vardecision^*_{-\varplayer} )\leq \varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision^*_{-\varplayer} ).
$$
\end{definition}
Given a strategy profile $(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})$ we say that strategy $\vardecision^\prime_\varplayer$ is an improvement step for MU $\varplayer$ if $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision^\prime_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) < \varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer} )$. We call a sequence of improvement steps in which one MU changes her strategy at a time an \emph{improvement path}.
Furthermore, we say that a strategy $\vardecision^*_\varplayer$ is a best reply to $ \vardecision_{-\varplayer}$ if it solves (\ref{eq::best-reply}), and we call an improvement path in which all improvement steps are best reply a \emph{best improvement path}. Observe that in a NE all MUs play their best replies to each others' strategies.
In the rest of the paper we investigate whether NE exist for the \emph{elastic} and for the \emph{non-elastic} cloud model, and whether the MUs can compute a NE efficiently using distributed algorithms.
\iffalse
\subsubsection{Generalized ordinal potential function}
\begin{itemize}
\item The treshold $\vartreshold_{\varplayer}$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
\vartreshold_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}=\frac{\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecisionsvector)}{\vartimeweight_{\varplayer}+\varenergyweight_{\varplayer}
\varpower_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}}
\end{equation}
\item We define the generalized ordinal potential function as
\begin{equation}
\Phi(\vardecisionsvector)= - \displaystyle{\sum_{k=1}^{\varAPsdim} \displaystyle{\sum_{\varplayer=1}^{\varplayerssetdim}}}
\vartreshold_{\varplayer}^{k}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varplayer},k)-
\displaystyle{\sum_{\varplayer=1}^{\varplayerssetdim}}\vartreshold_{\varplayer}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_\varplayer,0)
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\begin{proof}
We first show that $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$
implies $\Phi_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\Phi_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$ for a user $\varplayer$.
According to ~(\ref{eq:cost_function}), ~(\ref{eq:offloading_cost}) and ~(\ref{eq:local_cost}), the condition
$\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$ implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:condition_1}
\vartreshold_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}>\vartreshold_{\varplayer}
\end{equation}
In the case of player $\varplayer$ we have
\begin{equation}
\Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})
=-\vartreshold_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}-\displaystyle{\sum_{k=1}^{\varAPsdim}\sum_{\varoplayer\neq\varplayer}
\vartreshold_{\varoplayer}^{k}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varoplayer},k)}-
\displaystyle{\sum_{\varoplayer\neq\varplayer}\vartreshold_{\varoplayer}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varoplayer},0)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\Phi(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})
=-\displaystyle{\sum_{k=1}^{\varAPsdim}\sum_{\varoplayer\neq\varplayer}
\vartreshold_{\varoplayer}^{k}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varoplayer},k)}- \vartreshold_{\varplayer}-
\displaystyle{\sum_{\varoplayer\neq\varplayer}\vartreshold_{\varoplayer}\varindicatorfunction(\vardecision_{\varoplayer},0)}
\end{equation}
which implies
\begin{equation}
\Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})-\Phi(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})=-\vartreshold_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}+\vartreshold_{\varplayer}.
\end{equation}
It follows from ~(\ref{eq:condition_1}) that $\Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})-\Phi(0,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})<0.$
Similarly we can show that $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$
implies $\Phi_{\varplayer}(0,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\Phi_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$.
We now show that $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varoAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$
implies $\Phi_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\Phi_{\varplayer}(\varoAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$ for a user $\varplayer$.
According to ~(\ref{eq:cost_function}), ~(\ref{eq:offloading_cost}) and ~(\ref{eq:local_cost}), the condition
$\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})<\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\varoAP,\vardecision_{\varplayer})$ implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:condition_2}
\vartreshold_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}>\vartreshold_{\varplayer}^{\varoAP}
\end{equation}
In the case of player $\varplayer$ we have
\begin{equation}
\Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})-\Phi(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})=-\vartreshold_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}+
\vartreshold_{\varplayer}^{\varoAP}.
\end{equation}
It follows from ~(\ref{eq:condition_2}) that $\Phi(\varAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})-\Phi(\varoAP,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})<0.$
\end{proof}
\fi
\section{Numerical Results}
\label{sec::numerical}
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\begin{minipage}{0.485\textwidth}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{test_cost_ratio_opt_algo.pdf}
\caption{Ratio between the total cost achieved by the proposed distributed algorithm and the optimal total cost for the elastic and non-elastic cloud,
$\varAPsdim = 3$. The results shown are the averages of 500 simulations, together with 95\% confidence intervals.}
\label{fig:total_cost}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{0.015\textwidth}
\begin{minipage}{0.485\textwidth}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{number_of_offloaders.pdf}
\caption{Offloading ratio vs. number of users $\varplayerssetdim$ for the elastic and non-elastic cloud,
$\varAPsdim=3$. The results shown are the averages of 500 simulations, together with 95\% confidence intervals.}
\label{fig:num_offlo}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{number_of_iterations.pdf}
\caption{Number of iterations vs. number of users $\varplayerssetdim$ for the elastic and non-elastic cloud,
$\varAPsdim = $10, 50 and 100. The results shown are the averages of 100 simulations, together with 95\% confidence intervals.}
\label{fig:num_iter}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.9cm}
\end{figure}
We use simulations to evaluate the cost performance and the computational time of the proposed distributed algorithms.
\subsection{Evaluation Scenario}
In all configurations, we consider that the bandwidth of each AP is drawn from a normal distribution with mean $\mu=5$ \textit{MHz} and standard deviation of $0.2\mu$. The parameters
$<\!\!\vardatasize_\varplayer,\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer\!\!>$ that characterize the computation tasks, the computational capability
of MU $\varusercapability_\varplayer$ and the weights attributed to energy consumption $\varenergyweight_\varplayer$ and the time it takes to finish the computation
$\vartimeweight_\varplayer$ were drawn
from a continuous uniform distribution with parameters $[0.42, 2]$Mb, $[0.1,0.8]$~\textit{Gigacycles}, $[0.5, 1]$~\textit{Gigacycles}, $[0,1]$ and $[0,1]$, respectively.
The consumed energy per CPU cycle $\varenergyconstant_\varplayer$ was set to $10^{-11}(\varusercapability_{\varplayer})^{2}$ according to
measurements reported in~\cite{Wen12Infocom,miettinenenergy}. The data transmit power $\varpower_\varplayer$ was set to 0.4\textit{W} according to~\cite{balasubramanian2009energy}.
In the case of the non-elastic cloud, the computation capability of the cloud $\varcloudcapability$ was set to $100$~\textit{Gigacycles}~\cite{soyata2012cloud} and in the case of the elastic cloud each MU that
offloads receives $\varcloudcapability_\varplayer= 100$~\textit{Gigacycles} amount of computing power.
In order to evaluate the cost performance of the equilibrium strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector^*$ computed by the proposed distributed algorithms,
we computed the optimal strategy profile $\bar{\vardecisionsvector}$ that minimizes the total cost, i.e.,
$\bar{\vardecisionsvector}=\arg\min_\vardecisionsvector\sum_{\varplayer\in\varplayersset}{\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecisionsvector)}$.
Furthermore, as a baseline for comparison we use the system cost that can be achieved in the strategy profile
in which all MUs execute their computation tasks locally, which coincides with the bound on the PoA.
\subsection{Price of Anarachy}
Figure~\ref{fig:total_cost} shows the cost ratio $\varcostfunction(\vardecisionsvector^*)/\varcostfunction(\bar{\vardecisionsvector})$ in the case of the
elastic as well as in the case of the non-elastic cloud. To make the computation of the optimal strategy profile $\bar{\vardecisionsvector}$ feasible, we considered
a scenario with $\varAPsdim=3$ APs and we show the cost ratio $\varcostfunction(\vardecisionsvector^{*})/\varcostfunction(\bar{\vardecisionsvector})$ as a function of the number of MUs.
Figure~\ref{fig:total_cost} shows that the results reached by the algorithms are close to the optimal results and the difference between the elastic cloud case and
the non-elastic cloud case is negligible. Furthermore, we can observe that the cost ratio increases slightly up to $\varplayerssetdim=6$ MUs and from that point it remains fairly unchanged.
This is due to the number of MUs that choose to offload, as we will see later.
The upper bound on the PoA, which is also shown in Figure~\ref{fig:total_cost}, additionally confirms that the proposed distributed algorithms perform good in terms of the cost ratio. It is interesting to note that the gap between the PoA bound and the actual cost ratio decreases with increasing number of MUs.
To get insight into the structure of the equilibrium strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector^{*}$ computed by the distributed algorithms,
we compare the number of MUs that offload in equilibrium and the number of MUs that offload in the optimal strategy profile $\bar{\vardecisionsvector}$,
by computing the offloading difference ratio $(\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector^{*})-\varnumberofusers(\bar{\vardecisionsvector}))/\varplayerssetdim$.
Figure~\ref{fig:num_offlo} shows the offloading difference ratio
corresponding to the results shown in Figure~\ref{fig:total_cost}. The results show that the offloading difference ratio is fairly small in the case of the
elastic cloud as well as in the case of the non-elastic cloud. As the number of MUs increases, the offloading difference ratio increases too, which explains the
increased cost ratio observed in Figure~\ref{fig:total_cost}, as more offloaders reduce the achievable rate, which in turn leads to increased costs.
The observation that the number of MUs that offload is higher in equilibrium than in the optimal solution
is consistent with the theory of the tragedy of the commons in economic theory~\cite{Hardin1968Science}.
\subsection{Computational Complexity}
In order to evaluate the computational complexity of the proposed algorithms, we study the number of iterations needed
to compute the strategy profile $\vardecisionsvector^{*}$ for three scenarios with $\varAPsdim=10,50,100$ APs, respectively.
For the elastic cloud the number of iterations is the number of update steps, while for the non-elastic cloud the number of iterations is the sum of the update steps over all induction steps.
Figure~\ref{fig:num_iter} shows the number of iterations as a function of the number of MUs. For the non-elastic cloud we consider two orderings of adding MUs: in the first case the MUs are added in random order, while in the second case the MUs enter the game in increasing order of their ratio $\frac{\vardatasize_{\varplayer}}{\varlocalcost_{\varplayer}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{\varplayer}}$.
In both cases we use the same simulation scenarios in order to compute the number of the iterations. Intuitively, we can expect
that the second case results in a smaller number of the iterations, since the MUs with lower $\frac{\vardatasize_{\varplayer}}{\varlocalcost_{\varplayer}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{\varplayer}}$ ratio
have higher computational capability to execute computationally more demanding tasks with smaller offloading data size than the MUs with higher $\frac{\vardatasize_{\varplayer}}{\varlocalcost_{\varplayer}\varCPUcyclesnumber_{\varplayer}}$ ratio.
However, the simulation results show that the number of iterations is fairly insensitive to the order of adding the MUs and mostly depends on the number of MUs $\varplayerssetdim$. This insensitivity allows for the implementation of a very low-overhead decentralized solution, as the coordinator need not care about the order in which the MUs are added for computing the equilibrium allocation.
\iffalse
\begin{itemize}
\item $\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP$ randomly chosen according to a normal distribution with the expectation $\mu=5MHz$ and standard deviation $0.2\mu$.
\item $\varcloudcapability=100\textit{Gigacycles}$.
\item $\bar{\varcloudcapability_\varplayer}=100\textit{Gigacycles}$ in the case of the elastic cloud.
\item $\varusercapability_\varplayer$ randomly chosen from the set $\{0.5, 0.8, 1\}\textit{Gigacycles}$.
\item $\vartimeweight_\varplayer$ randomly chosen according to a uniform distribution in the in the interval (0,1).
\item $\varenergyweight_\varplayer$ randomly chosen according to a uniform distribution in the in the interval (0,1).
\item $\varenergyconstant_\varplayer=10^{-11}(\varusercapability_{\varplayer})^{2}$
\item $\vardatasize_\varplayer$ randomly chosen according to a uniform distribution in the in the interval $(0.42, 2)\textit{Mb}$.
\item $\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer$ randomly chosen according to a uniform distribution in the in the interval $(0.1, 0.8)\textit{Gigacycles}$.
\item $\varpower_\varplayer=0.4\textit{W}$ for all users.
\end{itemize}
\fi
\section{Price of Anarchy}
\label{sec::poa}
We have so far shown that NE exist and provided low complexity algortihms for computing a NE. We now address the important question
how far the system performance would be from optimal in a NE. To quantify the difference from the
optimal performance we use the price of anarchy (PoA), defined as the ratio of the worst case NE cost and the minimal
cost
\begin{equation}
PoA =\frac{\max\limits_{\vardecisionsvector^{*}}\sum_{\varplayer \in \varplayersset}\varcostfunction_\varplayer(\vardecisionsvector^{*})}
{\min\limits_{\vardecisionsvector\in\vardecisionsset}\sum_{\varplayer \in \varplayersset}\varcostfunction_\varplayer(\vardecisionsvector)}.
\end{equation}
In what follows we give an upper bound on the PoA.
\begin{theorem}
The price of anarchy for the computation offloading game is upper bounded by
$$\frac{\sum_{\varplayer \in \varplayersset}\varlocalcost_\varplayer}{\sum_{\varplayer\in\varplayersset}\min\{\varlocalcost_\varplayer,\bar{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,1}},...,
\bar{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAPsdim}}\}},$$
both in the case of elastic cloud and in the case of non-elastic cloud.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First we show that if there is a NE in which all players perform local computation then it is the worst case NE.
To show this let $\vardecisionsvector^{*}$ be an arbitrary NE.
Observe that $\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*},\vardecision_{-\varplayer}^{*})
\leq \varlocalcost_\varplayer$ holds for every player $\varplayer \in \varplayersset$. Otherwise, if $\exists \varplayer \in \varplayersset$ such that
$\varcostfunction_{\varplayer}(\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*},\vardecision_{-\varplayer}^{*}) > \varlocalcost_\varplayer$, player $\varplayer$ would have an incentive to deviate from
decision $\vardecision_{\varplayer}^{*}$, which contradicts our initial assumption that $\vardecisionsvector^{*}$ is a NE. Thus in any NE
$\sum_{\varplayer\in\varplayersset}\varcostfunction_\varplayer(\vardecision_\varplayer^{*},\vardecision_{-\varplayer}^{*})\leq\sum_{\varplayer\in\varplayersset}\varlocalcost_\varplayer$
holds, and if all players performing local computation is a NE then it is the worst case NE.\\
Now we derive a lower bound for the optimal solution of the computation offloading game in the case of both the elastic and non-elastic cloud. Let us consider an arbitrary decision profile
$(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})\in\vardecisionsset$. If $\vardecision_\varplayer=0$, then $\varcostfunction_\varplayer(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})=\varlocalcost_\varplayer$.
Otherwise, if $\vardecision_\varplayer=\varAP$ for some $\varAP\in\varAPs$, we have that in the best case $\vardecision_\varoplayer=0$ for every $\varoplayer\in\varplayersset\setminus\{\varplayer\}$,
and thus $\varnumberofusers(\vardecisionsvector)=1$. Therefore, $\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})\leq \varchannelbandwidth_\varAP$ and
$\varcloudcapability_\varplayer\leq\varcloudcapability$, which implies that
\begin{align}
\nonumber & \varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAP}(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer}) =
(\vartimeweight_\varplayer+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer)\frac{\vardatasize_\varplayer}{\varuplinkrate_{\varplayer}^{\varAP}(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})} +
\vartimeweight_\varplayer\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}{\varcloudcapability_\varplayer}\\ \nonumber
& \geq (\vartimeweight_\varplayer+\varenergyweight_\varplayer\varpower_\varplayer)\frac{\vardatasize_\varplayer}{\varchannelbandwidth_\varAP}
+ \vartimeweight_\varplayer\frac{\varCPUcyclesnumber_\varplayer}{\varcloudcapability}=\bar{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAP}}.\nonumber
\end{align}
Hence, we have $\varcostfunction_\varplayer(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})\!\geq\!\min\{\varlocalcost_\varplayer,\bar{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,1}},...,\bar{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAPsdim}}\}$
and $\sum_{\varplayer\in\varplayersset}\varcostfunction_\varplayer(\vardecision_\varplayer,\vardecision_{-\varplayer})
\!\geq\! \sum_{\varplayer \in \varplayersset} \min\{\varlocalcost_\varplayer,\bar{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,1}},...,\bar{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAPsdim}}\}$. Using these we can establish the following bound
\begin{align}
\nonumber PoA\!=\!\frac{\max\limits_{\vardecisionsvector^{*}}\!\sum_{\varplayer \in \varplayersset}\!\varcostfunction_\varplayer(\vardecisionsvector^{*})}
{\min\limits_{\vardecisionsvector\in\vardecisionsset}\!\sum_{\varplayer \in \varplayersset}\!\varcostfunction_\varplayer(\vardecisionsvector)}
\!\leq\!\frac{\!\sum_{\varplayer \in \varplayersset}\!\varlocalcost_\varplayer}{\!\sum_{\varplayer\in\varplayersset}\!\min\{\varlocalcost_\varplayer,\!\bar{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,1}}\!,\!...,
\!\bar{\varcloudcost_{\varplayer,\varAPsdim}}\}},
\end{align}
which proves the theorem.
\end{proof}
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec::related}
There is a significant body of works that deals with the design of energy efficient computation
offloading for a single mobile user~\cite{Cuervo2010MobiSys,Wen12Infocom,Barbera2013Infocom,Kumar2013MobNet,Rudenko:1998:SPC:584007.584008,Huang2012twc,Hyytia2015wowmom}.
The experimental results in~\cite{Rudenko:1998:SPC:584007.584008} showed that significant battery power savings can be achieved
by computation offloading.~\cite{Barbera2013Infocom} studied the commmunication overhead of computation offloading and the impact of bandwidth availability on an experimental platform.
~\cite{Cuervo2010MobiSys} proposed a code partitioning solution for fine-grained energy-aware computation offloading.
~\cite{Huang2012twc} proposed an algorithm for offloading partitioned code under bandwidth and delay constraints.
~\cite{Wen12Infocom} proposed CPU frequency and transmission power adaptation for energy-optimal computation offloading under delay constraints.
~\cite{Hyytia2015wowmom} modeled the offloading problem under stochastic task arrivals as a Markov decision process and provided a near-optimal offloading policy.
A number of recent works considered the problem of joint energy minimization for multiple mobile users~\cite{Yang:2013:FPE:2479942.2479946,Rahimi2013Cloud,Sardellitti2015tsipn}.
~\cite{Yang:2013:FPE:2479942.2479946} studies computation partitioning for streaming data processing with the aim of maximizing throughput, considering sharing of
computation instances among multiple mobile users, and proposes a genetic algorithm as a heuristic for solving the resulting optimization problem.
~\cite{Rahimi2013Cloud} models computation offloading to a tiered cloud infrastructure under user mobility in a location-time workflow framework, and proposes a heuristic for minimizing the
users' cost.
~\cite{Sardellitti2015tsipn} aims at minimizing the mobile users' energy consumption by joint allocation of radio resources and cloud computing power, and provides an iterative
algorithm to find a local minimum of the optimization problem.
A few recent works provided a game theoretic treatment of computation offloading in a game theoretical setting~\cite{Wang2013Sose,Cardellini2015,Chen2015tpds,Chen2015ToN,Meskar2015ICC,Ma:2015:GAC:2811587.2811598}.
~\cite{Wang2013Sose} considers a two-stage problem, where first each mobile user decides what share of its task to offload so as to minimize its energy consumption and to meet its delay deadline,
and then the cloud allocates computational resources to the offloaded tasks.
~\cite{Cardellini2015} considers a two-tier cloud infrastructure and stochastic task arrivals and proves the existence of equilibria and provides an algorithm for computing and equilibrium.
~\cite{Meskar2015ICC} considers tasks that arrive simultaneously, a single wireless link, and elastic cloud, and show the existence of equilibria when all mobile users have the same delay budget.
Our work differs from~\cite{Wang2013Sose} in that we consider that the allocation of cloud resources is known to the mobile users, from~\cite{Cardellini2015} in that we take into account
contention in the wireless access, and from~\cite{Meskar2015ICC} in that we consider multiple wireless links and a non-elastic cloud.
Most related to our work are the problems considered in~\cite{Chen2015tpds,Chen2015ToN,Ma:2015:GAC:2811587.2811598}.~\cite{Chen2015tpds} considers contention on a single wireless link and an elastic cloud, assumes upload rates to be determined by the Shannon capacity of an interference channel, and shows that the game is a potential game.
~\cite{Chen2015ToN} extends the model to multiple wireless links and shows that the game is still a potential game. Unlike these works, we consider fair bandwidth sharing and consider the case of non-elastic cloud.
~\cite{Ma:2015:GAC:2811587.2811598} considers multiple wireless links, fair bandwidth sharing and a non-elastic cloud, and claims the game to have an exact potential.
In our work we on the one hand extend the model to an elastic cloud, on the other hand we show that an exact potential cannot exist in case of a non-elastic cloud, but at the same time we prove the existence of an equilibrium allocation, provide an efficient algorithm with quadratic complexity for computing one, and provide a bound on the price of anarchy.
Besides providing efficient algorithms for computing equilibria, the importance of our contribution lies in the fact that while games with an elastic cloud are player-specific singleton congestion games for which the existence of equilibria is known~\cite{Milchtaich1996111}, the non-elastic cloud model does not fall in this category of games and thus no general equilibrium existence result exists.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:1}
\noindent Let ${\mathbb D}$ be the open unit disk, and let ${\mathbb T}$ be the boundary circle parameterized by $\{\theta: 0 \leq \theta <2\pi\}$. Let
\begin{equation} \label{eq1.1}
{\mathcal E}_{\mathbb D} (u, v) = \int_{\mathbb D} \nabla u (x) \nabla v(x) dx
\end{equation}
be the standard Dirichlet form on ${\mathbb D}$. In classical analysis, it is well-known that a function $\varphi \in L^1({\mathbb T})$ can be extended to a harmonic functions on ${\mathbb D}$ via the Poisson integral
$$
(H\varphi)(x) = \int_{\mathbb T} \varphi (\theta) K(x, \theta)d \theta, \qquad x \in {\mathbb D},
$$
where $K(x, \theta)$ is the Poisson kernel. Furthermore, there is an induced Dirichlet form on ${\mathbb T}$ defined by
$$
{\mathcal E}_{\mathbb T} (\varphi, \psi) = {\mathcal E}_{\mathbb D} (H\varphi, H\psi).
$$
Indeed, it can be shown that
\begin{equation} \label{eq1.2}
{\mathcal E}_{\mathbb T} (\varphi, \psi) = \frac 1{16 \pi}\int_ {\mathbb T} \int_ {\mathbb T} (\varphi(\theta) -\varphi (\theta'))(\psi(\theta) -\psi(\theta'))\ \frac 1{\sin^2(\frac {\theta- \theta'}2)}\ d\theta d\theta'.
\end{equation}
This integral is called the {\it Douglas integral} (see \cite[Section 1.2]{FOT}). From the probabilistic point of view, the Dirichlet form in \eqref{eq1.1} is associated with a Brownian motion on ${\mathbb D}$. The hitting distribution of the Brownian motion at the boundary ${\mathbb T}$ (starting from $0$) is the uniform distribution $\frac {d\theta}{2 \pi}$; the induced Dirichlet form in \eqref{eq1.2} corresponds to the reflecting Brownian motion on $\overline {\mathbb D}$ time-changed by its local time on ${\mathbb T}$, and defines a jump process on ${\mathbb T}$ which is a Cauchy process \cite{CF}.
\medskip
The above consideration has a counterpart in Markov chain theory. Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a transient Markov chain on an infinite discrete set $X$ with transition probability $P$. According to the discrete potential theory of Markov chains \cite{Dy,Wo1,Wo2}, a chain starting at the reference point $\vartheta$ will converge to the {\it Martin boundary} ${\mathcal M}$ at infinity, and defines a hitting distribution $\nu=\nu_\vartheta$ on ${\mathcal M}$. Also, there is a Martin kernel $K(x, \xi), \ x\in X, \xi \in {\mathcal M}$, which plays the same role as the Poisson kernel: if we define
$$
(H \varphi) (x) = \int_{\mathcal M}\varphi (\xi) K(x, \xi) d\nu (\xi), \qquad x \in X,
$$
then $u=H\varphi$ is harmonic on $X$, i.e., $u=Pu$.
We call a Markov chain {\it reversible} if the transition probability is of the form $P(x, y) = c(x, y)/m(x)$, where $c(x,y) =c(y,x) \geq 0$, and $m(x) = \sum_{y\in X} c(x,y)$. We define a graph energy ${\mathcal E}_X$ on $X$ by
\begin{equation} \label{eq1.3}
{\mathcal E}_X[u] = \frac 12\sum_{x, y \in X} c(x, y) |u(x) -u(y)|^2.
\end{equation}
In \cite{Si}, Silverstein showed that for such Markov chain, there is an energy form ${\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M}$ on ${\mathcal M}$ that satisfies
$$
{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M} [\varphi] = {\mathcal E}_X [H\varphi],
$$
and ${\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M}$ has the expression
\begin{equation}\label{eq1.4}
{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M} [\varphi] = \int_{\mathcal M}\int_{\mathcal M} |\varphi(\xi) - \varphi (\eta)|^2 \,\Theta (\xi, \eta)\,d\nu (\xi) d\nu (\eta).
\end{equation}
Here $\Theta (\cdot, \cdot)$ is called the {\it Na\"{i}m's $\Theta$-kernel} (or simply, the {\it Na\"{i}m kernel}). It was first introduced in classical potential theory by Na\"{i}m \cite{Na}, and a general Douglas integral formula (corresponding to \eqref{eq1.2}) on Euclidean domain was proved by Doob \cite{Do}. Recently, Georgakopoulos introduced a class of ``group-walk random graphs", and he outlined a study of the Poisson boundary and the Na\"{i}m kernel using electrical network theory in \cite{Ge}.
\bigskip
The domain of ${\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M}$ in \eqref{eq1.4} consists of square integrable functions $\varphi$ such that ${\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M}[\varphi] < \infty$. If the domain is dense in $L^2({\mathcal M}, \nu)$, then ${\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M}$ defines a non-local Dirichlet form. In the analysis of fractals, there is a large literature on the study of local and non-local Dirichlet forms as well as their associated heat kernels on self-similar sets, $d$-sets and more general metric measure spaces \cite{CF, CK, GHL1, GHL2,GHL3,J,Ki1,Ki2,P1,P2,St,Str}. In many cases, a non-local form can be obtained by subordination of a local form, and has a jump kernel with order $|\xi-\eta|^{-(\alpha + \beta)}$, where $\alpha$ is the Hausdorff dimension of the underlying set and $\beta$ is the walk dimension of the corresponding stable-like process \cite{St,CK}.
\medskip
For a self-similar set $K$ generated by an iterated function system (IFS), there is a symbolic space (coding space) $\Sigma^*$ which gives a convenient representation of any $\xi \in K$ (analogous to the dyadic expansion of a real number). If the IFS satisfies the {\it open set condition} (OSC), then the representation is unique for generic points of $K$. Recently, there are studies of random walks on $\Sigma^*$ such that $K$ can be identified with the Martin boundary ${\mathcal M}$ under the canonical homeomorphism \cite{DS1,DS2,DS3,JLW, Ka, LN1, LN2, LW2}. In particular, Kaimanovich \cite{Ka} used the Sierpi\'{n}ski gasket to introduce a natural {\it augmented tree} (Sierpi\'{n}ski graph) by adding horizontal edges on $\Sigma^*$ according to the intersections of the cells from the IFS. This work brings into play the hyperbolic structure and hyperbolic boundary which are powerful tool for studying random walks on the graph. Kaimanovich's augmented tree was extended to general self-similar sets in \cite{LW1, LW3}.
\bigskip
In this paper we will study random walks on the augmented trees $(\Sigma^*, {\mathfrak E})$ and their induced Dirichlet forms on $K$. We investigate a class of reversible random walks on $(\Sigma^*,{\mathfrak E})$ so that
\vspace {0.2cm}
\noindent \hspace {0.3cm} (i) the self-similar set $K$ can be identified with the Martin boundary, and
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent \hspace {0.3cm}(ii) the hitting distribution $\nu = \nu_\vartheta$ is the normalized Hausdorff measure on $K$, and the Na\"{i}m kernel is of order $|\xi-\eta|^{-(\alpha + \beta)}$.
\medskip
As a special case, Kigami \cite{Ki2} studied reversible random walks on trees where the Martin boundaries are Cantor-type sets. He used the resistance metric to give explicit expressions of the hitting distribution $\nu$ and the Martin kernel $K(x,y)$. Also, under the volume doubling property of $\nu$ with respect to the resistance metric, he studied the associated jump process and estimates of the heat kernel. These results were extended to the non-compact case in \cite{Ki3}. Recently, a duality between reversible random walks on trees and certain jump processes on the boundaries was studied in detail in \cite{BGPW}.
\bigskip
Let $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ denote an IFS of contractive similitudes, and let $K$ denote the self-similar set generated. For simplicity, here we only state the case where the IFS is {\it homogenous} (all the maps $S_i$ have the same contraction ratio $r$). Following standard notations, we let $\Sigma = \{1, 2, \ldots, N\}$, $\Sigma^n =
\{\mathbf{x}=i_1 \cdots i_n: i_1, \cdots, i_n \in \Sigma\}, \ n \geq 1$
(by convention $\Sigma^0 =\{\vartheta\}$) and use $|\mathbf{x}|$ to denote the length of $\mathbf{x}$; also we let $\Sigma^{\ast}:=\bigcup_{n=0}^{\infty}\Sigma^n$, the set of finite words, and $\Sigma^{\infty}:=\{ i_1 i_2 \cdots :\
i_1, i_2, \cdots \in \Sigma\}$, the set of infinite words.
There is a natural surjection $\kappa: \Sigma^{\infty} \rightarrow K$
defined by
\begin{equation*}
\{\kappa(\omega)\} = {\bigcap}_{m \geq 0} \ S_{i_1 i_2 \cdots i_m}(K), \qquad \omega = i_1 i_2 \cdots \in \Sigma^{\infty},
\end{equation*}
where $S_{i_1 i_2 \cdots i_m} = S_{i_1} \circ S_{i_2} \circ \cdots \circ S_{i_m}$. Hence each $\xi \in K$ admits a symbolic representation (coding) $\omega \in \Sigma^\infty$.
\medskip
The symbolic space $\Sigma^*$ has a natural tree structure ${\mathfrak E}_v$ which is referred to as the set of ``vertical edges". To consider (i) above, we enrich this simple graph by adding more ``horizontal edges", denoted by ${\mathfrak E}_h$, to reflect the behaviors of the neighboring cells of $K$ at each level:
\begin {equation} \label{eq1.5}
(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) \in {\mathfrak E}_h\ \hbox {if} \ \mathbf{x} \neq \mathbf{y}, \
|\mathbf{x}|=|\mathbf{y}| {\it \text{ and }} \inf\limits_{\xi, \eta \in K}|S_{\mathbf{x}}(\xi) - S_{\mathbf{y}}(\eta)| \leq \gamma \cdot r^{|\mathbf{x}|},
\end{equation}
where $\gamma > 0$ is any fixed constant (see Definition \eqref {de3.3}). We write $X_n = \bigcup_{j=1}^n\Sigma^j$, and $X = \Sigma^*$ for brevity, and
let ${\mathfrak E} = {\mathfrak E}_v \cup {\mathfrak E}_h$. We call $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ the {\it augmented tree} of $K$. This notion was invented by Kaimanovich in \cite{Ka}, where the last condition in \eqref{eq1.5} was replaced by $S_\mathbf{x}(K) \cap S_\mathbf{y}(K) \neq \emptyset$. For general IFS (even with the OSC), there are certain technical difficulties to identify $K$ with the graph at infinity [LW1]; the modification in \eqref{eq1.5} is from [LW3] which avoids the superfluous conditions in [LW1].
\medskip
Recall that for a hyperbolic graph $X$, there is a {\it Gromov product} $(x|y)$ for $x, y \in X$, a {\it Gromov metric} $\varrho_a(x, y) = e^{-a(x|y)}$ on $X$, and a {\it hyperbolic boundary} $\partial_HX$ with $\varrho_a(\cdot, \cdot )$ extended to $\partial_HX$ (see Section \ref{sec:2} below for more details).
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th1.1} \hspace{-2mm} {\rm\cite{Ka,LW1,LW3}}~For any IFS the augmented tree $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ is hyperbolic.
Moreover, there is a canonical identification ${\iota}: \partial_H X \rightarrow K$ (independent of $\gamma>0$), such that $K$ and $\partial_H X$ are H\"{o}lder equivalent, i.e., $\varrho_a(\xi, \eta) \asymp |{\iota}(\xi)-{\iota}(\eta)|^{-a/\log r}$.
\end{theorem}
\bigskip
For a homogenous IFS $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ satisfying the open set condition (OSC), the self-similar set has Hausdorff dimension $\alpha = \log N/ |\log r|$. For $0<\lambda<1$, we define a class of reversible random walks on $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ with conductance
$$
c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}^-) = (\lambda^{-1} r^\alpha)^{|\mathbf{x} |}, \qquad
\mathbf{x} \in X.
$$
and $c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) \asymp c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}^-)$ for $(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) \in \mathfrak{E}_h$ where $\mathbf{x}^-$ is the parent of $\mathbf{x}$ (here $\asymp$ means the two terms dominate each other by two constants $C_1$, $C_2$ independent of the variables), and call it a {\it $\lambda$-natural random walk} ($\lambda$-NRW) (see Definition \ref{th4.4}). Here $r^\alpha$ corresponds to the natural weight $p_i = r^\alpha$ of the IFS $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ which generates, as a self-similar measure, the normalized Hausdorff measure ${\mathcal H}^\alpha$ on $K$; the parameter $\lambda$ is the ratio of the probabilities for the walk to go upward or downward at each $\mathbf{x}$ (see \eqref{eq4.1} and Section \ref{sec:4}).
Note that a simple random walk (SRW) has transition probability
$$
P(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = \frac 1{{\rm deg}(\mathbf{x})} \qquad \hbox {for} \quad (x,y) \in \mathfrak{E},
$$
where ${\rm deg}(\mathbf{x})$ is the number of edges joining $\mathbf{x}$. It is easy to see that a SRW is a $1/N$-NRW with $c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}^-) = c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) =1$ for $(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \in \mathfrak{E}_h$. Using Theorem \ref{th1.1} and a well-known result of Ancona \cite{An1,An2,Wo1} on uniformly irreducible random walks on hyperbolic graphs, we prove the following theorem (Theorem \ref {th5.1}) which extends \cite[Theorem 4.7]{Ka} for the Sierpi\'{n}ski graph with the simple random walk.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th1.2} Suppose in addition, the IFS satisfies the OSC, let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a $\lambda$-NRW on $(X,{\mathfrak E})$. Then the hyperbolic boundary $\partial_H X$, the Martin boundary $\mathcal{M} $ and the self-similar set $K$ are all homeomorphic under the canonical mapping.
\end{theorem}
\bigskip
The above theorem allows us to identify $K$ with the two boundaries. More importantly, we are able to use the hyperbolic structure to give sharp estimates of the Martin and Na\"{i}m kernels for the $\lambda$-NRW on $(X, {\mathfrak E})$.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th1.3} The hitting distribution $\nu=\nu_\vartheta$ of the $\lambda$-NRW on $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ is the normalized Hausdorff measure ${\mathcal H}^\alpha$ on $K$, and the Martin kernel satisfies the estimate
$$
K (\mathbf{x}, \xi)\asymp \lambda^{|\mathbf{x} | - (\mathbf{x} | \xi)} r^{-\alpha (\mathbf{x} |\xi)}, \qquad \mathbf{x} \in X, \ \ \xi \in K.
$$
\end{theorem}
\medskip
To derive the hitting distribution, a main part is to show that
$F_n({\vartheta}, \mathbf{x}):= {\mathbb P}_{\vartheta}(Z_{\tau_n} = \mathbf{x})$ equals $r^{\alpha n}$ for $|\mathbf{x} | =n$,
where $\tau_n$ is the first hitting time at level $n$ (Theorem \ref{th4.6}). The result then follows from a limiting argument (Theorem \ref{th5.6}). Recall that the Martin kernel is given by
$$
K(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = \frac {G(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) } {G(\vartheta, \mathbf{y}) } = \frac {F(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) } {F(\vartheta, \mathbf{y}) }, \qquad \mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y} \in X,
$$
where $G(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ is the Green function, and $F(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ is the probability of the chain ever visiting $\mathbf{y}$ from $\mathbf{x}$.
The estimates of $F(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta)$ (Proposition \ref{th4.1}), $F(\vartheta, \mathbf{x})$ (Theorem \ref{th4.6}) and $F(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ (Theorem \ref{th5.3}) are the core of the proof, they need substantial use of the reversibility of the chain as well as the hyperbolicity of $(X, {\mathfrak E})$.
\medskip
Following Silverstein \cite{Si}, the Na\"{i}m kernel is defined by
$$
\Theta (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = \frac {K(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})}{G(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta)} = \frac {K(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})}{F(\mathbf{x}, \theta) G(\vartheta, \vartheta)}.
$$
It is the discrete analogue of the kernel studied by \cite{Na} in classical potential theory. It is easy to extend $\Theta (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ to $\Theta (\mathbf{x}, \eta)$ for $\eta \in K$, but the extension to $\Theta (\xi, \eta)$ for $\xi \in K$ is much more involved. In \cite{Na}, the extension involves Cartan's fine topology; in Markov chain theory, Silverstein \cite{Si} proved the identity
$$
\Theta (\xi, \eta) = \lim_{k \to \infty} {\sum}_{\mathbf{z} \in X} \ell_k^\xi(\mathbf{z} ) \Theta(\mathbf{z}, \eta), \quad \xi, \eta \in K,
$$
where $\ell_k^\xi(\mathbf{z})$ is the probability for the $\xi$-process to last exit the $k$th-level at $\mathbf{z}$ (see \eqref{eq6.1}, \eqref{eq6.3}). Analyzing the above limit, we have (Theorem \ref{th6.4})
\begin{theorem} \label{th1.4} For the $\lambda$-NRW on $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ with the energy form as in \eqref{eq1.3}, the Na\"{i}m kernel is asymptotically given by
$$
\Theta (\xi, \eta) \asymp (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi | \eta)}, \quad \xi, \eta \in K.
$$
Consequently by Theorem \ref{th1.1} and \eqref{eq1.4}, the induced energy form satisfies
$$
{\mathcal E}_K[\varphi] \asymp \int_K \int_K |\varphi(\xi) - \varphi (\eta)|^2 \,|\xi - \eta|^{-(\alpha + \beta)} d\nu (\xi) d\nu (\eta)
$$
with $\beta = \log \lambda / \log r$.
\end{theorem}
The domain ${\mathcal D}_K$ of ${\mathcal E}_K$ consists of all functions in $L^2(K, \nu)$ that possess finite $\mathcal{E}_K$-energies, and equals the Besov space $\Lambda^{\alpha, \beta/2}_{2, 2}$ on $K$ \cite{St}. Let $\beta^*$ be the critical exponent such that $\Lambda^{\alpha, \beta/2}_{2,2} \cap C(K)$ is dense in $C(K)$ for all $0 <\beta < \beta^*$, then the pair $({\mathcal E}_K,{\mathcal D}_K)$ with $\beta \in (0,\beta^*)$ is a non-local Dirichlet form. There are certain values of $\beta$ for which the Dirichlet forms are known to be regular \cite{St, CK, GHL1, GHL2}, and there are some standard examples where the values of $\beta^*$ can be determined explicitly \cite{Ku,J}. These issues will be discussed in Section~\ref{sec:7}, and more detail in the forthcoming paper \cite{KL}.
For a more recent development, Grigor'yan and Yang \cite {GY} reconstructed the corresponding reflective process of the $\lambda$-NRW on the Sierpi\'{n}ski graph and its boundary analogous to the Brownian motion on the closed unit disk, and use this device and Theorem \ref {th1.4} to study the critical exponent $\beta^*$.
\medskip
In the text the theorems are presented in greater generality. We will define a {\it pre-augmented tree} on an $N$-ary tree that has the hyperbolic property (Definition \ref{de3.1}). Many results for the random walks will hold on such graphs. For an IFS $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ that is not homogeneous, we need to re-adjust the levels $\Sigma^n$ as in \eqref{eq3.1''} and restrict to the natural weights $p_i = r_i^\alpha$, where $r_i$ is the contraction ratio of $S_i$, and $\alpha$ satisfies $\sum_{i=1}^N r_i^\alpha =1$. Furthermore, we can set up a more general $\lambda$-{\it quasi-natural random walk} ($\lambda$-QNRW) (Definition \ref{th4.4}), which corresponds to weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$, that gives a doubling self-similar measure, and Theorems \ref {th1.2} and \ref{th1.3} are still valid (the hitting distribution becomes the self-similar measure defined by the weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$).
\bigskip
For the organization of the paper, we first recall some basic facts about hyperbolic graphs and the potential theory of Markov chains in Section~\ref{sec:2}. In Section~\ref{sec:3} we introduce the augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ on the symbolic space and study its hyperbolic structure. In Section~\ref{sec:4}, we study the classes of $\lambda$-QNRW and $\lambda$-NRW and estimate the associated probabilities. Theorems \ref{th1.2} and \ref{th1.3} are proved in Section~\ref{sec:5}. After a brief review of the Na\"{i}m kernel, we prove Theorem \ref{th1.4} in Section~\ref{sec:6}. Finally, the induced Dirichlet forms will be discussed in Section~\ref{sec:7}.
\bigskip
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{sec:2}
\noindent This section presents a quick summary of hyperbolic graphs and the potential theory of Markov chains we need throughout the paper. For more details, the reader can refer to the excellent monograph \cite{Wo1} by Woess.
\medskip
Let $X$ be a countable set. An {\it (undirected simple) graph} is a pair $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ where ${\mathfrak E}$ is a symmetric subset of $X \times X \setminus \{(x,x):x \in X\}$. We call $x \in X$ a vertex, and $(x,y) \in {\mathfrak E}$ an edge (denoted by $x \sim y$). For $x \in X$, the {\it degree} of $x$,
denoted by $\deg (x)$, is the number of edges joining $x$. We say that $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ is
of {\it bounded degree} if
$\sup_{x \in X}\deg (x)<\infty$. For $x,y \in X$, a {\it path} from $x$ to $y$ with
{\it length} $n$ is a finite sequence $[x_0 , x_1, \ldots, x_n]$ such that
$x_0= x, x_n=y$, and $(x_i, x_{i+1}) \in {\mathfrak E}$ for all $0\leq i \leq n-1$. We always assume that $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ is {\it connected}, i.e., any two vertices can be connected by a path. A graph is called a {\it tree} if any two points can be connected by a unique non-self-intersecting path.
\medskip
We use $\pi (x,y)$ to denote a path connecting two vertices $x$ and $y$ with minimum length, and call it a {\it geodesic path}. The length of $\pi (x,y)$ defines a metric $d(x,y)$ on $X$. Let $\vartheta$ be any fixed vertex in $X$ regarded as the {\it root}. We define the {\it Gromov product} by
\begin{equation} \label{eq2.0}
(x|y) = \frac 12 (|x| + |y| - d(x,y)), \qquad x, y \in X,
\end{equation}
where $|x| = d(\vartheta, x)$.
\medskip
\begin{definition} \label{th2.1} We say that $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ is {\it hyperbolic} if there exists $\delta \geq 0$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{eq2.1}
(x|y) \geq \min \{(x|z), (z|y)\} -\delta, \qquad \forall \ x, y, z \in X.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\medskip
Clearly, every tree is hyperbolic with $\delta =0$.
For a hyperbolic graph $(X,{\mathfrak E})$, we choose $a > 0$ satisfying $e^{\delta a}< \sqrt{2}$, and define
\begin{equation} \label{eq2.1'}
\varrho_a(x, y) = e^{-a(x|y)}, \ x \neq y,\quad \hbox {and} \quad =0 \ \ \hbox {if}\ x=y.
\end{equation}
This $\varrho_a(\cdot, \cdot)$ on $X \times X$ is equivalent to a metric, and is called {\it Gromov metric} for convenience.
\medskip
\begin{definition} \label{th2.3}
Let $\widehat{X}_H$ denote the completion of $(X,\varrho_a)$.
The {\it hyperbolic boundary} of $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ is defined as
$\partial_H X = \widehat{X}_H \setminus X$.
\end{definition}
\medskip
The hyperbolic boundary $\partial_H X$ is compact and can be regarded as the collection of all (infinite) geodesic rays starting at $\vartheta$, where two rays
$(x_n)_n$ and $(y_n)_n$ are identified if $\lim_{n \to \infty}(x_n | y_n) = \infty$.
\medskip
Next we consider random walks on a graph $(X,\mathfrak{E})$. Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$ be a Markov chain on $X$ with transition probability $P$. We write $\mathbb{P}(\cdot \mid Z_0 = x)=\mathbb{P}_x(\cdot)$ for short.
A function $u$ on $X$ is said to be {\it harmonic} (with respect to $P$) if $Pu=u$ where $Pu(x)=\sum_{y\in X} P(x,y)u(y) = \mathbb E_x u(Z_1)$.
The {\it Green function} with respect to $P$ is
$G(x, y) := \sum_{k=0}^{\infty} P^k(x, y)$. We always assume that the Markov chain is irreducible and transient, i.e., $0 < G(x,y) < \infty$ for any $x,y \in X$.
We define $F(x, y)$ as the probability that the chain starting from $x$ ever visits $y$, i.e.,
\begin{equation} \label{eq2.2}
F(x, y) := \mathbb{P}_x (\exists \ n \geq 0 \ \hbox{such that} \ Z_n = y).
\end{equation}
It is clear that $G(x, y) = F(x, y)G(y, y)$.
\medskip
Fix a reference point $\vartheta \in X$.
We define the {\it Martin kernel} by
\begin{equation*}
K(x,y):=\frac{G(x,y)}{G(\vartheta, y)} = \frac {F(x, y)}{F(\vartheta, y)}, \quad x,y \in X.
\end{equation*}
The following definition is taken from \cite{Wo1}.
\begin{definition} \label{th2.4}
The {\it Martin compactification} of $(X,P)$ is the minimal compactification $\widehat{X}$ of $X$ such that the Martin kernel $K(x, \cdot)$ extends continuously to $\widehat X$ for all $x \in X$. The set $\mathcal{M} = \widehat{X} \setminus X$ is called the {\it Martin boundary} of $(X,P)$.
\end{definition}
It is known that under the Martin topology, $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ converges almost surely to a $\mathcal{M}$-valued random variable $Z_{\infty}$.
For $x \in X$, we define the hitting distribution $\nu_x$ to be the distribution of $Z_{\infty}$ on $\mathcal M$ under $\mathbb P_x$.
The measure $\nu_x$ is absolutely continuous with respect to $\nu_\vartheta$, and the Radon-Nikodym density is $d \nu_x / d \nu_\vartheta = K(x,\cdot)$.
For $u \in L^1(\mathcal{M},\nu_\vartheta)$, we define its {\it Poisson integral} by
$$
Hu(x) = \mathbb{E}_x u(Z_\infty) = \displaystyle\int_{\mathcal{M}} K(x,\xi)u(\xi)d \nu_\vartheta (\xi), \quad x \in X.
$$
Clearly $Hu$ is harmonic on $X$ since $K(\cdot, \xi)$ is harmonic for all $\xi \in \mathcal{M}$.
A nonnegative harmonic function $h$ on $X$ is called {\it minimal} if $h(\vartheta) = 1$ and if $h' \leq h$ such that $h'$ is nonnegative harmonic functions on $X$, then $h'/h$ is constant. We define the {\it minimal Martin boundary} as $\mathcal{M}_{\min} = \{\xi \in \mathcal{M}: K(\cdot,\xi) \hbox{ is minimal}\}$. Then $Z_\infty \in {\mathcal M}_{\rm min}$ with probability 1, and $\nu_\vartheta$ is supported on ${\mathcal M}_{\rm min}$. We will make use of $\mathcal M_{\min}$ in Section 6 (Lemma \ref{th6.1}).
\bigskip
We say that $P$ has {\it bounded range} if $\sup\{d(x,y): P(x,y)>0 \hbox{ for some } x,y \in X\} < \infty$, and is {\it uniformly irreducible} if there exist $\epsilon > 0$ and $k_0$ such that for any $x \sim y$, there exist $k \leq k_0$ with $P^k(x,y) \geq \epsilon$. The {\it spectral radius} of $P$ is
$$
r(P) = {\limsup}_{n\to \infty} (P^n(x,y))^{1/n} \in (0,1], \quad x,y \in X.
$$
(Note that the limsup is independent of $x$ and $y$ \cite{Wo1}.)
The following important result is due to Ancona \cite{An1,An2}, and the specific version we use is taken from \cite[Theorem 27.1]{Wo1}.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th2.5} \hspace{-2mm} {\rm (Ancona)} Suppose $(X,\mathfrak{E})$ is a hyperbolic graph, $P$ is uniformly irreducible with bounded range, and $r(P) < 1$. Then for any $\delta \geq 0$, there is a constant $C_\delta \geq 1$ such that for any $x$, $y \in X$ and $u$ within distance $\delta$ from a geodesic segment between $x$ and $y$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq2.4}
F(x, u)F(u, y) \leq
F(x, y) \leq C_\delta F(x, u)F(u, y).
\end{equation}
Moreover, the Martin boundary equals the minimal Martin boundary, and is homeomorphic to the hyperbolic boundary.
\end{theorem}
\medskip
We focus on the class of (transient) {\it reversible random walks} on $(X,\mathfrak E)$ where the transition function $P$ satisfies
\begin{equation} \label{eq2.6}
P(x,y) =
\ \dfrac{c(x,y)}{m(x)}, \quad x \sim y,
\end{equation}
and is $0$ elsewhere. Here $c(x,y)=c(y,x)>0$ for each pair $(x,y) \in \mathfrak E$. We call $c(x,y)$ the {\it conductance} of the edge $(x,y)$, and $m(x) = \sum_{y \in X, y \sim x} c(x,y) > 0$ the {\it total conductance} at $x$.
To apply Theorems \ref{th2.5}, we need to check the condition $r(P)<1$. Here we cite a geometric characterization of this condition in \cite[Theorem 10.3]{Wo1} which will be used in Section~\ref{sec:5}. For $A \subset X$, let
$$
\partial A = \{(x,y) \in \mathfrak E: x \in A, \ y \notin A\}
$$
be the {\it boundary} of $A$ and let $c(\partial A) = \sum_{(x,y) \in \partial A}c(x,y)$ (analogous to the surface area of $A$). We also view $m(A)=\sum_{x \in A}m(x)$ as the ``volume" of $A$.
\medskip
\begin{proposition} \label{th2.7}
Suppose $P$ is a reversible random walk on $(X,\mathfrak E)$. Then $r(P)<1$ if and only if $(X,P)$ satisfies the strong isoperimetric inequality: there exists $\eta >0$ such that
$$
m(A) \leq \eta c(\partial A)
$$
for all finite subsets $A \subset X$.
\end{proposition}
\bigskip
\section{Self-similar sets and augmented trees}
\label{sec:3}
\noindent Let $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$, $N \geq 2$, be an {\it iterated function system (IFS)} of contractive similitudes on $\mathbb{R}^d$ where $S_i$ has contraction ratios $r_i \in (0,1)$. The {\it self-similar set} $K$ of the IFS is the unique non-empty compact set in $\mathbb{R}^d$ satisfying $$
K={\bigcup}_{i=1}^{N}S_i(K).
$$
For a set of positive probability weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$, there is a unique self-similar measure $\mu$ satisfying the identity
\begin{equation} \label {eq3.1}
\mu (\cdot) = {\sum}_{i=1}^Np_i \mu(S_i^{-1}(\cdot)).
\end{equation}
The IFS is said to satisfy the {\it open set condition} (OSC) if there exists a nonempty bounded open set $U$ such that $S_i(U) \subset U$, and $S_i(U) \cap S_j(U) = \emptyset$ for $i\not = j$. The OSC is the most basic condition imposed on the IFS. It is known that under this condition, the Hausdorff dimension of $K$, denoted by $\dim_H(K)$, equals $\alpha$ where $\sum_{i=1}^N r_i^\alpha=1$. Furthermore, if we take $p_i= r_i^\alpha, i=1, \cdots, N$, then the self-similar measure is the normalized $\alpha$-Hausdorff measure on $K$. We call such weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$ the {\it natural weight} of the IFS.
\medskip
The IFS gives rise to a symbolic space. Let $\Sigma^*$ and $\Sigma^{\infty}$ be respectively the sets of finite indices (words) and infinite indices as in Section~\ref{sec:1}. For $\mathbf{x}=i_1 \cdots i_n \in \Sigma^{\ast}$, we let $S_{\mathbf{x}}$ be the composition
$S_{\mathbf{x}}=S_{i_1} \circ \cdots \circ S_{i_n}$, and the contraction ratio of $S_\mathbf{x}$ is denoted by $r_\mathbf{x} = r_{i_1}\cdots r_{i_n}$. There exists a natural surjection $\kappa: \Sigma^{\infty} \rightarrow K$
defined by
\begin{equation*}
\{\kappa(\omega)\} = {\bigcap}_{m \geq 0} S_{i_1 i_2 \cdots i_m}(K), \qquad \omega = i_1 i_2 \cdots \in \Sigma^{\infty}.
\end{equation*}
Hence each $\xi \in K$ admits a symbolic representation (coding) $\omega \in \Sigma^\infty$. Under the OSC, the representation is unique, except a $\mu$-null set, for any self-similar measure $\mu$.
\medskip
The finite word space $\Sigma^\ast$ has a natural tree structure where $\mathbf{x} \sim \mathbf{y}$ if $\mathbf{y} = \mathbf{x} i$ or $\mathbf{x} = \mathbf{y} i$ for some $i\in \Sigma$. Here the empty word $\vartheta$ is the root. The canonical metric on $\Sigma^\ast$ is $\rho_r (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})= r^{\mathbf{x}\wedge \mathbf{y}} $ ($0<r<1$), where $\mathbf{x}\wedge\mathbf{y} = \min\{k: i_{k+1} \not = j_{k+1}\}$. Note that $\mathbf{x} \wedge \mathbf{y}$ coincides with the Gromov product, and $\rho_r$ is a visual metric as in \eqref {eq2.1'}; the (hyperbolic) boundary is $\Sigma^\infty$, and is a Cantor-type set. The symbolic space is a convenient tool to study the self-similar set $K$, but obviously it misses many properties of $K$. Following Kaimanovich's idea \cite{Ka}, we will define an ``augmented tree" by adding more edges to $\Sigma^*$.
\medskip
First, to deal with an IFS with different contraction ratios, we modify the symbolic space by grouping together words that have approximately the same contraction ratios. Let $r = \min \{r_i: 1 \leq i \leq N\}$. Define, for $n \geq 1$,
\begin{equation} \label {eq3.1''}
\mathcal{J}_n = \{\mathbf{x} = i_1\cdots i_k \in \Sigma^\ast: r_\mathbf{x} \leq r^n < r_{i_1 \cdots i_{k-1}}\},
\end{equation}
and $\mathcal{J}_0 = \{\vartheta\}$ by convention. Clearly, $\mathcal{J}_n \cap \mathcal{J}_m = \emptyset$ for $n \neq m$. We define the {\it modified symbolic space} as $X = \bigcup_{k=0}^\infty\mathcal{J}_k$. We write $|\mathbf{x}| = n$ if $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_n$, and use $\mathbf{x}^-$ to denote the {\it parent} of $\mathbf{x} \in X$, i.e., the unique word in $X$ such that $|\mathbf{x}^-| = |\mathbf{x}|-1$. We also define $\mathbf{x}^{-k}, k \geq 2$ for the unique word in $X$ such that $|\mathbf{x}^{-k}|=|\mathbf{x}|-k$ and $\mathbf{x} = \mathbf{x}^{-k}\mathbf{z}$ for some $\mathbf{z} \in \Sigma^\ast$. In particular, if the IFS $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ has equal contraction ratio ({\it homogeneous} IFS), then $\mathcal{J}_n = \Sigma^n$ and $\mathbf{x}^{-k}$ is just $\mathbf{x}$ with the last $k$ alphabets deleted. The following basic lemma is known.
\medskip
\begin{lemma} \label{th3.0} Suppose the OSC holds, and let $\alpha$ be the Hausdorff dimension of $K$. Then
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item if $\mu$ is the self-similar measure with natural weights $p_i = r_i^\alpha$, then for $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_n,\ p_\mathbf{x} = \mu(S_\mathbf{x}(K)) \asymp r^{\alpha n}$;
\item $r^{-\alpha n} \leq \# \mathcal{J}_n < r^{-\alpha(n+1)}.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Note that $p_\mathbf{x}= r_\mathbf{x}^\alpha$, and by definition $r_\mathbf{x} \in (r^{n+1}, r^n]$ for $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_n$. Also the OSC implies that $p_\mathbf{x} = \mu(S_\mathbf{x}(K))$, and hence (i) follows. Observe that
$$
1=\mu(K) = {\sum\limits}_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_n} \mu(S_\mathbf{x}(K)) = {\sum\limits}_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_n} r_\mathbf{x}^\alpha.
$$
As $r_\mathbf{x} \in (r^{n+1}, r^n]$, we have $(\# \mathcal{J}_n)r^{\alpha(n+1)} < 1 \leq (\# \mathcal{J}_n)r^{\alpha n}$. This implies (ii).
\end{proof}
To introduce a graph structure on $X$, we let
$$
{\mathfrak E}_v=\{(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \in X \times X:\
\mathbf{x}=\mathbf{y}^- \text{ or } \mathbf{y}=\mathbf{x}^-\},
$$
be the set of edges of the original tree structure on $X$, and use the notation $\mathbf{x} \sim_v \mathbf{y}$ for $(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})\in {\mathfrak E}_v$. We call ${\mathfrak E}_v$ the set of {\it vertical edges} of $X$. Now we augment the tree by adding more {\it horizontal edges}.
\medskip
\begin{definition} \label{de3.1}
Let $X$ be the modified symbolic space associated with $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$. We call $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ a {\it pre-augmented tree} if ${\mathfrak E} = {\mathfrak E}_v \cup {\mathfrak E}_h$, where ${\mathfrak E}_h$ satisfies the condition
\begin{equation} \label{eq3.2}
(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \in {\mathfrak E}_h \Rightarrow |\mathbf{x}|=|\mathbf{y}|, \hbox{ with } \mathbf{x}^- = \mathbf{y}^- \hbox{ or } (\mathbf{x}^-,\mathbf{y}^-) \in {\mathfrak E}_h.
\end{equation}
We write $\mathbf{x}\sim_h \mathbf{y}$ if $(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \in {\mathfrak E}_h$.
\end{definition}
\medskip
For any vertices $\mathbf{x}$, $\mathbf{y}$ in $(X, {\mathfrak E})$, we say that the geodesic $\pi (\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})$
is a {\it horizontal geodesic} if it consists of horizontal edges only, and define {\it vertical geodesics} analogously. The geodesic between two vertices $\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}$ may not be unique (see Figure \ref{fig:1}), but there is always a
{\it canonical geodesic} such that there exist $\mathbf{u}$,
$\mathbf{v} \in \pi (\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})$ with
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $\pi (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = \pi (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{u}) \cup
\pi (\mathbf{u}, \mathbf{v}) \cup \pi (\mathbf{v}, \mathbf{y})$,
where $\pi (\mathbf{u}, \mathbf{v})$ is a horizontal geodesic and
$\pi (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{u})$, $\pi (\mathbf{v}, \mathbf{y})$
are vertical geodesics.
\item for any geodesic $\pi' (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$,
$\text{dist} (\vartheta, \pi (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})) \leq
\text{dist} (\vartheta, \pi' (\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}))$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=39mm,height=30mm]{Fig1.eps}
\caption{{\bf} Canonical geodesic} \label{fig:1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
If we let $\ell = {\rm dist} (\vartheta, \pi (\bf u, \bf v))$, and $h= d(\bf u , \bf v)$, then the canonical geodesic has a simple geometric interpretation for the Gromov product \eqref{eq2.0},
\begin{equation} \label{eq3.1'}
(\mathbf{x}|\mathbf{y}) = \ell - \frac 12 h .
\end{equation}
We will use this expression frequently. As a consequence we have (see also \cite [Theorem 3.13] {Ka} for the ``no big squares" condition)
\medskip
\begin{proposition} \label{th3.2} \hspace{-2mm} {\rm \cite[Theorem 2.3]{LW1}} A pre-augmented tree $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ is hyperbolic if and only if there exists $M>0$ such that the lengths of all horizontal geodesics are bounded by $M$.
\end{proposition}
\medskip
The concept of pre-augmented tree is rather flexible (see Remark 2 in the following). For our purpose, we will use the following specific horizontal edge set.
\medskip
\begin{definition} \label{de3.3} \hspace{-2mm} {\rm\cite{LW3}}~For $\gamma > 0$, we define a horizontal edge set ${\mathfrak E}_h^\gamma$ on $X$ by
\begin{equation} \label{eq3.3}
{\mathfrak E}_h^\gamma=\{(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \in X \times X:\ \mathbf{x} \neq \mathbf{y}, \
|\mathbf{x}|=|\mathbf{y}| {\it \text{ and }} \inf\limits_{\xi, \eta \in K}|S_{\mathbf{x}}(\xi) - S_{\mathbf{y}}(\eta)| \leq \gamma \cdot r^{|\mathbf{x}|}\}.
\end{equation}
The {\it augmented tree} $(X,{\mathfrak E}^\gamma)$ is the graph with edge set ${\mathfrak E}^\gamma={\mathfrak E}_v \cup {\mathfrak E}_h^\gamma$.
\end{definition}
\medskip
It is direct to check that $(X,{\mathfrak E}^\gamma)$ is a pre-augmented tree. As the constant $\gamma>0$ has no significance on the edges in the levels ${\mathcal J}_n$ when $n$ is large, we will omit the superscript $\gamma$ in the notations when there is no confusion. The following theorem is the main reason for introducing the augmented tree.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th3.6} \hspace{-2mm} {\rm\cite{Ka,LW1,LW3}}~Let $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ be an IFS of contractive similitudes and let $K$ be the self-similar set. Let $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ be the augmented tree. Then
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ is hyperbolic;
\item there is a canonical identification ${\iota}: \partial_H X \rightarrow K$ (independent of $\gamma>0$) defined by $\{{\iota}(\xi)\} = \bigcap_n S_{\mathbf{x}_n}(K)$ and $(\mathbf{x}_n)_n$ is a geodesic ray converging to $\xi$. Under this map, $K$ is H\"{o}lder equivalent to $\partial_H X$ in the sense that $\varrho_a(\xi, \eta) \asymp |{\iota}(\xi)-{\iota}(\eta)|^{-a/ \log r}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\medskip
\noindent {\it Remark 1.}
Let $e_0 =0$ and $e_i$, $1\leq i \leq d$, be the standard basis vectors in ${\mathbb R}^d$. Let $\{S_i\}_{i=0}^d$ be an IFS on ${\mathbb R}^d$ defined by
$$
S_i(\xi) = e_i + \frac{1}{2}(\xi-e_i), \quad \xi \in {\mathbb{R}}^d.
$$
Then the self-similar set $K$ is the {\it $d$-dimensional Sierpi\'{n}ski gasket}. When $d = 1$, $K$ is simply the unit interval; when $d=2$, $K$ is the standard Sierpi\'{n}ski gasket. Theorem \ref{th3.6} was first proved in \cite[Section~3]{Ka} for the Sierpi\'{n}ski gaskets with a slightly different horizontal edge set $\mathfrak{E}_h^0$ (see Section \ref{sec:1}; call this augmented tree the Sierpi\'{n}ski graph). The extension to general self-similar sets was in \cite{LW1}, where we need to assume, in addition, the OSC and some geometric condition on $K$. For many standard cases, ${\mathfrak E}^\gamma_h = {\mathfrak E}^0_h$ for small $\gamma$, but there are examples where they are different for any $\gamma >0$. The setup in Definition \ref{de3.3} with $\gamma >0$ allows us to avoid the delicate behavior on $S_{\mathbf{x}}(K) \cap S_{\mathbf{y}}(K)$ without changing the boundary. Consequently, in \cite{LW3}, the technical assumptions in \cite{LW1} were eliminated, and Theorem \ref{th3.6} was stated in the most general setting.
\bigskip
\noindent {\it Remark 2.} A pre-augmented tree can be constructed easily, and can be trivial; for example, we can connect all the vertices in each level by edges and still form a hyperbolic graph. On the other hand, if we augment the tree by suitable edges, we can obtain other interesting graphs. For example, starting with the binary augmented tree of the interval ($d=1$ in Remark 1), we can add one more horizontal edge on each level to connect the two end vertices. This new graph is a pre-augmented tree and is hyperbolic (see Figure~\ref{fig:3} or \cite{Ne}). It is easy to modify the proof of Theorem \ref{th3.6} and show that the hyperbolic boundary is H\"older equivalent to the unit circle.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=39mm,height=39mm]{Fig3.eps}
\caption{{\bf} The circle as a hyperbolic boundary}
\label{fig:3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\medskip
That an augmented tree has bounded degree is important when we consider random walks on it. This property is verified when the IFS has the OSC.
\medskip
\begin{proposition} \label{th3.7} \hspace{-2mm} {\rm \cite[Theorem 1.4]{LW3}}~The IFS $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ satisfies the OSC if and only if the augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ has bounded degree.
\end{proposition}
\medskip
To conclude this section, we will use the special form of the canonical geodesic to provide more information of the Gromov product in the augmented tree, which will be needed in Section~\ref{sec:6}. Note that $\mathbf{x}_n \in {\mathcal J}_n$ for any geodesic ray $(\mathbf{x}_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ in $X$ (starting from $\vartheta)$.
\medskip
\begin{lemma} \label{th3.8}
Let $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ be a pre-augmented tree as in Definition \ref{de3.1}. Let $\mathbf{z} \in X$, and let $(\mathbf{x}_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ and $(\mathbf{y}_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ be two distinct geodesic rays from $\vartheta$. Then we have
\begin {enumerate}[(i)]
\item for $n\geq |\mathbf{z}|:=k$, $d(\mathbf{x}_n, \mathbf{z}) - |\mathbf{x}_n| = d(\mathbf{x}_{k}, \mathbf{z}) - k$;
\item $\{(\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{z})\}_n$ is increasing, and
$
(\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{z}) = (\mathbf{x}_k|\mathbf{z})$ for $n \geq k$;
\item $\{(\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{y}_n)\}_n$ is increasing, and there exists $\ell$ such that
$ (\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{y}_n) = (\mathbf{x}_\ell|\mathbf{y}_\ell)$ for $n\geq \ell$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}\ (i) For $n \geq |\mathbf{z}|:=k$, consider the canonical geodesic $\pi(\mathbf{x}_n, \mathbf{z}) = \pi(\mathbf{x}_n, {\bf u}) \cup \pi({\bf u},{\bf v}) \cup \pi({\bf v},\mathbf{z})$, where $\pi({\bf u}, {\bf v})$ is a horizontal geodesic, and $\pi(\mathbf{x}_n, {\bf u})$, $\pi({\bf v} ,\mathbf{z})$ are vertical geodesics.
Since $|\mathbf{x}_n|= n \geq |k| \geq |{\bf u}|=|{\bf v}|$,
$\mathbf{x}_{k}$ lies on the vertical geodesic $\pi(\mathbf{x}_n, {\bf u})$. Hence (i) follows from
\begin{align*}
d(\mathbf{x}_n,\mathbf{z})-|\mathbf{x}_n|
= d({\bf u},\mathbf{z})-|{\bf u}|
= d({\bf u},\mathbf{z})+ (d(\mathbf{x}_k, {\bf u})-|\mathbf{x}_{k}|)= d(\mathbf{x}_{k}, \mathbf{z})-k .
\end{align*}
\indent(ii) That $\{(\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{z})\}$ is increasing in $n$ follows by checking the definition of the Gromov product.
Then by (i), we have
\begin{align*}
(\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{z}) = \dfrac{1}{2} (|\mathbf{z}|+|\mathbf{x}_n|-d(\mathbf{x}_n,\mathbf{z}))
= \dfrac{1}{2} (2k-d(\mathbf{x}_k,\mathbf{z}))
= (\mathbf{x}_k|\mathbf{z}), \quad n\geq k.
\end{align*}
\indent(iii)\, By the same proof as the above, we see that $\{(\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{y}_n)\}_n$ is increasing.
Let $M$ be the maximal length of the horizontal geodesics in $(X, {\mathfrak E} )$ (by Proposition \ref{th3.2}). Since the two rays are distinct, we have $\lim_{n\to \infty} (\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{y}_n) < \infty$. Then there exists a positive integer $\ell$ such that $d(\mathbf{x}_n,\mathbf{y}_n) > M$ for any $n > \ell$.
That canonical geodesic $\pi(\mathbf{x}_n,\mathbf{y}_n)$ is not horizontal means both $\mathbf{x}_{n-1}$ and $\mathbf{y}_{n-1}$ lie in the two vertical segments of $\pi(\mathbf{x}_n,\mathbf{y}_n)$ respectively. Now (iii) follows since
$$
(\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{y}_n) = 2n-d(\mathbf{x}_n,\mathbf{y}_n) = 2(n-1)-d(\mathbf{x}_{n-1},\mathbf{y}_{n-1}) = (\mathbf{x}_{n-1}|\mathbf{y}_{n-1}), \quad n > \ell.
$$
\end{proof}
\begin {corollary} \label{th3.9} Let $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ be an augmented tree as in Definition \ref{de3.3}. Let $\xi, \eta \in \partial_H X$, $\xi \neq \eta$, and let $(\mathbf{x}_n), (\mathbf{x}'_n), (\mathbf{y}_n), (\mathbf{y}'_n)$ be geodesic rays, where $(\mathbf{x}_n), (\mathbf{x}'_n)$ converge to $\xi$, and $(\mathbf{y}_n), (\mathbf{y}'_n)$ converge to $\eta$. Then for any $\mathbf{z} \in X$,
\begin{equation*}
\big |\lim_{n \to \infty} (\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{z}) - \lim_{n \to \infty} (\mathbf{x}_n'|\mathbf{z})\big| \leq \dfrac{1}{2},
\quad \hbox {and} \quad
\big|\lim_{n \to \infty} (\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{y}_n) - \lim_{n \to \infty} (\mathbf{x}_n'|\mathbf{y}_n')\big| \leq 1.
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} We first observe from Theorem \ref{th3.6} that $\xi \in S_{\mathbf{x}_n} (K) \cap S_{\mathbf{x}'_n}(K)$. Thus $S_{\mathbf{x}_n} (K) \cap S_{\mathbf{x}'_n}(K) \neq \emptyset$, and by \eqref{eq3.3} either $\mathbf{x}_n=\mathbf{x}'_n$ or $\mathbf{x}_n \sim_h \mathbf{x}'_n$. It follows that $d(\mathbf{x}_n,\mathbf{x}'_n) \leq 1$ for all $n$.
Then the triangle inequality implies
\begin {equation} \label {eq3.5'}
|(\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{z})-(\mathbf{x}_n'|\mathbf{z})| = \dfrac{1}{2}|d(\mathbf{x}_n',\mathbf{z})-d(\mathbf{x}_n,\mathbf{z})|
\leq \dfrac{1}{2}d(\mathbf{x}_n',\mathbf{x}_n) \leq \dfrac{1}{2}.
\end{equation}
For the second part, we need only to replace the above $\mathbf{z}$ by $\mathbf{y}_n$ and $\mathbf{y}_n'$ respectively and apply the triangle inequality.
\end{proof}
\medskip
From the corollary, we can extend the Gromov product to $\partial_H X$ by
\begin{equation} \label{eq3.4}
(\xi|\mathbf{z}) = \sup \big \{\lim_{n \to \infty} (\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{z})\big \}, \qquad \xi \in \partial_H X, \ \ \mathbf{z} \in X,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{eq3.5}
(\xi|\eta) = \sup \big \{\lim_{n \to \infty} (\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{y}_n)\big \}, \qquad \xi, \eta \in \partial_H X,
\end{equation}
where the supremum is taken over all geodesic rays $(\mathbf{x}_n)_n$ and $(\mathbf{y}_n)_n$ that converge to $\xi$ and $\eta$ respectively.
\bigskip
\section{Constant return ratio and quasi-natural RW}
\label{sec:4}
\medskip
\noindent Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a reversible random walk on the pre-augmented tree $(X,{\mathfrak E})$. For $\mathbf{x} \in X \setminus \{\vartheta\}$, we define the {\it return ratio} at $\mathbf{x}$ by
\begin{equation} \label{eq4.1}
\lambda(\mathbf{x}) = \dfrac{P(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)}{\sum\limits_{\mathbf{y}:\mathbf{y}^- = \mathbf{x}}P(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})} = \dfrac{c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)}{\sum\limits_{\mathbf{y}:\mathbf{y}^- = \mathbf{x}}c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})}.
\end{equation}
For $\lambda >0$, we introduce the following condition on the transition probability $P$:
\medskip
\noindent $(R_\lambda)$ \ ({\it Constant return ratio}) For any $\mathbf{x} \in X \setminus \{\vartheta\}$, $\lambda(\mathbf{x}) \equiv \lambda$ is a constant.
\medskip
\noindent For example, the SRW on the augmented tree of a homogeneous IFS $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ satisfies condition $(R_\lambda)$ with $\lambda = N^{-1}$.
\medskip
For a fixed level $m \geq 1$, let $X_m := \bigcup_{k=0}^{m}\mathcal{J}_k$ and ${\mathfrak E}_m := {\mathfrak E}|_{X_m \times X_m}$.
Consider the following random walk $\{Z_n^{(m)}\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$ with transition probability
$P_m$ on the graph $(X_m, {\mathfrak E}_m)$: for $\mathbf{x}$, $\mathbf{y} \in X_m$,
\begin{equation*}
P_m(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = \begin{cases}
P(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}), \quad \ \ & \hbox{if } \mathbf{x} \sim \mathbf{y}
\text{ and } |\mathbf{x}|<m, \\
\quad 1, \quad \ \ & \text{if } \mathbf{x} = \mathbf{y}
\text{ and } |\mathbf{x}|=m, \\
\quad 0, \quad \ \ & \text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
This is the restriction of $P$ on $X_m \setminus \mathcal{J}_m$, where the vertices in $\mathcal{J}_m$ are absorbing states of $P_m$. Let
$F_m(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ be the probability of ever visiting $\mathbf{y}$ from $\mathbf{x}$ in $X_m$, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
F_m(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) := \mathbb{P} (\exists \ n \geq 0 \ \hbox{such that}
\ Z_n^{(m)} = \mathbf{y} \mid Z_0^{(m)}=\mathbf{x}).
\end{equation*}
\medskip
We begin by finding the value of $F_m(\mathbf{x},\vartheta)$ for a reversible random walk with condition $(R_\lambda)$, which is the most basic identity to be used in this section and Theorem \ref{th5.3}.
\medskip
\begin{proposition} \label{th4.1}
Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a reversible random walk on a pre-augmented tree $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ that satisfies $(R_\lambda)$ for some $\lambda>0$. Then for $m \geq 1$ and $\mathbf{x} \in X_m$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq4.2}
F_m(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta) =
\begin{cases}
\ \dfrac{\lambda^{|\mathbf{x}|}-\lambda^m}{1-\lambda^m}, & \quad \hbox{if } \lambda \neq 1, \vspace{0.3cm} \\
\ \dfrac{m-|\mathbf{x}|}{m}, & \quad \hbox{if } \lambda = 1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Consequently, $F(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta) = \lambda^{|\mathbf{x}|}$ if $0\leq \lambda <1$, and $=1$ if $\lambda \geq 1$.
\end{proposition}
\noindent {\it Remark.} We thank Professor J. Kigami for informing us for the following proof which shortened the original one.
\begin{proof}
For $n \geq 0$, let $t(n) = \inf\{k \geq n: |Z_k| \neq |Z_n|\}$ be the first time that the random walk jumps to a different level from time $n$. Define a sequence of stopping times $\{n_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ by letting $n_0=0$ and $n_k=t(n_{k-1})$ for $k \geq 1$. For $k \geq 0$, let $L_k=|Z_{n_k}|$ denote the level of the chain.
It can be checked directly that $\{L_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ is a birth and death chain on the nonnegative integers with the following transition probabilities: $P_L(0,1)=1$, $P_L(\ell,\ell-1)=\lambda/(1+\lambda)$, and $P_L(\ell,\ell+1)=1/(1+\lambda)$ for $\ell \geq 1$. Let $T_\ell$ be the first time that $L_k$ visits level $\ell$, then the expression \eqref{eq4.2} of $F_m(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta)=\mathbb P(T_0<T_m \mid L_0=|\mathbf{x}|)$ for $\mathbf{x} \in X_m$ follows from standard calculations for birth and death chains.
Observe that for $|\mathbf{x}|< m$, $F_m(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta) \nearrow F(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta)$ as $m\to \infty$, the second part follows by taking limit of \eqref {eq4.2}.
\end{proof}
\medskip
Since our main interest is on transient random walks, we will assume $\lambda \in (0,1)$ throughout the paper. As a simple consequence of Proposition \ref{th4.1} we have the follow result on the Green function, which will be needed to consider $F_m(\vartheta, \mathbf{x})$ and $F(\vartheta, \mathbf{x})$.
\medskip
\begin{lemma} \label{th4.2} Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a reversible random walk on a pre-augmented tree $(X,{\mathfrak E})$, and $G_m(\cdot, \cdot)$ be the Green function of $\{Z_n^{(m)}\}_{n=0}^\infty$. If $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ satisfies condition $(R_\lambda)$ with $\lambda \in (0,1)$, then $G_m (\vartheta, \vartheta) = \frac{1-\lambda^m}{1-\lambda}$ and $G(\vartheta, \vartheta)= \frac 1{1-\lambda}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Note that
$
G_m(\vartheta, \vartheta) = \frac{1}{1-U_m(\vartheta, \vartheta)},
$
where $U_m(\vartheta, \vartheta) := {\mathbb P} (\exists\,n \geq 1 \hbox{ such that } Z^{(m)}_n = \vartheta \mid Z^{(m)}_0 = \vartheta)$,
the probability that the random walk returns to $\vartheta$ after
starting at the root $\vartheta$). The lemma follows from this identity together with the one-step formula $U_m(\vartheta, \vartheta) = \sum_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_1} P_m(\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) F_m(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta)$ and Proposition \ref{th4.1}.
\end{proof}
\medskip
\begin{proposition} \label{th4.3}
Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a reversible random walk on a pre-augmented tree $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ that satisfies condition $(R_\lambda)$. Then for $m \geq 1$ and $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_m$,
\begin{equation} \label {eq4.5}
F_m (\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) = \frac{c(\mathbf{x}^-,\mathbf{x})\lambda^{m-1}}{m(\vartheta)}\ .
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For $\mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal J}_m$, using the reversibility $m(\vartheta)G_m(\vartheta,\mathbf{x}^-) = m(\mathbf{x}^-)G_m(\mathbf{x}^-,\vartheta)$, together with Proposition \ref{th4.1} and Lemma \ref{th4.2}, we can evaluate $F_m (\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) = G_m(\vartheta,\mathbf{x}^-)P(\mathbf{x}^-,\mathbf{x})$ directly to get \eqref{eq4.5}.
\end{proof}
\medskip
In view of the expression of $F_m(\vartheta, \mathbf{x})$ in \eqref{eq4.5}, we will introduce a class of conductance $c(x,y)$ so that the limits exist as $m \to \infty$. (We can not take the limit directly, as $\mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal J}_m$ depends on $m$.)
\medskip
\begin{definition} \label{th4.4}
Let $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ be a pre-augmented tree of an IFS $\{S_i\}_{j=1}^N$. A reversible random walk $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ on $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ with conductance $c:X \times X \rightarrow [0,\infty)$ is called {\it quasi-natural} with return ratio $\lambda \in (0,1)$ ($\lambda$-QNRW) if for a set of probability weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$,
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item
$c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-) = p_\mathbf{x}\lambda^{-m}$, for $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal J_m$, $m \geq 1$, where $p_\mathbf{x}=p_{i_1} \cdots p_{i_k}$ if $\mathbf{x} = i_1 \cdots i_k$,
\item
$c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) \asymp c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)$ for $\mathbf{y} \sim_h \mathbf{x} \in \mathcal J_m$, $m \geq 1$, and
\item
$c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) =0 $ if \ $\mathbf{y} \not \sim \mathbf{x} $.
\end{enumerate}
(Here the bounds of $\asymp$ are independent of $\mathcal J_m$, $m\geq 1$).
Furthermore, if the IFS satisfies the OSC and $p_i = r_i^\alpha$, the natural weights of the IFS, we call $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ a {\it natural random walk} with return ratio $\lambda$ ($\lambda$-NRW) on $(X, {\mathfrak E})$.
\end{definition}
\medskip
For a homogeneous IFS, using $\Sigma^n = {\mathcal J}_n$, it is direct to check from $P(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = \frac {c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})}{m(\mathbf{x})}, \ \mathbf{x}\sim \mathbf{y}$ that
$P(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}^-) = C_\mathbf{x} \lambda$, and $P(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x} i) = C_\mathbf{x} p_i$ for some $C_\mathbf{x}>0$. Clearly the walk has constant return ratio $\lambda$. More generally, we have
\medskip
\begin{proposition} \label{th4.5}
Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a $\lambda$-QNRW on the pre-augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$. Then $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ satisfies condition $(R_\lambda)$. Also $m(\vartheta) = \lambda^{-1}$, and if $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ is of bounded degree, then
\begin{equation} \label{eq4.6}
m(\mathbf{x}) \asymp c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}^{-}), \qquad \mathbf{x} \in X.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For $\mathbf{x} \in X \setminus \{\vartheta\}$, by \eqref{eq4.1}, we have $
\lambda(\mathbf{x}) = {\lambda p_\mathbf{x}}/ ({\sum_{\mathbf{y}:\mathbf{y}^- =\mathbf{x}}p_\mathbf{y}}) = \lambda.
$
Hence the walk satisfies condition $(R_\lambda)$. Also, $m(\vartheta) = \sum_{\mathbf{y} \in \mathcal J_1}p_\mathbf{y} \lambda^{-1} =\lambda^{-1}$, and \eqref{eq4.6} is straightforward by the bounded degree assumption.
\end{proof}
\medskip
We now apply the previous results to make the following conclusion.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th4.6}
Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a $\lambda$-QNRW on a pre-augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ with bounded degree. Then
\begin{equation} \label{eq4.7}
F_m(\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) = p_\mathbf{x} , \qquad \mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal J}_m,
\end{equation}
Furthermore, $F(\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) \asymp p_\mathbf{x}$ (the bounds depend on $\lambda$) for any $\mathbf{x} \in X$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} For $m\geq 1$ and for $\mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal J}_m$, Propositions \ref {th4.3} and \ref{th4.5} imply that
$$
F_m(\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) = \frac {c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}^-)\lambda^{m-1}}{m (\vartheta)} = \frac {p_\mathbf{x} \lambda^{-m}\cdot \lambda^{m-1}}{ \lambda^{-1}} = p_\mathbf{x} .
$$
Note that we cannot directly send $m \to \infty$ as $\mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal J}_m$ depends on $m$. Instead, we observe that
$$
F(\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) \geq F_m(\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) = p_\mathbf{x}.
$$
Also, note that $P$ is reversible, and hence
$m(\mathbf{x})G(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta) = m(\vartheta)G(\vartheta, \mathbf{x})$ for any vertex $\mathbf{x} \in X$.
Hence, for $\mathbf{x} \in X \setminus \{\vartheta\}$, by Proposition \ref{th4.1}, Lemma \ref{th4.2} and Proposition \ref{th4.5}, we have
\begin{align*} \label{eqM1}
F(\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) & = \dfrac{G(\vartheta, \mathbf{x})}{G(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x})} \ \leq\ G(\vartheta, \mathbf{x}) \hspace{1.2cm} (\hbox{by } G(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}) \geq 1) \\
&= \dfrac{m(\mathbf{x})}{m(\vartheta)}G(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta) \ \leq \ C_1 p_\mathbf{x}\lambda^{-|\mathbf{x}|} F(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta)G(\vartheta, \vartheta) \\
&= C_1 p_\mathbf{x} \lambda^{-|\mathbf{x}|} \cdot \Big(\lambda^{|\mathbf{x}|}\cdot \frac{1}{1-\lambda}\Big)
\ =\ \frac {C_1}{1-\lambda} \ p_\mathbf{x}.
\end{align*}
This shows that $F(\vartheta, \mathbf{x} ) \asymp p_\mathbf{x}$.
\end{proof}
\medskip
\noindent {\it Remark 1}. In general, we cannot expect a $\lambda$-QNRW to have the {\it strict reversibility} property (i.e., $0< M^{-1} \leq c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})\leq M$ for any $\mathbf{x} \sim \mathbf{y}$). More precisely, we can show that if the IFS satisfies the OSC, then strict reversibility of $\lambda$-QNRW implies that $\lambda =r^\alpha$, where $r = \min_{1\leq i\leq N} r_i$.
\vspace {0.1cm}
Indeed, suppose strict reversibility holds, and let $c(\mathcal J_m) = \sum_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal J_{m}} c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)$, $m \geq 0$. Then by \eqref{eq4.1}, we have $c( {\mathcal J}_{m+1}) = \lambda^{-m}c(\mathcal J_1) = \lambda^{-m}m(\vartheta)$. Recall that $r^{-\alpha m}\leq \#{\mathcal J}_m < r^{-\alpha(m+1)}$ where $\alpha$ satisfies $\sum_{i=1}^N r_i^\alpha =1$ (Lemma \ref{th3.0}). Hence
$$
0 < M^{-1} \leq \dfrac{c(\mathcal J_{m+1})}{\# \mathcal J_{m+1}} \leq \dfrac{\lambda^{-m}m(\vartheta)}{r^{-\alpha (m+1)}}, \qquad m\geq 0.
$$
This implies $\lambda \leq r^\alpha$. On the other hand,
$$
M\geq \dfrac{c(\mathcal J_{m+1})}{\# \mathcal J_{m+1}} \geq \dfrac{\lambda^{-m}m(\vartheta)}{r^{-\alpha (m+2)}}, \qquad m\geq 0
$$
yields $\lambda \geq r^\alpha$, and hence $\lambda = r^\alpha$. It follows that in Definition \ref {th4.4}(i), we must have $p_i = r_i^\alpha$, the natural weight to have the strict reversibility property.
\bigskip
\noindent {\it Remark 2}. Conditions (i) and (ii) of the $\lambda$-QNRW imply that $c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-) \asymp c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) \asymp c(\mathbf{y},\mathbf{y}^-)$ for $\mathbf{x} \sim_h \mathbf{y} $. It follows that $p_\mathbf{x} \asymp p_\mathbf{y}$ for all $\mathbf{x} \sim_h \mathbf{y}$, which is a strong restriction on the choice of possible probability weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$. For the $\lambda$-NRW this restriction is fulfilled, as the natural weights satisfy $p_\mathbf{x}=r_\mathbf{x}^\alpha \asymp r^{\alpha|\mathbf{x}|}$ for all $\mathbf{x} \in X$. In particular, for a homogeneous IFS that satisfies the OSC and has contraction ratio $r$, the SRW on a pre-augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ is a $\frac 1N$-NRW, as $p_i = 1/N = r^\alpha$, $\lambda = N^{-1}$ and $c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}^-)=1$.
\vspace{1mm}
However, for the $\lambda$-QNRW, we have to choose special probability weights so that $p_\mathbf{x} \asymp p_\mathbf{y}$, $\mathbf{x} \sim_h \mathbf{y}$. For instance, if $K$ is the $d$-dimensional Sierpi\'{n}ski graph, one can derive from $p_\mathbf{x} \asymp p_\mathbf{y}$, $\mathbf{x} \sim_h \mathbf{y}$ that all $p_i$'s are equal. Hence the $\lambda$-QNRW on the corresponding augmented tree must be the $\lambda$-NRW.
\medskip
\begin{example} {\rm If $K$ is the Sierpi\'{n}ski carpet, and the IFS is $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^8$ on $\mathbb{R}^2$, where $S_i(z)=(z+q_i)/2$, $i=1,2,\ldots,8$, and the $q_i$'s are the four vertices and four mid-points of the edges of a square, and is labeled clockwise starting from the top left corner. Consider the pre-augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ with ${\mathfrak E}_h$ defined by $\mathbf{x} \sim_h\mathbf{y}$ if $ |\mathbf{x}| = |\mathbf{y}|$ and ${\rm dim_H}\big (K_\mathbf{x} \cap K_\mathbf{y} \big ) =1$. Then it is direct to check that one obtains a $\lambda$-QNRW with probability weight $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^8$ on $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ if and only if $p_1=p_3=p_5=p_7$, $p_2=p_6$, and $p_4=p_8$. Note that with this weight, the self-similar measure is a {\it doubling measure }\cite{Y}, i.e, there exists a constant $C>0$ such that for any $\xi \in K$ and any $\delta > 0$, we have $\mu(B(\xi;2\delta)) \leq C \mu(B(\xi;\delta))$. }
\end{example}
\medskip
In general, we can make use of a result in \cite{Y} to characterize the probability weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$ that admit a $\lambda$-QNRW.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th4.4'}
Let $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ be an IFS with OSC, $K$ be the self-similar set, and $\mu$ be the self-similar measure generated by $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$. Then $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$ admits a $\lambda$-QNRW on the augmented tree $(X,\mathfrak{E})$ if and only if $\mu$ is a doubling measure on $K$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Let $K_\mathbf{x} = S_\mathbf{x}(K)$. For $F\subset {\mathbb R}^d$, let $|F|= {\rm diam} (F)$, and $B(F;\delta):=\{\xi \in \mathbb{R}^d : \ {\rm dist}(\xi,F) \leq \delta\}$ be the closed $\delta$-neighborhood of $F$. Consider the following two conditions:
\vspace {0.1cm}
(i) if there exist constants $C_1$, $C_2>0$ such that for any $\mathbf{w}$, $\mathbf{v} \in \Sigma^*\setminus \{\vartheta\}$ that satisfy $K_\mathbf{w} \subset B(K_\mathbf{v};\ C_1 r_\mathbf{v})$, then $p_\mathbf{w} \leq C_2 p_\mathbf{v}$;
\vspace {0.1cm}
(ii) Replace the quantifiers of (i) to ``if for any $C_1 >0$, there exists $C_2>0$ such that $\ldots$".
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent In \cite[Theorem 2.3]{Y}, it was proved that (i) $\Rightarrow $ $\mu$ is a doubling measure $\Rightarrow $ (ii). We will prove (ii) $\Rightarrow $ $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$ admits a QNRW $\Rightarrow $ (i). Hence all four conditions are equivalent, proving the theorem.
\vspace{0.1cm}
Assume (ii) and let $C_1=(\gamma+|K|)r^{-1}$, where $r=\min_{1\leq i\leq N}r_i$, and $\gamma$ is as in \eqref{eq3.3}. Then by \eqref{eq3.3}, $\mathbf{x} \sim_h \mathbf{y}$ implies
\begin{align*}
K_\mathbf{x} \subset &B(K_\mathbf{y};\ \gamma r^{|\mathbf{x}|}+r_\mathbf{x}|K|) \\
\subset & B(K_\mathbf{y};\ (\gamma+|K|)r^{|\mathbf{x}|}) \subset B(K_\mathbf{y};\ C_1 r_\mathbf{y}).
\end{align*}
Then by (ii), $p_\mathbf{x} \leq C_2 p_\mathbf{y}$ for some $C_2>0$; by the same reason, $p_\mathbf{y} \leq C_2 p_\mathbf{x}$. Hence for $0< \lambda <1$, $c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)=p_\mathbf{x} \lambda^{-|\mathbf{x}|} \asymp p_\mathbf{y} \lambda^{-|\mathbf{y}|} = c(\mathbf{y},\mathbf{y}^-)$ for all $\mathbf{x} \sim_h \mathbf{y}$. We can choose, for instance, $c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) = \sqrt{c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)c(\mathbf{y},\mathbf{y}^-)}$ to get a $\lambda$-QNRW on $(X,\mathfrak{E})$.
\vspace {0.2cm}
Next we assume $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$ admits a $\lambda$-QNRW on $(X,\mathfrak{E})$.
We first define an integer $N_0 =\lceil\log r/\log r'\rceil$ where $r'=\max_{1 \leq i\leq N}r_i$. Then for $p=\min_{1\leq i\leq N} p_i$, and for any $\mathbf{z} \in X$, we have $p_\mathbf{z} \geq p^{N_0}p_{\mathbf{z}^-}$ since the difference of the length of the words $\mathbf{z}$ and $\mathbf{z}^-$ is at most $N_0$.
\vspace {0.1cm}
The $\lambda$-QNRW implies that $
p_\mathbf{x} \lambda^{-|\mathbf{x}|} = c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-) \asymp c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \asymp c(\mathbf{y},\mathbf{y}^-) = p_\mathbf{y} \lambda^{-|\mathbf{y}|}$ for any $\mathbf{x} \sim_h \mathbf{y}$.
Therefore there exists $C>0$ such that $p_\mathbf{x} \leq Cp_\mathbf{y}$ for any $\mathbf{x} \sim_h \mathbf{y}$. Let $C_1 = \min\{\gamma, (1-r)(2r)^{-1}|K|\}>0$. It follows that for any $\mathbf{y} \in \mathcal J_m$,
\begin{align*}
|B(K_\mathbf{y};\ C_1r_\mathbf{y})| &\leq |K_\mathbf{y}|+2C_1r_\mathbf{y} \\
&\leq (1+2(1-r)(2r)^{-1})r^m|K|=r^{m-1}|K|.
\end{align*}
Hence for $\mathbf{x} \in X$ such that $K_\mathbf{x} \subset B(K_\mathbf{y};\ C_1r_\mathbf{y})$, $|\mathbf{x}| \geq m-1$ (by \eqref{eq3.1''}). We claim that $p_\mathbf{x} \leq Cp^{-N_0}p_\mathbf{y}$. Indeed, let $\mathbf{x}_m \in \mathcal J_m$ such that it is on the same vertical path of $\mathbf{x}$. Then either $K_\mathbf{x} \subset K_{\mathbf{x}_m}$ or $K_{\mathbf{x}_m} \subset K_\mathbf{x}$. We have three distinct cases:
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent \hspace {0.23cm} (a) If $\mathbf{x}_m=\mathbf{y}$, then $p_\mathbf{x} \leq p_{\mathbf{y}^-} \leq p^{-N_0}p_\mathbf{y}$.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent \hspace {0.2cm} (b) If $\mathbf{x}_m \neq \mathbf{y}$ and $|\mathbf{x}|=m-1$, then $\mathbf{x}_m^-=\mathbf{x}$ and $K_{\mathbf{x}_m} \subset K_\mathbf{x} \subset {B}(K_\mathbf{y};\ C_1r_\mathbf{y})$, which implies ${\rm dist} (K_{\mathbf{x}_m},K_\mathbf{y}) \leq C_1r_\mathbf{y} \leq \gamma r^m$, hence $\mathbf{x}_m \sim_h \mathbf{y}$. This shows that $p_\mathbf{x} \leq p^{-N_0}p_{\mathbf{x}_m} \leq Cp^{-N_0}p_\mathbf{y}$.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent \hspace {0.23cm} (c) If $\mathbf{x}_m \neq \mathbf{y}$ and $|\mathbf{x}|\geq m$, then $K_{\mathbf{x}} \subset K_{\mathbf{x}_m}$ and ${\rm dist}(K_{\mathbf{x}_m},K_\mathbf{y}) \leq {\rm dist} (K_\mathbf{x},K_\mathbf{y}) \leq C_1r_\mathbf{y} \leq \gamma r^m$, hence $\mathbf{x}_m \sim_h \mathbf{y}$. This shows that $p_\mathbf{x} \leq p_{\mathbf{x}_m} \leq Cp_\mathbf{y}$.
\vspace{0.1cm}
To conclude the proof, we let $\mathbf{w}$, $\mathbf{v} \in \Sigma^*\setminus \{\vartheta\}$. We can choose $\mathbf{u}$, $\mathbf{t} \in X$ such that $S_\mathbf{u}(K) \subset K_\mathbf{w} \subset K_{\mathbf{u}^-}$, and $K_\mathbf{t} \subset K_\mathbf{v} \subset K_{\mathbf{t}^-}$. If $K_\mathbf{w} \subset B(K_\mathbf{v};\ C_1r_\mathbf{v})$ as in the assumption in condition (i), then $K_\mathbf{u} \subset B(K_{\mathbf{t}^-};\ C_1r_{\mathbf{t}^-})$, hence
\begin{equation*}
p_\mathbf{w} \leq p_{\mathbf{u}^-} \leq p^{-N_0}p_\mathbf{u} \leq Cp^{-2N_0}p_{\mathbf{t}^-} \leq Cp^{-3N_0}p_\mathbf{t} \leq Cp^{-3N_0}p_\mathbf{v}.
\end{equation*}
Let $C_2=Cp^{-3N_0}$. Then (i) follows.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\section{Martin boundary and hitting distribution}
\label{sec:5}
\noindent In this section we focus on the boundary behavior of natural random walks on augmented trees. We first show that Ancona's Theorem (Theorem \ref{th2.5}) can be applied to identify the Martin and hyperbolic boundaries with the self-similar sets. This extends \cite[Theorem 4.7]{Ka} for the SRW on the Sierpi\'{n}ski graph.
\vspace{1mm}
\begin{theorem} \label{th5.1}
Let $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ be a pre-augmented tree which is hyperbolic and has bounded degree, and let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a $\lambda$-QNRW on $(X,{\mathfrak E})$. Then the transition probability $P$ satisfies the hypotheses in Theorem \ref{th2.5}. Hence ${\mathcal M} = {\mathcal M}_{\min}$, and the hyperbolic boundary $\partial_H X$ and ${\mathcal M}$ are homeomorphic under the canonical mapping.
In particular, if the IFS satisfies the OSC, and $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ is the augmented tree as in \eqref{eq3.3}, then $\partial_H X$, $\mathcal{M} $ and the self-similar set $K$ are all homeomorphic under the canonical mapping.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We need to check that the conditions in Ancona's theorem (Theorem \ref{th2.5}) are satisfied. Clearly $P$ is of bounded range. That
\begin{equation} \label{eq5.0}
P(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) = \frac{c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})}{m(\mathbf{x})} \geq \eta >0, \qquad \mathbf{x} \sim \mathbf{y}
\end{equation}
follows from Definition \ref {th4.4} and \eqref{eq4.6}. Hence $P$ is uniformly irreducible. It remains to show that $r(P)<1$. By Proposition \ref{th2.7}, it suffices to show that $(X,P)$ satisfies the strong isoperimetric inequality.
\vspace{0.1cm}
Consider the subtree $T = (X,{\mathfrak E}_v)$, and restrict the random walk to $T$. The transition probability is given by $P_T(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}^-) = \frac {c(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}^-)}{m_T (\mathbf{x})}$, and $=0$ otherwise, where $m_T(\mathbf{x}) = c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)+\sum_{\mathbf{y}:\mathbf{y}^-=\mathbf{x}} c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})$ for $\mathbf{x} \in X \setminus \{\vartheta\}$. Note that $m_T(\vartheta) = m(\vartheta)$. We claim that the transition probability $P_T$ satisfies the following strong isoperimetric inequality:
\begin{equation} \label{eq5.1}
m_T(A) \leq \frac{1+\lambda}{1-\lambda}c_T(\partial A)
\end{equation}
for all finite subsets $A \subset X$.
To prove the claim, we can first assume that $A$ is nonempty and connected (otherwise check \eqref{eq5.1} for each connected component and then sum them up). We use induction on $n:=\min\{m: A \subset X_m\}$. It is clear that if $n=0$, then $A=\{\vartheta\}$ and $m_T(A) = m(\vartheta) = c_T(\partial A)$ implies \eqref{eq5.1}. Suppose that for some $n \geq 1$, \eqref{eq5.1} holds for any finite connected subset in $ X_{n-1}$. Consider a connected subset $A \subset X$ such that $\min\{m: A \subset X_m\} = n$. If $\# A = 1$, then $m_T(A) = c_T(\partial A)$ implies \eqref{eq5.1}. Now we suppose $\# A \geq 2$. Then for any $\mathbf{x} \in A \cap \mathcal J_n$, $\mathbf{x}^- \in A$ since $T$ is a tree and $A$ is connected. Hence
\begin{align*}
m_T(A)
&= m_T(A \setminus \mathcal J_n) + \sum_{\mathbf{x} \in A\cap \mathcal J_n} \Big( c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-) + \sum_{\mathbf{y}: \mathbf{y}^-=\mathbf{x}} c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \Big) \\
&= m_T(A \setminus \mathcal J_n) + \sum_{\mathbf{x} \in A\cap \mathcal J_n} (1+\lambda^{-1})c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-) \qquad \qquad \hbox{(by \eqref{eq4.1})} \\
&\leq \frac{1+\lambda}{1-\lambda}\Big(c_T(\partial(A \setminus \mathcal J_n))+\sum_{\mathbf{x} \in A\cap \mathcal J_n} (\lambda^{-1}-1)c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)\Big) \quad \hbox{(by induction)}\\
&= \frac{1+\lambda}{1-\lambda}\Big(c_T(\partial(A \setminus \mathcal J_n))+\sum_{\mathbf{x} \in A\cap \mathcal J_n}\big(\sum_{\mathbf{y}: \mathbf{y}^-=\mathbf{x}} c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})-c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)\big)\Big) \quad \hbox{(by \eqref{eq4.1})}\\
& = \frac{1+\lambda}{1-\lambda} c_T(\partial A)\qquad \qquad \hbox {(use tree property)}
\end{align*}
This completes the proof of the claim. Next observe that for any $\mathbf{x} \in X \setminus \{\vartheta\}$, there exists $C_1>0$ such that
\begin{align*}
m(\mathbf{x}) &\leq C_1p_\mathbf{x}\lambda^{-|\mathbf{x}|} = C_1c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-) \qquad \qquad \quad \hbox{(by bounded degree and \eqref{eq4.6})}\\
&= \frac{C_1\lambda}{1+\lambda}\big(\sum_{\mathbf{y}: \mathbf{y}^-=\mathbf{x}} c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})+c(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}^-)\big) \quad ~~\hbox{(by \eqref{eq4.1})} \\
&= \frac{C_1\lambda}{1+\lambda}m_T(\mathbf{x}).
\end{align*}
This together with the above claim imply the following strong isoperimetric inequality on $(X,{\mathfrak E})$:
$$
m(A) \leq \frac{C_1\lambda}{1+\lambda}m_T(A) \leq \frac{C_1\lambda}{1-\lambda}c_T(\partial A) \leq \frac{C_1\lambda}{1-\lambda}c(\partial A), \quad A \subset X\ \hbox{finite}.
$$
For the last part, we observe the OSC implies that the the augmented tree $(X, {\mathcal E})$ is of bounded degree (Proposition \ref{th3.7}), and Theorem \ref {th3.6} and the above give the homeomorphism among $K$, $\partial_HX$ and ${\mathcal M}$.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
Since $r(P)<1$ as shown in the above proof, we can apply the first part of Theorem \ref{th2.5} to obtain the same inequality for $F(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ of the $\lambda$-QNRW.
\medskip
\begin{corollary} \label{th5.2}
Let $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ be a hyperbolic pre-augmented tree with bounded degree, and let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a $\lambda$-QNRW on $(X,{\mathfrak E})$. Then for $\delta \geq 0$, there is a constant $C_\delta \geq 1$ such that for any $\mathbf{x}$, $\mathbf{y} \in X$ and $\mathbf{u}$ within distance $\delta$ from a geodesic segment between $\mathbf{x}$ and $\mathbf{y}$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq5.2}
F(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{u})F(\mathbf{u}, \mathbf{y}) \leq
F(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) \leq C_\delta F(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{u})F(\mathbf{u}, \mathbf{y}).
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\bigskip
The above corollary allows us to give a useful estimate for $F(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ in terms of the Gromov product, which will be essential in the estimates of the Martin kernel and the Na\"{i}m kernel. For this, we need to restrict our consideration to the IFS satisfying the OSC, and to the class of natural random walks with natural weights $p_i = r_i^\alpha, 1\leq i \leq N$. In this case, we have $p_{\mathbf{x}} = \mu (S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)) = r_{\mathbf{x}}^\alpha \asymp r^{\alpha m}$ for $\mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal J}_m$, where $r= \min_{1\leq i\leq N}\{r_i\}$, $\alpha$ is the Hausdorff dimension of $K$, and $\mu$ is the self-similar measure corresponding to $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$ (Lemma \ref{th3.0}).
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th5.3}
Let $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ be an IFS satisfying the OSC, and let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a $\lambda$-NRW on the augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$. Then
$$
F(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) \asymp \lambda^{|\mathbf{x}|-(\mathbf{x}|\mathbf{y})}r^{\alpha(|\mathbf{y}|-(\mathbf{x}|\mathbf{y}))}, \qquad \forall \ \mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y} \in X
$$
where $(\mathbf{x}|\mathbf{y})$ is the Gromov product. Moreover, the Martin kernel satisfies
$$
K(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \asymp \lambda^{|\mathbf{x}|-(\mathbf{x}|\mathbf{y})}r^{-\alpha(\mathbf{x}|\mathbf{y})}, \qquad \mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y} \in X,
$$
and also for $K(\mathbf{x}, \xi)$ by replacing $\mathbf{y}$ with $\xi \in \partial_HX (\approx {\mathcal M}\approx K)$ in the above estimate.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the canonical geodesic $\pi(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) = \pi(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{u}) \cup \pi(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{v}) \cup \pi(\mathbf{v},\mathbf{y})$ as in Section~\ref{sec:3}.
It follows from Corollary \ref{th5.2} that
$$
F(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \asymp F(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{u})F(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{v})F(\mathbf{v},\mathbf{y})
\asymp \dfrac{F(\mathbf{x}, \vartheta)}{F(\mathbf{u}, \vartheta)} \cdot
F(\mathbf{u}, \mathbf{v})\cdot \dfrac{F(\vartheta,\mathbf{y})}{F(\vartheta,\mathbf{v})}.
$$
Since $d(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{v}) \leq M$ (Proposition \ref{th3.2}), \eqref{eq5.0} yields $\eta^M \leq F(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{v}) \leq 1$.
Applying Theorem \ref{th4.1} ($F(\mathbf{w}, \vartheta) = \lambda^{|\mathbf{w}|}$), Theorem \ref{th4.6} ($F(\vartheta, \mathbf{w}) \asymp r^{\alpha |\mathbf{w}|}$) and $d(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{v}) \leq M$ to the other two factors of the above expression, we have
$$
F(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) \asymp \lambda^{d(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{u})}r^{\alpha d(\mathbf{v}, \mathbf{y})} \asymp \lambda^{d(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{u})}r^{\alpha d(\mathbf{v}, \mathbf{y})} (\lambda r^\alpha)^{d(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{v})/2}= \lambda^{|\mathbf{x}|-(\mathbf{x}|\mathbf{y})}r^{\alpha(|\mathbf{y}|-(\mathbf{x}|\mathbf{y}))}.
$$
\indent For the estimate of the Martin kernel, we recall that $K(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})= \frac {G(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})}{G(\vartheta,\mathbf{y})} = \frac{F(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})}{F(\vartheta,\mathbf{y})}$, and the Gromov product $(\mathbf{x}|\xi)$ is defined for $\xi \in \partial_HX$ (see (\ref {eq3.4})). Using the above estimate of $F(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})$, the second part follows.
\end{proof}
\medskip
In the following, we will assume the IFS satisfies the OSC, so the augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ has bounded degree (Proposition \ref {th3.7}). By Theorem \ref{th5.1}, we identify $K$ with the Martin boundary ${\mathcal M}$ of a $\lambda$-QNRW $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$. We will study the hitting distribution on ${\mathcal M} \approx K$ starting from the root $\vartheta$.
\medskip
First we construct a projection $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ on $X$ onto $K$. For $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ satisfying the OSC, we let $O$ be an open set in the OSC such that $O\cap K \not = \emptyset$ \cite{Sc}. Define a projection $\iota: X \to K $ by selecting arbitrarily
\begin{equation*}
\iota (\mathbf{x}) \in S_{\mathbf{x}} (O \cap K), \quad \mathbf{x} \in X.
\end{equation*}
We extend $\iota$ to $\widehat X = X \cup {\mathcal M} $ by defining $\iota(\xi) = \xi$ for $\xi \in {\mathcal M} (\approx K)$. Then a sequence $\{\mathbf{x}_n\}_n \subset X$ with $|\mathbf{x}_n| \to \infty$ converges to
$\xi \in \widehat X$ if and only if $\iota(\mathbf{x}_n) \to \iota(\xi) \in K$ in the Euclidean topology. Hence $\iota$ is continuous on $\widehat{X}$, and $\iota |_{\mathcal M}$ is the canonical homeomorphism of ${\mathcal M}$ onto $K$. Also we have
\begin{equation}\label {eq5.3}
\iota (Z_{\infty}) = \lim\limits_{n \to \infty} \iota (Z_n) \quad {\mathbb P_\vartheta} -a. e.
\end{equation}
Let $\nu_\vartheta$ be the distribution of $Z_\infty$, and $\nu$ the distribution of $\iota (Z_\infty)$. It is direct to check that $\nu = \nu_{\vartheta}\circ \iota^{-1}$ on $K$. For later use, we shall write $\mathbb P = \mathbb P_\vartheta$ and $\mathbb E = \mathbb E_\vartheta$ if there is no confusion.
\bigskip
For $\ell \geq 1$, let $\tau_\ell : = \inf \{n \geq 0: Z_n \in \mathcal{J}_\ell\}$ be the first hitting time of $\mathcal{J}_\ell$. Then by
Theorem \ref{th4.6}, the distribution of $Z_{\tau_\ell}$ is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq5.4}
\mathbb{P}(Z_{\tau_\ell} = \mathbf{x} )= p_\mathbf{x} = \mu(S_\mathbf{x}(K)), \quad \mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_\ell,
\end{equation}
where $\mu$ is the self-similar measure associated with the probability weight $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$. Note that under the OSC, $\mu (S_\mathbf{x}(K) \cap S_\mathbf{y}(K))=0$ for $\mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal J}_m, \ \mathbf{x} \neq \mathbf{y}$.
\bigskip
\begin{proposition} \label{th5.4}
For $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_m$ and $\ell \geq m $,
\begin{equation} \label{eq5.5}
\mathbb{P}\big (\iota(Z_{\tau_\ell} ) \in S_{\mathbf{x}} (K)\big ) = \mu (S_\mathbf{x}(K)).
\end{equation}
Also $\mathbb{P}\big (\iota(Z_{\tau_\ell} ) \in S_{\mathbf{x}} (K)\cap S_{\mathbf{y}} (K)\big ) = 0$ for any $\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y} \in {\mathcal J}_m, \ \mathbf{x} \not = \mathbf{y}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{J}_m$, $\mathbf{z}\neq \mathbf{x}$. Since $\iota(\mathbf{z}) \in S_{\mathbf{z}} (O \cap K)$, the OSC implies that $S_\mathbf{z}(O) \cap S_\mathbf{x}(O) =\emptyset$. Hence $\iota(\mathbf{z}) \not \in \overline {S_\mathbf{x}(O)}\supset {S_\mathbf{x}(K)}$. It follows that for $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{J}_m$ and $\iota(Z_{\tau_\ell}(\omega)) \in S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)$, $\ell \geq m$, $Z_{\tau_\ell}(\omega)$ must be of the form $\mathbf{x}\mathbf{u}$ for some $\mathbf{u} \in \Sigma^*$ and $\mathbf{x}\mathbf{u} \in {\mathcal J}_\ell$.
By \eqref{eq5.4},
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}(\iota(Z_{\tau_\ell}) \in S_{\mathbf{x}} (K))
& = \sum_{\mathbf{u} \in \Sigma^\ast: \mathbf{x}\mathbf{u} \in \mathcal{J}_\ell}\mathbb{P}(Z_{\tau_\ell} = \mathbf{x} \mathbf{u}) \\
& = \sum_{\mathbf{u} \in \Sigma^\ast: \mathbf{x}\mathbf{u} \in \mathcal{J}_\ell}\mu(S_{\mathbf{x}\mathbf{u}}(K))
= \mu(S_\mathbf{x}(K)) .
\end{align*}
Using the fact that $\mathbb{P}(Z_{\tau_\ell} = \mathbf{x} \mathbf{z}, \ Z_{\tau_\ell}= \mathbf{y}\mathbf{z}')= 0 $ and adopting the same argument, the second part follows.
\end{proof}
\medskip
To obtain the hitting distribution $\nu_\vartheta$, a simple minded approach is to take limit of $\ell$ in \eqref{eq5.5} to obtain $\mathbb{P}\big (\iota (Z_{\infty} )\in S_{\mathbf{x}} (K)\big ) = \mu(S_\mathbf{x}(K))$. However this requires that $\chi_{S_{\mathbf{x}} (K)} (\iota (Z_{\tau_\ell})) \to \chi_{S_{\mathbf{x}} (K)} (\iota (Z_\infty))$ a.e., but we cannot make such conclusion directly, as the convergence for the composition $f(\iota (Z_{\tau_\ell}))$ generally requires the continuity of $f$ \cite{BJ}. We need to go through a more detailed analysis.
\medskip
\begin{lemma} \label{th5.5} For any two distinct $\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}'\in {\mathcal J}_m$, we have
$$
\nu (S_\mathbf{x}(K) \cap S_{\mathbf{x}'} (K)) =0.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin {proof} For $\mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal J}_m$, and $k>m$, we let
$$
{\mathcal F}_{k, \mathbf{x}} = \{\mathbf{y}\mathbf{u} \in {\mathcal J}_k:\ \mathbf{y} \in {\mathcal J}_m \setminus \{\mathbf{x}\},\ \mathbf{u} \in \Sigma^*, \ S_{\mathbf{y}\mathbf{u}}(K) \cap S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)\neq \emptyset\}
$$
Let $F_{k,\mathbf{x}} = \bigcup_{\mathbf{w} \in {\mathcal F}_{k, \mathbf{x}} }S_{\mathbf{w}}(K)$. Then $F_{k,\mathbf{x}}$ is a decreasing sequence of sets in $k$ and the limit set is $\bigcup_{\mathbf{y}\in {\mathcal J}_m\setminus \{\mathbf{x}\}} (S_\mathbf{y}(K) \cap S_\mathbf{x}(K))$, which is a $\mu$-null set by the OSC. This implies that $ \lim_{k\to \infty} \mu (F_{k,\mathbf{x}}) =0$.
\vspace {0.1cm}
Let $T_{k, \mathbf{x}} = S_{\mathbf{x}}(K) \bigcup F_{k, \mathbf{x}}$. By a similar argument as in Proposition \ref {th5.4}, we can show that
\begin{equation} \label {eq5.6}
\mathbb{P}\big (\iota(Z_{\tau_\ell} ) \in T_{k,\mathbf{x}} \cap T_{k, \mathbf{y}} \big ) =\mu (T_{k,\mathbf{x}} \cap T_{k, \mathbf{y}})\qquad \hbox {for} \ \ell \geq m.
\end{equation}
Observe that $K \setminus T_{k, \mathbf{x}}$ has positive Euclidian distance to $S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)$. Hence $\iota (Z_{\infty}) \in S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)$ implies that $\iota (Z_n)$ is eventually in ${T_{k,\mathbf{x}}}$, which means $\lim_{n \to \infty}
\chi_{T_{k, \mathbf{x}}}(\iota(Z_n)) = 1$.
\vspace {0.1cm}
Now for two distinct $\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{x}' \in {\mathcal J}_m$, if $S_\mathbf{x} (K) \cap S_{\mathbf{x}'} (K) = \emptyset$, then the lemma is obviously true. Hence assume that $S_\mathbf{x} (K) \cap S_{\mathbf{x}'} (K) \neq \emptyset$. Let $T_{k, \mathbf{x}}$ and $T_{k, {\mathbf{x}'}}$ be defined as the above. Then
\begin{align} \label {eq5.7}
\nu(S_{\mathbf{x}}(K) \cap S_{\mathbf{x}'}(K))
&= \mathbb{P} (\iota (Z_{\infty}) \in S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)\cap S_{\mathbf{x}'}(K))
\nonumber \\
&\leq \mathbb{E} \left(\liminf_{n \to \infty}~\chi_{T_{k, \mathbf{x}} \cap T_{k, \mathbf{x}'} }(\iota(Z_n)) \right)\nonumber\\
&\leq \liminf_{n \to \infty} ~\mathbb{E} \big( \chi_{T_{k, \mathbf{x}} \cap T_{k, \mathbf{x}'}}(\iota(Z_n)) \big) \qquad \ \hbox {(by Fatou's lemma)} \nonumber \\
&\leq \liminf_{\ell\to \infty} ~\mathbb{P} (\iota(Z_{\tau_\ell}) \in T_{k, \mathbf{x}}\cap T_{k, \mathbf{x}'}) \\
& = \mu(T_{k, \mathbf{x}}\cap T_{k, \mathbf{x}'}) \qquad \qquad \qquad
\quad ~~~\hbox {(by \eqref{eq5.6})}. \nonumber
\end{align}
By the limit in the first paragraph, we have $\nu(S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)\cap S_{\mathbf{x}'}(K) ) \leq \lim_{k\to \infty} \mu(T_{k, \mathbf{x}}\cap T_{k, \mathbf{x}'})=
\mu((S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)\cap S_{\mathbf{x}'}(K)) = 0$, and this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th5.6}
Let $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ be an IFS with the OSC, and let $K$ be the self-similar set.
Suppose $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ is a $\lambda$-QNRW on the augmented tree $(X, \mathfrak E)$ associated with a set of probability weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$. Then the hitting distribution $\nu_{\vartheta}$ is the self-similar measure $\mu$ with weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$ on $K$.
\end{theorem}
\medskip
\begin{proof}
To prove the theorem, it suffices to show that
$\nu(S_{\mathbf{x}} (K)) = p_\mathbf{x}$ for $m \geq 1$ and $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal J_m$.
Then $\nu$ is the unique self-similar measure with weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$.
To this end, we fix $m \geq 1$ and $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal J_m$.
Let
$$
U_{\mathbf{x}} = S_{\mathbf{x}}(K) \setminus \bigcup_{\mathbf{y} \in \mathcal J_m: \mathbf{y} \neq \mathbf{x}} S_{\mathbf{y}}(K)
$$
be the `interior' of the $m$-cell $S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)$. Then any sequence of points in $K$ that has a limit in $U_{\mathbf{x}}$ must be in $U_{\mathbf{x}}$ eventually. Therefore $\iota (Z_{\infty}) \in U_{\mathbf{x}}$ implies
$\lim_{n \to \infty} \chi_{U_{\mathbf{x}}} (\iota(Z_n)) = 1.$
Hence by using Fatou's lemma as in Lemma \ref{th5.4}, we have
\begin{align*}
\nu(S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)) & = \nu(U_{\mathbf{x}}) \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad \hbox {(by Lemma \ref{th5.5})}\\
&\leq \liminf_{\ell \to \infty} ~\mathbb{P} (\iota(Z_{\tau_\ell}) \in U_{\mathbf{x}}) \quad ~~\hbox {(as in \eqref{eq5.7})} \\
&\leq \liminf_{\ell \to \infty} ~\mathbb{P} (\iota(Z_{\tau_\ell}) \in S_{\mathbf{x}}(K)) \\
&= \mu(S_\mathbf{x}(K)) = p_\mathbf{x} \qquad \qquad \quad \hbox {(by Proposition \ref{th5.4})}.
\end{align*}
Summing the above inequality over $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal J_m$, we have $1 = \nu(K) \leq \sum_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal J_m} \nu(S_\mathbf{x}(K)) \leq \sum_{\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal J_m} p_\mathbf{x} = 1$. Thus $\nu(S_{\mathbf{x}} (K)) = p_\mathbf{x}$ for $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal J_m$. This completes the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\section{Estimation of the Na\"{i}m kernel}
\label{sec:6}
Let $P$ be a transient reversible random walk on a countable set $X$.
For $\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y} \in X$, we define the $\Theta$-kernel by
\begin{equation*}
\Theta(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) = \dfrac{K(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})}{G(\mathbf{x},\vartheta)} = \dfrac{F(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})}{F(\mathbf{x},\vartheta)G(\vartheta,\vartheta)F(\vartheta,\mathbf{y})}.
\end{equation*}
This kernel is clearly positive and symmetric (by $m(\mathbf{x})G(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})=m(\mathbf{y})G(\mathbf{y},\mathbf{x})$) on $X \times X$, and can be extended to $\Theta (\mathbf{x}, \eta)$ on $X \times \widehat{X}$ continuously (as $K(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ does), but it is more difficult to extend to $\widehat{X} \times \widehat{X}$. We first recall the extension of $\Theta (\xi, \eta)$ on $\widehat{X} \times \widehat{X}$ in \cite{Si}. For $\xi \in \mathcal{M}$, we define the {\it $\xi$-process} by setting the transition probability
\begin{equation} \label{eq6.1}
P^{\xi}(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}) = \dfrac{P(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y})K(\mathbf{y},\xi)}{K(\mathbf{x},\xi)}.
\end{equation}
(It is also known as the {\it $h$-transform} of $P$ \cite{Dy}, by taking the harmonic function $h = K(\cdot, \xi)$ on $X$.) Clearly $P^{\xi}$ is a transition probability since $K(\cdot, \xi)$ is harmonic on $X$. For the $\xi$-process, we denote the corresponding ever-visiting probability and Green function by $F^\xi(\cdot,\cdot)$ and $G^\xi(\cdot,\cdot)$ respectively.
The following lemma can be found in \cite[Corollary 7.51]{Wo2}.
\medskip
\begin{lemma} \label{th6.1}
For $\xi \in \mathcal{M}$, let $\nu_\vartheta^\xi$ be the hitting distribution of the $\xi$-process. Then $\xi \in \mathcal{M}_{\min}$ if and only if
$\nu_\vartheta^\xi = \delta_{\xi}$, the point mass at $\xi$.
\end{lemma}
For $m \geq 0$, let $\tau_m^*$ be the last visit time of $X_m = \bigcup_{k=0}^m \mathcal{J}_k$ by $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$. Note that $\tau_m^*$ is not a stopping time. For $\xi \in K$ and $\mathbf{z} \in X$, let
\begin{equation*}
\ell_m^\xi(\mathbf{z}) = \mathbb{P}_{\vartheta}^\xi (Z_{\tau_m^*}=\mathbf{z}),
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbb{P}_{\vartheta}^\xi$ is the probability corresponding to the $\xi$-process. The following lemma is from \cite[Lemma 1.9]{Si}.
\medskip
\begin{lemma} \label{th6.2} Let $\xi, \eta \in \mathcal{M}$. Then the sum
$
\sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in X} \ell_m^\xi(\mathbf{z}) \Theta(\mathbf{z},\eta)
$
is increasing in $m$.
\end{lemma}
In view of Lemmas \ref{th6.1} and \ref{th6.2}, Silverstein \cite{Si} extended the Na\"{i}m kernel on ${\mathcal M} \times {\mathcal M}$ by
$\Theta(\xi, \eta) = \lim_{k \to \infty} {\sum}_{\mathbf{z} \in X}~\ell_k^\xi(\mathbf{z}) \Theta(\mathbf{z}, \eta)$ for $\xi, \eta \in \mathcal{M}$.
We will apply this to the $\lambda$-NRW on the augmented tree. Since the walk satisfies $|Z_{n+1}|-|Z_n| \in \{0,\pm 1\}$, the identity reduces to
\begin{equation} \label{eq6.3}
\Theta(\xi, \eta) = \lim_{k \to \infty} {\sum}_{\mathbf{z} \in {\mathcal J}_k}\ell_k^\xi(\mathbf{z}) \Theta(\mathbf{z}, \eta).
\end{equation}
Here is the main theorem of this section.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th6.4}
Let $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ be an IFS that satisfies the OSC, and let $K$ be the self-similar set. Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$ be a $\lambda$-NRW on the augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$. Then
\begin{align*}
\Theta(\xi, \eta) \asymp (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)}, \quad \xi, \eta \in \partial_H{X}, \ \xi \neq \eta,
\end{align*}
where $\alpha = \dim_HK$. Consequently, by Theorem \ref{th3.6}, we have
$$
\Theta(\xi, \eta) \asymp |\xi - \eta|^{-(\alpha+\beta)}, \quad \xi, \eta \in K, \ \xi \neq \eta,
$$
with $\beta = \frac{\log \lambda}{\log r}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\xi,\eta \in \partial_HX$, $\xi\neq \eta$. For $\mathbf{x} \in X$, Proposition \ref{th4.1} and Theorem \ref{th5.3} imply
\begin{align}\label{eq6.4}
\Theta(\mathbf{x},\eta) =\frac{K(\mathbf{x},\eta)}{F(\mathbf{x},\vartheta)G(\vartheta,\vartheta)} \asymp (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\mathbf{x}|\eta)}.
\end{align}
We fix two geodesic rays $(\mathbf{x}_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ and $(\mathbf{y}_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ starting from $\vartheta$ such that $(\mathbf{x}_n)$ tends to $\xi$, $(\mathbf{y}_n)$ tends to $\eta$, and $(\xi|\eta) = \lim_{n\to \infty} (\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{y}_n)$.
\medskip
We first estimate $\Theta (\xi, \eta)$ from below.
Following Lemma \ref{th3.8}(iii), there exists a positive integer $\ell$ such that $(\xi| \eta) = (\mathbf{x}_n|\mathbf{y}_n)$ for all $n \geq \ell$.
Let $T_\xi=S_{\mathbf{x}_\ell}(K) \cup (\bigcup_{\mathbf{y} \sim_h \mathbf{x}_\ell}S_\mathbf{y}(K))$. For $\mathbf{z} \in \iota^{-1}(T_\xi)$ with $|\mathbf{z}| \geq \ell$, let $\mathbf{z}_\ell \in {\mathcal J}_\ell \cap \pi(\vartheta, \mathbf{z})$. Then $d(\mathbf{z}_\ell, \mathbf{x}_\ell) =0$ or $1$. By Lemma \ref{th3.8}(ii), (iii) and the triangle inequality (see \eqref{eq3.5'}), we have
\begin{align} \label{eq6.5}
(\mathbf{z}|\eta) \geq (\mathbf{z}_\ell|\mathbf{y}_\ell)
\geq (\mathbf{x}_\ell|\mathbf{y}_\ell) - \dfrac{1}{2} = (\xi|\eta)-\dfrac{1}{2}.
\end{align}
As $K$ is identified with ${\mathcal M}$ (Theorem \ref{th5.1}), Lemma \ref{th6.1} implies that $\iota(Z_n)$ converges to $\xi$ $\mathbb P_\vartheta^\xi$-almost surely.
Let ${t}_\xi = \sup \{n \geq \ell: \iota(Z_n) \notin T_\xi\}+1$, i.e., the first time that $Z_n$ enters $\iota^{-1}(T_\xi)$ and then stays inside. Clearly $\mathbb{P}_\vartheta^\xi({t}_\xi < \infty) = 1$. Therefore we can choose an integer $m_1$ such that $\mathbb{P}_\vartheta^\xi({t}_\xi \leq \tau^*_{m_1})\geq 1/2$. By Lemma \ref{th6.2}, \eqref{eq6.4} and \eqref{eq6.5},
\begin{align*}
\Theta(\xi, \eta)
&\geq {\sum}_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{J}_{m_1} \cap\,\iota^{-1}(T_\xi)} \ell_{m_1}^\xi(\mathbf{z})\Theta(\mathbf{z},\eta) \\
&\geq c_1 (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)} ~{\sum}_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal J_{m_1} \cap\,\iota^{-1}(T_\xi)} \ell_{m_1}^\xi(\mathbf{z}) \\
&\geq c_1(\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)} \cdot \mathbb{P}_\vartheta^\xi(t_\xi \leq \tau^*_{m_1}) \geq c_2 (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)}.
\end{align*}
\vspace{2mm}
To obtain the upper bound, we first observe that $
\ell_k^\xi(\mathbf{z}) \leq G^\xi(\vartheta,\mathbf{z}) = G(\vartheta,\mathbf{z})K(\mathbf{z},\xi).
$
This together with the reversibility $G(\vartheta, \mathbf{z}) = (m(\mathbf{z})/m(\vartheta))G(\mathbf{z},\vartheta)$ imply
\begin{align*}
\Theta(\xi, \eta)
&\leq (m(\vartheta))^{-1} \lim\limits_{k \to \infty} \sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{J}_k} m(\mathbf{z})K(\mathbf{z},\xi)K(\mathbf{z},\eta) \\
&\asymp \lim\limits_{k \to \infty} \sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{J}_k} (\lambda r^\alpha)^{|\mathbf{z}|-(\mathbf{z}|\mathbf{x}_k)-(\mathbf{z}|\mathbf{y}_k)}
\end{align*}
(the $\asymp$ is a consequence of Proposition \ref{th4.5}, Theorem \ref{th5.3} and Lemma \ref{th3.8}(ii)). Let $\Phi(\mathbf{z})$ denote the summand in the above sum. Using Lemma \ref{th3.8}(iii) and the triangle inequality, we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq6.6}
\Phi(\mathbf{z}) \leq ({\lambda r^\alpha})^{d(\mathbf{x}_k,\mathbf{y}_k)/2-k} = (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\mathbf{x}_k|\mathbf{y}_k)} \leq (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)}, \quad \mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{J}_k.
\end{equation}
For any ${\mathbf{w}} \in \mathcal{J}_k$, $k \geq 1$, let
$
\mathcal{F}_k(\mathbf{w}) = \{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{J}_k: d(\mathbf{z},\mathbf{w}) \leq M\},
$
where $M$ is the maximal length of the horizontal geodesics. As $(X,{\mathfrak E})$ is of bounded degree (Lemma \ref{th3.7}), it is direct to check that $\#\mathcal{F}_k({\bf w}) \leq C_1$ for some $C_1>0$ independent of ${\bf w}$ and $k$.
Our aim is to show that for sufficient large $n$, the sum $\sum_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{J}_{k+n}} \Phi(\mathbf{z})$ is concentrated on the $n$-th descendants of $\mathcal{F}_k(\mathbf{x}_k) \cup \mathcal{F}_k(\mathbf{y}_k)$. This enables us to obtain the desired upper bound.
\vspace{1mm}
To this end, for $\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal J_k$, we let ${\mathcal J}_n(\mathbf{z})$ denote the set of $n$-th descendants of $\mathbf{z}$ in ${\mathcal J}_{k+n}$. For $\mathbf{z} \notin \mathcal F_k(\mathbf{x}_k)$ and $\mathbf{z}^{(1)} \in \mathcal J_1(\mathbf{z})$, it is clear that $d(\mathbf{z}^{(1)},\mathbf{x}_{k+1}) \geq d(\mathbf{z},\mathbf{x}_k) > M$, which yields $\mathbf{z}^{(1)} \notin \mathcal F_{k+1}(\mathbf{x}_{k+1})$. Moreover, by the same argument as in Lemma \ref{th3.8}(iii), we have $(\mathbf{z}^{(1)}|\mathbf{x}_{k+1}) = (\mathbf{z}|\mathbf{x}_k)$.
Let $\mathcal{F}_k^c = \mathcal{J}_k \setminus (\mathcal{F}_k(\mathbf{x}_k) \cup \mathcal{F}_k(\mathbf{y}_k))$. It follows that $\Phi(\mathbf{z}^{(1)}) = \lambda r^\alpha\Phi(\mathbf{z})$ for any $\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{F}_k^c$, and hence inductively,
\begin{equation} \label {eq6.7}
\Phi(\mathbf{z}^{(n)}) = (\lambda r^\alpha)^n \Phi(\mathbf{z}),\qquad \mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{F}_k^c, \ \ \mathbf{z}^{(n)} \in {\mathcal J}_n(\mathbf{z}).
\end{equation}
Also by the same proof as Lemma \ref{th3.0}, we have
\begin{equation} \label {eq6.8}
r^{-\alpha n} \leq \#{\mathcal J}_n(\mathbf{z}) \leq r^{-\alpha (n+1)}.
\end{equation}
Now choose $n_0$ such that $\delta = r^{-\alpha} \lambda^{n_0} <1$. It follows from \eqref{eq6.6}-\eqref{eq6.8} that for any $k \geq 1$,
\begin{align*}
\sum\limits_{\mathbf{w} \in \mathcal{J}_{k+n_0}} \Phi(\mathbf{w})
&= \Big(\sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{F}_k^c} \sum\limits_{\mathbf{w}\in {\mathcal J}_{n_0}(\mathbf{z})} + \sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{F}_k(\mathbf{x}_k)} \sum\limits_{\mathbf{w}\in {\mathcal J}_{n_0}(\mathbf{z})} +
\sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{F}_k(\mathbf{y}_k)} \sum\limits_{\mathbf{w}\in {\mathcal J}_{n_0}(\mathbf{z})} \Big ) \Phi(\mathbf{w})\\
&\leq r^{-\alpha}\lambda^{n_0}\sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{F}_k^c} \Phi(\mathbf{z}) + r^{-\alpha (n_0+1)}\Big (\sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{F}_k(\mathbf{x}_k)} +\sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{F}_k(\mathbf{y}_k)}\Big )(\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)} \\
&\leq \delta \sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{J}_k} \Phi(\mathbf{z}) + C_2 (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)}.
\end{align*}
By iteration, we have for any integer $q \geq 1$, and any $k \in \{1,2,\cdots,n_0\}$,
\begin{align*}
\sum\limits_{\mathbf{w} \in \mathcal{J}_{k+n_0 q}} \Phi(\mathbf{w})
&\leq \delta^q \sum\limits_{\mathbf{z} \in \mathcal{J}_k}\Phi(\mathbf{z}) + \dfrac{C_2}{1-\delta}(\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)} \\
&\leq \left(\# \mathcal J_k+\dfrac{C_2}{1-\delta}\right)\cdot (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)} \qquad \hbox{(by \eqref{eq6.6})}\\
&\leq \left(\# \mathcal J_{n_0}+\dfrac{C_2}{1-\delta}\right)\cdot (\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)}.
\end{align*}
This completes the upper estimation of $\Theta(\xi,\eta)$.
\end{proof}
\medskip
We remark that for homogeneous IFS, the SRW is a special example of $\lambda$-NRW with $\lambda = 1/N = r^\alpha$. Hence by Theorem \ref{th6.4}, $\Theta(\xi, \eta) \asymp |\xi - \eta|^{-2\alpha}$. Also for the example in Section ~\ref{sec:3}, Remark 2 (see Figure ~\ref{fig:3}), the above theorem (with slight adjustment) shows that for the SRW there, the Na\"{i}m kernel $\Theta(\xi, \eta) \asymp |\xi - \eta|^{-2}$, which resembles the classical case of the kernel in the Douglas integral \eqref{eq1.2} on the unit circle.
\medskip
We also remark that there is an analogous result for the more general random walks on $N$-ary trees investigated by Kigami \cite{Ki2}. For the $\lambda$-QNRW on the $N$-homogeneous tree $T$ defined by a set of probability weights $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$, the effective resistance between $\mathbf{x} \in T$ and $\Sigma_\mathbf{x}$ with respect to the sub-tree $T_\mathbf{x}$ is $R_\mathbf{x} = \lambda^{|\mathbf{x}|+1}/((1-\lambda)p_\mathbf{x})$, which can be derived from the combined resistance by iteration. Since the hitting distribution $\nu$ is the self-similar measure of $\{p_i\}_{i=1}^N$ on the Cantor set $\Sigma^\infty$ as Martin boundary, we have $\nu(\Sigma^\infty_\mathbf{x})=p_\mathbf{x}$. In the notations of \cite {Ki2}, $D_\mathbf{x}:=\nu(\Sigma^\infty_\mathbf{x})R_\mathbf{x}=\lambda^{|\mathbf{x}|+1}/(1-\lambda)$, $\lambda_\mathbf{x}=1/D_\mathbf{x}=(1-\lambda)/\lambda^{|\mathbf{x}|+1}$, and $N(\xi, \eta) = (\xi|\eta)$. Following \cite[Theorem 5.6]{Ki2}, we can rewrite his jump kernel $J(\xi,\eta)$ for such $\lambda$-QNRW as
\begin{equation} \label{eq6.9}
J(\xi,\eta) = \dfrac{1-\lambda}{2\lambda}\Big(1+\sum_{m=1}^{(\xi|\eta)}\dfrac{1-\lambda}{\lambda^m p_{[\xi,\eta]_m}}\Big) \asymp \lambda^{-(\xi|\eta)}p_{[\xi,\eta]}^{-1}, \quad \xi,\eta \in \Sigma^\infty,
\end{equation}
where $[\xi,\eta]_m$ is the unique word in $\Sigma^m$ such that both $\xi$ and $\eta$ belong to $\Sigma_{[\xi,\eta]_m}$, and $[\xi,\eta]:=[\xi,\eta]_{(\xi|\eta)}$.
In particular, for the $\lambda$-NRW on the $N$-homogeneous tree, $p_\mathbf{x} = N^{-|\mathbf{x}|}$, and we have the following estimate:
\begin{equation} \label{eq6.10}
J(\xi,\eta) = \dfrac{(1-\lambda)(N-1)}{2(N-\lambda)}+\dfrac{N(1-\lambda)^2(N/\lambda)^{(\xi|\eta)}}{2\lambda(N-\lambda)} \asymp (N/\lambda)^{(\xi|\eta)}=(\lambda r^\alpha)^{-(\xi|\eta)},
\end{equation}
where $\alpha=|\log N/\log r|$ is the Hausdorff dimension of the Cantor set $\Sigma^\infty$. It coincides with Theorem \ref{th6.4}.
\bigskip
\section{Induced Dirichlet forms}
\label{sec:7}
\noindent In this section we use the $\lambda$-NRW and the Na\"{i}m kernel to induce an energy form on $K$, and make some remarks about the known results for it to be a Dirichlet form. First we summarize some general results that hold for all transient reversible random walks.
\medskip
Let $(X, {\mathfrak E})$ be a countably infinite, connected, locally finite graph, and let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a transient reversible random walk on $(X, E)$ with conductance $c$ and total conductance $m$. The {\it graph energy} of a (real) function $f$ on $X$ is defined by
\begin{equation*}
{\mathcal{E}}_X[f] = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{x, y \in X, x \sim y} c(x, y) (f(x) - f(y))^2.
\end{equation*}
We let ${\mathcal D}_X $, the domain of ${\mathcal{E}}_X$, be the set of $f: X \to \mathbb R$ with ${\mathcal{E}}_X[f] <\infty$. Since $P(x, y) = c(x, y)/m(x)$, we have
\begin{align} \label{eq7.1}
{\mathcal{E}}_X[f] &= \frac{1}{2} \sum_{x \in X} m(x) \sum_{y \in X, y \sim x} P(x, y)(f(y) - f(x))^2 \nonumber \\
&= \frac{1}{2} \sum_{x \in X} m(x) {\mathbb{E}}_x [(f(Z_1) - f(Z_0))^2].
\end{align}
The graph energy defines a non-negative definite symmetric form ${\mathcal{E}}_X (f, g)$ on ${\mathcal D}_X$ by polarization. Moreover, if we fix any $x_0 \in X$, then ${\mathcal D}_X$ is a Hilbert space under the inner product
$$
\langle f, g\rangle_0 := f(x_0)g(x_0) + {\mathcal E}_X(f, g), \quad f, g \in {\mathcal D}_X,
$$
and the convergence in $({\mathcal D}_X, {\mathcal E}_X)$ implies pointwise convergence \cite[Lemma 2.4]{Wo1}.
\medskip
\begin{proposition} \label{th7.1} Let ${\mathcal M}$ be the Martin boundary of $\{Z_n\}_{n=1}^\infty$, and let $\nu=\nu_\vartheta$ be the hitting distribution.
Suppose $f \in {\mathcal D}_X$ and is harmonic. Then $\{f(Z_n)\}_{n = 0}^{\infty}$ converges almost surely and in $L^2$, and there exists $u \in L^2({\mathcal M}, \nu)$ such that $\lim_{n\to \infty} f(Z_n) =u(Z_\infty)$. Moreover, $u$ is uniquely determined $\nu$-a.e., and $f = Hu$ where
$$
Hu (x) = \int_{\mathcal M} u(\xi) K(x, \xi)\,d\nu(\xi), \quad x \in X.
$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The first statement was actually proved in \cite[Theorem 1.1]{ALP} without the assumption that $f$ is harmonic. We only need this result when $f$ is harmonic, and the proof is easy for this case. Fix $x \in X$, we claim that ${\mathbb{E}}_x[f(Z_n)^2]$ is bounded. In fact, Since $f$ is harmonic, $\{f(Z_n)\}_{n=0}^\infty$ is a martingale under ${\mathbb{P}}_x$. It follows that
\begin{align*}
{\mathbb{E}}_x[f(Z_n)^2] &\leq f(x)^2 + \sum_{k = 1}^{\infty} {\mathbb{E}}_x\big [(f(Z_k) - f(Z_{k-1}))^2\big ] \\
&= f(x)^2 + \sum_{k = 1}^{\infty} \sum_{y \in X} P^k(x, y) {\mathbb{E}}_y\big [(f(Z_1) - f(Z_0))^2\big ] \\
&= f(x)^2 + \sum_{y \in X} G(x, y) {\mathbb{E}}_y\big [(f(Z_1) - f(Z_0))^2\big ].
\end{align*}
Using the reversibility, we have $G(x, y) = \frac{m(y)}{m(x)}G(y, x) \leq \frac{m(y)}{m(x)}G(x, x) $. Therefore, by (\ref{eq7.1}),
\begin{align*}
{\mathbb{E}}_x[f(Z_n)^2]
\leq f(x)^2 + 2 \frac{G(x, x)}{m(x)} \, {\mathcal{E}}_X[f],
\end{align*}
and the claim follows.
Consequently, $\{f(Z_n)\}_{n=0}^\infty$ is an $L^2$-bounded martingale under ${\mathbb{P}}_x$. The martingale convergence theorem implies the almost surely convergence and $L^2$-convergence.
\vspace {0.2cm}
Let $Y = \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} f(Z_n)$. Note that $Y$ is a {\it final} random variable, i.e. $Y \circ \theta = Y$ a.s. where $\theta$ is the shift operator on the path space. Hence there exists a measurable function $u$ on ${\mathcal{M}}$ such that $Y = u(Z_{\infty})$ a.s. (under any ${\mathbb{P}}_x$) (see \cite{Dy}). It is clear that $u$ is unique $\nu$-a.e. Now since $Y \in L^2({\mathbb{P}}_\vartheta)$, we have
\[
\int_{{\mathcal{M}}} u(\xi)^2 d\nu(\xi) = {\mathbb{E}}_\vartheta(u(Z_{\infty})^2) = {\mathbb{E}}_\vartheta(Y^2) < \infty.
\]
That $f= Hu$ follows from
\begin{equation*}
f(Z_n)=\mathbb E[u(Z_\infty) | \mathcal F_n]= \mathbb E[u(Z_\infty) | Z_n] = \mathbb E_{Z_n}[u(Z_\infty)] = Hu(Z_n),
\end{equation*}
and the irreducibility of the chain.
\end{proof}
\medskip
For a reversible random walk on $(X, {\mathfrak E})$, the energy form induces a bilinear form $(\mathcal{E}_{\mathcal M}, \mathcal{D}_{\mathcal M})$ on $L^2({\mathcal M}, \nu)$ defined by
\begin{equation} \label{eq7.2}
\mathcal{E}_{\mathcal M}(u,v) = \mathcal{E}_X(Hu,Hv), \quad u, v \in \mathcal{D}_{\mathcal M} ,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{D}_{\mathcal M} = \{ u \in L^2({\mathcal M}, \nu): Hu \in {\mathcal D}_X \}$ is the domain of $\mathcal{E}_{\mathcal M}$. It follows from Proposition \ref{th7.1} that
\begin{equation} \label{eq7.2'}
\mathcal{D}_{\mathcal M} = \{u \in L^2(\mathcal M, \nu): \ \exists \hbox{ harmonic } f \in {\mathcal D}_X \ \hbox{such that}\ u(Z_\infty)=\lim_{n \to \infty} f(Z_n) \ \hbox{a.s.}\}.
\end{equation}
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th7.2}{\rm \cite[Theorem 3.5]{Si}}
The induced bilinear form $({\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M}, {\mathcal D}_{\mathcal M})$ has the expression
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M}[u] = {\mathcal E}_X[Hu] = \frac{1}{2} m(\vartheta) \int_{\mathcal M} \int_{\mathcal M} (u(\xi) - u(\eta))^2 \Theta(\xi, \eta) d\nu(\xi) d\nu(\eta), \quad u \in {\mathcal D}_{\mathcal M},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\Theta (\xi,\eta) $ is the Na\"{i}m kernel defined in \eqref{eq6.3}. Moreover,
$ {\mathcal D}_{\mathcal M}
= \{u \in L^2({\mathcal M}, \nu):\, {\mathcal E}_{\mathcal M} [u] < \infty\} $.
\end{theorem}
\medskip
As a direct consequence of Theorem \ref{th6.4} and the above, we have
\medskip
\begin {theorem} \label {th7.3} Let $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ be an IFS on $\mathbb{R}^d$ that satisfies the OSC, and let $K$ be the self-similar set. Let $\{Z_n\}_{n=0}^{\infty}$ be a $\lambda$-NRW on the augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\mathcal E}_K[u] \asymp \int_K \int_K (u(\xi) - u(\eta))^2 \ |\xi - \eta|^{-(\alpha + \beta)} d\nu(\xi) d\nu(\eta), \quad u \in {\mathcal D}_K,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\alpha=\dim_H K$, and $\beta = \frac{\log \lambda}{\log r}$.
\end{theorem}
\medskip
Next we recall the definition of Dirichlet form (see \cite{CF,FOT}). Let $\mathfrak{X}$ be a locally compact separable metric space together with a positive Radon measure $\mu$ such that ${\rm supp} (\mu) = \mathfrak{X}$; also let $C_0(\mathfrak{X})$ denote the space of continuous function on $\mathfrak{X}$ with compact support.
\medskip
\begin{definition} \label{th7.4}
A Dirichlet form $(\mathcal{E}, \mathcal{D})$ on $L^2(\mathfrak{X}, \mu)$ is a bilinear form which is symmetric, non-negative definite, closed, Markovian and densely defined on $L^2(\mathfrak{X}, \mu)$. It is called {\it regular} if the subspace $\mathcal{D} \cap C_0(\mathfrak{X})$ is dense in $\mathcal{D}$ with the $\mathcal{E}_1$-norm, and is dense in $C_0(\mathfrak{X})$ with the supremum norm. It is called {\it local} if for two functions $u,v \in \mathcal{D}$ having disjoint compact supports, $\mathcal{E}(u,v)=0$.
\end{definition}
\medskip
It is easy to see that the bilinear form ${\mathcal E}_K(\cdot, \cdot)$ in Theorem \ref {th7.3} is symmetric, non-negative definite, closed and Markovian. For it to be a Dirichlet form, we need to show that its domain ${\mathcal D}_K$ is dense in $L^2(K, \nu)$. In view of the fact that the Na\"{i}m kernel in Theorem \ref{th7.3} satisfies the estimate $\Theta (\xi, \eta) \asymp |\xi - \eta|^{-(\alpha + \beta)}$, we introduce the following Besov space on $L^2(\mathfrak{X},\mu)$ (see \cite{J,St,GHL1,GHL2,HK}).
\medskip
For convenience, we assume that ${\mathfrak X}\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ and is equipped with the Euclidean distance; we also assume that ${\mathfrak X}$ has Hausdorff dimension $\alpha$, and $\mu (B(x;r)) \asymp r^\alpha$ for all $x \in {\mathfrak X}$ and $0<r<1$. We call such ${\mathfrak X}$ an {\it $\alpha$-set} \cite{JW}. For $\sigma >0$, and for $u \in L^2({\mathfrak X},\mu)$, we define
\begin{equation} \label{eq7.4}
\mathcal{N}_{2,2}^{\alpha, \sigma}(u) = \displaystyle\int_0^\infty \dfrac{dr}{r} \dfrac{1}{r^{\alpha+2\sigma} }\displaystyle\iint\limits_{\{\xi,\eta \in {\mathfrak X}: |\xi-\eta|<r\}} (u(\xi)-u(\eta))^2d\mu(\xi)d\mu(\eta),
\end{equation}
and the {\it Besov spaces}
$
\Lambda_{2,2}^{\alpha, \sigma} = \{u \in L^2({\mathfrak X},\mu): \mathcal{N}_{2,2}^{\alpha, \sigma}(u) < \infty\}
$
with the associated norms
$
\Vert u \Vert_{\Lambda_{2,2}^{\alpha, \sigma}}^2 = \Vert u \Vert_2^2 + \mathcal{N}_{2,2}^{\alpha, \sigma}(u) $.
The space can be trivial when $\sigma$ is a large value. (For example, in Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^d$, $\Lambda_{2,2}^{d,1} = \{0\}$.)
We introduce an important quantity $\beta^*\in [0, +\infty]$ which is intrinsic to the underlying space $\mathfrak X$ \cite{St,GHL1}:
\begin{align} \label{eq7.7}
\beta^* := \sup \{\beta>0: \Lambda_{2,2}^{\alpha, \beta/2} \cap C_0(\mathfrak X) \hbox{ is dense in } C_0(\mathfrak X) \}.
\end{align}
It is called the {\it critical exponent} of the family $\left\{\Lambda_{2,2}^{\alpha, \beta/2}\right\}_{\beta>0}$. The value of $\beta^*$ is already known for some standard cases: for the Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^d$, we have $\alpha =d, \beta^*=2$. For $d$-dimensional Sierpi\'{n}ski gasket, then $\alpha = \log (d+1)/ \log 2$, and $\beta^*=\log (d+3)/ \log 2$ \cite{J}. There are also extensions to nested fractals and related Besov spaces \cite{P1,P2}, and evaluation of some other specific cases \cite{Ku}. For Cantor-type set as the boundary of an infinite binary tree, it follows from \cite[Theorem 5.6]{Ki2} that $\beta^*=\infty$. In general, we know that if a metric measure space $({\mathfrak X}, \mu)$ satisfies $\mu (B(x; r)) \asymp r^{\alpha}$ for all $x \in {\mathfrak X}$ and $0<r<1$, then $\beta^* \geq 2$. If in addition $\mathfrak{X}$ satisfies {\it the chain condition} \cite{GHL1}, then $\beta^* \leq \alpha+1$.
\medskip
Continuing the statement in Theorem \ref{th7.3}, we have the following conclusion.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{th7.8}
With the same assumption and notations as in Theorem \ref{th7.3}, we have
\begin{equation} \label {eq7.8}
\mathcal{E}_K[u] \asymp \mathcal{N}_{2,2}^{\alpha, \beta/2}(u), \quad u \in \mathcal{D}_K ,
\end{equation}
and $\mathcal{D}_K$ is the Besov space $\Lambda_{2,2}^{\alpha, \beta/2}$. Therefore, if $\beta < \beta^*$, then $(\mathcal{E}_K, \mathcal{D}_K)$ is a non-local Dirichlet form on $L^2(K,\nu)$.
\end{theorem}
\medskip
The proof of \eqref{eq7.8} and that $\mathcal{D}_K$ is the Besov space $\Lambda_{2,2}^{\alpha, \beta/2}$ are in \cite{St}. The following proposition deals with the regularity of the induced Dirichlet form.
\medskip
\begin{proposition} \label{th7.9}
Let $\{S_i\}_{i=1}^N$ be an IFS of contractive similitudes with the OSC, \ and let $K$ be the self-similar set. For a $\lambda$-NRW on the augmented tree $(X, {\mathfrak E})$, if either (i) $\lambda \in (r^2,1)$, or (ii) $\alpha < \beta^*$ and $\lambda \in (r^{\beta^*},r^\alpha)$, then the induced form $({\mathcal E}_K, {\mathcal D}_K)$ is a regular non-local Dirichlet form on $L^2(K,\nu)$.
\vspace{0.1cm}
Moreover, if $2 \leq \alpha<\beta^*$ and $\lambda \in [r^\alpha,r^2]$, let ${\mathcal D}_K^* = \overline {C(K) \cap {\mathcal D}_K}$, where the closure is taken under the norm $||\cdot||_{\Lambda_{2,2}^{\alpha, \beta/2}}$. Then $({\mathcal E}_K, {\mathcal D}_K^*)$ is a regular non-local Dirichlet form on $L^2(K,\nu)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} It is well-known that $K$ equipped with Euclidean metric and $\alpha$-Hausdorff measure is an $\alpha$-set. As $\beta^* \geq 2$, the assumption $\lambda \in (r^2, 1)$ in (i) implies $0< \beta< 2 (\leq \beta^*)$. It follows from \cite[Theorem 3]{St} that the Dirichlet form $(\mathcal{E}_K, \mathcal{D}_K)$ is regular.
\vspace {0.1cm}
For (ii), we have $\alpha <\beta< \beta^*$, and the domain ${\mathcal D}_K$ is embedded into the Lipschitz space of H\"older exponent $(\beta -\alpha)/2$ (see \cite[Theorem 4.11]{GHL1}). Hence $({\mathcal E}_K, {\mathcal D}_K)$ is regular.
For the last part, we have $2\leq \beta \leq \alpha < \beta^*$. Let $\beta_0 = (\alpha + \beta^*)/2$. Then $\alpha < \beta_0 < \beta^*$. Hence by the above paragraph, ${\mathcal D}_K^{(\beta_0)}$ consists of certain Lipschitz functions of order $(\beta_0 -\alpha)/2$, and
$
{\mathcal D}_K^{(\beta_0)} = C(K) \cap {\mathcal D}_K^{(\beta_0)} \subset C(K) \cap {\mathcal D}_K \subset {\mathcal D}_K^*.
$
This implies that $C(K) \cap {\mathcal D}_K$ is dense in $L^2(K, \nu)$ and in $C(K)$, and $({\mathcal E}_K, {\mathcal D}_K^*)$ is regular.
\end{proof}
\medskip
\noindent {\it Remark.} In the proof of the last part, we cannot prove $ C(K)\cap {\mathcal D}_K$ is dense in $\mathcal{D}_K$ with the $\mathcal{E}_1$-norm. Hence we use $ {\mathcal D}_K^\ast = \overline {C(K)\cap {\mathcal D}_K}$ instead of the original $\mathcal{D}_K$. Also we do not know the regularity of the Dirichlet form for $2 \leq \beta< \beta^* \leq \alpha$.
\medskip
By \cite[Theorems 7.2.1, 7.2.2]{FOT}, we know that a regular Dirichlet form $(\mathcal E_K, \mathcal D_K)$ on $L^2(K,\nu)$ generates an associated Hunt jump process with transition density function (heat kernel) $p(t,\xi,\eta)$. For $0<\beta<2$ , i.e., $\lambda \in (r^2,1)$, it has been shown in \cite{CK} that the heat kernel satisfies the following estimate:
$$
p(t,\xi,\eta) \asymp \min \Big \{ t^{-\alpha/\beta},\, \frac{t}{|\xi-\eta|^{\alpha+\beta}} \Big \}, \quad \xi,\eta \in K, \ 0< t \leq 1.
$$
We do not have estimates of $p(t,\xi,\eta)$ for $\alpha<\beta<\beta^*$ or for other cases in general.
\medskip
The Besov spaces at the critical exponent $\beta^*$ are particularly important, and are not completely understood. In fact, there is another class of Besov spaces $\Lambda_{2, \infty}^{\alpha, \sigma}$ involved (see \cite{GHL1,GHL2}). For example on ${\mathbb R}^d$, $\beta^* =2$, and we have $\Lambda_{2,2}^{d, 1}({\mathbb R}^d) = \{0\}$, but $\Lambda^{d, 1}_{2,\infty}$ equals the Sobolev space $W^1_2 ({\mathbb R}^d)$, the domain of classical Dirichlet form that generates the Gaussian heat kernel. Similar situations hold for self-similar sets (and more general metric measure spaces) that admit local Dirichlet forms and subgaussian kernels \cite{GHL1,GHL2}. In forthcoming paper \cite{KL}, we will give a more detailed discussion, and provide a criterion to determine the exponent $\beta^*$.
\bigskip
\noindent {\bf Acknowledgements}: The authors would like to thank Professors A.~Grigor'yan, J.X.~Hu, J.~Kigami and T.~Kumagai for many valuable discussions and suggesting some references, and to Professor S.M.~Ngai for going through the manuscript carefully. They are also indebted to the referee for many constructive comments which helped improve the presentation of the paper. Part of the work was carried out while the second author was visiting the University of Pittsburgh, he is grateful to Professors C.~Lennard and J.~Manfredi for the arrangement of the visit.
\bigskip
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Introduction}
Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), also known as aspirin, has been one of the
most widely used medications in the world due to its well-known
effects of reducing fevers and relieving aches and pains. Aspirin has
been used to help prevent heart attacks, strokes, blood clot
formation and suppression of prostaglandin owing to its antiplatelet
effect of decreasing platelet aggregation and inhibiting thrombus
formation.~\cite{Cheng2007} It has also been reported that aspirin has
an anticancer effect~\cite{Ferreira1973} and a precautionary effect on
stroke~\cite{Lewis1983}. Despite of such good effects, however, it has
been warned that such a famous non-prescription medicine may provoke
some adverse effects and thus people should avoid its substance (drug)
abuse and misuse. Because aspirin has an effect on the stomach
lining, it is recommended that people with gastroenteric disorders such as
gastritis and peptic ulcers take medical advice before using aspirin. When
aspirin is taken with alcohol, stomach bleeding may occur even to healthy
people. Therefore, it is important to measure the amount of ASA molecule in solution or
in human body.
Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are thin and long macromolecules of graphitic carbon
that have attracted huge academic and industrial interest because of unique
physical and chemical properties~\cite{Chico1996, Tans1998, Kwon1999, Yao1999,
Sanvito1999, Berber2000, Zhou2000, Lee2002, Kim2005, Charlier2007, Choi2008}.
One of the attractive characteristics of the CNT is a very large adsorption
surface area~\cite{Long2001a, Cinke2002, Yin2000} comparable to that of
carbon-based adsorbents (such as activated carbon) used commercially. Several
binding properties of molecules onto the CNT have been also studied
theoretically and experimentally~\cite{Dillon1997, Chambers1998, Long2001a,
Peng2003, Fagan2004, Fagan2006, Tournus2005} for its applications. Using the
property of the large adsorption surface areas, CNT can be used to filter or to
detect molecules. Since some gas molecules such as ammonia
(NH$_{3}$)~\cite{Kong2000}, nitrogen dioxide (NO$_{2}$)~\cite{Kong2000},
alcohol~\cite{Song2008}, and other molecules~\cite{Collins2000, Bradley2003,
Yu2000, Burt2005} were reported to be detectable by these devices, a wide range
of molecules have been studied for chemical sensing of CNT. Due to the
modification of intrinsic electronic structures of semiconducting CNT by
adsorption, the type and concentration of target molecules may be detected.
Carbon nitride compounds have been studied in various area such as electronic
devices, humidity sensor, and coatings because of their electronic and chemical
properties~\cite{Zhang2009, Li1995, Zambov2000}. They have various structures,
depending on their carbon to nitrogen atomic ratio and arrangement. In this
study, we focus on a graphitic carbon nitride (g-C$_{3}$N$_{4}$) nanotube
(CNNT), triazine-based form. Recent studies report g-C$_{3}$N$_{4}$ nanotube with
respect to synthesis and first-principles calculations~\cite{Cao2004, Guo2004,
Li2007, Pan2011}. Various adsorption properties are expected because of the
unique porous structure.
In this paper, we present a first-principles study of binding properties of ASA
on the bare CNT and the bare CNNT. ASA binds to pristine CNT (CNNT) with binding
energy of $0.51$~eV ($0.67$~eV), and no practical charge transfer takes place.
According to our analysis on the electronic structure,
CNT with ASA adsorbates does not show significant characteristics, but
CNNT with ASA adsorbates show noticeable effects. Because of the
structure of the CNNT, local electric dipole moments occur and interrupt
exchange of electrons between the ASA molecule and the CNNT.
Finally we discuss homogeneous external electric field (E-field) effects on the
CNNT with ASA adsorbates.
The response of nanotubes to the E-field is attractive for the application to
electric devices.
\section{Computational method}
\label{Computational}
Using the first-principles calculations based on density functional theory
(DFT)~\cite{Hohenberg1964, Kohn1965}, we examined the CNT and the CNNT with
respect to the adsorption of ASA. The electronic wavefunctions were expanded
into plane waves up to a cutoff energy of $450$~eV, and the ion-electron
interactions were described using the projector augmented wave method
implemented in the Vienna \textit{ab initio} simulation package (VASP)~\cite{
Kresse1993, Kresse1996}, within the generalized gradient approximation (GGA)
method~\cite{Perdew1996}. To better describe interaction between ASA and
nanotubes, we considered van der Waals interaction using Grimme's method
(DFT-D2)~\cite{Grimme2006}. All the model structures were relaxed until the
Hellmann--Feynman forces were smaller than $0.03$~eV/{\AA}. We chose the
$(10,0)$ CNT and the $(8,0)$ CNNT as host materials for molecular
adsorption. For the calculation of the ASA molecule in vacuum, we used a cubic
supercell with a length of 30~{\AA}. The $\Gamma$-point were used in
calculations of the isolated ASA molecule. The lengths of the supercell along
the tube axis were $16.05$~{\AA} for the CNT, and $15.72$~{\AA} for the CNNT,
respectively. We used one $k$ point (the $\Gamma$-point) for the nanotubes in the
geometry optimization, and $1\times 1 \times 10$ Monkhorst-
Pack~\cite{Monkhorst1976} $k$ point sampling in the electronic structure
calculations. For each adsorption configuration, we calculated binding energy
($E_{b}$) defined by Eq.~\ref{equation1}. $E$[tube+ASA] is the total energy of
the CNT and the CNNT with an ASA molecule, and $E$[tube] is the total energy of
the two nanotubes without any ASA molecule, respectively. $E$[ASA] also shows
the energy of the isolated ASA molecule.
\begin{align}\label{equation1}
\textit{E}_{b} = \textit{E}[\rm{tube}] + \textit{E}[\rm{ASA}] - \textit{E}[\rm{tube+ASA}]
\end{align}
\section{Results and discussion}
\label{Results}
Fig.~\ref{asaFig1}(a) shows the most stable structure of an ASA molecule
(C$_{9}$H$_{8}$O$_{4}$) in vacuum. It consists of an aromatic ring, ester, and
carboxylic acid. Fig.~\ref{asaFig1}(b) and (c) show the highest occupied
molecular orbital (HOMO) and the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO),
respectively. Its HOMO--LUMO gap is $3.75$~eV. In the HOMO and the LUMO of ASA,
electronic densities are distributed over the entire molecule, as shown in
Fig.~\ref{asaFig1}(b). We selected the two types of nanotubes to investigate
their application for detecting ASA molecules: the $(10,0)$ CNT and the $(8,0)$
g-C$_{3}$N$_{4}$ nanotube. As shown in Fig.~\ref{asaFig2}(a) and (b), the bare
$(10,0)$ CNT has a band gap of $0.88$~eV, and the bare $(8,0)$ CNNT has a band gap
of $2.55$~eV.
When an ASA molecule is adsorbed on nanotubes, many possible configurations can
be considered.
We chose only $\pi-\pi$ stacking configurations, and calculated the total energy
of each configuration
to obtain the most stable adsorption site.
For visual clarity, the carbon atoms of the ASA molecule is shown in yellow,
while those of the CNT and the CNNT is represented in black
(Fig.~\ref{asaFig2}). For the binding of ASA on the $(10,0)$ CNT, the most
stable
configuration resembles Bernal stacking (AB stacking) of graphite, as seen in
Fig.~\ref{asaFig2}(a).
Its electronic band structure shows no clear change near the Fermi level
compared with that of the bare CNT,
even if flat bands originating from the ASA molecule are shown around $-2$~eV
and $+2$~eV.
Fig.~\ref{asaFig2}(b) shows the most stable adsorption configuration of the CNNT
with ASA adsorbates. Nitrogen atoms located in the benzene ring of ASA and the
carboxyl group of ASA is placed just above pore sites of the CNNT. The band gap
slightly decreases by $0.07$~eV.
Since $\pi-\pi$ hybridization is the main origin of the molecular binding,
noticeable charge transfer does not occur.
Consequently any molecular state from ASA is not shown in the band gap of the
CNT or the CNNT.
We conclude that it is difficult to detect ASA using the CNT or the CNNT in the
absence of external E-field.
Table~\ref{asatable1} summaries the adsorption energy and the distance between
the ASA molecule and the tube wall for each adsorption configuration. We find
that ASA binds more strongly to the CNNT than the CNT.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{asaFig1.pdf}
\caption{(a) Model structure of an ASA molecule. (b) Electronic energy levels of
an ASA molecule with wavefunctions of its HOMO and LUMO. The HOMO--LUMO gap is
$3.75$~eV.
\label{asaFig1}}
\end{figure}
To understand the difference in the adsorption energy between the CNT and the
CNNT, we studied
the interaction between the ASA molecule and the CNT and CNNT in
more detail.
Fig.~\ref{asaFig3}(a) and (b) shows a charge difference [$\rho({\rm tube+ASA}) -
\rho({\rm tube}) - \rho({\rm ASA})$] plot of the $(10,0)$ CNT and $(8,0)$
CNNT with ASA, respectively. As mentioned above, there is no charge transfer between
the ASA molecule and both nanotubes. Interestingly, we observe that the much bigger
charge redistribution appears in the ASA molecule with CNNT than CNT. What makes
the charge redistribution in ASA?
Because of the electronic configurations of the C and N atoms, the nanotube
forms a buckled structure contrary to CNT's structure. Lone pair electrons,
which are localized at the N atoms, result in buckling of the tube surface.
In addition, we can take into account local electric dipole moments of the CNNT.
The difference in the electron affinity of the C and N atoms causes the local
electric dipole moments, which are obtained by Eq.~\ref{equation2}. Electric
dipole moments of the CNNT are shown in Fig.~\ref{asaFig3}(c). As a result,
local electric dipole moments together with buckling and vacancies bring about
the charge redistribution of ASA.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{asaFig2.pdf}
\caption{Electronic property of ASA adsorbed on (a) the CNT and (b) the CNNT. The most stable adsorption sites among possible configurations (left) and band structures of the bare nanotube (middle) and ASA on nanotube (right). The flat bands in the rectangles originate from the ASA molecule
on the tube.
\label{asaFig2}}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[b]
\caption{
The binding energy and the distance between the adsorbed molecule and nanotubes.
(C$_{3}$N$_{4}$ + ASA 2, 3 in Supplementary Information.)
\label{asatable1}}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
Structure & Binding energy (eV) & Distance (\AA) \\
\hline
CNT + ASA & 0.54 & 2.59 \\
C$_{3}$N$_{4}$ + ASA 1 & 0.66 & 2.70 \\
C$_{3}$N$_{4}$ + ASA 2 & 0.68 & 2.68 \\
C$_{3}$N$_{4}$ + ASA 3 & 0.67 & 2.72 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
\begin{align}\label{equation2}
\int \rho(r)rdr+\sum_{i}Z_iez_i
\end{align}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{asaFig3.pdf}
\caption{(a) Charge difference of the ASA-adsorbed CNT and (b) charge difference
of the ASA-adsorbed CNNT. (c) Directions and magnitudes of electrical dipole
moments in the bare CNNT. Cyan and yellow colors represent
electron accumulation and electron depletion, respectively. D is the unit of the
electric dipole moment, debye.
\label{asaFig3}}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{asaFig3}(c) depicts local electric dipole moments in the surface of
the CNNT.
Above all, the nitrogen atoms with red arrows are more buckled in a different
direction from those with green and blue arrows.
Therefore, the dipole moments denoted by green and blue arrows have almost
similar values, $1.64$~D and $1.65$~D, respectively.
($1~{\rm D} \approx 3.336 \times 10^{-30}~ {\rm C \cdot m} \approx 0.2082$
e$\cdot$\AA), respectively, while those by red arrows are bigger ($1.88$~D).
Because of the local electric dipole moments, the ASA molecule has dipole-dipole
interaction with the CNNT. ASA in vacuum has an electric dipole
moment of $1.51$~D, but ASA on the CNNT has a larger moment
of $2.25$~D. If a simple dipole-dipole interaction ($V_{dd}$ in
Eq.~\ref{equation3})
is applied with the aforementioned dipole moments at the ASA molecule and the
CNNT, the interaction energy is about $-0.1$~eV. It explains the difference in
the binding energy listed in Table~\ref{asatable1}. We conclude that the aspirin
molecule adsorbs more strongly on the CNNT than the CNT owing to the dipole-dipole interaction.
\begin{align}\label{equation3}
V_{dd} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}}\left[\frac{\vec{p}_{1}\cdot\vec{p}_{2}}{|\vec{r}_{1} - \vec{r}_{2}|^3}-\frac{3\{(\vec{r}_{1} - \vec{r}_{2})\cdot \vec{p}_{1}\}\{(\vec{r}_{1} - \vec{r}_{2})\cdot \vec{p}_{2}\}}{|\vec{r}_{1} - \vec{r}_{2}|^5}\right],
\end{align}
where $V_{dd}$ is a potential energy for dipole-dipole interaction, and $\vec{p}_i$ and $\vec{r}_i$
($i$ = 1, 2) are the $i$-th electric dipole moment and its position, respectively.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{asaFig4.pdf}
\caption{(a) Directions of external electric field on the ASA-adsorbed
CNNT. (b) Band gaps of bare CNNT and ASA-adsorbed CNNT in all
directions of the external electric field. The $x$ directions in (a) cross both
of the ASA molecule and the CNNT perpendicularly. The $y$
directions also cross CNNT perpendicularly, but ASA molecule
horizontally.
They tend to decrease according to intensity of electric field.
\label{asaFig4}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{asaFig5.pdf}
\caption{(a-d) PDOS plots and electron density differences of the ASA-adsorbed
CNNT under the external E-fields in $\pm x$ and $\pm y$
directions, respectively. The arrow means the direction of E-field. Charge
transfer occurs due to the external E-field. Cyan and yellow colors represent
electron accumulation and electron depletion, respectively.
\label{asaFig5}}
\end{figure}
To check whether the nanotube can be applied to a detecting device for ASA
molecules, we checked effects of external E-field on electric property of the
bare CNNT and ASA-adsorbed CNNT.
In a single-gated field effect transistor, an E-field is generated by an applied
gate bias between the gate and the nanotube. Our computational results reveal
the difference between the electronic structure of the bare CNNT and
ASA-adsorbed CNNT. Band gap of the bare CNNT is shown much smaller than
ASA-adsorbed CNNT. Not only there are the difference of band gap between the
bare CNNT and ASA-adsorbed CNNT, but also the different electronic property
among four directions. The electronic structure of the ASA-adsorbed CNNT is not
affected very much by the E-field perpendicular to the tube axis. In contrast,
the ASA-adsorbed CNNT show remarkable characters in the band structure, depending on
the direction of the transverse E-field, as shown Fig.~\ref{asaFig4}. We chose
four directions of the E-field ($\pm x$ and $\pm y$), which were all
perpendicular to the CNNT axis direction. The E-fields in $\pm x$ directions may
enhance electronic coupling between the ASA molecule and the CNNT, whereas the
fields in the $\pm y$ directions show the weak ASA-CNNT coupling.
Fig.~\ref{asaFig4}(b) shows that the external E-field can modulate the
electronic structure of the ASA-adsorbed CNNT. We also present partial densities
of states (PDOS) of the ASA-adsorbed CNNT in Fig.~\ref{asaFig5}. Since the
E-field is in the $+x$ direction and the CNNT has a higher electric potential
than the ASA adsorbate, electrons are donated from adsorbed ASA molecule to one
part of the CNNT. Fig.~\ref{asaFig5}(a) shows that the transverse E-field in the
$+x$ direction makes localized states of the ASA molecule be upshifted, and move
into the + region of the CNNT, as the E-field strength
increases. Besides the conduction band of the tube also moves down to the Fermi
level. On the other hand, the E-fields in $-x$, $+y$ and $-y$ directions have
the similar tendency; Although the band gap decreases, the states originating
from ASA do not appear as the in-gap states. In both $\pm y$ directions,
external E-field does not cause strong ASA-CNNT coupling enhancement, which is related
to the reflection symmetry. The band gap of the bare CNNT is also reduced under
external E-field, but there is no localized states in the energy band gap in
this case. In real situations, the CNNT would be coated with ASA molecules
randomly, and thus any direction of the E-field makes the ASA states occur in
the forbidden band. Such in-gap states could result in the scattering in the
electron transport, which would be reflected in the current-voltage curve in
experiment. Consequently, the C$_{3}$N$_{4}$ nanotube-based sensor device may
detect the ASA molecules using the gate bias voltage (or external E-field).
\section{Conclusion}
\label{Summary}
In summary, we have performed {\it ab initio} calculations within density
CNNT. ASA is adsorbed more weakly on the CNT than the
CNNT. Since CNNT have local electric dipole moments, it causes a stronger binding to
ASA than the CNT owing to dipole-dipole interaction of the CNNT with the ASA
molecule. When a homogeneous external electric field is introduced, the band gap of
the CNNT decreases dramatically in the presence of the ASA adsorbates.
Especially, when $+x$ direction is applied, in-gap states of aspirin molecule occur.
Thus we expect that CNNT could be used in application to chemical sensors based on
the field effect transistor.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Korean government
through National Research Foundation (NRF-2011-0016188).
GK were supported by the Priority Research Center Program
(2010-0020207) and the Basic Science Research Program (2013R1A2009131) through
NRF.
Some portion of our computational work was done using the resources of the KISTI
Supercomputing Center (KSC-2015-C3-023).
\bibliographystyle{apsrev
|
\section{Introduction}
An \emph{interval exchange transformation} is a bijection
$f: [0,a) \to [0,a)$ with the property that there exist
$0 = a_0 < a_1 < \cdots < a_{n} = a$ and $t_1,\ldots,t_{n} \in \mathbb{R}$
such that $f|_{[a_{i-1},a_{i})}(x) = x+t_i$ for $1\le i \le n$. The
\emph{Sah-Arnoux-Fathi (SAF) invariant} of $f$ takes values in
$\mathbb{R} \wedge_\mathbb{Q} \mathbb{R}$, and it is defined as
\begin{displaymath}
SAF(f) = \sum_{i=1}^n (a_{i}-a_{i-1}) \wedge_\mathbb{Q} t_i.
\end{displaymath}
Given a transversely orientable singular measured foliation $\mathcal{F}$ on
an orientable surface, any transverse arc gives rise to an interval
exchange transformation $f$ by the first return map of the flow along
the leaves of $\mathcal{F}$. It turns out that $SAF(f)$ is independent of
the choice of the arc, hence one obtains the notion of the SAF
invariant for foliations by setting $SAF(\mathcal{F}) = SAF(f)$. Note that
if $\mathcal{F}$ is not transversely orientable or the surface is
nonorientable, then the first return map is not an interval exchange
transformation in the above sense, hence (at least in this way)
$SAF(\mathcal{F})$ cannot be not defined.
A homeomorphism $\psi$ of a surface is \emph{pseudo-Anosov} if there
is a number $\lambda>1$, and a pair of transverse invariant singular
measured foliations $\mathcal{F}^u$ and $\mathcal{F}^s$ such that
$\psi(\mathcal{F}^u) = \lambda\mathcal{F}^u$ and $\psi(\mathcal{F}^s) =
\lambda^{-1}\mathcal{F}^s.$
The number $\lambda$ is called the stretch factor (or dilatation) of
$\psi$. \cite{FLP}
If $\mathcal{F}^u$ and $\mathcal{F}^s$ are transversely orientable (which implies
the orientability of the surface), then $SAF(\mathcal{F}^u)$ and
$SAF(\mathcal{F}^s)$ are defined up to scale. It turns out that
$SAF(\mathcal{F}^u) = 0$ if and only if $SAF(\mathcal{F}^s) = 0$ \cite[Lemma
2]{CaltaSchmidt13}, and in this case we say that $\psi$ has vanishing
SAF invariant.
To make the SAF invariant well-defined, in the rest of the paper we
assume without mentioning that $\mathcal{F}^u$ and $\mathcal{F}^s$ are
transversely orientable when $\psi$ is supported on an orientable
surface. On a nonorientable surface, they cannot both be transversely
oriented, so we only assert that one of them is. This ensures that the
surface has a double cover where both foliations are transversely
orientable.
It is well-understood when the SAF invariant of foliations vanish in
genus 2, and this was used for classifying Teichm\"uller curves in
genus 2 by Calta \cite{Calta04} and McMullen \cite{McMullen03}. In
higher genera, the picture is more complicated. Pseudo-Anosov maps
with vanishing SAF invariant (which do not exist in genus 2) have been
constructed
\cite{ArnouxYoccoz81,ArnouxSchmidt09,CaltaSchmidt13,DoSchmidt16} in
genus 3 and up.
We say that a pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism $\tilde\psi$ of an orientable
surface $S$ is a \emph{nonorientable lift} if
\begin{itemize}
\item $S$ is the oriented double cover of a nonorientable surface $N$,
\item and there is a pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism $\psi$ of $N$ such
that $\tilde\psi$ is a lift of $\psi$.
\end{itemize}
The orientable double cover is unique: it corresponds to the index two
subgroup of orientation-preserving loops in $\pi_1(N)$. The lift of a
pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism is a pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism with same
stretch factor, and the invariant foliations upstairs are the lifts of
the foliations downstairs.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:SAF}
If a pseudo-Anosov map is a nonorientable lift, then it has
vanishing SAF invariant.
\end{theorem}
This yields a new large collection of pseudo-Anosov maps with
vanishing SAF invariant. It also explains why the Arnoux--Yoccoz
\cite{ArnouxYoccoz81} and Arnoux--Rauzy (\cite[Section
4.1]{DoSchmidt16}, \cite{ArnouxRauzy91}) examples have vanishing SAF invariant. We were
unable to find a reference for the fact that these examples are
nonorientable lifts, so we elaborate on this in \Cref{sec:AY-and-AR}.
The construction of the other known examples with vanishing SAF does
not involve nonorientable surfaces, so the following question arises.
\begin{question}
Which of the known examples of pseudo-Anosov maps with vanishing SAF
invariant are nonorientable lifts?
\end{question}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:criterion}
Let $\tilde\psi$ be a pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism of the closed orientable
surface of genus $g$. Suppose $\tilde\psi$ is a nonorientable lift.
Then the stretch factor $\lambda$ is a root of a monic polynomial
$p(x) \in \mathbb{Z}[x]$ of degree $g$ whose constant coefficient is
$\pm 1$. Moreover, $p(x)$ is reciprocal mod 2.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:not_lifts}
Pseudo-Anosov maps with vanishing SAF invariant that are not
nonorientable lifts include:
\begin{itemize}
\item the example for $q=14$ in \cite{ArnouxSchmidt09}
\item the example in Remark 6 and several examples in Sections 4.2
and 4.3 in \cite{DoSchmidt16}.
\end{itemize}
\end{corollary}
There may be other examples in
\cite{ArnouxSchmidt09,CaltaSchmidt13,DoSchmidt16} where
\Cref{theorem:criterion} applies. We only checked the examples where
the minimal polynomial of $\lambda$ was mentioned in the papers.
\Cref{theorem:SAF} gives a geometric reason for the vanishing of the
SAF invariant: an orientation-reversing symmetry.
\begin{question}
Is the vanishing of the SAF always a consequence of some
symmetry?
\end{question}
\subsection{Some remarks}
Examples of pseudo-Anosov homeomorphisms of nonorientable surfaces are
scarce in the literature. However, the general theory is the same as
for orientable surfaces \cite{FLP, Thurston88}. Some examples are
found in
\begin{itemize}
\item \cite{ArnouxYoccoz81}, where the surface is the thrice punctured
projective plane;
\item \cite{Penner88}, where the surface is the
connected sum of two Klein bottles;
\item \Cref{sec:AY-and-AR} of this paper, where the surface is any
closed nonorientable surface of genus at least 4.
\end{itemize}
Penner's method \cite{Penner88} is in fact general enough to construct
pseudo-Anosov mapping classes on every nonorientable surface that
allows them \cite{StrennerDegrees}.
The way in which ``nonorientable lift'' is defined may seem
unnecessarily restrictive. Why not allow branched covers or higher
degree covers of nonorientable surfaces? Any such covering would
factor through the oriented double cover, so in fact no generality is
lost.
\section{Proof of the vanishing}
\begin{lemma}\cite[Lemma 2]{CaltaSchmidt13}\label{lemma:vanishing_SAF_crit}
A pseudo-Anosov map with stretch factor $\lambda$ has vanishing SAF
invariant if and only if
$\mathbb{Q}(\lambda) = \mathbb{Q}(\lambda + \frac{1}\lambda)$.
\end{lemma}
Note that $\mathbb{Q}(\lambda) : \mathbb{Q}(\lambda + \frac{1}\lambda)$ is either 1
or 2.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:Galois-conjugates}
$\mathbb{Q}(\lambda) : \mathbb{Q}(\lambda + \frac{1}\lambda) = 2$ if and only if
$\lambda$ and $1/\lambda$ are Galois conjugates.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
$\lambda$ and $1/\lambda$ are Galois conjugates if and only if there
is an automorphism $\sigma$ of $\mathbb{Q}(\lambda)$ such that
$\sigma(\lambda) = 1/\lambda$. Note that $\sigma$ acts trivially on
$\mathbb{Q}(\lambda + \frac{1}\lambda)$. Such a $\sigma$ exists when
$\mathbb{Q}(\lambda) : \mathbb{Q}(\lambda + \frac{1}\lambda) = 2$, but not if
$\mathbb{Q}(\lambda) = \mathbb{Q}(\lambda + \frac{1}\lambda)$.
\end{proof}
We remark that a similar lemma with a similar proof appears in
\cite{DoSchmidt16} as Proposition 1, and it is used to prove following
version of \Cref{lemma:vanishing_SAF_crit}: A pseudo-Anosov map with
stretch factor $\lambda$ has vanishing SAF invariant if and only if
the minimal polynomial of $\lambda$ is reciprocal \cite[Theorem
1]{DoSchmidt16}.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:lambda-and-reciprocal-not-conjugates}
Let $\lambda$ be the stretch factor of a pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism of a
nonorientable surface. Then $\lambda$ and $1/\lambda$ are not Galois
conjugates.
\end{proposition}
\newcommand{\widetilde{\psi}}{\widetilde{\psi}}
\begin{proof}
Denote the surface by $N$ and the pseudo-Anosov map by $\psi$. There
is a degree 2 cover $S \to N$, where $S$ is an orientable surface,
and $\psi$ lifts to an orientation-preserving pseudo-Anosov
homeomorphism $\widetilde{\psi}$ of $S$ whose invariant foliations $\mathcal{F}^u$
and $\mathcal{F}^s$ are transversely orientable.
It is well-known that $\lambda$ and $1/\lambda$ (or $-\lambda$ and
$-1/\lambda$) are eigenvalues of
$\widetilde{\psi}^* : H^1(S,\mathbb{R}) \to H^1(S,\mathbb{R})$, and every other eigenvalue
$\eta$ satisfies $1/\lambda < |\eta| < \lambda$ \cite[Theorem
5.3]{McMullen03a}. The characteristic polynomial $\chi(\widetilde{\psi}^*)$ has
integral coefficients, since $\widetilde{\psi}^*$ acts on $H^1(S,\mathbb{Z})$.
Let $h:S\to S$ be the orientation-reversing deck transformation. We
have $H^1(S,\mathbb{R}) = W^+ \oplus W^-$, where $W^+$ and $W^-$ are the
$\pm1$-eigenspaces of $h^*$. Since $h$ commutes with $\widetilde{\psi}$, the
subspaces $W^+$ and $W^-$ are invariant under $\widetilde{\psi}^*$. In
particular, $\chi(\widetilde{\psi}^*) = \chi(\widetilde{\psi}^*|W^+) \chi(\widetilde{\psi}^*|W^-)$,
and the polynomials on the right have integral coefficients.
Note that $\mathcal{F}^u$ and $\mathcal{F}^s$ are represented by 1-forms
$\omega^u,\omega^s \in H^1(S,\mathbb{R})$. We have
$h(\mathcal{F}^u) = \pm \mathcal{F}^u$ and $h(\mathcal{F}^s) = \pm \mathcal{F}^s$, where one
of the signs is positive, the other one is negative. Hence
$\omega^u \in W^+$ and $\omega^s \in W^-$ or the other way around.
In particular, $\pm \lambda$ and $\pm 1/\lambda$ are roots of
different factors of $\chi(\widetilde{\psi}^*)$.
\end{proof}
\Cref{theorem:SAF} is a corollary of
\Cref{lemma:vanishing_SAF_crit,lemma:Galois-conjugates} and
\Cref{prop:lambda-and-reciprocal-not-conjugates}.
Note that \Cref{prop:lambda-and-reciprocal-not-conjugates} is true
even if none of the invariant foliations of $\psi$ is transversely
orientable. One can see this by lifting $\psi$ to a branched double
cover orienting one of the foliations.
\section{A geometric point of view}
One may also desire a geometric proof of \Cref{theorem:SAF} that uses
the definition of the SAF invariant. We sketch such an argument below.
Let $\psi$ be a pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism of a nonorientable surface. Assume
that its unstable foliation $\mathcal{F}^u$ is orientable. Take a one-sided
simple closed curve $c$ transverse to $\mathcal{F}^u$. Normalize the measure
on $\mathcal{F}^u$ so that $c$ has measure $1/2$. The flow of
$\mathcal{F}^u$ induces an interval exchange map $f$ on the boundary of the
Moebius band neighborhood of $c$. Note that the intervals come in
pairs that are interchanged by $f$.
When lifted to the orientable double cover, $c$ lifts to a curve of
measure 1, and the induced interval exchange is defined by the formula
\begin{displaymath}
\tilde{f}(x) = f(x) + 1/2\quad (\mbox{mod }1).
\end{displaymath}
It is straightforward to check that $SAF(\tilde{f}) = 0$ using the
fact that the terms in the sum come in pairs such as
$l_i \wedge (t_i \pm 1/2) + l_i \wedge (-t_i \pm 1/2)$ and this causes
cancellations.
\section{The certificate}
A monic degree $n$ polynomial $p(x) = x^n + \cdots + a_{n-1}x + a_n$ is
\emph{reciprocal} if $p(x) = x^n p(1/x)/a_n$. We will use the
following well-known result for the field with two elements.
\begin{lemma}\cite[Theorem 8.14]{McMullenNotes}\label{lemma:reciprocal}
Let $f: V \to V$ be a linear transformation of the vector space $V$
over a field $K$. If $f$ preserves a non-degenerate bilinear
form, then the characteristic polynomial $\chi(f)$ is reciprocal.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:reciprocal-mod-2}
Let $\phi$ be a homeomorphism of the closed nonorientable surface
$N$ of genus $g$. The characteristic polynomial $p(x)$ of
$\phi^* : H^1(S,\mathbb{Z}) \to H^1(S,\mathbb{Z})$ is reciprocal mod 2.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $H_1(N,\mathbb{Z}) = \mathbb{Z}^{g-1} \oplus \mathbb{Z}_2$, so
$H^1(N,\mathbb{Z}) \cong \mathbb{Z}^{g-1}$ and $H^1(N,\mathbb{Z}_2) \cong \mathbb{Z}_2^{g}$. The
cup product on $H^1(N,\mathbb{Z}_2)$ is a non-degenerate bilinear form
\cite[Example 3.8]{Hatcher02}.
Consider the mod 2 reduction $r : H^1(N,\mathbb{Z}) \to H^1(N,\mathbb{Z}_2)$. The
image $\operatorname{im}(r) \subset H^1(N,\mathbb{Z}_2)$ has codimension 1. It is
$\phi^*$-invariant and $\phi^*|{\operatorname{im}(r)}$ can be described by the
same matrix as $\phi^*|H^1(N,\mathbb{Z})$. Since $V$ has codimension 1, the
characteristic polynomial of $\phi^*|{H^1(N,\mathbb{Z}_2)}$ is $(x+1)p(x)$
or $xp(x)$ mod 2, but the latter is not possible since $\phi^*$ is
invertible. According to \Cref{lemma:reciprocal}, $p(x)(x+1)$ is
reciprocal mod 2 and hence the same holds for $p(x)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of \Cref{theorem:criterion}]
Suppose $\tilde\psi$ is a lift of the pseudo-Anosov map
$\psi: N \to N$, where $N$ is the closed genus $g+1$ nonorientable
surface. The orientable invariant foliation of $\psi$ is represented
by an element of $H^1(N,\mathbb{R})$ and it is an eigenvector of
$\psi^*|H^1(N,\mathbb{R})$ with eigenvalue $\pm \lambda$ if it is the
unstable foliation and $\pm 1/\lambda$ if it is the stable
foliation.
Let $p(x)\in\mathbb{Z}[x]$ be the characteristic polynomial of
$\psi^*|H^1(N,\mathbb{R})$. Note that $\lambda$ is a root of $p(x)$,
$p(-x)$, $x^gp(1/x)$ or $x^gp(-1/x)$. The statement of the theorem
now follows from \Cref{prop:reciprocal-mod-2}.
\end{proof}
\section{The Arnoux--Yoccoz and Arnoux--Rauzy examples as nonorientable
lifts}
\label{sec:AY-and-AR}
In this section we define pseudo-Anosov homeomorphisms of
nonorientable surfaces whose lifts by the orientable double cover are
the well-known pseudo-Anosov homeomorphisms of orientable surfaces
defined by Arnoux and Yoccoz \cite{ArnouxYoccoz81}. This justifies the
statement made in the introduction that the Arnoux--Yoccoz examples are
nonorientable lifts.
Let $M$ be a Moebius band with meridian $\gamma$. Define a measured
foliation on $M$ transverse to $\gamma$ such that the length of
$\gamma$ is 1. (See \Cref{fig:AY}, where $M$ arises from identifying
the vertical sides of the rectangle by a flip, and leaves of the
foliation are vertical lines.)
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=12]
\def0.005{0.005}
\def40{40}
\def8{2}
\def0.1{0.1}
\def0.1296975/1/1/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.3890925/1/2/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.5860758/1/3/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.7206474/1/4/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.8228404/1/5/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.8926548/1/6/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.9456715/1/7/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.9818905/1/8/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.0860758/-1/4/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.2206474/-1/3/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.3228404/-1/6/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.3926548/-1/5/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.4456715/-1/8/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.4818905/-1/7/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.6296975/-1/2/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.8890925/-1/1/0.2594/$\alpha${0.259395/1/1/0.2594, 0.7781851/1/1/0.2594, 0.1721517/-1/2/0.1346, 0.4412948/-1/2/0.1346, 0.6456808/-1/3/0.0698, 0.7853096/-1/3/0.0698, 0.891343/-1/4/0.0362, 0.963781/-1/4/0.0362}
\def{0/1/red, 0.259395/1/green/orange/0/, 0.5187901/1/red/green/0/, 0.6533616/1/green/blue/0/, 0.7879332/1/red/cyan/0/, 0.8577476/1/green/magenta/0/, 0.927562/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.963781/1/green/gray/0/, 1/1/red/brown/0/}, {0.0187901/-1/green/red/0/3.62190772036, 0.1533616/-1/red/cyan/0/, 0.2879332/-1/green/blue/0/, 0.3577476/-1/red/yellow/0/, 0.427562/-1/green/magenta/0/, 0.463781/-1/red/brown/0/, 0.5/-1/green/gray/0/, 0.759395/-1/red/green/0/, 0.0187901/-1/green/orange/0/3.62190772036}{{0/1/red, 0.5187901/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.0375801/-1/red/yellow/0/3.6218987807, 0.3067233/-1/red/green/0/, 0.5758664/-1/red/green/0/, 0.7154952/-1/red/blue/0/, 0.855124/-1/red/blue/0/, 0.927562/-1/red/cyan/0/, 1/-1/red/cyan/0/}}
\foreach \list in {0/1/red, 0.259395/1/green/orange/0/, 0.5187901/1/red/green/0/, 0.6533616/1/green/blue/0/, 0.7879332/1/red/cyan/0/, 0.8577476/1/green/magenta/0/, 0.927562/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.963781/1/green/gray/0/, 1/1/red/brown/0/}, {0.0187901/-1/green/red/0/3.62190772036, 0.1533616/-1/red/cyan/0/, 0.2879332/-1/green/blue/0/, 0.3577476/-1/red/yellow/0/, 0.427562/-1/green/magenta/0/, 0.463781/-1/red/brown/0/, 0.5/-1/green/gray/0/, 0.759395/-1/red/green/0/, 0.0187901/-1/green/orange/0/3.62190772036}{
\def{}
\def{}
\foreach \x/\sign/\notused/\col/\isflipped/\mp[count=\i from 0,remember=\x as , remember=\sign as ] in \list{
\ifnum \i > 0
\def\col!\colorstrength!white{\col!40!white}
\ifnum \isflipped = 0
\def0{40}
\def\colorstrength{0}
\else
\def0{0}
\def\colorstrength{40}
\fi
\ifnum 8 = \i
\ifnum \sign = -1
\fill[color=\col!40!white] (, 0) rectangle (1,*0.1);
\fill[color=\col!40!white] (0,0) rectangle (\x, \sign*0.1);
\else
\fill[color=\col!40!white] (, 0) rectangle (\x, \sign*0.1);
\fi
\else
\fill[color=\col!40!white] (, 0) rectangle (\x, \sign*0.1);
\fi
\fi
}
}
\foreach \list in {0/1/red, 0.259395/1/green/orange/0/, 0.5187901/1/red/green/0/, 0.6533616/1/green/blue/0/, 0.7879332/1/red/cyan/0/, 0.8577476/1/green/magenta/0/, 0.927562/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.963781/1/green/gray/0/, 1/1/red/brown/0/}, {0.0187901/-1/green/red/0/3.62190772036, 0.1533616/-1/red/cyan/0/, 0.2879332/-1/green/blue/0/, 0.3577476/-1/red/yellow/0/, 0.427562/-1/green/magenta/0/, 0.463781/-1/red/brown/0/, 0.5/-1/green/gray/0/, 0.759395/-1/red/green/0/, 0.0187901/-1/green/orange/0/3.62190772036}{
\foreach \x/\sign in \list{
\draw (\x,0) -- (\x,\sign*0.1);
}
}
\foreach \sign in {-1,1}{
\draw[dashed] (0,\sign*0.1) -- +(1,0);
}
\draw[very thick] (0,0) -- (1,0);
\foreach \list in {0/1/red, 0.259395/1/green/orange/0/, 0.5187901/1/red/green/0/, 0.6533616/1/green/blue/0/, 0.7879332/1/red/cyan/0/, 0.8577476/1/green/magenta/0/, 0.927562/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.963781/1/green/gray/0/, 1/1/red/brown/0/}, {0.0187901/-1/green/red/0/3.62190772036, 0.1533616/-1/red/cyan/0/, 0.2879332/-1/green/blue/0/, 0.3577476/-1/red/yellow/0/, 0.427562/-1/green/magenta/0/, 0.463781/-1/red/brown/0/, 0.5/-1/green/gray/0/, 0.759395/-1/red/green/0/, 0.0187901/-1/green/orange/0/3.62190772036}{
\foreach \x/\sign/\singcol in \list{
\filldraw[fill=\singcol, draw=black] (\x,\sign*0.1) circle (0.005);
}
}
\newcommand\drawSeparatrices[1]{
\foreach \x/\yone/\ytwo in #1{
\draw (\x,\yone*0.1) -- (\x,\ytwo*0.1);
}
}
\definecolor{separatrixcolor}{rgb}{0.0,0.392156862745,0.0}
\tikzstyle{separatrix opts}=[dashed,very thick]
\def0.005/0/1, 0.5237901/0/1{0/-1.0/1.0, 0.4812099/0/1.0, 0.5187901/0/1.0, 0.0375801/0/-1.0, 0.3067233/0/-1.0, 0.575866387689/-1.0/1.0, 0.0570763/0/1.0, 0.715495169328/-1.0/1.0, 0.1967051/0/1.0, 0.855123950966/-1.0/1.0, 0.3363339/0/1.0, 0.927561975483/-1.0/1.0, 0.4087719/0/1.0}
\begin{scope}[color=separatrixcolor,separatrix opts]
\drawSeparatrices{0.005/0/1, 0.5237901/0/1}
\end{scope}
\definecolor{curvecolor}{rgb}{1.0,0.0,0.0}
\tikzstyle{curve opts}=[ultra thick]
\def0.005/0/1, 0.5237901/0/1{0.005/0/1, 0.5237901/0/1}
\begin{scope}[color=curvecolor,curve opts]
\drawSeparatrices{0.005/0/1, 0.5237901/0/1}
\end{scope}
\draw[color=curvecolor,curve opts] (0.005,0.004) -- (0.523790063676,0.004);
\path (0,0.1) -- node[above] {$\alpha$} (0.518,0.1);
\path (0.518,0.1) -- node[above] {$\alpha$} (1.03,0.1);
\path (0.03,-0.1) -- node[below] {$\alpha^2$} (0.3,-0.1);
\path (0.3,-0.1) -- node[below] {$\alpha^2$} (0.57,-0.1);
\path (0.57,-0.1) -- node[below] {$\alpha^3$} (0.71,-0.1);
\path (0.71,-0.1) -- node[below] {$\alpha^3$} (0.85,-0.1);
\path (0.85,-0.1) -- node[below] {$\alpha^4$} (0.92,-0.1);
\path (0.92,-0.1) -- node[below] {$\alpha^4$} (1,-0.1);
\node[right] at (1,0) {$\gamma$};
\node[above] at (0.27,0) {$\gamma'$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The nonorientable surface.}
\label{fig:AY}
\end{figure}
Fix some $g \ge 3$, and divide the boundary of $M$ into intervals of
lengths $\alpha,\alpha,\alpha^2,\alpha^2,\ldots,\alpha^g,\alpha^g$,
where $\alpha$ is the unique root of the polynomial
$x^g+x^{g-1}+\ldots+x-1$ lying in the interval $[0,1]$. Identification
of pairs of intervals of the same length by translations gives rise to
a singular measured foliation $\mathcal{F}$ of $N_g$, the closed
nonorientable surface of genus $g+1$ whose orientable double cover is
$S_g$, the closed orientable surface of genus $g$. The curve $\gamma$
is one-sided and is transverse to $\mathcal{F}$.
Consider another transverse curve $\gamma'$ that is obtained by a small
perturbation of the U-shaped curve shown on \Cref{fig:AY}. By following
the leaves of $\mathcal{F}$ emanating from the unique singularity until they
hit $\gamma'$, one can see that the intervals appearing along
$\gamma'$ have lengths
$\alpha^2,\alpha^2,\alpha^3,\alpha^3,\ldots,
\alpha^{g+1},\alpha^{g+1}$,
in this order. It follows that there is a homeomorphism of $\gamma$ to
$\gamma'$ that brings intervals to intervals by shrinking by a factor
of $\alpha$, and this map extends to the homeomorphism $\psi$ of the
surface such that $\psi (\mathcal{F}) = \alpha \mathcal{F}$.
We claim that the lift of $\psi$ to the orientable double cover is the
Arnoux--Yoccoz example on $S_g$. First notice that $\mathcal{F}$ is
transversely orientable, hence so is the lift $\tilde\mathcal{F}$. The curve
$\gamma$ lifts to a two-sided curve $\tilde\gamma$ transverse to
$\tilde\mathcal{F}$ whose measure is 2. The induced interval exchange
transformation is the transformation $T$ in \cite{ArnouxYoccoz81} (up
to scaling by 2). See \Cref{fig:lift}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale = 12]
\def0.005{0.005}
\def40{40}
\def8{8}
\def0.1{0.1}
\def0.1296975/1/1/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.3890925/1/2/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.5860758/1/3/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.7206474/1/4/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.8228404/1/5/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.8926548/1/6/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.9456715/1/7/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.9818905/1/8/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.0860758/-1/4/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.2206474/-1/3/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.3228404/-1/6/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.3926548/-1/5/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.4456715/-1/8/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.4818905/-1/7/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.6296975/-1/2/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.8890925/-1/1/0.2594/$\alpha${0.1296975/1/1/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.3890925/1/2/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.5860758/1/3/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.7206474/1/4/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.8228404/1/5/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.8926548/1/6/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.9456715/1/7/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.9818905/1/8/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.0860758/-1/4/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.2206474/-1/3/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.3228404/-1/6/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.3926548/-1/5/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.4456715/-1/8/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.4818905/-1/7/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.6296975/-1/2/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.8890925/-1/1/0.2594/$\alpha$}
\def{0/1/red, 0.259395/1/green/orange/0/, 0.5187901/1/red/green/0/, 0.6533616/1/green/blue/0/, 0.7879332/1/red/cyan/0/, 0.8577476/1/green/magenta/0/, 0.927562/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.963781/1/green/gray/0/, 1/1/red/brown/0/}, {0.0187901/-1/green/red/0/3.62190772036, 0.1533616/-1/red/cyan/0/, 0.2879332/-1/green/blue/0/, 0.3577476/-1/red/yellow/0/, 0.427562/-1/green/magenta/0/, 0.463781/-1/red/brown/0/, 0.5/-1/green/gray/0/, 0.759395/-1/red/green/0/, 0.0187901/-1/green/orange/0/3.62190772036}{{0/1/red, 0.259395/1/green/orange/0/, 0.5187901/1/red/green/0/, 0.6533616/1/green/blue/0/, 0.7879332/1/red/cyan/0/, 0.8577476/1/green/magenta/0/, 0.927562/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.963781/1/green/gray/0/, 1/1/red/brown/0/}, {0.0187901/-1/green/red/0/3.62190772036, 0.1533616/-1/red/cyan/0/, 0.2879332/-1/green/blue/0/, 0.3577476/-1/red/yellow/0/, 0.427562/-1/green/magenta/0/, 0.463781/-1/red/brown/0/, 0.5/-1/green/gray/0/, 0.759395/-1/red/green/0/, 0.0187901/-1/green/orange/0/3.62190772036}}
\foreach \list in {0/1/red, 0.259395/1/green/orange/0/, 0.5187901/1/red/green/0/, 0.6533616/1/green/blue/0/, 0.7879332/1/red/cyan/0/, 0.8577476/1/green/magenta/0/, 0.927562/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.963781/1/green/gray/0/, 1/1/red/brown/0/}, {0.0187901/-1/green/red/0/3.62190772036, 0.1533616/-1/red/cyan/0/, 0.2879332/-1/green/blue/0/, 0.3577476/-1/red/yellow/0/, 0.427562/-1/green/magenta/0/, 0.463781/-1/red/brown/0/, 0.5/-1/green/gray/0/, 0.759395/-1/red/green/0/, 0.0187901/-1/green/orange/0/3.62190772036}{
\def{}
\def{}
\foreach \x/\sign/\notused/\col/\isflipped/\mp[count=\i from 0,remember=\x as , remember=\sign as ] in \list{
\ifnum \i > 0
\def\col!\colorstrength!white{\col!40!white}
\ifnum \isflipped = 0
\def0{40}
\def\colorstrength{0}
\else
\def0{0}
\def\colorstrength{40}
\fi
\ifnum 8 = \i
\ifnum \sign = -1
\fill[left color=\col!\colorstrength!white, right color=\col!\colorstrength!white] (, 0) rectangle (1,*0.1);
\fill[left color=\col!\colorstrength!white, right color=\col!\colorstrength!white] (0,0) rectangle (\x, \sign*0.1);
\else
\fill[left color=\col!\colorstrength!white, right color = \col!\colorstrength!white] (, 0) rectangle (\x, \sign*0.1);
\fi
\else
\fill[left color=\col!\colorstrength!white, right color = \col!\colorstrength!white] (, 0) rectangle (\x, \sign*0.1);
\fi
\fi
}
}
\newcommand\definepos[1]{
\ifnum #1 = 1
\defbelow{above}
\else
\defbelow{below}
\fi
}
\foreach \list in {0/1/red, 0.259395/1/green/orange/0/, 0.5187901/1/red/green/0/, 0.6533616/1/green/blue/0/, 0.7879332/1/red/cyan/0/, 0.8577476/1/green/magenta/0/, 0.927562/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.963781/1/green/gray/0/, 1/1/red/brown/0/}, {0.0187901/-1/green/red/0/3.62190772036, 0.1533616/-1/red/cyan/0/, 0.2879332/-1/green/blue/0/, 0.3577476/-1/red/yellow/0/, 0.427562/-1/green/magenta/0/, 0.463781/-1/red/brown/0/, 0.5/-1/green/gray/0/, 0.759395/-1/red/green/0/, 0.0187901/-1/green/orange/0/3.62190772036}{
\foreach \x/\sign in \list{
\draw (\x,0) -- (\x,\sign*0.1);
}
}
\begin{scope}[red, ultra thick]
\draw (0.005,0.1+0.005) -- ++(0,-0.1) -- ++(0.259395,0) -- ++(0,0.1);
\draw (0.505,-0.1-0.005) -- ++(0,0.1) -- ++(0.259395,0) -- ++(0,-0.1);
\end{scope}
\foreach \sign in {-1,1}{
\draw[dashed] (0,\sign*0.1) -- +(1,0);
}
\draw[very thick] (0,0) -- (1,0);
\foreach \list in {0/1/red, 0.259395/1/green/orange/0/, 0.5187901/1/red/green/0/, 0.6533616/1/green/blue/0/, 0.7879332/1/red/cyan/0/, 0.8577476/1/green/magenta/0/, 0.927562/1/red/yellow/0/, 0.963781/1/green/gray/0/, 1/1/red/brown/0/}, {0.0187901/-1/green/red/0/3.62190772036, 0.1533616/-1/red/cyan/0/, 0.2879332/-1/green/blue/0/, 0.3577476/-1/red/yellow/0/, 0.427562/-1/green/magenta/0/, 0.463781/-1/red/brown/0/, 0.5/-1/green/gray/0/, 0.759395/-1/red/green/0/, 0.0187901/-1/green/orange/0/3.62190772036}{
\foreach \x/\sign/\singcol in \list{
\filldraw[fill=\singcol, draw=black] (\x,\sign*0.1) circle (0.005);
}
}
\foreach \x/\sign/\label/\length/\text in 0.1296975/1/1/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.3890925/1/2/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.5860758/1/3/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.7206474/1/4/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.8228404/1/5/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.8926548/1/6/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.9456715/1/7/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.9818905/1/8/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.0860758/-1/4/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.2206474/-1/3/0.1346/$\alpha^2$, 0.3228404/-1/6/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.3926548/-1/5/0.0698/$\alpha^3$, 0.4456715/-1/8/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.4818905/-1/7/0.0362/$\alpha^4$, 0.6296975/-1/2/0.2594/$\alpha$, 0.8890925/-1/1/0.2594/$\alpha${
\definepos{\sign}
\node at (\x,\sign*0.1) [below] {\text};
}
\node[right] at (1,0) {$\tilde\gamma$};
\node[above] at (0.1296975, 0) {$\tilde\gamma'$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The oriented double cover.}
\label{fig:lift}
\end{figure}
The lift $\tilde \psi$ maps $\tilde \gamma$ to $\tilde \gamma'$, so
the interval exchanges $f$ and $f'$ induced by the two curves are
conjugates by scaling by $\alpha$. Note also that $f'$ is the same as
the restriction of $f$ to the initial subinterval of length $2\alpha$.
Arnoux and Yoccoz use exactly this restriction to construct their
homeomorphism. Hence their example coincides with $\tilde\psi$.
Before Arnoux and Yoccoz gives the above mentioned examples in their
paper, they produce a pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism of the thrice
punctured projective plane. The genus 3 example in the Arnoux--Yoccoz
family is actually a lift of this map. Arnoux and Rauzy has given many
more examples on the thrice punctured projective plane. The lifts of
these examples to $S_3$ are the Arnoux--Rauzy examples mentioned in
\cite[Section 4.1]{DoSchmidt16}, hence they are also nonorientable
lifts.
\section{Acknowledgements}
The paper was written while the author was a member at the Institute
for Advanced Study. The author thanks the IAS for its hospitality. He
also thanks the referee for thoughtful remarks and Livio Liechti for
correcting some typos.
This work was supported by NSF grant DMS-1128155.
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
Traditionally, task and motion planning for mobile robots are designed separately, and they work in a hierarchical manner with a task planner sitting on top of motion planners \cite{latombe2012robot}. Task planning is usually carried on symbolically based on an abstracted view of physical environments that ignores details in geometric or physical constraints. Hence, it is possible that there is no feasible trajectories to achieve the derived mission plans. Therefore, a recent trend is towards an Integrated Task and Motion Planning (ITMP), see e.g., \cite{cambon2003overview,galindo2004improving,wolfe2010combined,kaelbling2011hierarchical,kimmel2012pracsys, saha2014automated,lin2014mission,hung2014motion,nedunuri2014smt,garrett2015ffrob} and references therein.
Earlier efforts in ITMP, such as Asymov \cite{cambon2003overview} and SMAP \cite{plaku2010sampling}, were still based on abstractions of the working environment and used a symbolic planner to provide a heuristic guidance to the motion planner. Recent work, such as \cite{littlefield2014extensible} and \cite{dornhege2012semantic}, introduced a ``semantic attachment," i.e. a predicate that is solved by a motion planner, to the symbolic planner. An overview of the recent developments in the symbolic motion planning can be found in \cite{lin2014mission}, where the task planning problem is reduced to model checking. Since these methods are based on abstracted symbolic models of the environments, it is a common assumption that the working environment is known or static and the robot is the only moving object (or the robot itself carries other movable objects). However, in practice, a robot often shares its workspace with others robots or even humans, and the environment often changes over time in a way that is hard to predict. This motivates us to investigate the ITMP problem for mobile robots in a dynamic environment with moving obstacles.
Inspired by behavior based robotics \cite{nakhaeinia2013behavior}, we adopt a hierarchical planner consisting of two layers: global and local. Our basic idea is to synthesize a global and integrated task and motion plan through composing simple local moves and actions, and to achieve its performance guarantee through modular incremental verifications. The design consists of two steps. First, basic motion primitives are designed with verified performances. Then, a global plan is built upon these certified motion primitives. Since the method proposed here is of bottom-up and compositional nature, so we call it as CoSMoP (Composition of Safe Motion Primitives).
In the first step, we propose to use a formally verified motion controllers that we call safe motion primitives. These primitives are designed offline, modeled and verified in Differential Dynamic Logic (d$\mathcal{L}$) \cite{platzer2010logical}, for which verification software tools are available, e.g., KeYmaera \cite{platzer2010logical}. In particular, we use the Dynamic Window Approach (DWA) \cite{fox1997dynamic} as obstacle avoidance motion primitives in this paper. DWA is a widely adopted and efficient approach for mobile robots to avoid collisions in uncertain and dynamic environments. The safety of an extended DWA on collision avoidance for moving obstacles has been formally proved in \cite{mitsch2013provably} using d$\mathcal{L}$ and hybrid system verification. With this proof, we can abstract them to the global layer, where the task and motion plans are integrated.
In the second step, those safe motion primitives are encoded to a Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solver as motion primitive constraints. This layer synthesizes a composition of pairs of actions (i.e. safe motion primitives) and waypoints (i.e. terminal positions), which is the sequential execution of actions that the robot must perform to ensure a task specification formally. The CoSMoP encodes an ITMP problem to the SMT by extending the Bounded Satisfiability Checking (BSC) \cite{pradella2013bounded} and using the Counter Linear Temporal Logic over Constraint System CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) \cite{bersani2010bounded} language, a Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) extension. The BSC models consist of temporal logic rather than transition systems; thus, the problem encoding is more compact and elegant. Moreover, it was also shown that if the constraint system $\mathcal{D}$ is decidable, then so is the CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$), and it can be encoded to SMT \cite{bersani2010bounded}. Therefore, encoding the ITMP problem using CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) language allows the description of a wide range of system properties in a problem that is decidable.
In summary, the contribution of this work is to provide an automatic synthesis that is provably safe even for unexpected moving obstacles that, to the best of our knowledge, has not been attempted before for ITMP:
\begin{itemize}
\item Unlike \cite{nakhaeinia2013behavior}, where the motion plan is not formally verified, in our approach, the performance of the resulting integrated task and motion plan is formally guaranteed.
\item Unlike \cite{saha2014automated, lin2014mission}, we do not assume static environment and complete knowledge of the other moving agents that is required for verification of symbolic partitioned environments.
\item Unlike \cite{nedunuri2014smt, littlefield2014extensible, lin2014mission, garrett2015ffrob}, we do not assume a static environment where the robot is the only moving agent, which is assumed in these others ITMP approaches.
\item Unlike \cite{bouraine2012provably,nakhaeinia2013behavior,mitsch2013provably,althoff2014online,hess2014formal}, where only motion specifications are considered, we combine task and motion specifications that allow specifications such as moving objects in the environment.
\item Unlike \cite{pradella2013bounded,bersani2010bounded}, we use CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) for automatic synthesis instead of model checking.
\end{itemize}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{sec:preliminaries} presents some background for understanding CoSMoP approach and defines the scenario used in this work. Section \ref{sec:CoSMoP} introduces the CoSMoP design procedure and formulates the problem. Section \ref{sec:prim} presents the design of motion primitives for the scenario proposed here. Section \ref{sec:comp} presents how to synthesize a global and integrated plan using SMT solver. Section \ref{sec:sim} studies which parameters affect the execution time the most. Section \ref{sec:conclusion} concludes the paper with a discussion and proposes possible future works.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:preliminaries}
\subsection{Differential Dynamic Logic}
The Differential Dynamic Logic $d\mathcal{L}$ verifies a symbolic hybrid system model, and, thus, can assist in verifying and finding symbolic parameters constraints. Most of the time, this turns into an undecidable problem for model checking \cite{platzer2010logical}. Yet, the iteration between the discrete and continuous dynamics is nontrivial and leads to nonlinear parameter constraints and nonlinearities in the dynamics. Hence, the model checking approach must rely on approximations. On the other hand, the $d\mathcal{L}$ uses a deductive verification approach to handling infinite states, it does not rely on finite-state abstractions or approximations, and it can handle those nonlinear constraints.
The hybrid systems are embedded to the d$\mathcal{L}$ as hybrid programs, a compositional program notation for hybrid systems.
\begin{defn}[Hybrid Program]
A hybrid program \cite{platzer2010logical} ($\alpha$ and $\beta$) is defined as:
\begin{equation*}
\alpha, \beta ::= \begin{cases}
x_1 := \theta_1,...,x_n:=\theta_n \mid ?\chi \mid \alpha ; \beta \mid \alpha \cup \beta \mid \alpha^* \mid \\
x_1^{\prime} := \theta_1,...,x_n^{\prime}:=\theta_n \& \chi
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
where:
\begin{itemize}
\item $x$ is a state variable and $\theta$ a first-order logic term.
\item $\chi$ is a first-order formula.
\item $x_1 := \theta_1,...,x_n:=\theta_n$ are discrete jumps, i.e. instantaneous assignments of values to state variables.
\item $x_1^{\prime} := \theta_1,...,x_n^{\prime}:=\theta_n \& \chi$ is a differential equation system that represents the continuous variation in system dynamics. $x_i^{\prime} := \theta_i$ is the time derivative of state variable $x_i$, and $\& \chi$ is the evolution domain.
\item $?\chi$ tests a first-order logic at current state.
\item $\alpha ; \beta$ is a sequential composition, i.e. the hybrid program $\beta$ will start after $\alpha$ finishes.
\item $\alpha \cup \beta$ is a nondeterministic choice.
\item $\alpha^*$ is a nondeterministic repetition, which means that $\alpha$ will repeat for finite times.
\end{itemize}
\end{defn}
Thus, we can define the $d\mathcal{L}$ formula, which is a first-order dynamic logic over the reals for hybrid programs.
\begin{defn}[$d\mathcal{L}$ formulas]
A $d\mathcal{L}$ formula \cite{platzer2010logical} ($\phi$ and $\psi$) is defined as:
\begin{equation*}
\phi, \psi ::= \chi \mid \neg \phi \mid \phi \wedge \psi \mid \forall x \phi \mid \exists x \phi \mid [\alpha] \phi \mid \langle \alpha \rangle \phi
\end{equation*}
where:
\begin{itemize}
\item $[\alpha] \phi$ holds true if $\phi$ is true after all runs of $\alpha$.
\item $\langle \alpha \rangle \phi$ holds true if $\phi$ is true after at least one runs of $\alpha$.
\end{itemize}
\end{defn}
$d\mathcal{L}$ uses a compositional verification technique that permits the reduction of a complex hybrid system into several subsystems \cite{platzer2010logical}. This technique divides a system $\psi \rightarrow [\alpha] \phi$ in an equivalent formula $\psi_1 \rightarrow [\alpha_1] \phi_1 \wedge \psi_2 \rightarrow [\alpha_2] \phi_2$, where each $\psi_i \rightarrow [\alpha_i] \phi_i$ can be proven separately. In our approaches we use this technique backwards, we prove a set of $d\mathcal{L}$ formulas $\psi_i \rightarrow [\alpha_i] \phi_i$, where each one is the $i^{th}$ motion primitive model, and we use the SMT to compose an equivalent $\psi \rightarrow [\alpha] \phi$ that satisfies a mission task. Therefore, the synthesized hybrid system performance is formally proven.
\subsection{Counter Linear Temporal Logic Over Constraint System}
We express the specification of an autonomous mobile robot using Counter Linear Temporal Logic Over Constraint System CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) defined in \cite{bersani2010bounded}. This language is interpreted over Boolean terms $p \in AP$ or arithmetic constraints $R \in \mathcal{R}$ belong to a general constraint system $\mathcal{D}$, where $AP$ is a set of atomic propositions and $\mathcal{R}$ is a set of arithmetic constraints. Thus, the semantics of a CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) formula is given in terms of interpretations of a finite alphabet $\Sigma \in \{AP, \mathcal{R}\}$ on finite traces over a finite sequence $\rho$ of consecutive instants of time with length $K$, meaning that $\rho(k)$ is the interpretation of $\Sigma$ at instant of time $k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}, \mathcal{N}_{\rho} = \{0,...,K\}$. Moreover, the arithmetic terms of an arithmetic constraint $R \in \mathcal{R}$ are variables $x$ over a domain $D \in \{\mathbb{Z}, \mathbb{R}\}$ valuated at instants $i$ and, thus, are called arithmetic temporal terms \textit{a.t.t.},
\begin{defn}[Arithmetic Temporal Term]
A CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) arithmetic temporal term (\textit{a.t.t.}) $\varphi$ is defined as:
\begin{equation*}
\varphi ::= x \mid \bigcirc \varphi \mid \bigcirc^{-1} \varphi
\end{equation*}
where $\bigcirc$ and $\bigcirc^{-1}$ stands for next and previous operator.
\end{defn}
Therefore, a CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) formula is a LTL formula over the \textit{a.t.t.} defined as below.
\begin{defn}[Formula]
A CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) formula ($\phi$, $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$) is defined as,
\begin{equation*}
\phi, \phi_1, \phi_2 ::=
\begin{cases}
p \mid R(\varphi_1,...,\varphi_n) \mid \neg \phi \mid \phi_1 \wedge \phi_2 \mid \\
\bigcirc \phi \mid \bigcirc^{-1} \phi \mid \phi_1 \mathbf{U} \phi_2 \mid \phi_1 \mathbf{S} \phi_2
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
where,
\begin{itemize}
\item $p \in AP$ is a atomic proposition, and $R \in \mathcal{R}$ is a relation over the \textit{a.t.t.} such as, for this work, we limit it to linear equalities or inequalities, i.e. $R(\varphi_1,...,\varphi_n) \equiv \sum_{i=1}^{n} c_i \cdot \varphi_i \# c_0$, where $\# \equiv \langle =, <, \leq, >, \geq \rangle$ and $c_i, \varphi_i \in D$.
\item $\bigcirc$, $\bigcirc^{-1}$, $\mathbf{U}$ and $\mathbf{S}$ stands for usual next, previous, until and since operators on finite traces, respectively.
\end{itemize}
\end{defn}
Based on this grammar, it can also use others common abbreviations, including:
\begin{itemize}
\item Standard boolean, such as $true$, $false$, $\vee$ and $\rightarrow$.
\item $\Diamond \phi$ that stands for $true \mathbf{U} \phi$, and it means that $\phi$ eventually holds before the last instant (included).
\item $\square \phi$ that stands for $\neg \Diamond \neg \phi$, and it means that $\phi$ always holds until the last instant.
\item $Last [\phi]$ that stands for $\Diamond (\neg \bigcirc true) \wedge \phi$, where $\neg \bigcirc true$ on finite trace is only $true$ at last instant. Thus, it means that $\phi$ is true at the last instant of the sequence $\rho$.
\end{itemize}
A CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) formula is verified in a Bounded Satisfiability Checking (BSC) \cite{pradella2013bounded}. Hence, it is interpreted on a finite sequence $\rho$ with length $K$. Therefore, $\rho(k) \vDash p$ means that $p$ holds true in the sequence $\rho$ at instant $k$ ($p \vdash \rho(k)$).
\begin{defn}[Semantics]
The semantics of a CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) formula $\phi$ at an instant $k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}$ is as follow:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\rho(k) \vDash p \Longleftrightarrow p \vdash \rho(k)$.
\item $\rho(k) \vDash R(\varphi_1,..., \varphi_n) \Longleftrightarrow R(\varphi_1,..., \varphi_n) \vdash \rho(k)$.
\item $\rho(k) \vDash \neg \phi \Longleftrightarrow \rho(k) \nvDash \phi$.
\item $\rho(k) \vDash \phi_1 \wedge \phi_2 \Longleftrightarrow \rho(k) \vDash \phi_1 \wedge \rho(k) \vDash \phi_2$.
\item $\rho(k) \vDash \bigcirc \phi \Longleftrightarrow \rho(k+1) \vDash \phi$.
\item $\rho(k) \vDash \bigcirc^{-1} \phi \Longleftrightarrow \rho(k-1) \vDash \phi$.
\item $\rho(k) \vDash \phi_1 \mathbf{U} \phi_2 \Longleftrightarrow \begin{cases}
\exists i \in [k,K]: \rho(i) \vDash \phi_2 \wedge \\
\forall j \in [k,i-1]: \rho(j) \vDash \phi_1
\end{cases}$.
\item $\rho(k) \vDash \phi_1 \mathbf{S} \phi_2 \Longleftrightarrow \begin{cases}
\exists i \in [0,k]: \rho(i) \vDash \phi_2 \wedge \\
\forall j \in [i+1,k]: \rho(j) \vDash \phi_1
\end{cases}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{defn}
\subsection{Scene Description}
As a motivating example, we consider a building with two way doors that an assistant robot needs to move objects with its gripper. The robot shares its workspace with other robots and humans, and we call this scenario Clean Up. The robot should be able to find and move those objects to designated areas through doors while stay inside the workspace.
In this scenario, each state robot state $q_r$ is a triple $\langle x, y, \alpha \rangle$ representing the robot pose in 2D, where $(x,y) \in \mathbb{Z}^2$ is the position in $mm$ and $\alpha \in \mathbb{R}$ is the heading angle in degrees. Yet, each object $j$ state $q_b^j$ is a triple $\langle x, y, p \rangle$ representing its 2D position $(x, y) \in \mathbb{Z}^2$ in $mm$ and a proposition $p \in AP$ that holds true when the robot is carrying this object. Based on a given scenario, scene description provides basic information on robots and the environment they work in.
\begin{defn}[Scene Description] \label{def:scene}
Scene description is a tuple $\mathcal{M} = \langle \mathcal{O}, \mathcal{D}, \mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B}, \mathcal{W} \rangle$:
\begin{itemize}
\item Obstacles $\mathcal{O}$: a set of rectangular obstacles in parallel to the axis $o_j \in \mathcal{O}: j \in N_{\mathcal{O}} = \{1,...,|\mathcal{O}|\}$ specified by two points $o_j = \langle (x_i, y_i), (x_f, y_f) \rangle$ describing a pair of diagonal vertexes;
\item Doors $\mathcal{D}$: a set of doors $d_j \in \mathcal{D}: j \in N_{\mathcal{D}} = \{1,...,|\mathcal{D}|\}$ that describe two robot poses $q_1$ and $q_2$ necessary to push and pass through this door, i.e. $d_j = \langle q_1, q_2 \rangle: q_1 = q_2 = \langle x, y, \alpha\rangle$.
\item Agent $a$: the robot $a = \langle l \rangle$ is abstracted as a square with length $l$.
\item Objects $\mathcal{B}$: a set of movable objects $b_j \in \mathcal{B}: j \in N_{\mathcal{B}} = \{1,...,|\mathcal{B}|\}$ and $b_j = \langle l \rangle$ that is abstracted as a square with length $l$.
\item Workspace $\mathcal{W} = \langle x, y, l \rangle$ : the workspace dimension description, which is assumed to be a square with center at position $( x, y)$ and length $l$.
\end{itemize}
\end{defn}
Now, we can define the scene description for this particular scenario as shown below.
\begin{example}\label{ex:example01}
Consider the workspace shown in Fig. \ref{fig:example01}. This scene description has two obstacles $\mathcal{O}=\{\langle (-1500,-2500), (-1500,2500) \rangle, \langle (-1500,0), (2500,0) \rangle\}$ that refer to two walls that Door $1$ (also Door $2$) and Door $3$ are located. The Door $1$ is described by $d_1 = \langle (-2000, -500, 0^o), (-1000, -500, 180^o) \rangle$, the Door $2$ by $d_2 = \langle (-2000, 1000, 0^o), (-1000, 1000, 180^o) \rangle$, and the Door $3$ by $d_3 = \langle (-1000, 500, 270^o), (-1000, -500, 90^o) \rangle$. There are two objects abstracted as a square of $100mm$ (i.e. $b_1.l = b_2.l = 100$) initially at $q_b^1 = \langle 1900,-1000,false \rangle$ and $q_b^2 = \langle 2000,-1000,false \rangle$, where initially neither of the two objects is picked up. The robot is abstracted as a square of $400mm$ (i.e. $a.l = 400$) and starts at $q_r = \langle -2000, 0, 0.0 \rangle$.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{simple_example02}
\caption{A example of blueprint for the clean up scenario.}
\label{fig:example01}
\end{figure}
\end{example}
\section{CoSMoP framework}\label{sec:CoSMoP}
This section describes a formal bottom-up approach that features a two-layer hierarchical ITMP architecture as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:framework}. The local layer implements reactive motion controllers such as the DWA that realize motion planning incorporating all kinematic and geometric constraints for dynamic environment with moving obstacles. These controllers are designed offline and are abstracted to the global layer as motion primitives specifications $\phi_{\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{M})$, in CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$). The global layer generates a constraint system in the Constraint Generator based on scene description $\mathcal{M}$ and the task specification $\phi_{\mathcal{G}}$, in CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$), and encode it to a SMT solver. If this constraint system is satisfiable, a plan that is a roadmap for the local layer is extracted to the local layer. We assume that $\mathcal{M}$ have geometric details about the environment enough for global layer to search for a satisfiable plan. Let $Q_r$, $Q_b$ and $Q_{\pi}$ be a sequence of assigned values to robot and object states and assigned motion primitive at each instant $k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}$, respectively, we can formulate our problem as follows.
\begin{problem}
Given a scene description $\mathcal{M}$, initial conditions, a task specification $\phi_{\mathcal{G}}$, the trace length $K$, design a set $\mathcal{U}$ of the reactive motion controllers in the local layer and respective motion primitives specifications $\phi_{\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{M})$ and check if the specification $\phi_{\mathcal{G}}$ is satisfiable in the scene $\mathcal{M}$ using the controllers $\mathcal{U}$. If yes, find a trace $s$ with length $K$, where $s(k) = \langle q_{r}(k), \pi(k) \rangle$ at instant $k \in \mathcal{N} = \{1,...,K\}$, $q_{r}(k) \in Q_r$ is a robot state and $\pi(k) \in Q_{\pi}$ is a motion primitives at instant $k$ such as $\pi(k)$ defines what controller $u \in \mathcal{U}$ to take at $q_{r}(k-1)$ to go to $q_{r}(k)$.
\end{problem}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{CoSMoP-framework2}
\caption{CoSMoP framework.}
\label{fig:framework}
\end{figure}
Note that we are restricted to take at most $K$ actions for the task, therefore it is a bounded time planning problem. The motion primitives are abstract actions that a robot can execute, such as moving to some place, picking up objects and so on.
\begin{defn}[Motion Primitive]
The Motion Primitive $\Pi \in \mathcal{P}$ is formally defined as $\langle u, \phi_{\Pi} \rangle$, where $\mathcal{P}$ is a set of abstract actions available to the global layer. The symbol $u \in \mathcal{U}$ is a reactive motion controller. The specification $\phi_{\Pi}$ constrains the states $q(k-1)$ and $q(k)$ such as $q(k) \in [q_{r}(k) \in Q_r] \cup [q_{b}^j(k) \in Q_b] \cup [\pi(k) \in Q_{\pi}]$ based on the Scene Description $\mathcal{M}$ when the robot takes $u$.
\end{defn}
Basically the framework needs to solve three subproblems. First, we design reactive motion controllers $u_i \in \mathcal{U}: i \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{U}} = \{1,...,|\mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{U}}|\}$ to provide enough maneuvers for the robot to complete the given task. If it is needed, the design criterion is that each controller modeled as a hybrid program $\alpha_{u_i}$ must formally ensure a safety property $\phi_{u_i}^{safe}$ after any execution, if the initial state is safe and satisfies the initial condition $\phi_{u_i}^{initial}$, i.e. $\phi_{u_i}^{initial} \wedge \phi_{u_i}^{safe} \rightarrow [\alpha_{u_i}] \phi_{u_i}^{safe}$ in $d\mathcal{L}$.
Second, we abstract these controllers from the local to the global layer, i.e. to design the specification $\phi_{\Pi}$, in CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) formulas, to enforce safety requirement after concatenation of designed motion primitives. We do so by ensuring that for any plan $s$ of size $K$, where $\forall \pi(k) \in Q_{\pi}: \pi(k) \in \mathcal{P} , u(k) \in \pi(k)$, the following two conditions hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item For each $i\in \mathcal{N}$, $\phi_{u(k)}^{safe}$ is satisfiable for at least one trajectory between $q_{r}(k-1)$ and $q_{r}(k)$.
\item For each $i\in \mathcal{N}$, $q_{r}(k-1) \vDash \phi_{u(k)}^{initial}$.
\end{itemize} This specification depends on the scene description $\mathcal{M}$ and the conjunction of all specifications $\phi_{\Pi}$ is called the motion primitives specification $\phi_{\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{M})$. Since the output of global layer is a sequence $s$, where each $\pi(k) \in Q_{\pi}$ assigns one of $\Pi \in \mathcal{P}$. If $\phi_{\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{M})$ constraints $s$ to satisfy both conditions, then the reachable states after any execution of the controller $u(k)$ will be constraint to satisfies $\phi_{u(k)}^{safe}$ and it will satisfy $\phi_{u(k+1)}^{initial} \wedge \phi_{u(k+1)}^{safe}$ before execute the next controller $u(k+1)$. Therefore, the hybrid program of resulting plan $s$ is $\phi_{u(1)}^{initial} \wedge \phi_{u(1)}^{safe} \rightarrow [\alpha_{u(1)};?(\phi_{u(1)}^{safe});?( \phi_{u(2)}^{initial} \wedge \phi_{u(2)}^{safe});\alpha_{u(2)};...;\alpha_{u(K)}] \phi_{u(K)}^{safe}$.
The following theorem formally proves that the composition of those motion primitives will also guarantee the safety properties $\forall k \in \mathcal{N}: \phi_{u(k)}^{safe}$, after executing a plan.
\begin{thm}
If a plan $s$ has size $K$, and satisfies $s \vDash \phi_{\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{M})$ and $\bigwedge_{\forall i \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{U}}} \phi_{u_i}^{initial} \wedge \phi_{u_i}^{safe} \rightarrow [\alpha_{u_i}] \phi_{u_i}^{safe}$ is valid, then it will also satisfy all safety properties $s \vDash \bigwedge_{k \in \mathcal{N}} \phi_{u(k)}^{safe}$, where $s(k) = \langle q_{r}(k), \pi(k) \rangle$ at instant $k \in \mathcal{N}$ and $u(k) \in \pi(k)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The d$\mathcal{L}$ formula of $s$ that satisfies the specification $\phi_{\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{M})$ is $\phi_{u(1)}^{initial} \wedge \phi_{u(1)}^{safe} \rightarrow [\alpha_{u(1)};?(\phi_{u(1)}^{safe});?( \phi_{u(2)}^{initial} \wedge \phi_{u(2)}^{safe});\alpha_{u(2)};...;\alpha_{u(K)}] \phi_{u(K)}^{safe}$. By applying the rules $[;]$, $[?]$ and $\rightarrow r$ \cite{platzer2010logical}, we find the equivalent formula $\bigwedge_{\forall k \in \mathcal{N}} \phi_{u(k)}^{initial} \wedge \phi_{u(k)}^{safe} \rightarrow [\alpha_{u(k)}] \phi_{u(k)}^{safe}$. Therefore, if we ensure that $\forall i \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{U}}: \phi_{u_i}^{initial} \wedge \phi_{u_i}^{safe} \rightarrow [\alpha_{u_i}] \phi_{u_i}^{safe}$, the run $s$ will satisfy safety property of all motion primitives.
\end{proof}
Finally, the global layer encodes the CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) task specifications $\phi_{\mathcal{G}}$ and $\phi_{\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{M})$ into forms that are solvable by an SMT solver such as Z3\cite{de2008z3}, in the Constraint Generator shown in Fig. \ref{fig:framework}. Encoding the ITMP problem using CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) language allows the description of a wide range of system properties that the satisfiability problem is decidable. If the global layer specification is satisfiable, a plan $s$ is then generated and extracted to the Motion Primitives Supervisor that enforces a sequential execution of this plan. In the following sections we will describe our framework in detail using the Clean Up example.
\section{Motion Primitives}\label{sec:prim}
In the Clean Up scenario, four motion controllers are needed so $\mathcal{U}=\{u_1,...,u_4\}$ where $u_1=$ go to, $u_2=$ push the door, $u_3=$ pick up and $u_4=$ leave. The following subsections will introduce how to design their motion primitives.
\subsection{Go To}
The first controller $u$ to be designed is the local navigation function which avoids obstacles that can be moving at a velocity up to $V$. Since the global layer does not take into account the environment kinematics, the safety property must be verified at a local layer. We implement a Dynamic Window Approach \cite{fox1997dynamic} (DWA) algorithm based on the verification presented by Mitsch et. al. \cite{mitsch2013provably}.
At every cycle time, based on the robot's sensor readings about its current position and surrounding obstacles, the DWA uses circular trajectories determined uniquely by the robot translational $v_r$ and rotational $\omega_r$ velocities. In summary, the algorithm is organized in two steps. (i) First it searches for a range of admissible $(v_r, \omega_r)$ pair that results in safe trajectories that the robot can realize in a short time frame, which is called dynamic window. (ii) Then, it chooses a $(v_r, \omega_r)$ pair in the dynamic window that maximizes the progress towards the goal.
The safety property that the DWA must satisfy is called Passive Safety Property $\phi_{ps}$\cite{macek2009towards}. This property means that the robot will never collide with the obstacle, or it will stop before collision.
\begin{equation*}\label{eq:dwa_passive_safety_prop}
\phi_{ps} \equiv \Big(v_r = 0\Big) \vee \Big(\parallel p_r - p_o \parallel > \frac{v_r^2}{2b} + V\frac{v_r}{b} \Big)
\end{equation*}
where $b$ is the maximum deceleration, and $p_r$ and $p_o$ are the position of the robot and the obstacle, respectively.
Finally, Mitsch et. al. \cite{mitsch2013provably} verified if this model ensures the Passive Safety Property $\phi_{ps}$ using KeYmaera.
\begin{thm}
If the DWA algorithm modeled with the hybrid program $dw_{ps}$ starts in a state that satisfies $\phi_{ps}$, it will always satisfies it.
\begin{equation*}
\phi_{ps} \rightarrow [dw_{ps}] \phi_{ps}
\end{equation*}
where $dw_{ps}$ is presented in the Model 1 in \cite{mitsch2013provably}.
\end{thm}
An example of such trajectories is sketched in Fig. \ref{fig:dwa_trajectory}. One robot passes in front of other robot executing the DWA algorithm. The DWA assigns circular trajectories to avoid the collision with the other robot, and the translational velocity is reduced based on the proximity to this robot.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.5in]{dwa_trajectory}
\caption{An example of safe circular trajectory for moving obstacles. The vehicles drive from the gray to the red in the dashed line, and the vehicle moving in straight line is the moving obstacle and the other is an executing DWA algorithm. }
\label{fig:dwa_trajectory}
\end{figure}
Now we move from the local layer to the global layer to abstract this controller. Since the safety property $\phi_{ps}$ is an invariant property as well, it can be used as a constraint to ensure the safe motion primitive composition. Details like moving obstacles are omitted in the global layer, so we can assume that the minimum robot velocity is zero ($v_r > 0$), and the known obstacles are static ($V = 0$), thus:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:corridor}
If there is a trajectory between the current and next states ($q_r$ and $\bigcirc q_r$), in which the robot can fits into, then there is, at least, one possible DWA passively safe trajectory.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
If $v_r > 0$ and $V = 0$, thus, if $\parallel p_r - p_o \parallel > 0$, then there exist at least one trajectory that can be executed by the DWA algorithm that $\phi_{ps}$ holds true.
\end{proof}
Hence, the Go To specification $\phi_{\Pi}$ in CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) should guarantee that there exists a trajectory free of obstacles if the initial $q_r$ and goal $\bigcirc q_r$ states should be to the left, right, below or above of all obstacles (i.e. $r_{left,o}^{j} \equiv \Big( \max (\bigcirc q_r.x, q_r.x) \leq \min (o_j.x_i, o_j.x_f) - \frac{a.l}{2} \Big)$, $r_{right,o}^{j} \equiv \Big( \min (\bigcirc q_r.x, q_r.x) \geq \max (o_j.x_i, o_j.x_f) + \frac{a.l}{2} \Big)$, $r_{below,o}^{j} \equiv \Big( \max (\bigcirc q_r.y, q_r.y) \leq \min (o_j.y_i, o_j.y_f) - \frac{a.l}{2} \Big)$, $r_{above,o}^{j} \equiv \Big( \min (\bigcirc q_r.y, q_r.y) \geq \max (o_j.y_i, o_j.y_f) + \frac{a.l}{2} \Big)$),
\begin{align*}
\phi_{GoTo}^{\mathcal{O}} \equiv \forall j \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{O}} : & \Box \Big[ (\pi = GoTo) \rightarrow \\
& r_{left,o}^{j} \vee r_{right,o}^{j} \vee r_{bellow,o}^{j} \vee r_{above,o}^{j} \Big].
\end{align*}
And similarly we have $\phi_{GoTo}^{\mathcal{B}}$ to avoid colliding into objects that are not being carried (i.e. $\neg q_b^{j}.p$). Thus, the initial $q_r$ and goal $\bigcirc q_r$ states should be to the left, right, below or above of all objects (i.e. $r_{left,b}^{j} \equiv \Big( \max (\bigcirc q_r.x, q_r.x) \leq q_b^{j}.x - l^{j} \Big)$, $r_{right,b}^{j} \equiv \Big( \min (\bigcirc q_r.x, q_r.x) \geq q_b^{j}.x + l^{j} \Big)$, $r_{below,b}^{j} \equiv \Big( \max (\bigcirc q_r.y, q_r.y) \leq q_b^{j}.y - l^{j} \Big)$, $r_{above,b}^{j} \equiv \Big( \min (\bigcirc q_r.y, q_r.y) \geq q_b^{j}.y + l^{j} \Big)$, where $l^{j} = \frac{b_j.l+a.l}{2}$),
\begin{align*}
\phi_{GoTo}^{\mathcal{B}} & \equiv \forall j \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}} : \Box \Big[ (\pi = GoTo) \wedge \neg q_b^{j}.p \rightarrow \\
& r_{left,b}^{j} \vee r_{right,b}^{j} \vee r_{bellow,b}^{j} \vee r_{above,b}^{j} \Big].
\end{align*}
Additionally, the robot can only move inside the workspace (i.e. $rin_{x} \equiv (\mathcal{W}.x - \frac{\mathcal{W}.l}{2} + \frac{a.l}{2} \leq \bigcirc q_r.x \leq \mathcal{W}.x + \frac{\mathcal{W}.l}{2} - \frac{a.l}{2})$ and $rin_{y} \equiv (\mathcal{W}.y - \frac{\mathcal{W}.l}{2} + \frac{a.l}{2} \leq \bigcirc q_r.y \leq \mathcal{W}.y + \frac{\mathcal{W}.l}{2} - \frac{a.l}{2})$) and won't change any object state (i.e. $p_{static}^{l} \equiv \bigcirc q_b^{l}.p = q_b^{l}.p$ when executing $Go To$, so, we have,
\begin{align*}
\phi_{GoTo} \equiv & \Box \Big[ \pi = GoTo \rightarrow \bigwedge_{l \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}}} p_{static}^{l} \wedge rin_{x} \wedge rin_{y} \Big] \wedge \\
& \phi_{GoTo}^{\mathcal{O}} \wedge \phi_{GoTo}^{\mathcal{B}}
\end{align*}
\subsection{Push the Door}
Another reactive motion controller $u$ is to push the door, a straight movement in the direction of the door until it is pushed and the robot completely passes through it. The safety property $\phi_{Push}$ is that the robot must start at the initial position and go to final position (i.e. $push^j \equiv \Big(q_r = d_j.q_1 \wedge \bigcirc q_r.x = d_j.q_2.x \wedge \bigcirc q_r.y = d_j.q_2.y\Big) \vee \Big(q_r = d_j.q_2 \wedge \bigcirc q_r.x = d_j.q_1.x \wedge \bigcirc q_r.y = d_j.q_1.y\Big) $), so, we have,
\begin{align*}
\phi_{Push} \equiv \forall j \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{D}}: \Box \Big[ & \pi = Push_j \rightarrow \bigwedge_{l \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}}} p_{static}^{l} \wedge push^j \Big]
\end{align*}
\subsection{Pick up and Leave}
Finally, the pick up and leave motion primitives describe the robot and objects dynamics. The safety property for those controllers does not depend on the robot or environment kinematics, so it does not require a verification in KeYmaera neither. So, we assume that the robot can pick up the object with the posing at $0\degree$. Hence, to pick an object up, the robot cannot be carrying any object (i.e. $\neg q_b^{l}.p$) and will carry the object $j$ (i.e. $\bigcirc p_{carry}^{j,l} \equiv (j=l \rightarrow \bigcirc q_b^{l}.p) \wedge (j \neq l \rightarrow \neg \bigcirc q_b^{l}.p)$). Also, the robot states will not change (i.e. $r_{static} \equiv (q_r.x = \bigcirc q_r.x) \wedge (q_r.y = \bigcirc q_r.y) \wedge (q_r.{\alpha} = \bigcirc q_r.{\alpha})$) and it will be posing in front of object (i.e. $r_{object}^{j} \equiv (q_r.\alpha = 0) \wedge (q_r.y = q_b^{j}.y) \wedge (q_r.x = q_b^{j}.x - l^j)$),
\begin{align*}
\phi_{PickUp} \equiv & \forall j \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}}: \Box \Big[ \pi = PickUp_j \rightarrow \\
& \bigwedge_{\forall l \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}}}\Big(\neg q_b^{l}.p \wedge \bigcirc p_{carry}^{j,l}\Big) \wedge r_{static} \wedge r_{object}^{j}\Big].
\end{align*}
Correspondingly, we leave the object at the same angle. Thus, to drop an object off, the robot should be carrying the object $j$ (i.e. $p_{carry}^{l} \equiv (j=l \rightarrow q_b^{l}.p) \wedge (j \neq l \rightarrow \neg q_b^{l}.p)$) and then drops it off (i.e. $\neg \bigcirc q_b^{l}.p$). Moreover, the robot will not change the initial and final states (i.e. $r_{static}^i$) and the object will be left next to it at $0^o$ (i.e. $b_{left}^{j} \equiv (q_r.\alpha = 0.0) \wedge (\bigcirc q_b^{j}.y = q_r.y) \wedge (\bigcirc q_b^{j}.x = q_r.x + l^j)$). However, we cannot leave the object over other objects. Therefore, the next object position should not have overlap with any other objects (i.e. $b_{left,b}^{j,l} \equiv \Big( \bigcirc q_b^{j}.y \leq \bigcirc q_b^{l}.y - l_b^{j,l} \Big)$, $b_{right,b}^{j,l} \equiv \Big( \bigcirc q_b^{j}.y \geq \bigcirc q_b^{l}.y + l_b^{j,l} \Big)$, $b_{below,b}^{j,l} \equiv \Big( \bigcirc q_b^{j}.x \leq \bigcirc q_b^{l}.x - l_b^{j,l} \Big)$, $b_{above,b}^{j,l} \equiv \Big( \bigcirc q_b^{j}.x \geq \bigcirc q_b^{l}.x + l_b^{j,l} \Big)$, where $l_b^{j,l} = \frac{b_j.l+b_l.l}{2}$),
\begin{align*}
\phi_{Leave}^{\mathcal{B}} \equiv & \forall j,l \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}}, j \neq l : \Box \Big[ \pi = Leave_j \wedge \neg q_b^{l}.p \rightarrow \\
& b_{left,b}^{j,l} \vee b_{right,b}^{j,l} \vee b_{below,b}^{j,l} \vee b_{above,b}^{j,l} \Big].
\end{align*}
And neither over an obstacle, (i.e. $b_{left,o}^{j,l} \equiv \Big( \bigcirc q_b^{j}.y \leq \min (o.x_i, o.x_f) - \frac{b_j.l}{2} \Big)$, $b_{right,o}^{j,l} \equiv \Big( \bigcirc q_b^{j}.y \geq \max (o.x_i, o.x_f) + \frac{b_j.l}{2} \Big)$, $b_{below,o}^{j,l} \equiv \Big( \bigcirc q_b^{j}.x \leq \min (o.y_i, o.y_f) - \frac{b_j.l}{2} \Big)$, $b_{above,o}^{j,l} \equiv \Big( \bigcirc q_b^{j}.x \geq \max (o.y_i, o.y_f) + \frac{b_j.l}{2} \Big)$),
\begin{align*}
\phi_{Leave}^{\mathcal{O}} \equiv & \forall j \in \mathcal{B}, l \in \mathcal{O} : \Box \Big[ \pi = Leave_j \rightarrow \\
& b_{left,o}^{j,l} \vee b_{right,o}^{j,l} \vee b_{below,o}^{j,l} \vee b_{above,o}^{j,l} \Big].
\end{align*}
Hence,
\begin{align*}
\phi_{Leave} \equiv & \forall j \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}}: \Box \Big[ \pi = Leave_j \rightarrow \\
& \bigwedge_{\forall l \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}}} \Big(p_{carry}^{j,l} \wedge \neg \bigcirc q_b^{l}.p \Big) \wedge r_{static} \wedge b_{left}^{j}\Big] \wedge \\
& \phi_{Leave}^{\mathcal{B}} \wedge \phi_{Leave}^{\mathcal{O}}.
\end{align*}
Finally, if $\pi \neq Leave_j$, the object does not change position (i.e. $b_{static}^j \equiv (\bigcirc q_b^{j}.x = q_b^{j}.x) \wedge (\bigcirc q_b^{j}.y = q_b^{j}.y) \Big)$).
\begin{align*}
\phi_{carry} \equiv \forall j \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}} : \Box \Big[ \Big( (\pi \neq Leave_j) \rightarrow b_{static}^j \Big].
\end{align*}
\section{Composition of motion primitives}\label{sec:comp}
The Motion Primitive Specifications $\phi_{\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{M})$ are the conjunctions of the specifications from each single motion primitive. For the Clean Up scenario, this specification is,
\begin{align*}
\phi_{\mathcal{P}}^{Clean}(\mathcal{M}) \equiv & \phi_{GoTo} \wedge \phi_{Push} \wedge \phi_{PickUp} \wedge \phi_{Leave_b} \wedge \phi_{carry}
\end{align*}
Now we can compose the motion primitives by encoding the Task Specification $\phi_{\mathcal{G}}$ and the Motion Primitive Specifications $\phi_{\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{M})$ to Z3 SMT solver. If the specifications are satisfiable, the SMT solver will output a feasible plan $s$.
We encode only CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) formulas with no nested path quantifiers, but it is possible to encode nested formulas as well \cite{bersani2010bounded}. Since Z3 is a decision procedure for the combination of quantifier-free first-order logic with theories for linear arithmetic \cite{de2008z3}, we encode each state variable as an array whose size depends on the length of the trace $K$. For example, each robot state $q_r.x(k) \in Q_r$ will be encoded as an array such that $q_r.x[k]$. Each object state is a two dimensional array such that each element is $q_b[j].x[k]: j \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{B}}$. Additionally, each motion primitives $\pi(k) \in Q_{\pi}$ will be an array such that each element is $\pi[k]$. Hence, the \textit{a.t.t.} operator $\bigcirc$ can be encoded by adding or subtracting the array index, for instance, $\bigcirc q_r.x \equiv q_r.x[k+1]$ at instant $k$. Therefore, a state formula $\psi$, defined as $\psi \equiv p \mid R(\varphi_1, \varphi_2,..., \varphi_n) \mid \neg \psi \mid \psi_1 \wedge \psi_2$, can be encoded to quantifier-free first-order logic formulas $\Psi[k]$, where $k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}$ is the instant that $\psi$ holds true. For instance, if $\psi \equiv q_b^0.p$, then $\Psi[2]$ holds true if $q_b^0.p$ holds true at instant $2$.
Encoding temporal logic quantifiers to first order logic requires quantifiers $\forall$ and $\exists$ in relation to the time instants. The quantifier $\forall k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho} : \Psi[k]$ can be implemented using for loop. The $\exists k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho} : \Psi[k]$ can be encoded by using an auxiliary variable $j$ such as $\forall k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}: (k = j) \rightarrow \Psi[k] \wedge j \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}$ and, then, also encoded using a for loop. Therefore, we can encode CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) quantifiers to Z3, for example,
\begin{itemize}
\item $\bigcirc^j \psi \Longleftrightarrow j \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho} \wedge \Psi[j]$
\item $\psi_1 \mathbf{U} \psi_2 \Longleftrightarrow \begin{cases}
\Big(\bigwedge_{k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}} \Big[(k < j \rightarrow \Psi_1[k]) \wedge \\
(k = j \rightarrow \Psi_2[k])\Big] \wedge j \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}
\end{cases}$
\item $\Box \psi \Longleftrightarrow \bigwedge_{k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}} \Psi[k]$
\item $\diamondsuit \psi \Longleftrightarrow \bigwedge_{k \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}} \Big[k = j \rightarrow \Psi[k]\Big] \wedge j \in \mathcal{N}_{\rho}$
\item $Last [\psi] \Longleftrightarrow \Psi[K]$
\end{itemize}
Finally, let $\varphi_1$ and $\varphi_2$ be \textit{a.t.t.}'s, the functions $\max(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$ and $\min(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$ are encoded with SMT function $ite$, i.e. $\max(\varphi_1,\varphi_2) \equiv ite(\varphi_1 > \varphi_2, \varphi_1,\varphi_2)$ and $\min(x,y) \equiv ite(\varphi_1 <
\varphi_2,\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$. Now, we can define a task specification in CLTLB($\mathcal{D}$) and find an integrated task and motion plan $s$ for the scenario in the Example \ref{ex:example01} as shown below.
\begin{example}\label{ex:example02}
A task can be any temporal logic describing how the robot or the objects should move in the environment. For example, it could be to bring the objects in the workspace of Fig. \ref{fig:example01} to the temporary rectangular area $Q_{temp}^j \equiv (-1500 \leq q_b^j.x \leq -500) \wedge (-2500 \leq q_b^j.y \leq -1000) \wedge \neg q_b^j.p$ (which can be represented by the coordinates of its upper-left and lower-right vertices) and later leave them in the state $Q_b^{goal} \equiv q_b^1 = \langle 1900, 1000, false \rangle \wedge q_b^2 = \langle 2000, 1000, false \rangle$. The specification of this task is,
\begin{align*}
\phi_{\mathcal{G}}^{Clean} \equiv \bigwedge_{\forall j \in N_{\mathcal{B}}} \diamondsuit \Big[ Q_{temp}^j \Big] \wedge Last \Big[ Q_b^{goal} \Big]
\end{align*}
If we set the trace length $K = 24$ and encode the formula $\phi_{\mathcal{G}}^{Clean} \wedge \phi_{\mathcal{P}}^{Clean}(\mathcal{M})$ to a SMT solver, we can find the following satisfiable plan,
{\small \begin{align*}
s = \{&\langle \Pi_1, (-2000, -500, 0) \rangle, \langle \Pi_2, (-1000, -500, 0) \rangle,\\
& \langle \Pi_1, (1650, -1000, 0) \rangle, \langle \Pi_3, (1650, -1000, 0) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_1, (-998, -1251, 0) \rangle, \langle \Pi_4, (-998, -1251, 0) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_1, (-999, -999, 0) \rangle, \langle \Pi_1, (1750, -1000, 0) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_3, (1750, -1000, 0) \rangle, \langle \Pi_1, (-751, -1001, 0) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_4, (-751, -1001, 0) \rangle, \langle \Pi_3, (-751, -1001, 0) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_1, (-1000, -500, 90) \rangle, \langle \Pi_2, (-1000, 500, 90) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_1, (1750, 1000, 0) \rangle, \langle \Pi_4, (1750, 1000, 0) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_1, (-1000, 500, 270) \rangle, \langle \Pi_2, (-1000, 500, 270) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_1, (-998, -1251, 0) \rangle, \langle \Pi_3, (-998, -1251, 0) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_1, (-1000, -500, 90) \rangle, \langle \Pi_2, (-1000, 500, 90) \rangle, \\
& \langle \Pi_1, (1650, 1000, 0) \rangle, \langle \Pi_4, (1650, 1000, 0) \rangle \}
\end{align*}
where $\Pi_1=$ go to, $\Pi_2=$ push the door, $\Pi_3=$ pick up and $\Pi_4=$ leave motion primitives.}
\end{example}
Note that this plan is safe to moving obstacles as well because the motion primitive Go To can handle it in the local layer. For example, when executing $\langle \Pi_1, (-2000, -500, 0) \rangle$, if a human appears moving inside the robot straight trajectory to position $(-2000, -500)$, it will reduce the velocity properly and try another circular trajectory that does not leads to a collision, shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dwa_trajectory}. If the robot cannot avoid the collision, it is formally proven that it will be stopped before it. Therefore, if the moving obstacle can and chooses to avoid the collision too, the robot will be always safe. It allows the robot always to find a new plan $s$ in a receding horizon strategy. Hence, if the moving obstacles change the environment in a way that the plan is not feasible, we can always update the scene description $\mathcal{M}$ to search for a new satisfiable plan at current state.
\section{Simulation/Experimental Results}\label{sec:sim}
The purpose of the experiments in this section is to determine which parameters can affect the computation time of the framework. The benchmarks shown here are relevant to designing an optimization algorithm that finds the best path using CoSMoP motion planning. All the experiments were executed on Linux with an Intel i7 processor and 8GB memory.
The environment is one floor of a building with square layout. It has multiple rooms with push-pull doors that permit the robot to move between rooms, shown in the Fig. \ref{fig:rooms}. The robot starts in the room marked with S, and it needs to reach the room with G. All doors permit the robot to move in the direction of the goal. To increase the complexity of the environment, we can increase its size and the number of rooms. It is executed 35 times for each scene description. The time average and standard variation are then calculated.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.5in]{rooms}
\caption{Environment framework used in the execution time experiments.}
\label{fig:rooms}
\end{figure}
To increase the environment size does not seem to affect the execution time, as shown in table \ref{tab:increasingsz}. However, it expressively increases when we raise the number of rooms, see table \ref{tab:increasingroom}. It suggests that the environment complexity to solve the trajectory is only affected by the number of obstacles and doors in the workspace. Moreover, we can assert that the precision on the robot state integer variables won't change the execution time, for example, if we change the position precision from $mm$ to $\mu m$. The size of the trace $K$ also increases the execution time as it increases, as shown in the table \ref{tab:increasingk}. Although, the number of rooms (i.e. obstacles and doors) can affect the size of satisfiable trace $K$, the table \ref{tab:increasingcomplex} shows that CoSMoP finds a reachable trajectory in a reasonable time for a significantly complex Scene Description.
\begin{table}
\caption{Benchmarks increasing the environment size.}
\label{tab:increasingsz}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline Environment (m) & $\#$ Rooms & $K$ & Time (avg $\pm$ std) \\ \hline
$4 \times 4$ & 9 & 14 & $30.2ms \pm 0.0067$ \\
$8 \times 8$ & 9 & 14 & $30.9ms \pm 0.0057$ \\
$16 \times 16$ & 9 & 14 & $30.2ms \pm 0.0088$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 9 & 14 & $30.6ms \pm 0.019$ \\
$64 \times 64$ & 9 & 14 & $30.7ms \pm 0.0052$ \\
$128 \times 128$ & 9 & 14 & $30.1ms \pm 0.056$ \\
$256 \times 256$ & 9 & 14 & $30.0ms \pm 0.0047$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\caption{Benchmarks increasing the number of rooms.}
\label{tab:increasingroom}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline Environment (m) & $\#$ Rooms & $K$ & Time (avg $\pm$ std) \\ \hline
$32 \times 32$ & 9 & 50 & $121.5ms \pm 0.020$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 25 & 50 & $434.3ms \pm 0.13$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 49 & 50 & $1007.0ms \pm 0.94$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 81 & 50 & $3994.1ms \pm 12$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\caption{Benchmarks increasing the size of the trace $K$.}
\label{tab:increasingk}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline Environment (m) & $\#$ Rooms & $K$ & Time (avg $\pm$ std) \\ \hline
$32 \times 32$ & 25 & 26 & $181.6ms \pm 3.0$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 25 & 32 & $284.9ms \pm 0.031$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 25 & 38 & $290.4ms \pm 0.027$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 25 & 44 & $344.4ms \pm 0.034$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 25 & 50 & $369.1ms \pm 0.032$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\caption{Benchmarks increasing the problem complexity.}
\label{tab:increasingcomplex}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline Environment (m) & $\#$ Rooms & $K$ & Time (avg $\pm$ std) \\ \hline
$32 \times 32$ & 9 & 14 & $34.7ms \pm 0.0051$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 16 & 20 & $69.3ms \pm 0.026$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 25 & 26 & $298.2ms \pm 0.28$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 36 & 32 & $461.6ms \pm 0.59$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 49 & 38 & $856.2ms \pm 0.63$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 64 & 44 & $1126.9ms \pm 0.26$ \\
$32 \times 32$ & 81 & 50 & $3909.3ms \pm 1.7$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusion}
We proposed the CoSMoP, an ITMP approach using formal bottom-up design for mobile robot planning. It synthesizes a sequential execution of motion primitives that ensures the task specification and safety properties even under a dynamic environment with moving obstacles. The main advantage of our approach is that we can handle the moving obstacles dynamics and some uncertainties about the environment at local motion primitive, which increase its robustness. Additionally, we evaluated CoSMoP in a motivating example showing that the ITMP can synthesize a correct plan, we also studied how different parameters affect the execution time. Future works includes implementation on real robot and extensions to multiple robots.
\small
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{%
\@startsection
{section}%
{1}%
{\z@}%
{0.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{0.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\bfseries
\centering
}%
}%
\def\@hangfrom@section#1#2#3{\@hangfrom{#1#2}\MakeTextUppercase{#3}}%
\def\subsection{%
\@startsection
{subsection}%
{2}%
{\z@}%
{.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\bfseries
\centering
}%
}%
\def\subsubsection{%
\@startsection
{subsubsection}%
{3}%
{\z@}%
{.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\itshape
\centering
}%
}%
\def\paragraph{%
\@startsection
{paragraph}%
{4}%
{\parindent}%
{\z@}%
{-1em}%
{\normalfont\normalsize\itshape}%
}%
\def\subparagraph{%
\@startsection
{subparagraph}%
{5}%
{\parindent}%
{3.25ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{-1em}%
{\normalfont\normalsize\bfseries}%
}%
\def\section@preprintsty{%
\@startsection
{section}%
{1}%
{\z@}%
{0.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{0.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\bfseries
}%
}%
\def\subsection@preprintsty{%
\@startsection
{subsection}%
{2}%
{\z@}%
{.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\bfseries
}%
}%
\def\subsubsection@preprintsty{%
\@startsection
{subsubsection}%
{3}%
{\z@}%
{.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\itshape
}%
}%
\@ifxundefined\frontmatter@footnote@produce{%
\let\frontmatter@footnote@produce\frontmatter@footnote@produce@endnote
}{}%
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5pt}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\def\tableofcontents{%
\addtocontents{toc}{\string\tocdepth@munge}%
\print@toc{toc}%
\addtocontents{toc}{\string\tocdepth@restore}%
}%
\def\tocdepth@munge{%
\let\l@section@saved\l@section
\let\l@section\@gobble@tw@
}%
\def\@gobble@tw@#1#2{}%
\def\tocdepth@restore{%
\let\l@section\l@section@saved
}%
\def\l@part#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty}%
\begingroup
\set@tocdim@pagenum{#2}%
\parindent \z@
\rightskip\tocleft@pagenum plus 1fil\relax
\skip@\parfillskip\parfillskip\z@
\addvspace{2.25em plus\p@}%
\large \bf %
\leavevmode\ignorespaces#1\unskip\nobreak\hskip\skip@
\hb@xt@\rightskip{\hfil\unhbox\z@}\hskip-\rightskip\hskip\z@skip
\par
\nobreak %
\endgroup
}%
\def\tocleft@{\z@}%
\def\tocdim@min{5\p@}%
\def\l@section{%
\l@@sections{}{section
}%
\def\l@f@section{%
\addpenalty{\@secpenalty}%
\addvspace{1.0em plus\p@}%
\bf
}%
\def\l@subsection{%
\l@@sections{section}{subsection
}%
\def\l@subsubsection{%
\l@@sections{subsection}{subsubsection
}%
\def\l@paragraph#1#2{}%
\def\l@subparagraph#1#2{}%
\let\toc@pre\toc@pre@auto
\let\toc@post\toc@post@auto
\def\listoffigures{\print@toc{lof}}%
\def\l@figure{\@dottedtocline{1}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\listoftables{\print@toc{lot}}%
\let\l@table\l@figure
\appdef\class@documenthook{%
\@ifxundefined\raggedcolumn@sw{\@booleantrue\raggedcolumn@sw}{}%
\raggedcolumn@sw{\raggedbottom}{\flushbottom}%
}%
\def\tableft@skip@float{\z@ plus\hsize}%
\def\tabmid@skip@float{\@flushglue}%
\def\tabright@skip@float{\z@ plus\hsize}%
\def\array@row@pre@float{\hline\hline\noalign{\vskip\doublerulesep}}%
\def\array@row@pst@float{\noalign{\vskip\doublerulesep}\hline\hline}%
\def\@makefntext#1{%
\def\baselinestretch{1}%
\reset@font
\footnotesize
\leftskip1em
\parindent1em
\noindent\nobreak\hskip-\leftskip
\hb@xt@\leftskip{%
\Hy@raisedlink{\hyper@anchorstart{footnote@\the\c@footnote}\hyper@anchorend}%
\hss\@makefnmark\
}%
#1%
\par
}%
\prepdef
\section{Introduction}
The combination of two or more different types of polymers as blends or copolymers
to obtain materials with improved properties is a common procedure. In most cases, however, blending
two different kinds of polymers can result in phase separation. In the case of
diblock copolymers (molecules that consist of two distinct polymer chains covalently
bonded at one end), because of connectivity constraints, the self-assembly results
into domains that exhibit ordered morphologies of a variety of ordered structures.
Depending on their chain asymmetry and the Flory-Huggins parameter, which
is a measure of the incompatibility of the different type of monomers~\cite{rubinstein},
these structures can be lamellae, cylinders, spheres, gyroids. When the self-assembly
is performed on patterned surfaces, the pattern can be used to guide the block copolymer
morphology giving precise control of the process resulting in perfect, defect free
structures that are similar to the bulk morphology or completely new structures.
These morphologies are especially suited for a number of applications in nanofabrication
such as nanowires~\cite{lopes}, photonic crystals~\cite{edrington}, quantum dots~\cite{park},
magnetic storage~\cite{cheng}.
Several theories have been proposed to study these materials. The classical theoretical
method to treat these systems is based on the Flory and Huggins lattice mean-field
model~\cite{rubinstein}. This theory has been the basis of considerable efforts to develop
methods able to describe the phase separation of polymer blends. One such popular method
is the self consistent field (SCF) technique~\cite{fredrickson}. However, the SCF theory is
built on a number of assumptions. For example, the SCF theory employs a Gaussian model for
polymer chains to describe the entropy of the system, and it adopts a Flory-Huggins interaction
parameter to account for energetic contributions to the free energy of the system. This theory
does not take into account fluctuation effects. Recently though, a new particle based SCF
method has been developed~\cite{muller2,daoulas,daoulas3} which retains the advantages of the
SCF but it also includes fluctuation effects and maintains explicitly information about the
molecular conformations.
Molecular simulations such as Monte Carlo (MC) and molecular dynamics (MD) have
been utilized in the past for the investigation of block copolymer self assembly.
Computer simulations play a significant role in testing theoretical models and in
interpreting experimental results. A study of these systems on a molecular level
is necessary and simulations are an indispensable tool to visualize the molecular
mechanism of the self-assembly of the block copolymers. They are able to explain
and predict the three dimensional final geometry and give details on chain conformational
properties. These techniques highlight the role of fluctuations and provide insights
into the local structure. Another important feature of molecular simulations is that
structural and thermodynamic quantities are simultaneously accessible and parameters
can be varied independently. They also provide the exact solution of a model which can
be fully atomistic or coarse grained. A fully atomistic description of block copolymer
chains is yet computationally prohibitive, if we desire to study chains of sufficiently
large molecular weight on length scales which usually range from the nanometer to
micrometer regime and enormous time scales required for equilibration. But one more
important issue is the fact that the results are quite sensitive to the intermolecular
potentials which is a serious limitation~\cite{heine}.
A coarse grained approach is ideal due to the fact that only important details
are kept and others, such as chemical details, are neglected. Of course the
issues that exist with the choice of the potential for the atomistic description
are transferred to the coarse grained model if results obtained from atomistic
simulations are used for the mapping procedure. To circumvent this problem we
can use as an input thermodynamic or structural data from available
experimental results of the system that we choose to study rather than atomistic
simulations. An important issue that has to be noted though is the fact that
results from the coarse grained model can be predictive only to the extent of
the model parametrization.
A common technique employed when using coarse grained models is the lattice Monte
Carlo~\cite{kikuchi,larson,wang1,wang2,chen,martinez}. This algorithm has the
advantage to be computationally convenient and fast and give the ability to simulate
large systems. However, these models can introduce artificial spatial anisotropies.
An additional compromise is that the systems must be studied in an isochoric ensemble
while some problems are more easily investigated in an isobaric ensemble.
An extension of the simple lattice Monte Carlo simulations is the bond
fluctuation model. The chains are more ``flexible'' since the monomers
are not restricted only to the closest lattice sites. This technique
has been vastly used and significant calculations on phase separation
of blends and block copolymers both in the bulk and under confinement
have been performed~\cite{geisinger,muller,reister}.
Apart from Monte Carlo, molecular dynamics have also been utilized
to study block copolymer self-assembly. One method used to
investigate the phase behavior of diblock copolymers is the
discontinuous molecular dynamics~\cite{schultz,alsunaidi,groot}.
This technique converges quite fast but at the same time is limited to
small chain lengths due to equilibration efficiency. One more
strength of the discontinuous molecular dynamics is its capability
to predict the dynamical pathway along which a block copolymer
melt finds its equilibrium structure after a temperature quench.
Going further in simulation complexity, Grest et al.~\cite{grest,murat}
have performed molecular dynamics simulations aided by Monte Carlo
identity exchange move focusing on the study of block copolymer chains
in the disordered and lamellae phase in the bulk.
In this manuscript we present a facile and incomplex procedure to map
the parameters of a coarse grained model to theory and connect our
results to specific experimental systems. After obtaining the values of
the necessary parameters we utilize a Monte Carlo algorithm in continuum
with specific moves that are proven to be efficient for the study of
these systems~\cite{depablo,yioryos}. We turn to continuum simulations
to avoid problems that cannot be dealt with lattice Monte Carlo. A few
of the advantages of resorting to continuum description are the ability
to use an isobaric ensemble, the investigation of systems such as branched
or crosslinked polymers since an off lattice simulation would be more
realistic and also the study of the effect of volume differences between
species. In a continuum description we have better means to investigate
local properties and interphase local structure. Upon describing the
suggested mapping methodology, our bead spring model will be used to
reproduce experimentally retrieved results such as lamellae and cylinder
formation on unpatterned and patterned surfaces.
\section{Simulation Details}
The segments of the polymer molecules interact pairwise via the
12-6 Lennard-Jones truncated potential energy function, shifted at
the cutoff $r_{c}=2^{1/6}\sigma$. This renders the segments repulsive
to one another and the cutoff is small so that the number of
interacting neighbors is quite small.
\begin{equation}
U_{nb}(r)= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 4\varepsilon\left[(\frac{\sigma}{r})^{12}-(\frac{\sigma}{r})^{6} \right] - U_{LJ}(r_{c}), & r\leq r_{c} \\
\\
0, &r>r_{c} \end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
where $\varepsilon$ and $\sigma$ are the Lennard-Jones parameters
for the energy and the length respectively and $r$ the distance
between the segments. The parameter $\sigma$ has a value of $\sigma = 1$
while $\varepsilon$ is an adjustable parameter. The bonding energy
between consecutive segments in the same chain is given by
\begin{equation}
U_{b}(r)=\frac{1}{2}k\left( r-\sigma\right)^{2}
\end{equation}
with bond constant $k = 2\cdot10^{3}\varepsilon/\sigma^2$.
The surface potential is described by
\begin{equation}
U_{surf}(r)= \pm \frac{\Lambda f(x,y)}{\epsilon R_{e}} exp( \frac{-z^{2}}{2(\epsilon R_{e})^{2}})
\end{equation}
where plus and minus signs correspond to PS and PMMA substrate
interactions. The coefficient $\Lambda$ characterizes the strength
of the interaction while the function $f(x,y)$ provides the pattern
of the substrate.
The systems studied consist of chains of $N=32$ beads and the density
was chosen to be $\rho=0.7$ for convenience of computation. The
temperature was selected to be $T=2.0$. For brevity all quantities in
the manuscript are reported in LJ reduced units.
Specific Monte Carlo (MC) moves have been utilized to overcome severe
limitations that traditional MC and molecular dynamics methods are
facing in macromolecular systems. Random monomer displacements are
used for local movements together with reptation moves in a configuration
bias scheme to increase performance. While reptation can be effective in
dilute systems of short chains, for intermediate to long chain molecules
it is essential to resort to trial moves capable of rearranging inner
segments of the polymer. This is particularly important in our present
study, where block copolymer chains get trapped after a phase starts
to form and sampling the correct structure and arrangement of long
chain molecules can be particularly demanding. For this reason double
bridging trial moves are implemented~\cite{depablo,theodorou}. This is a
chain-connectivity-altering move which consists of a simultaneous
exchange of parts of two neighboring chains. Double bridging allows
for effective equilibration of the systems under study and sampling
via configurational bias significantly enhances acceptance of the
rebridging scheme. The acceptance ratio of the random displacement
is kept at $30\%$. For the double bridging either two or one beads
are chosen to be deleted and rebuilt to increase acceptance and
depending on the system under study an acceptance ratio of $0.5$
to $1.5\%$ is obtained in the case where one bead is chosen.
\section{Mapping Methodology}
In order to be able to compare results from a molecular simulation of a coarse grained model
with theory and experiments it is necessary for a number of parameters of the
coarse grained model to be mapped. The first one is the Flory-Huggins parameter,
$\chi N$, which is a measure of the incompatibility of the segments belonging
to different blocks and determines the parametrization of the cohesive interactions.
The second is the end-to-end distance of the block copolymer chain and provides
the mapping of the length scales. The interaction strength of the surface is
regulated by the parameter $\Lambda N$ and finally the invariant degree of
polymerization $\overline{N}$ controls the strength of fluctuations.
The degree of polymerization is defined as:
\begin{equation}
\overline{N} = (\frac{\rho R_{e}^{3}}{N})^{2}
\end{equation}
For a usual block copolymer system~\cite{daoulas,daoulas2,stoy,kim} the value
of this parameter is extremely large. Due to computation limitations, we shall
not use an exact value of an experimental system for our coarse grained model;
$\overline{N}$ can be increased by either increasing the chain length $N$ or the
density $\rho$. We are more interested to show how a realistic system can be mapped
and suffice with a lower value for $\overline{N}$ which will give rise to stronger fluctuations.
These fluctuations, even if they affect the occurring morphologies they still
allow for a clear pattern formation which as will be shown later is quantitatively
in agreement to experimental results.
The next step is to obtain the length scale for our model, which, as was mentioned, is
$R_{e}$. The value of $R_{e}$ can be easily determined from a simulation of the blockcopolymer
after the Lennard-Jones parameters have been mapped to correspond to specific $\chi N$. For
example, for a density of $\rho=0.7$, chain length $N=32$, and chain asymmetry of $f=15/32$, the
system of $\varepsilon_{AA} = \varepsilon_{BB} = 0.022$ and $\varepsilon_{AB} = 1.0$ it is
found that $R_{e} = 7.8$, while for $\varepsilon_{AB} = 10.0$ we obtain $R_{e} = 8.1$.
The strength of the surface interaction $\Lambda N$ for our simulations is obtained by
considering a PMMA-PS block copolymer of chain length $N = 32$ and
$\chi N = 36.7$ confined between two uniform substrates, one PMMA-attractive
and the other PS-attractive substrate, which form a sandwich geometry. We calculate the
density profile of the polymer segments perpendicular to the substrates. The surface
energy is determined via the convolution of the polymer-substrate interactions and the estimated
density profile.
\begin{equation}
\Delta E = \int dz U_{surf}(\rho_{A}-\rho_{B})
\end{equation}
To obtain an order of magnitude estimate for the surface free energy differences, we utilize the
adsorption energy per unit surface of a PMMA melt on a silicon oxide substrate, which as found in
the literature~\cite{costa}, is $0.018 k_{B}T$/$nm^{2}$. In order to match this value we
choose $\Lambda N = 3.0$, which for the system $\varepsilon_{AA} = \varepsilon_{BB} = 0.022$ and
$\varepsilon_{AB} = 1.0$, corresponds to $\sim 0.016 k_{B}T$/$nm^{2}$. In Figure \ref{figure:wallmap}
the density profile and the convolution of the surface energy with the difference of density
profiles is given.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=7cm]{wallmap2}
\caption{Distribution of density for the block copolymer system in the ``sandwich'' system defined
in the text. The convolution of the density profile with the polymer-surface interaction used to
obtain the free energy differences and map $\Lambda N$ is also plotted.}
\label{figure:wallmap}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
To map the Flory-Huggins parameter, $\chi N$, we perform semigrand canonical
ensemble simulations on a blend of unlike A and B homopolymers, and change the
energy interaction parameter $\varepsilon_{AB}$ of the Lennard Jones potential
between the beads of polymer chains. The chain length is chosen sufficiently
smaller in this set of simulations for efficiency. The volume fraction of the
unlike beads, from the first derivative of the Flory-Huggins free energy,
will follow:
\begin{equation}
\chi N = \frac{ln(\phi/(1-\phi))}{2\cdot\phi-1}
\end{equation}
which at the strong segregation regime reduces to:
\begin{equation}
\phi \sim exp(-\chi N)
\end{equation}
Initially chains of the same type are inserted with the aid of configuration bias
in the simulation box. When the desired density is reached, $50\%$ of the chains
are selected to be of one type and the rest of the other. The opposing type
interactions are ``switched on'' in this way. Next the system is simulated under the
semigrand canonical ensemble. By virtue of the structural symmetry of the blend components,
the semigrand ensemble reduces to an identity exchange type of move and the acceptance
criterion involves only the difference in initial and final energy. By
knowing the desired value of $\chi N$ the energy interaction parameter $\varepsilon$
can be modified until the volume fraction occurring from the simulation fulfills the
previous relation.
In the following, we will exhibit how the values of the energy interaction
parameter $\varepsilon$ of the Lennard Jones potential can be estimated so
that our bead spring model represents a system of a desired Flory-Huggins
parameter. The experimental system that will be compared is composed of
PS-b-PMMA chains of such molecular weight giving a
$(\chi N)_{exp} = 36.7$~\cite{daoulas,daoulas2,stoy,kim}. The chain length
chosen for the block copolymer self assembly simulations is $N = 32$. The
described mapping methodology is performed using smaller polymer chains
of length $4$ and changing $\varepsilon$ until the volume fraction is
\begin{equation}
\phi \sim exp(-(\chi N)_{experimental}*4/32)
\end{equation}
From our calculations we find that the values of the Lennard-Jones energy parameters that
correspond to this $(\chi N)_{exp}$ are $\varepsilon_{AA} = \varepsilon_{BB} = 0.022$ and
$\varepsilon_{AB} = 1.0$ using the test case $N=4$. We continue by performing semigrand
canonical simulations using the extracted parameters, but for different chain lengths in order to recover
the value of $\chi$ as a function of $N$. From Figure \ref{figure:checkepsilon}a we see that
the value of $\chi$ depends on molecular weight. This molecular weight dependence can be
described by~\cite{gennes,sun,kamal}:
\begin{equation}
\chi = \chi_{\infty} + k*N^{-1/2}
\end{equation}
From this result it is clear that for the calculations of the mapping procedure
we have to use polymer chains of the same length as the ones that will be used
for modeling these systems. However, these simulations are
computationally expensive for large chain lengths as was already mentioned. We can perform instead the
calculations for a range of smaller chain lengths and then extrapolate to the desired one.
The results are plotted in Figure \ref{figure:checkepsilon}.
We see that if this molecular weight dependence was not taken into account, then the mapping procedure would have
resulted in a set of parameters giving an incorrect value of $\chi$.
If we extrapolate the data to $N = 32$, we find that $\varepsilon_{AB} = 284$ for $(\chi N)=36.7$
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=7cm]{eps1}
\includegraphics*[width=7cm]{checkepsilon}
\caption{a) $\chi$ dependence on molecular weight for a blend of unlike A and B homopolymers
system and Lennard-Jones parameter, $\varepsilon_{AB}=1$. b) Value of Lennard-Jones parameter,
$\varepsilon_{AB}$, in order to obtain $\chi N = 36.7$ for block copolymer chains of length
$N = 32$ using chain of different lengths for the mapping procedure through semigrand canonical
simulation.}
\label{figure:checkepsilon}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We now examine the temperature effect on $\chi N$.
For a set of temperatures and a series of $\varepsilon_{AB}$ the value of $\chi N$ is calculated.
Our results are exactly described by a quadratic function in $1/T$ of the form~\cite{balsara}:
\begin{equation}
\chi(T) = A + B/T + C/T^{2}
\end{equation}
We thus find a non-linearity of $\chi$ as a function of $1/T$. Another interesting point is the fact
that for high values of $\varepsilon_{AB}$ the curves collapse on each other, as can be seen from
Figure \ref{figure:32_xN-T}b. This suggests that another way for mapping $\varepsilon_{AB}$
for a system of $N = 32$ is to perform the calculations for the mapping procedure at a high $T$ and then
use the collapsed curve to extrapolate the desired value of $\chi N$ for a specific temperature.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=6cm]{32_xN-T2}
\includegraphics*[width=6cm]{32_xN-Tcollapse}
\caption{a) $\chi N$ with respect to temperature for different values of $\varepsilon_{AB}$
and for chain length $N = 32$. For low values of $\varepsilon_{AB}$ the curve appears to be
linear. The solid lines represent fits with equation 10. The dashed line is plotted for comparison
with a linear fit of our data. b) $\chi N$ with respect to temperature for different values of $\varepsilon_{AB}$
and for chain length $N = 32$. Curves shifted in order for $\chi N = 0$ zero at $T = 10$.
Collapse of curves of $\chi N$ with respect to temperature for high values of $\varepsilon_{AB}$.}
\label{figure:32_xN-T}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We continue by performing simulations in the semigrand canonical ensemble for a
system of chain length $N = 32$ at temperature $T = 10$ and for a range of $\varepsilon_{AB}$.
As can be seen from Figure \ref{figure:32_eps}, $\chi N$ increases as $\varepsilon_{AB}$
increases. Using the correction from Figure \ref{figure:32_xN-T}b we obtain the corresponding
curve for $T = 2$. In addition to this mapping technique, we perform an NVT simulation of
a symmetric blend of homopolymers and calculate the value of $\chi N$ from the definition
of Flory-Huggins theory for the same range of values of $\varepsilon_{AB}$:
\begin{equation}
\chi = \frac{z*\Delta\omega}{kT}
\end{equation}
where $z$ is the coordination number (the number of nearest neighbors or the average number
of sites surrounding an individual segment below the cutoff radius), and
$\Delta\omega = \Delta U_{AB}=\frac{\epsilon_{AB}-(\epsilon_{AA}+\epsilon_{BB})/2}{\epsilon_{AB}}$
is the energy increment per A-B monomers contact (excess potential energy attributed to the A-B
interactions over the number of A-B interactions). From Figure \ref{figure:32_eps} we find
that for all the range of $\varepsilon_{AB}$ values, the difference of the two methodologies is
small. In order to verify the agreement of these two methods we perform a calculation
with the last mapping methodology using $\varepsilon_{AB}=284$ and we find $\chi N = 34.8$
in close agreement with our desired result.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=6cm]{epsilon2}
\caption{$\chi N$ with respect to $\varepsilon_{AB}$ for chains of length $N = 32$
and for the two methodologies. The technique utilizing the semigrand canonical simulations
and the one extracting $\chi$ as defined from Flory-Huggins theory.}
\label{figure:32_eps}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We continue our study by investigating how the value of $\chi$ is affected by the composition and
the difference between having a blend or block copolymer. We use the previously described methodology, where $\chi$
is directly obtained by the definition from the Flory-Huggins theory. First we perform a calculation
for a blend system with a composition of $50\%$ and then a symmetric block copolymer system.
Two values of $\epsilon_{AB}=1$ and $300$ are chosen.
We find for both systems that the value of $\chi$ is the same independent of system type (blend or block copolymer),
$\chi_{\epsilon_{AB}=1}\cong0.619$ and $\chi_{\epsilon_{AB}=300}\cong1.096$. This suggests that the fact that
the system is a blend or a block copolymer does not have any effect on the value of $\chi$. We perform
a calculation for blend systems of compositions $1\%$, $25\%$, and $50\%$. It is found
that again the value of $\chi$ remains constant. This is a special case for our system since the
interaction between similar type segments are considered to be identical. In general~\cite{stryuk,lee},
a composition dependence exists for the Flory-Huggins interaction parameter $\chi$.
\section{Testing the model}
As a test system we choose to study the behavior of lamellae forming A-B block copolymer chains on
patterned surfaces having the stripe geometry. The mismatch of the pattern spacing $L_{s}$ to the block
copolymer lamellae period can affect the final structure. In order to proceed with the investigation
of this problem, we have to calculate one extra parameter: the block copolymer lamellae period $L_{0}$.
Block copolymers chains are inserted between two hard wall surfaces using the configuration bias method.
The Lennard-Jones interaction parameters are assigned the values
$\varepsilon_{AA} = \varepsilon_{BB} = 0.022$ and $\varepsilon_{AB} = 1.0$ and the system is equilibrated
(the extraction of these parameters has been shown in the previous Chapter).
The block copolymer chain length is $N=32$ and comprised of $15$ beads of A and $17$ beads of B copolymer
in order to match chain asymmetry of experimental results~\cite{kim} for PMMA-PS blockcopolymer.
An initial guess for $L_{0}$ comes from the literature~\cite{kim,sferrazza} and is $1.7$ $R_{e}$.
The z axis of the simulation box is chosen to be normal to the two surfaces. We perform a $NPT$
simulation setting the x direction to be multiple of $L_{0,guess}$. The pressure is chosen
so that the average density of the system is $\rho = 0.7$. Only the x and y box lengths are allowed
to change keeping the z length constant. The system is equilibrated and the lamellae period is
found to be $L_{0}=14.1\sigma$ or $L_{0} = 1.81 R_{e}$.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=7cm,angle=0]{BCbetweensurfaces2}\\
\includegraphics*[width=4cm,angle=90]{lamellae}\\
\includegraphics*[width=2cm,angle=270]{b1}
\includegraphics*[width=2cm,angle=270]{b2}
\includegraphics*[width=2cm,angle=270]{b3}
\caption{a) Distribution of volume fraction of a block copolymer on a stripe patterned surface. Results
for mismatch of the pattern spacing and the block copolymer lamellae period are plotted for both extensions
and compressions. b) Top view snapshot of the block copolymer film simulation on a stripe patterned
surface with pattern spacing commensurate to the lamellae period and $10\%$ mismatch. c,d,e) Consecutive sideview snapshots
of block copolymer with an increase of pattern spacing of $20\%$.}
\label{figure:bcbetweensurfaces}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We can now proceed with the study of the previously stated problem. The block copolymer
is deposited on a patterned surface of stripe geometry with pattern $L_{s}$. A mismatch
is chosen between the pattern spacing and the blockcopolymer period ranging from $-20\%$
to $+20\%$. Upon equilibration of the systems the density profile along the normal
to the lamellae axis is calculated. The results are plotted in Figure \ref{figure:bcbetweensurfaces}a.
Lamellae are obtained for the full spectrum of the previously mentioned ``strains''.
We find that for both compression and extension, a certain ``strain'' can be tolerated
as seen in Figure \ref{figure:bcbetweensurfaces}b. Below or above these critical ``strains'',
defects arise that are ``frozen'' as shown in Figures \ref{figure:bcbetweensurfaces}c,d,e where
subsequent sideview snapshots of the system are plotted. The simulation time between
these last configurations is equal to five rouse relaxation times. Similar defects have been observed
by experiments under SEM and AFM~\cite{kim} and quantitative agreement is found with our simulations.
The systems that we investigated so far consisted of block copolymer chains with a chain
asymmetry and a $\chi N$ value that corresponds to the lamellae region of the phase
diagram. The natural next step to test our model is to proceed with the investigation of
another domain of the phase diagram and more specifically the cylinder regime. We choose
values of chain asymmetry and Lennard-Jones interaction parameters that result in the cylinder phase.
A chain length of $N = 32$ is chosen with $22$ segments of A type and the rest $10$ of B type
giving a fraction of $0.3125$. The Lennard Jones energy parameters are chosen to be
$\varepsilon_{AA} = \varepsilon_{BB} = 0.022$ and $\varepsilon_{AB} = 19.0$, which
correspond to a $\chi N$ of $30.6$.
Block copolymer chains are inserted between neutral surfaces. A simulation in the $NPT$
ensemble was performed changing the axes independently. After equilibration, it is found
that $L_{x} = sin(\frac{\pi}{3})*L_{y}$. This relation is necessary in order for the system
to be able to accommodate the hexagonal structure of the cylinder phase, which can be seen from
geometrical calculations. The cylinder to cylinder spacing was measured to be $L_{cc} = 2.1 R_{e}$.
The resulting two dimensional density profile is plotted in Figure \ref{figure:cylinder}. The
hexagonal cylinder morphology is clearly observed.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=6cm,angle=90]{cylbulk}
\caption{Thin film of asymmetric block copolymer chains forming a hexagonal cylinder morphology.}
\label{figure:cylinder}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We continue our analysis by investigating the behavior of this cylindrical
forming block copolymer on striped nanopatterned surfaces were each
stripe is preferential to one block and repulsive to the other. The two
stripes are symmetric with $W = \frac{L_{S}^{A}}{L_{S}} = 0.5$ where
$W$ is the stripe asymmetry, $L_{S}^{A}$ the thickness of a stripe
preferential to the $A$ part of the block copolymer chain and $L_{S}$
the thickness of the pattern period. The pattern periods of the surface
were chosen equal to the cylinder to cylinder spacing. The thickness
of the film was varied and the equilibrium morphologies were obtained.
Recently, Edwards et al.~\cite{edwards2} have investigated these systems
experimentally and have characterized with scanning electron microscopy
the top part of these polymer films. However, the rest of the film cannot
be characterized with these experimental techniques. With our simulations
we attempt to verify and complement this analysis.
In Figure \ref{figure:height} the morphologies for different film heights are given.
As we can see for a thickness commensurate to $L_{cc}\cdot sin(\frac{\pi}{3})/2$,
semicylinders are formed on the stripe patterns (Figure \ref{figure:height}a,b).
Increasing the film thickness, making it commensurate to $L_{cc}\cdot sin(\frac{\pi}{3})$,
the block copolymer thin film assembles to form a layer of defect free semicylinders
at the patterned surface as previously and a second layer of semicylinders at the
top surface both with the same repeat period equal to the cylinder to cylinder
spacing and the chemical surface pattern (Figure \ref{figure:height}c,d).
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=4cm,angle=270]{c1}
\includegraphics*[width=2.1cm,angle=270]{c2}
\includegraphics*[width=4cm,angle=270]{cb1}
\includegraphics*[width=4cm,angle=270]{cb2}
\caption{Morphology change of asymmetric block copolymer chains on patterned
surfaces, with pattern periods equal to the cylinder to cylinder spacing and
varying the height of the film. The top and sideview of the systems is plotted.
Thickness: a,b) $7 \sigma$ or $L_{cc}\cdot sin(\frac{\pi}{3})/2$, c,d) $13.6 \sigma$ or
$L_{cc}\cdot sin(\frac{\pi}{3})$}
\label{figure:height}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We continue our study for a system of film thickness $27.2\sigma$ and we observe
again the formation of semicylinders near the patterned surface and the appearance of
defects further away. We additionally find the formation of
cylinders perpendicular to the surface near the upper wall (Figure \ref{figure:height2})
in agreement with previous literature findings~\cite{wang3}.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=4cm,angle=270]{cbig2}
\includegraphics*[width=4cm,angle=270]{cbig1}
\caption{Morphology change of asymmetric block copolymer chains on patterned surfaces, with
pattern periods equal to the cylinder to cylinder spacing for higher film thickness.
a) Sideview of a systems of thickness $27.2 \sigma$ or $2 \cdot L_{cc}\cdot sin(\frac{\pi}{3})$
b) Topview of a systems of thickness $27.2 \sigma$ or $2 \cdot L_{cc}\cdot sin(\frac{\pi}{3})$}
\label{figure:height2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We saw the effect of film thickness on the self assembly of a cylindrical block copolymer
on a patterned surface. Until now the stripe patterned surface was kept symmetric
($W = 0.5$). By choosing a film of thickness $L_{cc}\cdot sin(\frac{\pi}{3})$, we
perform two calculations of asymmetrical stripes one of $W = 0.45$ and a second of
$W = 0.55$. For the system of $W = 0.55$, defects were found that consist mostly of
unregistered cylindrical domains (Figure \ref{figure:partoper}a). More interesting
are the results for $W = 0.45$. As we can see from Figures \ref{figure:partoper}b,c,d,
some defects are apparent on the free surface of the film. However, if we look at a
slab of the film slightly lower (height $11.5 \sigma$) than the free surface, we
observe cylinders perpendicular to the surface. On the patterned surface a layer
of semicylinders parallel to the stripes is found. These parallel semicylinders and
the perpendicular cylinders are connected. We can see that while experiments such as
scanning electron microscopy can provide us with a clear view of the free surface of
the film, simulations are necessary to characterize the self assembly through the material.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=5.8cm,angle=90]{def-hex}\\
\includegraphics*[width=5cm,angle=90]{top-hex}\\
\includegraphics*[width=5cm,angle=90]{asym-hex2}\\
\includegraphics*[width=5cm,angle=90]{bot-hex}
\caption{Captions of self assembled cylindrical domains in a $13.6 \sigma$ thickness block
copolymer film. a) Top view of a system of stripe asymmetry $W = 0.55$. b) Top view of a
system of stripe asymmetry $W = 0.45$. c) Slab of the film at height $11.5 \sigma$ d) Bottom
view of a system of stripe asymmetry $W = 0.45$.
}
\label{figure:partoper}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We have described a technique, that allows us to map a coarse grained
model exactly to theory and connect it to a realistic experimental system.
For this procedure three variables are necessary to be estimated: the Flory-Huggins
parameter, $\chi N$, which is a measure of the incompatibility of different type
of segments, the end-to-end distance of the blockcopolymer chain $R_{e}$ for the
length scaling, and the invariant degree of polymerization $\overline{N}$ related
to the strength of the fluctuations. For blockcopolymer chains under confinement
one extra parameter has to be determined, which describes the strength of the polymer
segment-surface interaction controlled by $\Lambda N$.
It has to be mentioned that, most commonly for experiments and coarse grained models,
the random phase approximation (RPA)~\cite{gennes} is used in order to obtain the
value of $\chi$ for a system. It has been shown, though, that an alteration of the end to end
distance is apparent with variance of interaction strength~\cite{sariban}, suggesting
that the RPA is not accurate. In addition, our verification that $\chi$ can depend
non-linearly on temperature suggests that RPA usage under the assumption that a
linear temperature dependence exists can lead to incorrect results. The same is
true for other techniques, such as the one-fluid approximation~\cite{grest}, that
are used to obtain a value of $\chi$ in the disordered regime and then extrapolate
the value of $\chi N$ in the ordered regime. This method will not be accurate because
of the non-linearity of $\chi$ with temperature. The Flory Huggins lattice model is
indeed an oversimplification. However, mapping the results on it is necessary
for a connection of experiments and simulations. The procedures that we presented
outputs the values for the Lennard Jones parameters in order for our bead
spring model to represent a specific value of $\chi N$ in the Flory Huggins theory.
We have presented results of microphase separation of block copolymer chains
on surfaces and we found well agreement with experiments. Lamellae structures,
formed on stripe patterned surfaces, were able to accommodate mismatch between
the block copolymer lamellae period and the surface spacing. A compression or
expansion of $10\%$ gave perfect lamellae without defects. For higher
compressions or extensions, defects became apparent.
A different region of the phase diagram of the bulk block copolymer was also
investigated where by appropriately selecting the chain asymmetry and value
of Lennard Jones parameters we captured the cylinder phase. After obtaining
the hexagonal cylinder morphology, we calculated the equilibrium cylinder to
cylinder spacing. The self assembly of this system on striped patterned surfaces
of varying stripe symmetries and for different film thicknesses was studied.
The coarse grained model described in this paper successfully captures
experimentally observed behaviors and it can be used to represent specific
realistic systems even if no atomistic details are accounted for. This
method can be used to obtain the values for the required parameters and
then one has the liberty to choose either Monte Carlo or molecular
dynamics simulations to study a problem. In our work we chose a Monte
Carlo algorithm to investigate the microphase separation. By implementing
the double bridging move we can efficiently sample the systems under
study. On the other hand, molecular dynamics can be utilized, after
the bead spring model is mapped, to investigate the dynamics of the
self-assembly.
\section{Acknowledgments}
This work is supported by NSF. Partial support from the Semiconductor Research
Corporation (SRC) is also gratefully acknowledged.
\section{Package options}
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{obeyspaces}
Ordinarily, all spaces are ignored in the url-text. The
``\texttt{[obeyspaces]}'' option allows spaces, but may introduce
spurious spaces when a url containing ``\cs{}'' characters is given in
the argument to another command.
So if you need to obey spaces you can say
``\cs{usepackage}\texttt{[obeyspaces]\char`\{url\char`\}}'', and if
you need both spaces and backslashes, use a defined-url.
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{hyphens}
Ordinarily, breaks are not allowed after ``\texttt{-}'' characters
because this leads to confusion. (Is the ``\texttt{-}'' part of the
address or just a hyphen?)
The package option ``\texttt{[hyphens]}'' allows breaks after explicit
hyphen characters. The \cs{url} command will \textbf{never ever}
hyphenate words.
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{spaces}
Likewise, given the ``\texttt{[obeyspaces]}'' option, breaks are not
usually allowed after the spaces, but if you give the options
``\texttt{[obeyspaces,spaces]}'', \cs{url} will allow breaks at those
spaces.
\begin{quote}
Note that it seems logical to allow the sole option
``\texttt{[spaces]}'' to let input spaces indicate break points, but
not to display them in the output. This would be easy to implement,
but is left out to avoid(?)\ confusion.
\end{quote}
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{lowtilde}
Normal treatment of the \verb+~+ character is to use the font's
``\cs{textasciitilde}'' character, if it has one (or claims to).
Otherwise, the character is faked using a mathematical ``\cs{sim}''.
The ``\texttt{[lowtilde]}'' option causes a faked character to be used
always (and a bit lower than usual).
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{allowmove}
This option suppresses the test for \cs{url} being used in a so-called
moving argument (check ``fragile command''). Using it will enable \cs{url}
to function in more contexts, but when it does fail, the error message
may be incomprehensible.
\section{Defining a defined-url}
Take for example the email address ``\url{mysel
which could not be given (using ``\cs{url}'' or ``\cs{verb}'') in a
caption or parbox due to the percent sign. This address can be
predefined with
\begin{quote}
\verb|\urldef{\myself}\url{mysel
\verb+\urldef{\myself}\url|mysel
\end{quote}
and then you may use ``\cs{myself}'' instead of
``\verb+\url{mysel
in an argument, and even in a moving argument like a caption because a
defined-url is robust.
\section{Style}
You can switch the style of printing using ``\verb+\urlstyle{+$xx$\verb+}+'',
where ``$xx$'' can be any defined style. The pre-defined styles are
``\texttt{tt}'', ``\texttt{rm}'', ``\texttt{sf}'' and ``\texttt{same}''
which all allow the same linebreaks but use different fonts~--- the
first three select a specific font and the ``\texttt{same}'' style
uses the current text font. You can define your own styles with
different fonts and/or line-breaking by following the explanations
below. The ``\cs{url}'' command follows whatever the currently-set
style dictates.
\section{Alternate commands}
It may be desireable to have different things treated differently, each
in a predefined style; e.g., if you want directory paths to always be
in typewriter and email addresses to be roman, then you would define new
url-like commands as follows:
\begin{quote}
\verb+\DeclareUrlCommand+\meta{command}\verb+{+\meta{settings}\verb+}+\\
\verb+\DeclareUrlCommand\email{\urlstyle{rm}}+\\
\verb+\DeclareUrlCommand\directory{\urlstyle{tt}}+.
\end{quote}
In fact, this \cs{directory} example is exactly the \cs{path}
definition which might be pre-defined by the package. Furthermore,
basic \cs{url} is defined with
\begin{quote}
\verb+\DeclareUrlCommand\url{}+,
\end{quote}
without any \emph{settings}, so it uses whatever \cs{urlstyle}
and other settings are already in effect.
You can make a defined-url for these other styles, using the usual
\cs{urldef} command as in this example:
\begin{quote}
\verb+\urldef{\myself}{\email}{mysel
\end{quote}
which makes \cs{myself} act like
\verb+\email{mysel
if the \cs{email} command is defined as above. The \cs{myself}
command would then be robust.
\section{Defining styles}
Before describing how to customize the printing style, it is best to
mention something about the unusual implementation of \cs{url}. Although
the material is textual in nature, and the font specification required
is a text-font command, the text is actually typeset in \emph{math} mode.
This allows the context-sensitive linebreaking, but also accounts for
the default behavior of ignoring spaces. (Maybe that underlying design
will eventually change.) Now on to defining styles.
To change the font or the list of characters that allow linebreaks, you
could redefine the commands \cs{UrlFont}, \cs{UrlBreaks},
\cs{UrlSpecials}, etc., directly in the document, but it is better to
define a new `url-style' (following the example of \cs{url@ttstyle}
and \cs{url@rmstyle}) which defines all of \cs{UrlBigbreaks},
\cs{UrlNoBreaks}, \cs{UrlBreaks}, \cs{UrlSpecials}, and \cs{UrlFont}.
\subsection{Changing font}
The \cs{UrlFont} command selects the font. The definition of
\cs{UrlFont} done by the pre-defined styles varies to cope with a
variety of \LaTeX{} font selection schemes, but it could be as simple
as \verb+\def\UrlFont{\tt}+. Depending on the font selected, some
characters may need to be defined in the \cs{UrlSpecials} list because
many fonts don't contain all the standard input characters.
\subsection{Changing linebreaks}
The list of characters after which line-breaks are permitted is
given by the two commands (list macros)
\cs{UrlBreaks} and \cs{UrlBigBreaks}. They consist of repeating
\cs{do}\cs{c} for each relevant character \texttt{c}.
The differences are that `BigBreaks' typically have a lower penalty (more
easily chosen) and do not break within a repeating sequence (e.g.,
``\verb+DEC::NODE+'').
(For gurus: `BigBreaks' are treated as mathrels while `Breaks' are mathbins;
see \textit{The TeXbook}, p.\,170.) The result is that a series of
consecutive `BigBreak'
characters will break at the end and only at the end; a series of
`Break' characters will break after the first and after every following
\emph{pair}; there will be no break between a `Break' character and a
following `BigBreak' char; breaks are permitted when a `BigBreak'
character is followed by `Break' or any other char. In the case
of \texttt{http://} it doesn't matter whether \texttt{:} is a
`Break' or `BigBreak'~--- the breaks are the same in either case; but
for (now ancient) \emph{DECnet} addresses using \texttt{::} it was
important to prevent breaks \emph{between} the colons, and that is why
colons are `BigBreaks'. (The only other `BigBreak' character is,
optionally, the hyphen; slashes are regular `Break's.)
It is possible for characters to prevent breaks after the next
following character (this is used for parentheses). Specify these in
\cs{UrlNoBreaks}.
You can allow some spacing around the breakable characters by assigning
\begin{quote}
\verb+\Urlmuskip = 0mu plus 1mu+
\end{quote}
(with \texttt{mu} units because of math mode).
You can change the penalties used for BigBreaks and Breaks by assigning
\begin{quote}
\verb+\mathchardef\UrlBreakPenalty=100+\\
\verb+\mathchardef\UrlBigBreakPenalty=100+
\end{quote}
The default penalties are \cs{binoppenalty} and \cs{relpenalty}.
These have such odd non-\LaTeX{} syntax because I don't expect people
to need to change them often. (The \verb+\mathchardef+ does not relate to
math mode; it is only a way to store a number without consuming registers.)
\subsubsection{Arbitrary character actions}
You can do arbitrarily complex things with characters by specifying
their definition(s) in \cs{UrlSpecials}. This makes them `active' in
math mode (mathcode \texttt{"8000}). The format for setting
each special character \texttt{c} is:
\verb+\do\c{+\meta{definition}\verb+}+, but other definitions not
following this style can also be included.
Here is an example to make ``\texttt{!}''\ inside \cs{url} force a line break
instead of being treated verbatim (it uses \LaTeX's \cs{g@addto@macro}):
\begin{quote}
\verb+\makeatletter \g@addto@macro\UrlSpecials{\do\!{\newline}}+
\end{quote}
Here is another overly-complicated example to put extra flexible
muglue around each ``\texttt{/}'' character, except when followed
by another ``\texttt{/}'', as in ``\texttt{http://}'', where extra
spacing looks poor.
\begin{quote}
\begin{verbatim}
\newmuskip\Urlslashmuskip
\Urlslashmuskip=2mu plus2mu minus2mu
\g@addto@macro\UrlSpecials{\do\/{\futurelet\Urlssnext\finishUrlspaceyslash}}
\def\futurelet\Urlssnext\finishUrlspaceyslash{\futurelet\Urlssnext\finishUrlspaceyslash}
\def\finishUrlspaceyslash{%
\mskip\Urlslashmuskip
\mathchar8239
\ifx\Urlssnext/\mskip-\Urlslashmuskip
\else\mskip\Urlslashmuskip \fi
}
\end{verbatim}
\end{quote}
If this sounds confusing~\dots{} well, it is! But I hope you
won't need to redefine breakpoints~--- the default assignments seem to
work well for a wide variety of applications. If you do need to make
changes, you can test for breakpoints using regular math mode and the
characters ``\texttt{+=(a}''.
\section{Yet more flexibility}
You can also customize the presentation of verbatim text by defining
\cs{UrlRight} and/or \cs{UrlLeft}. An example for ISO formatting of
urls surrounded by \verb+< >+ is
\begin{quote}
\begin{verbatim}
\DeclareUrlCommand\url{\def\UrlLeft{<url:\ }\def\UrlRight{>}%
\urlstyle{tt}}
\end{verbatim}
\end{quote}
The meanings of \cs{UrlLeft} and \cs{UrlRight} are \emph{not}
reproduced verbatim. This lets you use formatting commands there, but
you must be careful not to use \TeX's special characters
(\verb+\^
to reprocess the verbatim text, but the format of the definition is special:
\begin{quote}
\verb+\def\UrlLeft#1\UrlRight{+\,\dots\ do things with \verb+#1+ \dots\,\verb+}+
\end{quote}
Yes, that is \verb+#1+ followed by \cs{UrlRight} then the definition (a \TeX\
macro with delimited arguments). For example, to produce a hyper\TeX\ hypertext
link:
\begin{quote}
\verb+\def\UrlLeft#1\UrlRight
\verb+ \special{html:<a href="#1">}#1\special{html:</a>}}+
\end{quote}
Using this technique, \path{url.sty} can provide a convenient
interface for performing various operations on verbatim text. You
don't even need to print out the argument! For greatest efficiency in
such obscure applications, you can define a null url-style where all
the lists like \cs{UrlBreaks} are empty.
Please note that this method is \emph{not} how the hyperref package
manages urls for its \cs{url} command, even though it makes use of
\path{url.sty}. Instead, hyperref's \cs{url} reads its argument in
a less-verbatim manner than described above, produces its hyperlink,
and invokes \cs{nolinkurl} to format the text. \cs{nolinkurl} is
the \cs{url} command descibed herein.
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Charged hard spheres have been shown to exhibit a bulk phase transition between an ionic ``liquid'' state and an ionic ``vapor'' state for low enough density and temperature~\cite{Stell1976,Fisher1993,Ding1996,Diehl1997}. This transition is entirely due to positional electrostatic correlations between oppositely charged ions and cannot therefore be described by mean-field theory, whose contribution to the free energy vanishes by charge electroneutrality (see the review~\cite{Levin2002}).
In the ionic vapor phase oppositely charged ions tend to form neutral but polar groups which tend to interact loosely with each others. In the ionic liquid phase, the ions do not form such pairs and are directly screened by the others. Although this bulk phase transition for common mineral salts is predicted to occur in aqueous solutions at unphysical low temperatures ($T<100\ \mathrm{K}$) and is therefore not observable in experiments with classical electrolytes, some exotic ones do show this phase transition around ambient temperature~\cite{Weingartner1992}, especially in low dielectric constant solvents. By evoking the law of corresponding states the same model of charged hard spheres in a dielectric continuum can be used to model electrolytes, salts in low dielectric constant solvents, molten salts (of great current interest for their potential technological applications), and perhaps also metallic fluids.
We have recently proposed a field theoretic variational approach that allows us, by going beyond mean-field theory, to study the effect of confinement and dielectric discontinuities on the ionic liquid-vapor phase transition~\cite{Buyukdagli2010a,Buyukdagli2010,Buyukdagli2011}. The method used previously did not take into account ionic size and therefore led to anomalies when extended to high electrolytes concentrations. It is, however, important to be able to go reliably to high electrolyte concentrations, because this same theoretical framework can be used to calculate the effect of confinement and dielectric exclusion on the ionic transport coefficients currently being measured for well characterized single nanopores~\cite{Siria2014,Balme2015}. At very high electrolyte concentration one expects the transport coefficients to tend toward their bulk values and the measured deviations as the concentration is lowered could provide valuable insight into the transport mechanisms.
Previous theoretical works included hardcore interactions coupled with Coulomb interactions. Modified Poisson-Boltzmann approaches, for example, have been developed by introducing an explicit expression for the free energy contribution of the hardcore interactions, which is based either on lattice gas calculations~\cite{Borukhov1997}, or on the Carnahan-Starling pressure~\cite{Lue1999,Maggs2016}. Netz and Orland~\cite{Netz1999}, working in the canonical ensemble, introduced an ultra-violet cut-off, $\Lambda_c$, in the Debye electrostatic free-energy calculation in order to take into account the excluded volume effect, following Brilliantov who did it for the one-component plasma~\cite{Brilliantov1998}. They obtained corrections to the well known Debye-H\"uckel volumetric free-energy density valid in the limit $\Lambda_c\to \infty$~\cite{Debye1923}
\begin{equation}
f_{\rm DH}= -k_{\rm B}T\frac{\kappa_b^3}{12\pi}
\label{fDH}
\end{equation}
where $k_{\rm B}T$ is the thermal energy and $\kappa_b$ the Debye screening parameter. Although these corrections take into account in an approximate way the effect of finite ion-size on the electrostatic interactions, they do not account for direct hardcore interactions. Using a field-theoretical model which includes them, Moreira and Netz~\cite{Moreira2002} derived the first coefficients of the virial expansion of a non-symmetric electrolyte, valid for low densities. In Ref.~\cite{Coalson1995} a Yukawa potential was introduced to model short range repulsive interactions and a variational approach to a similar model was studied in~\cite{Buyukdagli2011b}. One of the most successful approaches in describing the Monte Carlo (MC) results~\cite{Valleau1980,Valleau1991,Abbas2009} for the bulk phase transition is the physically motivated but \textit{ad hoc} model developed by Fisher and Levin~\cite{Fisher1996}, where a free energy with an explicit ion pairing term, or Bjerrum association, was constructed (see also~\cite{Yeh1996}). Recently
Giera \textit{et al.}~\cite{Giera2015} performed molecular dynamics simulations of electric double layers and compared successfully the measured capacitance to the Carnahan-Starling mean-field calculation.\\
In this paper we extend our previously developed variational approach~\cite{Buyukdagli2011} by including the Carnahan-Starling pressure contribution in the variational grand potential. We show that it is necessary to include both a hardcore regularization (\textit{via} a Fourier space wave vector cut-off) in the electrostatic part of the grand potential and the direct hardcore interactions in order to recover the correct behavior for the chemical potential and internal energy, computed using Monte Carlo simulations~\cite{Valleau1980}.
We subsequently apply our model to a fluid confined in a nanopore connected to reservoirs of ions and explore the partition coefficient of the ions in the pore and the modification of the phase transition (induced by the dielectric exclusion) due to the hardcore interactions.
In Section~\ref{sec:var} the general field theoretic approach, including the electrostatic and hardcore interactions, as well as the variational scheme used in this paper (and developed in Appendix~\ref{appA}) are exposed.
In Section~\ref{sec:bulk} we compute the bulk grand potential by introducing a wave vector cutoff in its electrostatic contribution and using the Carnahan-Starling pressure to express the hardcore one.
We then investigate the low temperature phase transition in the bulk in order to validate our model. We apply it in Section~\ref{sec:nano} to the case of an electrolyte confined in a neutral cylindrical nanopore inside a low dielectric medium, where we obtain a corrected behavior for the partition coefficient due to hardcore interactions. We also investigate the phase transition for the case of a weakly charged nanopore.
Finally our conclusions and perspectives are presented in Section~\ref{sec:concl}.
\section{General field theoretic variational model}
\label{sec:var}
We consider an electrolyte made of $N_\nu$ ions of type $\nu=1,\ldots,p$ in solution in water. We work in the grand canonical ensemble where the temperature $T$, the volume $V$ are fixed together with the ionic chemical potentials $\mu_\nu$ or equivalently their fugacity
\begin{equation}
\lambda_\nu=\frac{\exp(\mu_\nu)}{V_\nu}
\end{equation}
where {$V_\nu$ is a reference volume that does not enter into the final results for physical quantities}, and we express all the energies in units of $\beta^{-1}=k_\mathrm{B} T$. Ions $\alpha$ and $\gamma$ interact through the electrostatic potential and a short range repulsive potential $U_{\alpha \gamma}$ and are submitted to an external potential, $u_\alpha (\vec{r})$, {acting} on particle $\alpha$.
We formulate the grand partition function in two steps. First we consider the hardcore potential alone by artificially setting the ion charges to zero.
The hardcore grand partition function is therefore
\begin{multline}
\label{grandpotHC}
\Xi_{\rm hc} =\sum_{N_1 = 0}^\infty \cdots \sum_{N_p = 0}^\infty \prod_{\nu=1}^{p} \frac{\lambda_\nu^{N_\nu}}{N_\nu !}
\int \prod_{\nu=1}^{p} \prod_{j=1}^{N_\nu} \dd \vec{r}_{\nu j} g(\vec{r}_{\nu j}) \\
\times \exp\left[-\frac{1}{2} \sum_{\alpha,\gamma=1}^p \int_{\vec{r},\vec{r}'} \hat{c}_\alpha(\vec{r}) U_{\alpha\gamma}(\vec{r}-\vec{r}') \hat{c}_\gamma(\vec{r}') \right. \\
\left. + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{\alpha=1}^p N_\alpha U_{\alpha\alpha}(0){-} \sum_{\alpha=1}^p \int_{\vec{r} }\hat{c}_\alpha(\vec{r}) u_\alpha(\vec{r})\right]
\end{multline}
where $\vec{r}_{\nu j}$ is the position of the $j$th particle of type $\nu$, and $g(\vec{r})$ is a function that models the possible restriction of the volume accessible to the particles. The density operators, $\hat{c}_\alpha$, are:
\begin{equation}
\hat{c}_\alpha(\vec{r}) = \sum_{j=1}^{N_\alpha} \delta ( \vec{r} - \vec{r}_{\alpha j})
\end{equation}
We obtain the corresponding field theoretic formulation by applying a Hubbard-Stratonovitch transformation~\cite{Negele1992}:
\begin{multline}
\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2} \sum_{\alpha\gamma} \int_{\vec{r},\vec{r}'} \hat{c}_\alpha(\vec{r}) U_{\alpha\gamma} \hat{c}_\gamma(\vec{r}') \right) = \\
\frac{1}{Z_U}\int \prod_\nu \DD \psi_\nu \, \exp \left( -H_{\rm hc}[\psi_\gamma] + i \sum_\alpha \int_{\vec{r}} \psi_\alpha(\vec{r}) \hat{c}_\alpha(\vec{r}) \right)
\end{multline}
where $Z_U = -\frac12\,\mathrm{tr}\,\ln(U)$ and the hardcore Hamiltonian is
\begin{equation}
H_{\rm hc}[\psi_\gamma] =\frac12 \sum_{\alpha\gamma} \int_{\vec{r},\vec{r}'} \psi_\alpha(\vec{r}) U^{-1}_{\alpha\gamma}(\vec{r}-\vec{r}') \psi_\gamma(\vec{r}')
\end{equation}
After summation over the number of particles $N_\nu$, \eq{grandpotHC} becomes:
\begin{multline}
\label{grandpotHCfield}
\Xi_{\rm hc}{\left[ \mu_\alpha - u_\alpha(\vec{r}) \right]} = \frac{1}{Z_U}\int \prod_\nu \DD \psi_\nu \exp \left(-H_{\rm hc}[\psi_\gamma]\right) \\ \times \exp \left[\sum_\alpha \frac{e^{\frac{1}{2} U_{\alpha\alpha}(0)}}{V_\alpha} \int_{\vec{r}} g(\vec{r}) e^{i \psi_\alpha(\vec{r}) {+ \mu_\alpha - u_\alpha(\vec{r})}} \right]
\end{multline}
Next we introduce the electrostatic contribution to the grand partition function. Ions $\alpha$ and $\gamma$ interact with the electrostatic energy $q_\alpha q_\beta v_{\rm c}(\vec{r})$ where $q_\alpha$ is the ion valency and the Coulomb interaction, $v_{\rm c}$, is
\begin{equation}
v_{\rm c}(\vec{r}) = \frac{\lb}{\left|\vec{r}\right|}
\label{Coulomb}
\end{equation}
with $\lb = \beta e^2 / (4\pi \eo \ew)$ the Bjerrum length and $\ew\approx 78$ is the permittivity of water ($e$ is the quantum of charge).
The corresponding electrostatic contribution to the Hamiltonian is therefore
\begin{equation}
H_{\rm el} = \frac{1}{2} \int_{\vec{r},\vec{r}'} \hat{\rho}(\vec{r}) v_{\rm c}(\vec{r}-\vec{r}') \hat{\rho}(\vec{r}') - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{\alpha=1}^p N_\alpha q_\alpha^2 v_{\rm c}(0)\label{Hel}
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\rho}$ is the charge density operator
\begin{equation}
\hat{\rho}(\vec{r}) = \sum_{\alpha=1}^p q_\alpha \hat{c}_\alpha (\vec{r})
\end{equation}
The {factor of 1/2 in first term of the rhs. of \eq{Hel} avoids double counting and the second term subtracts the self-interactions}. The charge density leads to the introduction of an additional field $\phi$ in the field-theoretic description, in a fashion similar to the introduction of the fields $\psi_\alpha$ above.
{As shown by Netz \textit{et al.}~\cite{Netz2000,Moreira2002} the grand partition function of the system including both the hardcore and the electrostatic interactions can be written as a double functional integral over the fluctuating fields,
$\psi_\gamma$ and $\phi$. Although the ensuing problem cannot be treated exactly, we show in the Appendix~\ref{appA} that a powerful approximate variational method can still be employed to handle the electrostatic part.
As in previous variational approaches without hardcore interactions~\cite{Netz2003,Curtis2005,Hatlo2008,Hatlo2008a}, we treat the electrostatic part by choosing a variational Hamiltonian $H_0$ with a general Gaussian form:
\begin{equation}
H_0[\phi] =\frac12 \int_{\vec{r},\vec{r}'} \left[ \phi(\vec{r}) - i \phi_0(\vec{r}) \right] v_0^{-1}(\vec{r},\vec{r}') \left[ \phi(\vec{r}') - i \phi_0(\vec{r}') \right]
\label{HOdef}
\end{equation}
where the variational functions are the average field $\phi_0(\vec{r})$ and the Gaussian kernel $v_0^{-1}(\vec{r},\vec{r}')$. The variational grand-potential accounting for both electrostatic and hardcore interactions is given by (see Appendix~\ref{appA})
\begin{eqnarray}
\Omega_{v} &=& - \ln (\Xi_{\rm el,hc}^{\rm v}) = \Omega_0+
\langle H_{\rm c}[\phi(\vec{r})] - H_0[\phi(\vec{r})] \rangle_0 \nonumber \\
&+&
\int_\vec{r} \rho_{\rm e}(\vec{r})\phi_0(\vec{r})
+\Omega_{\rm hc} [\mu_\gamma - u_\gamma^0(\vec{r})],
\label{varpot}
\end{eqnarray}
where
$\Omega_0=-\frac12\mathrm{tr}\, \ln(v_0/v_{\rm c})$, the expectation value is evaluated with the variational Gaussian Hamiltonian $H_0[\phi]$,
$\rho_{\rm e}(\vec{r})$ is the external fixed charge density (in units of $e$),
\begin{equation}\label{Hc0}
H_{\rm c}[\phi]=\int \mathrm{d}\vec{r} \frac{\epsilon(\vec{r})}{2\beta e^2} [\nabla\phi(\vr)]^2,
\end{equation}
is the Coulomb Hamiltonian with a spatially dependent permittivity $\epsilon (\vr)$ and
\begin{eqnarray}
\Omega_{\rm hc} [\mu_\gamma - u_\gamma^0(\vec{r})] &=& -\ln \left( \Xi_{\rm hc} [\mu_\gamma - u_\gamma^0(\vec{r})] \right) \nonumber\\
&=& -V P_{\rm hc} [\mu_\gamma - u_\gamma^0(\vec{r})],
\label{omegahc}
\end{eqnarray}
is the exact hardcore grand-potential (or minus the normalized osmotic pressure times volume) in an external field equal to
\begin{equation}
u_\gamma^0(\vec{r}) = q_\gamma \phi_0(\vec{r}) + \frac{1}{2} q^2_\gamma
\left[ v_0(\vr, \vr) - v_{\rm c}(0)\right].
\end{equation}
We will see below that the last term in $ u_\gamma^0(\vec{r})$ is the excess chemical potential and therefore $\mu_\gamma - u_\gamma^0(\vec{r})$ is simply equal to the ideal gas contribution,
\begin{equation}
\mu_\gamma^{\rm id} = \ln (V_\gamma c_\gamma),
\end{equation}
where $c_\gamma$ is the concentration of ion $\gamma$. The variational grand-potential, $\Omega_{\rm v} $, is an upper bound to the exact grand-potential $\Omega_{\rm el,hc} = - \ln (\Xi_{\rm el,hc})$.}
\eq{varpot} is then a sum of an electrostatic contribution minus an osmotic pressure one, $V P_{\rm hc}$, created by a hardcore fluid with a modified fugacity that is expressed as a function of the variational fields $\phi_0(\vr)$ and $\v_0(\vr,\vr)$.
For simplicity we work in the following with a restricted variational method by choosing the inverse kernel $v_0$ to be the solution of the inhomogeneous variational \DH equation~\cite{Buyukdagli2011},
\begin{equation}
[-\nabla( \epsilon(\vr) \nabla) + \epsilon(\vr) \kappa^2(\vr)]v_0(\vec{r},\vec{r}') = \beta e^2 \delta(\vec{r} - \vec{r}'),
\end{equation}
and the average potential and variational inverse screening length to be constant:
\begin{equation}
\phi(\vec{r}) = \phi_0 \quad \mathrm{and} \quad \kappa(\vec{r}) = \kv g(\vec{r})
\end{equation}
\eq{varpot} is then minimized with respect to the restricted variational parameters $\kv$ and $\phi_0$.
\section{Bulk electrolyte with hardcore interactions}
\label{sec:bulk}
\subsection{Excess chemical potential}
The variational grand potential \eq{varpot} without the hardcore contribution, i.e. without the last term, has been computed in Ref.~\cite{Buyukdagli2011}. The bulk contribution, i.e. with $\rho_e=0$, reads per unit volume:
\begin{equation}
\label{wbnohc}
w_{v} \equiv \frac{\Omega_{v}}{V} =
-\sum_i \lambda_i e^{\frac{q_i^2}{2} \lb \kv}
+ \frac{\kv^3}{24 \pi}
\end{equation}
where $\kappa_v$ is the only variational parameter because the mean-field $\phi_0$ vanishes in the bulk due to overall
charge neutrality (the index $i$ denotes the type of ion). The first term is minus the osmotic pressure of an ideal solution of ions and the second one is the usual Debye-H\"uckel term, which in the canonical ensemble leads to \eq{fDH}. Note that, in \eq{wbnohc}, $w_v\to-\infty$ when $\kv\to\infty$. Physically this divergence means that the most stable state of the system without hardcore interaction is a state of infinite concentration of neutral ionic pairs on top of each other.
Although the variational theory without hardcore interactions is not rigorously well defined, for sufficiently low salt concentrations the (metastable) minimum of \eq{wbnohc} with respect to $\kv$ does yield the standard \DH inverse length $\kb$, where
\begin{equation}
\label{DHkappanohc}
\kb^2 = 4\pi \lb \sum_i q_i^2 c_i ,
\end{equation}
which is obtained from the grand potential per unit volume $w_v$:
\begin{equation}
c_i = - \lambda_i \frac{\partial w_v }{\partial \lambda_i}
\label{defc}
\end{equation}
The first term in \eq{wbnohc}, with $\kv$ replaced by $\kb$, is therefore minus the osmotic pressure of an ideal solution, $\sum_ic_i$. Indeed, within the variational approach the excess electrostatic chemical potential is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_{{\rm el},i}^{\rm ex} &\equiv& \ln(\lambda_i/c_i) \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{1}{2} q^2_i \left[ v_0(\vr, \vr) - v_{\rm c}(0)\right] = -\frac{q_i^2}{2} \lb \kb, \label{muexnohc}
\end{eqnarray}
where in the bulk system the inverse kernel takes on the Debye-H\"uckel form:
\begin{equation}
v_0(\vec{r},\vec{r}') =\lb \frac{e^{-\kb\left|\vec{r} - \vec{r}' \right|}}{\left|\vec{r} - \vec{r}' \right|}.
\end{equation}
Note that $\mu_{{\rm el},i}^{\rm ex}\to -\infty$ when $\kb \to -\infty$. It costs less and less energy to add an ion into the system as the concentration increases which can again be interpreted as the collapse of the ions on each other in the absence of hardcore repulsion.
The second term in \eq{wbnohc} is the \DH electrostatic correlation contribution to the grand potential. Although this form is correct for low concentrations, it is not reliable for high concentrations, where the hardcore interaction should dominate.
To take into account the hardcore repulsion, we use the variational prescription delineated above, and replace the first term of \eq{wbnohc} by minus the (grand canonical) pressure of a hardcore liquid, $-P_{\rm hc}$. To implement the variational method we choose to approximate this hardcore pressure by the well known Carnahan-Starling form, which is almost quantitatively exact for neutral liquids up to freezing densities~\cite{Carnahan1969,Lue1999,Hansen2007}.
Explicitly, we use the following replacement:
\begin{equation}
\sum_i \lambda_i e^{ -\mu_{{\rm el},i}^{\rm ex} } \rightarrow P_{\rm hc}\left(\sum_i \lambda_i e^{ -\mu_{{\rm el},i}^{\rm ex} }\right)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{CSpress}
P_{\rm hc}(\bl) = \frac{1}{\v} \eta(\bl) \frac{1 + \eta(\bl) + \eta(\bl)^2 - \eta(\bl)^3}{(1-\eta(\bl))^3}
\end{equation}
is the Carnahan-Starling result with $\v = \pi d^3/6$ the excluded volume and $d$ the particle diameter.
In the pure hardcore system there are no Coulombic interactions and the packing fraction is:
\begin{equation}
\eta = \v \sum_i c_i
\label{packfrac}
\end{equation}
with $0\leq \eta \leq 1$. For sake of clarity, we decide to consider here only the case where anions and cations have the same diameter (the so-called Restricted Primitive Model). The case of different diameters will be treated in a future work. In our grand canonical approach a relation has to be given between the fugacity and the packing fraction. The total concentration of hard sphere particles is $c = \sum_i c_i = \bl {\partial P_{\rm hc}(\bl )}/{\partial \bl}$ and therefore the packing fraction, \eq{packfrac} is related to the pressure given in \eq{CSpress} by:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqdiffeta}
\eta(\bl) = \v \bl \frac{\partial P_{\rm hc}(\bl )}{\partial \bl},
\end{equation}
which can be integrated and rewritten as a self-consistent equation for $\eta(\bl)$:
\begin{equation}
\label{relfugacity}
\bl = \frac{1}{\v} \eta(\bl) e^{\mu_{\rm hc}^{\rm ex}(\eta(\bl))},
\end{equation}
where the Carnahan-Starling excess chemical potential due to hardcore interactions,
\begin{equation}
\label{muexhc}
\mu_{\rm hc}^{\rm ex}(\eta) = \frac{\eta-3}{(\eta-1)^3}-3,
\end{equation}
has been deduced using the definition $\bl = c \ e^{\mu_{\rm hc}^{\rm ex}}$. Note that the passage to \eq{relfugacity} is equivalent to integrating the thermodynamic relation ${\partial P_{\rm hc}(c)}/{\partial c} = c {\partial \mu_{\rm hc}(c)}/{\partial c}$ (at constant $T$ and $V$) and that given $\bl$, \eq{relfugacity} has to be solved numerically, although $\eta(\bl)$ as a function of $\v \bl$ can easily be plotted parametrically (see Figure \ref{fig:eta}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{eta_of_lambda.pdf}
\caption{The packing fraction $\eta(\lambda)$ as a function of $\v \lambda$. The function is zero at $\lambda = 0$ and slowly saturates to $1$ as $\lambda \rightarrow \infty$.}\label{fig:eta}
\end{figure}
To introduce in an approximate way the hardcore interaction directly into the electrostatic part (beyond the introduction of the hardcore pressure), we compute the \DH term in the grand potential by introducing a cut-off in Fourier space, $0\leq|{\bf q}|\leq \Lambda_c$.
This is similar to what has been done in Ref.~\cite{Netz1999}, except that we work in the grand canonical ensemble and the appropriate thermodynamic potential is the grand potential.
By integrating in Fourier space the first two terms of \eq{varpot}, we obtain
\begin{multline}
\delta w_{vb} = \left( \Omega_0+ \langle H_{\rm c}[\phi(\vec{r})] - H_0[\phi(\vec{r})] \rangle_0 \right)/V = \\
-\frac{\kv^2 \qc }{12 \pi^2} + \frac{\kv^3}{12 \pi^2} \at{\frac{\qc}{\kv}} +\frac{\qc^3}{12 \pi^2} \ln \left(1 + \frac{\kv^2}{\qc^2}\right)
\end{multline}
Although for small $\kv$ we recover the $\kv^3/24 \pi$ behavior, the role of the cut-off parameter $\qc$ is to avoid the unphysical divergence of the excess electrostatic chemical potential, \eq{muexnohc} for large $\kv$.
The resulting variational grand potential for the bulk phase is:
\begin{equation}
\label{bulkgrdpot}
w_{vb}(\kv) = - P_{\rm hc} \left( \sum_i \lambda_i e^{\frac{q_i^2}{\pi} \kv \lb \at{\frac{\qc}{\kv} }} \right) + \delta w_{vb}
\end{equation}
For large $\kv$ Eq.\eqref{bulkgrdpot} now implies that $w_{vb}(\kv) \sim \ln(\kv/\qc)$ remains finite and positive and the ions can no longer collapse on each other.
Minimizing \eq{bulkgrdpot} with respect to $\kv$ and using \eq{relfugacity} leads to the following variational {equation for the solution} $\kappa_b$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\kappa_b^2 = &\frac{4\pi\lb}{v} \frac{\sum_i q_i^2 \lambda_i e^{\frac{q_i^2}{\pi} \kb \lb \arctan\left(\frac{\qc}{\kv} \right)}}{\sum_i \lambda_i e^{\frac{q_i^2}{\pi} \kb \lb \arctan\left(\frac{\qc}{\kb} \right)}}\nonumber\\
&\times \eta\left(\sum_i \lambda_i e^{\frac{q_i^2}{\pi} \kb \lb \arctan\left(\frac{\qc}{\kb} \right)}\right)
\label{vareq}
\end{eqnarray}
where the function $\eta(\bar \lambda)$ is defined in \eq{relfugacity}.
Computing the concentration $c_i$ of each {ion using} \eq{defc} leads, after some {rearrangement}, to the same \DH result for the inverse screening length, \eq{DHkappanohc}.
Using \eq{vareq} leads again to \eq{packfrac}, which means that $\eta$ is still the system packing fraction (even in the presence of combined hardcore and electrostatic interactions). The variational result for the bulk phase grand potential is then $w_{b} = w_{vb}(\kb)$ and the total excess ionic chemical potential is the sum of a regularized electrostatic and hardcore contributions, \eq{muexhc},
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{muex}
\mu_i^{\rm ex} &=& \mu_{{\rm el},i}^{\rm ex} + \mu_{{\rm hc}}^{\rm ex}
\nonumber \\
&=& -\frac{q_i^2}{\pi} \kb \lb \at{\frac{\qc}{\kb}}+ \left[\frac{\eta-3}{(\eta-1)^3}-3 \right].
\end{eqnarray}
The approach adopted here leads to an excess chemical potential that is simply the direct sum of a regulated electrostatic part and a pure hardcore part. The electrostatic part $\mu_{{\rm el},i}^{\rm ex}$ saturates to a finite value for $\kb\to\infty$ and to \eq{muexnohc} for $\kb\to 0$.
Hence for large $\kb$, $\mu_{\rm ex}$ is dominated by the hardcore contribution \eqref{muexhc}, which diverges (in the Carnahan-Starling approach) at $\eta = 1$. We emphasize that in order to get an appropriate physical result for electrolytes two ingredients are necessary: the electrostatic part has to be regularized (e.g., by introducing a Fourier space cut-off into the inverse kernel) and the hardcore interactions have to be included explicitly. This is in contrast to a previous approaches adopted for one component plasmas~\cite{Netz1999}, where one or the other feature, but not both, was added.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{gamma_bulk_new.pdf}
\caption{The excess chemical potential in the bulk phase as a function of the ionic concentration. The solid line is the result of our model, \eq{loggamma}, fitted to the MC data by Valleau \textit{et al.}~\cite{Valleau1980} shown as circles. The orange dotted and red dashed lines are curves that capture the asymptotic behavior of the model for low and large concentrations respectively. \textit{Inset}: Average excess internal energy per ion (circles: MC data of~\cite{Valleau1980}, line: our model without additional fitting parameter).}
\label{fig:gammabulk}
\end{figure}
The mean excess chemical potential for a simple salt, defined as
\begin{equation}
\mu_\pm^{\rm ex} = \frac{\nu_{+} \mu_{+}^{\rm ex} + \nu_{-} \mu_{-}^{\rm ex}}{\nu_{+} + \nu_{-}},
\end{equation}
where $\nu_\pm$ are the stoichiometric coefficients (electroneutrality implies $\nu_{+} q_{+} = \nu_{-}|q_{-}|$), can be obtained from the excess ionic chemical potentials, $\mu_i^{\rm ex}$.
The method proposed here also provides a variational foundation to canonical ensemble approaches to ion fluids (with and without hardcore interactions) formulated previously: either by integrating \eq{muex} or performing a Legendre transformation on the grand potential leads to a bulk Helmholtz Free energy, $F_b$,
\begin{equation}
f_{b} = \frac{F_{b}}{V} = w_{b} + \sum_i c_i \mu_i = f_{b}^{\rm el} + f_{b}^{\rm hc},
\end{equation}
that is the direct sum of a regularized electrostatic part and a hardcore contribution (for the Fourier space cut-off approach adopted here for the electrostatic contribution, $f_{b}^{\rm el}$ is identical to the result obtained in Ref.~\cite{Netz1999}).
We now investigate further the simplest case, that of a symmetrical $q-q$ electrolyte with $\lambda_+=\lambda_-=\lambda$ and $q_+=-q_-=q$. The excess chemical potential \eq{muex} simplifies to:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_\pm^{\rm ex} (c_b) &=& -\frac{(2\lb q^2)^{3/2}}{\sqrt{\pi}} \sqrt{c_b} \at{\frac{\qc}{\sqrt{8\pi\lb q^2c_b}}} \nonumber \\
&+& \left[ \frac{2vc_b - 3}{(2vc_b-1)^3} - 3 \right] \label{loggamma}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used $\eta_b = 2 \v c_b$ and $\kappa_b^2=8\pi\lb q^2c_b$ (we assume that $\nu_\pm =1$ and therefore $c_b$ is the salt concentration and the concentration of both anions and cations and $2 c_b$ is the total concentration of hardcore particles).
The first term on the right hand side of \eq{loggamma} is the contribution from the cut-off regularized electrostatic to the chemical potential.
This term always decreases when the concentration increases and tends to $- q^2 \lb \qc/\pi $ for large concentrations.
The second term, which is the hardcore contribution to the chemical potential, increases when the concentration increases.
The excess chemical potential, \eq{loggamma}, is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:gammabulk} vs the bulk concentration together with the Monte Carlo (MC) simulation results obtained at room temperature by Valleau \textit{et al.}~\cite{Valleau1980}, shown as circles.
We have fitted \eq{loggamma} to these data using $\qc$ as a parameter and $v = \pi d^3/6$ with $d = 4.25\ \AA$ the hardcore particle diameter used in the MC simulations~\cite{Valleau1980}. The fit is shown as a solid line in Figure \ref{fig:gammabulk} and yields $\qc = 3.73\ \mathrm{nm^{-1}}$. The agreement is very good. The average excess internal energy per ion is shown as circles in the inset and the curve correspond to our model without any additional parameter. The fitted value of the cut-off is $\sim 1/d$, an expected physically reasonable result (when compared with the usual DH approach~\cite{McQuarrie2000}) lends credence to our approach.
For small $c_b$ the excess chemical potential reduces to
\begin{equation}
\mu_\pm^{\rm ex} \approx -\frac{(2\lb q^2)^{3/2}}{\sqrt{\pi}} \sqrt{c_b} + 8\left(\frac{q^4\lb^2}{\qc} +v\right)c_b,
\end{equation}
and this approximation is shown as a dotted line in Figure \ref{fig:gammabulk}.
It is clear that the large electrostatic term in the second virial contribution to the excess chemical potential obtained perturbatively by Netz and Orland~\cite{Netz1999} for electrolytes at low concentrations has its origin in the regularization of the modified Coulomb interaction at short distances arising from hardcore interactions (an effect that for small enough ions typically dominates over the direct hardcore contribution). Note that expanding the first term on the right hand side of \eq{loggamma} for low $c_b$ leads to an alternating series and keeping the next term in $c_b^{3/2}$ without the hardcore term $v c_b$ would lead to a worse result.
For large concentrations, $c_b\lesssim c_{\max}=(2v)^{-1}$, the behavior is dominated by the hardcore contribution shifted by a constant:
\begin{multline}
\mu_\pm^{\rm ex} \approx \frac{2vc_b - 3}{(2vc_b-1)^3} - 3 \\ -\frac{2(\lb q^2)^{3/2}}{\sqrt{\pi v}} \at{\frac{\qc\sqrt{v}}{\sqrt{4\pi\lb q^2}}}
\end{multline}
This curve is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:gammabulk} (red dashed curve).
In conclusion, the relatively simple method presented here enables us to account for the thermodynamic properties of the Restrictive Primitive Model from low concentrations up to saturation, nearly rivaling the accuracy of much more sophisticated liquid theory methods (see. e.g., Ref.~\cite{McQuarrie2000}).
\subsection{Bulk ionic liquid-vapor phase transition}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{wvb.pdf}
\caption{The grand potential per unit volume $w_v$ as a function of the variational parameter $\kb$ for $\lb^3 \lambda=0.085$, 0.09 and 0.095 (from top to bottom). For each curve the temperature is kept fixed and the chemical potential increases from top to bottom. The low $\kv$ minima correspond to the vapor phase while the large $\kv$ ones correspond to the liquid phase.}
\label{fig:wvb}
\end{figure}
The low temperature bulk ionic phase transition governed by ion-ion correlations and discussed in the Introduction is a natural consequence of our model. In our variational scheme, this phase transition is characterized by the presence of two minima of $w_{v}(\kv)$ at fixed fugacity $\lambda$ and temperature $T$. Hence phase coexistence corresponds to multiple solutions to the variational equation, $\partial w_{vb}(\kv)/\partial\kv = 0$, for sufficiently low temperature. We illustrate this point in Figure~\ref{fig:wvb} where, by increasing $\lambda$ at low $T$ a second minimum of $w_{vb}(\kv)$ appears at a higher screening parameter value, $\kappa_v^{\rm L}$. From the vapor phase, we thus enter in the coexistence region.
This method is equivalent to the usual one employed in the canonical ensemble, where phase coexistence is determined by solutions $c_{L}$ and $c_{V}$ to the simultaneous equations, $P(c_{V}) = P(c_{L})$ and $\mu_\pm(c_{V}) = \mu_\pm(c_{L})$, where $\mu_\pm = \mu_\pm^{\rm id} + \mu_\pm^{\rm ex}$ and $P(c) = P_{\rm el}(c) + P_{\rm hc}(2c)$.
The total pressure $P=-w_{v}(\kb)$ is plotted with respect to the volume per ion $V/\langle N\rangle=1/c_b$ in Figure~\ref{fig:pc}. It shows the coexistence region where two solutions appear.
In Figure~\ref{fig:Tcphasediagram} is shown the coexistence region in the temperature vs. concentration plane. This figure has been plotted by identifying the two minima that appear in the variational grand potential as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:wvb} when varying $\lambda$ at fixed $T$ and by repeating this for various temperatures.
For our chosen value of $d$ and $\qc$ we get a critical point at $T_c=44.16$~K and $c_c=51.91$~mM (which confirms the unphysical nature of the transition for common electrolytes).
When hardcore interactions are included in the theory, the coexistence region, as well as $T_c$ and $c_c$, are slightly reduced. The spinodal curve, $T_{\rm sp}(c)$, on which the susceptibility diverges, is defined by $(\partial P / \partial c)_{T_{\rm sp}} = 0$ and shown in green.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{pV.pdf}
\caption{The pressure in $\mathrm{Pa}$ as a function of the volume per ion, $c_b^{-1}$ where $c_b$ is expressed in mM, for various temperatures (from bottom to top $T= 42$, $44.16$ and $45\ \mathrm{K}$). The horizontal lines denote the beginning and the end of the phase coexistence region. The dashed lines are the pressure defined in the canonical ensemble, \eq{CSpress}, expressed in terms $c_b$. For $T=T_c=44.16 \mathrm{K}$, the phase transition is continuous.}
\label{fig:pc}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Tccc.pdf}
\caption{Rescaled coexistence curve $T/T_c$ vs. $c/c_c$ in the bulk. The ``vapor'' and ``liquid'' phase are respectively on the left and right of the coexistence region. The green line is the spinodal curve and the dashed line is the coexistence curve without hardcore effects.}
\label{fig:Tcphasediagram}
\end{figure}
The critical temperature $T_c$ depends on the particle diameter $d$. In order to investigate this point and compare our method to other approaches, we derive the equations defining the critical point. We first note that the pressure $P$ is a function of the concentration at a fixed temperature. The critical point $(T_c,c_c)$ is defined by:
\begin{equation}
\left.\frac{\partial P}{\partial c}\right|_{c_c,T_c} = 0 \quad \mathrm{and} \quad \left.\frac{\partial^2 P}{\partial c^2}\right|_{c_c,T_c} = 0
\end{equation}
After some calculation we obtain:
\begin{align}
&1 + \frac{8\eta_c - 2 \eta_c^2}{(\eta_c-1)^4} = \frac{q^2 \kc^*}{2 \pi} \left[\arctan\left(\frac{\qc^*}{\kc^*}\right) -\frac{\kc^* \qc}{\qc^{*2} + \kc^{*2}}\right]\label{g}\\
&\frac1{2 \eta_c} - \frac{5 \eta_c^2 - 25 \eta_c -4}{(\eta_c -1)^5} = \frac{2 q^4}{ \v^*} \frac{\qc^{*3}}{(\qc^{*2}+\kc^{*2})^2} \label{gp}
\end{align}
where we have introduced the dimensionless parameters $\eta_c = 2 \v c_c$, $\kc^* = \sqrt{8 \pi q^2 \lc^3 c_c}$, $\v^* = \v/\lc^3$, $\qc^* = \lc \qc$ and $\lc$ is the Bjerrum length at the temperature $T_c$. \eqs{g}{gp} both depend on the cut-off, $\qc^*$, and the excluded volume $\v^*$.
Now suppose that the critical temperature is $T_{c,1}$ for a particle diameter $d_1$, which defines the hardcore parameters $\Lambda_{c,1}$ and $\v_1$. The critical temperature $T_{c,2}$ corresponding to a diameter $d_2$ with $\Lambda_{c,2}$ and $\v_2$ is such that both $\qc^*$ and $\v^*$ are unchanged. Hence $\Lambda_{c,1} /T_{c,1} = \Lambda_{c,2} /T_{c,2}$ and $\v_1 T_{c,1}^3 = \v_2 T_{c,2}^3$.
If we now use that the excluded volume is proportional to $d^3$ and that the cut-off is proportional to $d^{-1}$, then the two previous conditions are equivalent to $T_{c,1} d_1 = T_{c,2} d_2$. In other words the critical temperature is inversely proportional to $d$.
In Figure~\ref{fig:Tcd} is plotted the critical temperature as a function of the particle diameter deduced from \eqs{g}{gp} together with the $1/d$ law. The agreement is excellent.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Tcd.pdf}
\caption{The critical temperature as a function of the particle diameter in a log-log plot. The dots are points calculated by solving \eqs{g}{gp}. The dashed line is obtained by using the first point as a reference and assuming $T_c \propto d^{-1}$.
\textit{Inset}: The critical concentration as a function of the particle diameter in a log-log plot. The dots are points calculated by solving \eqs{g}{gp}. The blue dashed line is obtained by using the first point as a reference and assuming that $c_c \propto d^{-3}$ while the red dashed line is \eq{ccapprox}. The two lines are superimposed.}
\label{fig:Tcd}
\end{figure}
In order to compare our result with the literature we introduce the rescaled temperature and concentration:
\begin{equation}
\label{adimpar}
T^* = \frac{4 \pi \eo \ew d k_{\rm B} T}{(q e)^2}=\frac{d}{q^2\ell_{\rm B}}\quad \mathrm{and} \quad c^* = d^3 c
\end{equation}
Various results have been found in the literature for those two quantities. For example in the Monte Carlo simulations of Ref.~\cite{Valleau1991} the authors found $T^*_c \approx 0.07$ and $c_c^* \approx 0.07$. In Ref.~\cite{Orkoulas1994} another result was found, $T^*_c \approx 0.053$ and $c_c^* \approx 0.025$, which compared well to experiments on molten salts~\cite{Kirshenbaum1962}. These values were subsequently found to be in agreement with the theory developed by Levin and Fisher \cite{Fisher1996}. They used a Bjerrum model of ion pairing which is introduced via an explicit ``pairing reaction" between the ions~\cite{Yeh1996}. Because explicit ion-pairing terms are not included in the present variational approach, our theory recovers a phase transition which is closer to the \DH model with added hardcore interactions. The specific values of the critical parameters given in \eq{adimpar} are in our case, $T^*_c \approx 0.088$ and $c_c^* = 0.0024$. They depend on the model used to account for hardcore interactions (the Carnahan-Starling approach in our case) but are close to the ones given in Ref.~\cite{Fisher1996} using the second virial coefficient approach, $T^*_c \approx 0.061$ and $c_c^* \approx 0.0046$. Our approach is more accurate for large ionic concentrations.
We now investigate the relation between $T_c$ and $c_c$. First note that in \eq{gp} the second term can be neglected, which reduces \eq{gp} to a second order polynomial in $\eta_c$ that can be solved to give:
\begin{equation}
\label{ccapprox}
c_c = \frac{\eta_c}{2 \v} \approx \frac{\qc^{*3} }{16 \pi^2 \lc^3} \left(1 -\sqrt{1-\frac{4 \pi}{q^2 \qc^*}} - \frac{2 \pi}{q^2 \qc^*} \right)
\end{equation}
Hence $c_c$ is proportional to $T_c^3$ and inversely proportional to $d^{3}$ as it should. In the inset of Figure \ref{fig:Tcd} is plotted the calculated $c_c$ together with \eq{ccapprox}, the agreement is excellent.
\section{Electrolyte with hardcore interactions inside a nanopore}
\label{sec:nano}
\subsection{Variational grand potential}
We consider an electrolyte in an infinite cylindrical nanopore of radius $a$ in contact with a reservoir at fixed $T$ and fixed ionic fugacities $\lambda_i$. The dielectric constant of the nanopore is $\epsilon_m\ll\epsilon_w$. In the following we chose $\epsilon_m=2$. We start from the variational grand potential per unit volume derived in~\cite{Buyukdagli2010,Buyukdagli2011} without hardcore interactions, which corresponds to the first 2 terms of \eq{varpot} with $\rho_e(\vec{r})=\sigma_s\delta(r-a)$ where $\sigma_s$ is the surface charge density of the pore:
\begin{multline}
w_{v,{\rm el}} = -\sum_i \lambda_i e^{\frac{q_i^2 \lb}{2} \kv - q_i \pO} \left\langle e^{-\frac{q_i^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)} \right\rangle + \frac{\kv^3}{24 \pi} \\
+ \frac{\kv^2}{8 \pi \lb} \int_0^1 \dd \xi \left\langle \dvO(r;\sqrt{\xi}\kv) - \dvO(r;\kv) \right\rangle + \frac{2}{a} \s \pO \label{wvnohc}
\end{multline}
where the brackets mean an average over the nanopore volume defined as:
\begin{equation}
\left\langle f(r) \right\rangle = \frac{2}{a^2} \int_0^a \dd r\ r f(r)
\end{equation}
and $\dvO(r;\kv)$ is the correction to the variational kernel due to the presence of the nanopore~\cite{Buyukdagli2011}
\begin{equation}
v_0(\vr,\vr')=\ell_{\rm B}\frac{e^{-\kappa_v|\vr-\vr'|}}{|\vr-\vr'|}+\delta v_0(\vr,\vr';\kappa_v)
\end{equation}
evaluated at $\vr=\vr'$, thus defined as
\begin{equation}\label{deltav0}
\delta v_0(\vr;\kappa_v)=\frac{4\ell_B}{\pi}\int_0^\infty \mathrm{d}k\sideset{}{'}\sum_{m\geq0}F_m(k;\kappa_v)I_m^2(\varkappa |\vr|)
\end{equation}
where we note $\varkappa^2=k^2+\kappa_v^2$ and the prime on the summation sign means that the term $m=0$ is multiplied by 1/2. The function $F_m$ is
\begin{equation}
F_m(k;\kappa_v)=\frac{\epsilon_w \varkappa K_m(ka)K'_m(\varkappa a)-\epsilon_m k K_m(\varkappa a)K'_m(k a)}
{\epsilon_m k I_m(\varkappa a)K'_m(k a)-\epsilon_w \varkappa K_m(k a)I'_m(\varkappa a)}
\end{equation}
where $K_m(x)$ and $I_m(x)$ are modified Bessel functions.
We make the reasonable simplifying assumption that the dielectric exclusion near the nanopore surface is strong enough to keep finite size ions from approaching the pore wall (in fact there should be a distance of closest approach given by the ionic radius). This assumption leads to the absence of purely steric exclusion effects, which would become important for neutral particles, very large ions or inverted dielectric profiles (with a larger dielectric constant outside the nanopore than within, leading to ion accumulation at the nanopore surface~\cite{Lue2015}).
Because of the rotational symmetry around the cylinder axis and the translational symmetry along the cylinder axis, all quantities depend only on the radial distance $r$.
The first term in \eq{wvnohc} is minus the pressure of an ideal solution for which the fugacity has been modified by the electrostatic potential $\phi_0$ and the excess electrostatic chemical potential, $\mu_{{\rm el},i}^{\rm ex}$ given in \eq{muexnohc}. The second term is the \DH electrostatic contribution which is also present in the bulk phase. The last two terms are the electrostatic contributions due to the presence of the nanopore.
We follow the same strategy as above by replacing the first term in \eq{wvnohc} by minus the pressure of the Carnahan-Starling approach, \eqs{CSpress}{relfugacity}, with the modified fugacity given in \eq{wvnohc}.
We then replace the second term by the equivalent terms of \eq{bulkgrdpot} including the short range cut-off $\qc$ and we leave the last terms identical. The resulting variational grand potential is:
\begin{eqnarray}
w_{v} &= &
\delta w_{vb} \label{wv}\\
& - & P_{\rm hc} \left( \sum_i \lambda_i e^{\frac{q_i^2\lb}{\pi} \kv \at{\frac{\qc}{\kv} } - q_i \pO} \left\langle e^{-\frac{q_i^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)} \right\rangle \right) \nonumber \\
& + & \frac{\kv^2}{8 \pi \lb} \int_0^1 \dd \xi \left\langle \dvO(r;\sqrt{\xi}\kv) - \dvO(r;\kv) \right\rangle + \frac{2}{a} \s \pO \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where the function $P_{\rm hc}(\bar \lambda)$ is given in \eq{CSpress}. This approach thus conserves some important properties of the system, as we will see in the next section. For our purposes here the simple ``average density" approach (in Density Functional Theory terminology) to inhomogeneous systems embodied in the above choice for the hardcore contribution to \eq{wv} suffices.
One can check that in the limits of large cutoff $\qc/\kv \gg 1$ and small packing fractions $\eta \ll 1$, \eq{wv} and \eq{wvnohc} are equivalent.
The variational equation for $\pO$ is simply:
\begin{equation}
\frac{2 \s}{a} + \sum_i q_i c_i = 0
\label{phi0}
\end{equation}
where the concentration inside the pore of ionic species $i$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
c_i = \frac{1}{\v}\eta(\bar \lambda) \frac{\lambda_i e^{\frac{q_i^2\lb}{\pi} \kv \at{\frac{\qc}{\kv} } - q_i \pO} \left\langle e^{-\frac{q_i^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)} \right\rangle}{\sum_j \lambda_j e^{\frac{q_j^2\lb}{\pi} \kv \at{\frac{\qc}{\kv} } - q_j \pO} \left\langle e^{-\frac{q_j^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)} \right\rangle}
\label{cihc}
\end{equation}
where $\eta(\bar \lambda)$ is solution of \eq{relfugacity} and $\bar \lambda$ is the argument of $P_{\rm hc}$ in \eq{wv}. We therefore recover $\eta = \v \sum_i c_i$, the packing fraction inside the cylinder, and \eq{phi0} is simply the condition of charge conservation.
The variational equation for $\kv$ is more involved. The details of the calculation are reported in the Appendix~\ref{appB}, and one obtains
\begin{multline}
\label{simplifvareq}
\frac{\kv^2}{4\pi \ell_{\rm B}} \left[\frac{2\ell_{\rm B}}{\pi} \at{\frac{\qc}{\kv}} - \frac{2\ell_{\rm B}}{\pi} \frac{\kv \qc}{\kv^2 + \qc^2} - \left\langle \dvOp(r;\kv) \right\rangle \right] \\
= \sum_i q_i^2 c_i \left[ \frac{2\ell_{\rm B}}{\pi} \at{\frac{\qc}{\kv}} - \frac{2\ell_{\rm B}}{\pi} \frac{\kv \qc}{\kv^2 + \qc^2} \phantom{\frac{ \left\langle \dvOp(r;\kv) e^{-\frac{q_i^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)} \right\rangle}{\left\langle e^{-\frac{q_i^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)} \right\rangle}} \right. \\
\left. - \frac{ \left\langle \dvOp(r;\kv) e^{-\frac{q_i^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)} \right\rangle}{\left\langle e^{-\frac{q_i^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)} \right\rangle} \right]
\end{multline}
which gives the modified \DH relation for $\kv$ in the nanopore. Clearly $\kv$ vanishes for neutral particles, $q_i \rightarrow 0$. Note that the contribution of the hardcore excess chemical potential enters implicitly though the expression of $c_i$.
\subsection{Partition coefficients and phase diagram}
The Potential of Mean Force (PMF), $\Phi_i$, and the partition coefficient $k_i$ are defined as:
\begin{multline}
k_i \equiv \frac{c_i}{c_{b,i}} = \left\langle e^{-\Phi_i(r;\kv)} \right\rangle \\
= e^{\frac{q_i^2\lb}{\pi}\left[ \kv \at{\frac{\qc}{\kv} } - \kb \at{\frac{\qc}{\kb}}\right] - q_i \pO} \\ \left\langle e^{-\frac{q_i^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)} \right\rangle e^{\frac{\eta_b -3}{(\eta_b -1)^3} - \frac{\eta -3}{(\eta-1)^3}}
\end{multline}
where $c_i$ and $c_{b,i}$ are the concentrations of ion $i$ in the pore and in the bulk, respectively.
We therefore define an \textit{effective} PMF as:
\begin{multline}
\Phi_i (r;\kv) = \frac{q_i^2}2 w_{\rm el}(r;\kappa_v)+ q_i\phi_0+w_{\rm hc}\\
=-\frac{q_i^2 \lb}{\pi}\left[ \kv \at{\frac{\qc}{\kv} } - \kb \at{\frac{\qc}{\kb} }\right] \\
+\frac{q_i^2}{2} \dvO(r;\kv)+ q_i \pO - \frac{\eta_b -3}{(\eta_b -1)^3} + \frac{\eta -3}{(\eta-1)^3}
\end{multline}
where the dependence on $r$ comes only from the term containing $\dvO(r;\kv)$, the other spatial dependencies being integrated out.
This effective PMF has 3 contributions, the electrostatic one $w_{\rm el}$ associated to the kernel $v_0$, the elecrostatic energy $q_i\phi_0$, and the hardcore contribution $w_{\rm hc}$. It allows us to simplify the variational equation \eq{simplifvareq} as
\begin{equation}
\kappa_v^2=\frac{4\pi\ell_{\rm B}}{\left\langle \frac{\partial w_{\rm el}(r;\kappa_v)}{\partial \kappa_v} \right\rangle}\sum_i q_i^2 c_{b,i}\left\langle \frac{\partial w_{\rm el}(r;\kappa_v)}{\partial \kappa_v} e^{-\Phi_i(r;\kv)} \right\rangle.
\end{equation}
Therefore the direct hardcore interactions associated to the Carnahan-Starling pressure enter through $w_{\rm hc}$ only in the Boltzmann factor. In the limit $\eta\to0$ and $\Lambda_c\to \infty$, we recover the variational equation of Ref.~\cite{Buyukdagli2011}.
In Figure~\ref{fig:kneutral} are plotted the partition coefficients of a symmetric electrolyte in a neutral and a charged pore.
In these figures, we compare the results obtained from the variational grand potential without the hardcore interactions, \eq{wvnohc}, (small dots) and the ones with the hardcore interactions, \eq{wv} (large dots).
We see that, for a high bulk ionic concentration, $c_b$, the partition coefficients without hardcore interactions decrease with $c_b$.
This unphysical result is an artifact of the approach, because the ions tends to form neutral pairs with ions of opposite sign on top of each other, as the concentration increases. Of course, this does not happen when hardcore interactions are included in the model, the partition coefficients now slowly saturate to 1 as $c_b$ increases.
For a low enough $c_b$, the two approaches lead to the same partition coefficients, although the difference between the two occurs for $c_b > 100$~mM. For a neutral pore (Fig.~\ref{fig:kneutral} Top), $k$ is a monotonously increasing function of $c_b$ and identical for anions and cations. For a charged pore with surface charge density $\s = -0.01\ \mathrm{e/nm^2}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:kneutral} Bottom), coions have an increasing partition coefficient, $k_-$, which evolves similarly to the case of neutral pore. For counterions, however, $k_+>1$ for low $c_b$ because $c_+$ is controlled by the surface charge density and then decreases down to $k_+\approx0.9$ for $c_b\approx0.5$~M. For higher $c_b$, $k_+$ increases slowly up to 1, so that $c_+\simeq c_b$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{k_neutral_a_1.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{k_charged_a_1.pdf}
\caption{The partition coefficient as a function of the bulk concentration ($a=1$~nm). The big circles are with excluded volume effect while the small circles are without. {\it Top}: Neutral pore ($\s = 0$), the inset is a zoom on the first 100 mM. {\it Bottom}: Charged pore ($\s = -0.01\ e/\mathrm{nm^2}$) with coions in yellow (bottom) and counterions in blue (top).}
\label{fig:kneutral}
\end{figure}
In the inset of Figure~\ref{fig:kneutral} Top, we see the signature of the phase transition studied in Ref.~\cite{Buyukdagli2011}. It is a first order phase transition between a phase where ions are excluded from the nanopore, the so called ionic ``vapor'' phase, and a phase where ions enter the pore, the ionic ``liquid'' phase.
This transition exists at room temperature for small enough pore radii. At a critical radius $a_c$, the phase transition becomes continuous and then disappears for $a>a_c$. Being a room temperature transition, the complications due to strong ion pairing and clustering that occur in bulk electrolytes (and lead to quantitative disparities between the present approach and MC simulations), may perhaps be minimized (it would thus be of great interest to carry out MC simulations in a nanopore to detect the predicted transition).
In Figure~\ref{fig:diagram} is shown the phase diagram obtained with (blue lines) and without (red lines) hardcore interactions and with (dashed lines) and without (solid lines) a small charge density on the nanopore. The coexistence lines without hardcore interactions are the same as the ones obtained in Ref.~\cite{Buyukdagli2011}.
For a given small nanopore radius $a$, hardcore interactions decrease the value of the bulk concentration at which the transition takes place. However for radii close to $a_c$, the difference between the two approaches decreases and the critical point is unchanged.
The effect of a non zero surface charge density $\s$ is to further decrease the value of the critical radius $a_c$ and to increase the bulk ionic concentration $c_{b,c}$ at the transition. The shapes of the coexistence lines are, however, very similar.
For sufficiently large surface charge densities, the phase transition disappears.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Phase_Diagram.pdf}
\caption{Ionic liquid-vapor phase diagram in a nanopore in the bulk concentration ($c_{b}$)--nanopore radius ($a$) plane. The critical lines separates the ionic exclusion ``vapor'' state (V) from the ionic penetration ``liquid'' state (L). The blue lines include the hardcore effect while the red lines does not. The solid lines correspond to $\s = 0$ and the dashed lines to $\s = 10^{-3}\ e/\mathrm{nm^2}$.}
\label{fig:diagram}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:concl}
By introducing the Carnahan-Starling pressure and a cut-off in Fourier space for the Debye-H\"uckel contribution to the grand potential, we develop a rigorous variational approach that includes ion-ion correlations modified by the dielectric jump and hardcore interactions. We consider both a bulk electrolyte and an electrolyte confined in a nanopore. First, we are able to recover important features of the bulk restricted primitive model, such as the increase of the excess chemical potential for large concentrations and the liquid-vapor phase transition induced by ion-ion correlations.
This approach allows us to study not only the behavior of charged hard spheres in a bulk phase, but also in the more complex case of a neutral or charged cylindrical nanopore. In the latter case the phase transition is induced by the dielectric exclusion and therefore occurs at room temperature for small pore radii (and ions sizes corresponding to those of common mineral salts). The ionic partition function is obtained for a whole range of reservoir concentrations, from very low ones up to saturation $c_b\simeq 3$~mol/L.
Possible extensions of our theory include the use of pressure expression taking into account the different sizes of the ions, as developed in Ref.~\cite{Lebowitz1964,Mansoori1971} for neutral liquids, the use of a more accurate variational kernel with a spatially dependent variational Debye screening parameter, $\kappa_v(\vec{r})$ and the integration of a more sophisticated approach to inhomogeneous liquids (such as local density approximations).
One weakness of our approach is that it gives a critical concentration for the phase transition which is too low compared to bulk MC simulations. This is probably because we did not consider explicit ion pairing in the theory.
Finally, our approach yields a theoretical framework for computing the transport coefficients for electrolytes in a single well characterized nanopores, experiments which are now accessible~\cite{Balme2015}.
\acknowledgments
Financial support by the French Research Program ANR-BLANC (TRANSION project, ANR-2012-BS08-0023) is acknowledged. We are tributary to the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and the Universities of Toulouse III-Paul Sabatier and Montpellier.
|
\section{The ATLAS detector and LHC data sample}
\label{sec:atlasdet}
The ATLAS detector has been described in detail elsewhere~\cite{ATLAS1}.
A short overview is presented here with an emphasis on the electromagnetic calorimeter needed for precision measurement of the high-energy photons. The major components of the ATLAS detector are an
inner tracking detector (ID) surrounded by a thin
superconducting solenoid providing a 2~T axial magnetic field,
electromagnetic (EM) and hadronic calorimeters, and a muon spectrometer (MS).
The ID is composed of three subsystems. The pixel and silicon
microstrip detectors cover the pseudorapidity range $|\eta|<2.5$, while
the transition radiation tracker (TRT) has an acceptance range of
$|\eta|<2.0$. The TRT provides identification information for
electrons by the detection of transition radiation. The MS is composed of three large superconducting air-core toroid magnets, a system of three stations of chambers for tracking
measurements with high precision in the range $|\eta|<2.7$, and a muon trigger system effective over the range $|\eta|<$ 2.4.
The electromagnetic calorimeter is a lead/liquid-argon detector
composed of a barrel ($|\eta|<1.475$) and two endcaps ($1.375<|\eta|<3.2$).
For |$\eta$| $<$ 2.5 the calorimeter has three layers, longitudinal in shower depth, with the first layer having the highest
granularity in the $\eta$ direction, and the second layer collecting most
of the electromagnetic shower energy for high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ objects. A thin presampler layer
covering the range $|\eta|<1.8$ is used to correct for the energy
lost by EM particles upstream of the calorimeter.
The hadronic calorimeter system, which
surrounds the electromagnetic calorimeter, is based on two different
detector technologies, with scintillator tiles or liquid-argon as the active
medium, and with either steel, copper, or tungsten as the absorber
material. Photons are identified as narrow, isolated showers
in the EM calorimeter with no penetration into the hadronic calorimeter.
The fine segmentation of the ATLAS calorimeter allows efficient rejection of jets fragmenting to high-energy $\pi^0$ or $\eta$ mesons that could be misidentified as isolated direct photons.
Collision events are selected using a three-level trigger system.
The first-level trigger is based on custom-built
electronics that use a subset of the total detector
information to reduce the data rate to below the design value of
75 kHz. The subsequent two trigger levels run on a processor farm
and analyze detector information with greater precision. The resulting
recorded event rate from LHC $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 8 \TeV~during the data-taking period in 2012 was approximately 400 Hz.
After applying criteria to ensure nominal
ATLAS detector operation, the total integrated luminosity useful for data
analysis is 20.3 fb$^{-1}$.
The uncertainty in the integrated luminosity is determined to be 1.9$\%$.
It is derived, following the same methodology as that detailed in Ref.~\cite{Aad:2013lumi}, from a calibration of the luminosity scale obtained from beam-separation scans.
Online triggers based on high-energy electrons, muons, and photons are used
to select events with final states consistent with one of the four following processes:
\begin{itemize}
\item $pp\to e^+e^{-}\gamma(\gamma) + X$,
\item $pp\to\mu^+\mu^-\gamma(\gamma) + X$,
\item $pp\to\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma + X$,
\item $pp\to\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma\gamma + X$.
\end{itemize}
The $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ events are selected using single-lepton or dilepton triggers.
The $\pT$ thresholds are 24 \GeV~for single-lepton triggers, and 12 \GeV~(13
\GeV) for dielectron (dimuon) triggers.
A dimuon trigger with asymmetric muon $\pT$ thresholds of 8 \GeV~and 18 \GeV~is also used.
The $\nnbar\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ events are selected using a single-photon trigger with a threshold of $\ET>$ 120 \GeV~and a diphoton trigger with a threshold of $\ET>$ 20 \GeV, respectively.
For the events falling within the acceptance of the measurement, the trigger efficiency is close to $100\%$ for $e^+e^{-}\gamma(\gamma)$ and $\nnbar\gamma$ final states, about $99\%$ for $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ final states, and about $95\%$ for $\mu^+\mu^-\gamma(\gamma)$ final states.
\section {Simulation of signals and backgrounds}
\label{sec:simulation}
Simulated signal and background events are produced with various Monte Carlo event generators, processed through a full ATLAS detector simulation~\cite{SOFT-2010-01} using \textsc{Geant4}~\cite{bib-geant4}, and then reconstructed with the same procedure as for data.
Additional $pp$ interactions (pileup), in the same and neighboring bunch crossings, are overlaid on the hard scattering process in MC simulation.
The MC events are then reweighted to reproduce the distribution of the number of interactions per bunch crossing in data.
The mean number of interactions per bunch crossing in the dataset considered is 20.7.
\subsection{Monte Carlo generation of SM $pp \to \Zboson \gamma (\gamma) + X$ and anomalous gauge-boson couplings processes}
\label{sec:signalMC}
The efficiency of the event selection is studied using a MC simulation of the $\Zboson\gamma$ and $\Zboson\gamma\gamma$ signals using the $\SHERPA$ 1.4
generator \cite{Gleisberg:2008ta} with the CT10 parton distribution function (PDF) set~\cite{Lai:2010vv}, and leading-order (LO) matrix elements with up to three additional final-state partons
for $\Zboson\gamma$ and up to one additional final-state parton for $\Zboson\gamma\gamma$.
$\SHERPA$ uses the CKKW scheme~\cite{Catani:2001cc,Krauss:2002up} to merge matrix elements and parton showers.
This "multileg" approach ensures that the first few hardest emissions are modeled by the real-emission matrix elements.
$\SHERPA$ was found to adequately characterize the distributions of selected $\Zboson\gamma$ candidates in a previous publication~\cite{Aad:2013izg}.
Theoretical uncertainties in the $\SHERPA$ predictions in Figures~\ref{fig:photonET_Zllg}--\ref{fig:ZnunuGGPlots} are taken to be the
same as those estimated with MCFM in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
Signal samples with anomalous triple and quartic gauge-boson couplings are generated using $\SHERPA$ for aTGC and {\textsc{Vbfnlo}} 2.7.0~\cite{bib:vbfnlo1, bib:vbfnlo2, bib:vbfnlo3} interfaced to $\PYTHIA$ 8.175~\cite{Sjostrand:2007gs} for parton showering, hadronization, and the underlying event for aQGC.
More details are given in Section~\ref{sec:agc}.
\subsection{Monte Carlo generation of background processes}
In the measurements of the $\ee\gamma(\gamma)$, $\mumu\gamma(\gamma)$, and $\nnbar\gamma(\gamma)$ production cross sections,
backgrounds are estimated either from simulation or from data.
The main backgrounds arise from object misidentification and are obtained using data-driven techniques, as described in Section~\ref{sec:backgrounds}. MC simulated backgrounds are used for validation in this case.
Smaller backgrounds are estimated directly from simulation.
The $W\Zboson$ and $\Zboson\Zboson$ backgrounds are generated with {\textsc{Powheg-box}} \cite{Frixione:2007vw, powheg-diboson} and the CT10 PDF set,
with parton showering, hadronization, and the underlying event modeled by $\PYTHIA$ 8.165 with the AU2 set of tuned parameters~\cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2012-003}.
The background arising from $t\bar{t}\gamma$ is generated with {\textsc{MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO}} 5.2.1.0~\cite{madgraph} and the CTEQ6L1~\cite{cteq} PDF set,
with parton showering, hadronization, and the underlying event modeled by $\PYTHIA$ 8.183.
$\SHERPA$ 1.4 with the CT10 PDF set is used to simulate $\tautau\gamma(\gamma)$, $\gamma$+jets, and
$W\gamma(\gamma)$ events.
An alternative MC sample of simulated $\gamma+\mathrm{jet}$ events is generated using $\PYTHIA$ 8.165 with the CTEQ6L1 PDF set.
An alternative MC sample of simulated $W\gamma$ events is generated using $\ALPGEN$ 2.14~\cite{Mangano:2002ea} with the CTEQ6L1 PDF set, interfaced to $\HERWIG$ 6.520~\cite{herwig} with {\textsc{Jimmy}} 4.30~\cite{Butterworth:1996zw} and the AUET2 set of tuned parameters~\cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-008} for parton showering, hadronization, and the underlying event.
The $t\bar{t}\gamma$, $W\Zboson$, and $\Zboson\Zboson$ backgrounds are normalized using the NLO cross sections~\cite{powheg-diboson,Melnikov:2011ta}; the $\tautau\gamma$ and $\tautau\gamma\gamma$ backgrounds are normalized using the cross sections predicted by $\SHERPA$.
\section {Selection of $\Zboson\gamma$ and $\Zboson\gamma\gamma$ signal events}
\label{sec:selection}
The event selection criteria are chosen to provide precise cross section measurements of $Z\gamma$ and $Z\gamma\gamma$ production, and to provide good sensitivities to anomalous gauge-boson couplings between photons and the $\Zboson$ bosons.
The selections are optimized
for each of these measurements to obtain
high signal efficiency together with good background rejection.
\subsection{Physics object reconstruction and identification}
\label{subsec:sel_id_and_reco}
Collision events are selected by requiring at least one reconstructed primary vertex candidate with at least three charged-particle tracks with $\pT > 0.4$
\GeV. The vertex candidate with the highest sum of the $\pT^2$ of the associated
tracks is chosen as the event primary vertex.
This criterion may choose the wrong primary vertex in $\nnbar\gamma(\gamma)$ events.
The effect of such a wrong choice was studied in simulation and found to have negligible impact on the photon transverse energy resolution for this analysis.
Electron candidates are reconstructed within the fiducial acceptance region $|\eta| <$ 2.47 from an energy cluster in the EM calorimeter
associated with a reconstructed track in the ID~\cite{Aad:2014elid}. Photon candidates are reconstructed from energy clusters with $|\eta| <$ 2.37~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2012-123}.
The EM cluster of the electron/photon candidate must lie outside the transition region between the barrel and endcap EM calorimeters,
thus electrons and photons with 1.37 $< |\eta| <$ 1.52 are rejected. The cluster energies are corrected using an in situ calibration based on the known $\Zboson$ boson mass~\cite{Aad:2012elid}.
Clusters without matching tracks are classified as unconverted photon candidates, whereas clusters that are matched to one or two tracks that originate from a conversion vertex are
considered as converted photon candidates. Both the unconverted and converted candidates are used in the analysis.
Electron tracks are required to be matched to the event primary vertex.
The electron $d_{0}$ significance, defined as the ratio of the absolute value of the transverse impact parameter, $d_{0}$, with respect to the primary vertex, to its measured uncertainty, must be less than 6.0, and
the weighted electron longitudinal impact parameter with respect to the primary vertex $|z_{0}\times\sin\theta|$ must be less than 0.5 mm.
Reconstructed electrons are required to have $\pT > 25$ \GeV.
The photon $\ET$ threshold depends on the analysis channel.
Muon candidates are identified, within pseudorapidity $|\eta| <$ 2.5, by matching complete tracks or track segments in the MS to tracks in the ID~\cite{PERF-2014-05}.
Similarly to electrons, the muon candidates are required to be matched to the
primary vertex with a transverse impact parameter significance of less
than 3.0, and a weighted longitudinal impact parameter $|z_{0}\times\sin\theta|$ of
less than 0.5 mm.
Reconstructed muons are required to have $\pT > 25$ \GeV.
Photons and electrons are required to meet identification criteria
based on shower shapes in the EM calorimeter,
leakage into the hadronic calorimeter, and ID tracking information. The
resulting selected photons are classified as
"loose" or "tight" and the electrons as "medium" as defined
in Refs.~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2012-123, ATLAS-CONF-2014-032, Aad:2014elid}. The "tight" identification
criterion for photons is used to suppress the
background from multiple showers produced in meson (e.g., $\pi^0, \eta $) decays~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2012-123}. The electron
identification criteria are used to suppress background electrons (primarily from photon conversions and Dalitz decays) and jets faking electrons~\cite{Aad:2012elid}.
Photons, electrons, and muons are required to be isolated from nearby hadronic activity.
Photons are considered isolated if the sum of transverse energy calculated from clusters of calorimeter energy deposits~\cite{Lampl:1099735} in an "isolation" cone of size $\Delta R=0.4$ around the candidate, $\ET^\mathrm{iso}$,
is smaller than 4 \GeV~after subtracting the contribution from the photon itself, and corrected for the leakage of the photon energy and the effects of underlying event and pileup~\cite{Aad:2010sp,Cacciari:2008gn}.
For electrons to be isolated, the calorimeter transverse energy deposits and the sum of the transverse momenta of tracks in a cone of size $\Delta R =
0.2$ around the candidate after subtracting the contribution from the electron itself must be below $0.14 \times \pT^e$ and $0.13 \times \pT^e$, respectively, where $\pT^e$ is the electron transverse momentum.
Muons are considered isolated if the sum of the transverse momenta of ID tracks excluding the track associated with the muon in a cone of size $\Delta R = 0.2$ is below $0.1 \times \pT^{\mu}$, where $\pT^{\mu}$ is the muon transverse momentum.
All lepton and photon efficiencies of the trigger, reconstruction, and identification are corrected in the simulation with data-derived correction factors.
Jets are reconstructed from clustered energy deposits in the calorimeter using the anti-$k_t$ algorithm~\cite{Cacciari:2008gp} with radius parameter $R = 0.4$ and are required
to have $\pT >$ 30 \GeV~and $|\eta| <$ 4.5.
Reconstructed calorimeter jets are corrected for effects of
noncompensating response, energy losses in the dead material, shower leakage,
as well as inefficiencies in energy clustering and jet reconstruction
by applying a simulation-based correction derived in bins of $\eta$ and $E$. An in situ calibration corrects for differences between data and
simulation in the jet response. This jet energy scale
calibration is thoroughly discussed in Ref.~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2015-037}.
In order to reduce pileup effects,
for jets with $\pT <$ 50 \GeV~and $|\eta| <$ 2.4 the jet vertex fraction (JVF),
defined as the ratio of the summed scalar $\pT$ of tracks associated with both the $R = 0.4$ jet and the primary vertex to that of all tracks associated with the jet,
must be greater than 0.5.
To reject electrons reconstructed from a bremsstrahlung photon emitted by a muon traversing the calorimeter, any electron candidate within a $\Delta R = 0.1$ cone around a selected muon is removed.
Jets are removed if they are found within a $\Delta R = 0.3$ cone around a selected lepton or photon.
The missing transverse momentum vector $\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}}$ is the vector of momentum imbalance in the transverse plane. The reconstruction of the direction and magnitude
of the missing transverse momentum vector is described in Ref.~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2013-082}.
The $\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}}$ is calculated from the vector sum of the calibrated transverse momenta of all jets with
$\pT$ > 20 \GeV~and $|\eta|$ < 4.5, the transverse momenta of electron and muon candidates, and all calorimeter energy clusters not belonging to a reconstructed object (soft-term).
Selection criteria based on $\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}}$ or its magnitude $\met$ are used only in the neutrino channels, as described in Section~\ref{subsec:sel_Znunu}.
\subsection{Selection of $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ event candidates}
\label{subsec:selllgg}
Selected $\leplep\gamma$ or $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ event candidates must contain exactly one pair of same-flavor, opposite-charge isolated leptons (electrons or muons) and at least one or two isolated photons with $\ET^{\gamma} > $ 15 \GeV, respectively.
In the case of additional photon candidates, those with the highest $\ET^{\gamma}$ are selected.
The dilepton invariant mass $m_{\leplep}$ is required to be greater than 40 \GeV.
The reconstructed photons are removed if they are found within a $\Delta R =$ 0.7 (0.4) cone around a selected lepton for $\leplep\gamma$ ($\leplep\gamma\gamma$) events.
A further requirement on the photon--photon separation of $\Delta R(\gamma,\gamma)$ > 0.4 is applied in $\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma\gamma$\xspace events.
The selected events are categorized as inclusive events, referring to those with no requirement on the jets, and exclusive events, which are defined to be those with no selected jet with $\pT > 30$ \GeV~and $|\eta|<4.5$.
\subsection{Selection of $\nnbar\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ event candidates}
\label{subsec:sel_Znunu}
The $\nnbar\gamma$ event candidates are selected by considering events with $\met > $ 100 \GeV~and at least one isolated photon with $\ET^{\gamma} > $ 130 \GeV.
The separation between the reconstructed photon direction and $\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}}$ in the transverse plane is required to be
$\Delta \phi(\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}},\gamma) > \pi/2$,
since in signal events the $\Zboson$ boson should recoil against the photon.
The $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ event candidates are selected by considering events with $\met>110$ \GeV~and at least two isolated photons with $\ET > 22$ \GeV~and $\Delta R(\gamma,\gamma)>0.4$.
The directions of the di-photon system and the $\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}}$ are required to be separated in the transverse plane by
$\Delta \phi(\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}},\gamma\gamma) > 5\pi/6$.
In the case of additional photon candidates in $\nnbar\gamma$/$\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ events, one/two photons with the highest $\ET^{\gamma}$ are selected.
To suppress $W(\gamma)$+jets and $W\gamma(\gamma)$ backgrounds,
events containing an identified muon or electron (as defined in Section~\ref{subsec:sel_id_and_reco} without isolation requirement) are rejected.
The selected events are categorized as inclusive events and exclusive events, as described in Section~\ref{subsec:selllgg}.
\section {Estimation of backgrounds}
\label{sec:backgrounds}
This section describes the background estimation in each of the final states.
The backgrounds in the $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ final states are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:backgrounds_Zllg_Zllgg}.
The dominant backgrounds in these final states are $Z$+jets and $Z\gamma$+jets with jets misidentified as photons.
The backgrounds in the $\nnbar\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ final states are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:bkgnngnngg}.
The dominant backgrounds in these final states are those with jets misidentified as photons, those with electrons misidentified as photons, as well as $W(\ell\nu)\gamma$ and $W(\ell\nu)\gamma\gamma$ where the lepton from the $W$ decay is not detected.
\subsection{Backgrounds to $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$}
\label{sec:backgrounds_Zllg_Zllgg}
Backgrounds in the selected $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ samples are dominated by events in which hadronic jets, which contain photons from $\pi^{0}$ or $\eta$ decays, are misidentified as prompt photons.
In the $\leplep\gamma$ measurement, the background from jets misidentified as photons originates from the production of $Z$ bosons in association with jets ($Z$+jets),
while in the $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ measurement this background originates from both $\Zboson\gamma$ in association with jets ($\Zboson\gamma$+jets) and $\Zboson$+jets events with one or two jets misidentified as photons, respectively.
The backgrounds from jets misidentified as photons are estimated using data-driven methods as described in Sections~\ref{sec:dd_bkg_Zllg} and~\ref{sec:dd_bkg_Zllgg}.
Smaller backgrounds originate from $t\bar{t}\gamma$, $WZ$, and $\tautau\gamma$ for $\leplep\gamma$, and from $WZ$, $ZZ$, and $\tautau\gamma\gamma$ for $\leplep\gamma\gamma$.
The backgrounds from $t\bar{t}\gamma$ and $\tautau\gamma(\gamma)$ yield the same final states as the signals, while the backgrounds from $WZ$ and $ZZ$ meet the selection criteria when the electrons from the $W$ or $Z$ decay are misidentified as photons or when final-state photons are radiated.
These are expected to contribute in total less than $1.5\%$ of the selected event yield in both the $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ final states, and are derived from simulation as described in Section~\ref{sec:bkgresults}.
\subsubsection{Estimation of the background from jets misidentified as photons in $\leplep\gamma$ measurements}
\label{sec:dd_bkg_Zllg}
For the $\leplep\gamma$ measurement, a two-dimensional sideband method is used to measure the background from jets misidentified as photons, as described in Refs.~\cite{Aad:2013izg,Aad:2010sp}.
In this method, a looser photon selection is considered, in which the isolation and some identification requirements on the photon are discarded.
After this selection, the $\leplep\gamma$ events are separated into one signal and three control regions, defined by varying the photon identification and isolation requirements.
Photon candidates failing a subset of requirements on the photon shower-shape variables but satisfying all other requirements in the "tight" photon identification are considered as "nontight".
Events in the signal region (A) have the photon satisfying the nominal photon isolation and "tight" identification requirements as described in Section~\ref{subsec:sel_id_and_reco}.
The three control regions are defined as:
\begin{description}
\item[i.] Control region B: the photon candidate meets the "tight" identification criteria and is not isolated ($\ET^\mathrm{iso} > 4$ \GeV);
\item[ii.] Control region C: the photon candidate meets the "nontight" identification criteria and is isolated ($\ET^\mathrm{iso} < 4$ \GeV);
\item[iii.] Control region D: the photon candidate meets the "nontight" identification criteria and is not isolated ($\ET^\mathrm{iso} > 4$ \GeV).
\end{description}
The shower-shape requirements that the "nontight" photons are required to fail are chosen to enhance the $\Zboson$+jets background events in the control regions while minimizing the correlation with the photon isolation.
The number of $Z+$jets events in the signal region, $N^{j\rightarrow\gamma}_{\mathrm{A}}$, can be derived from the number of observed events in the control regions $N_{i}$ ($i$=B,C,D) :
\begin{linenomath}
\begin{align}
N^{j\rightarrow\gamma}_{\mathrm{A}} & = \left( (N_{\mathrm{B}} - N_{\mathrm{B}}^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}} - c_{\mathrm{B}} N_{\mathrm{A}}^{Z\gamma})\frac{N_{\mathrm{C}} - N_{\mathrm{C}}^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}} - c_{\mathrm{C}} N_{\mathrm{A}}^{Z\gamma}}{N_{\mathrm{D}} - N_{\mathrm{D}}^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}} - c_{\mathrm{D}} N_{\mathrm{A}}^{\Zboson\gamma}} \right) R, \label{eq:ABCD1} \\
N_{\mathrm{A}}^{Z\gamma} & = N_{\mathrm{A}} - N_{\mathrm{A}}^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}} - N^{j\rightarrow\gamma}_{\mathrm{A}}. \label{eq:ABCD2}
\end{align}
\end{linenomath}
The coefficients $c_i$ ($i$=B,C,D) are equal to the ratio of the \ensuremath{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma}\xspace yields in the control regions to the signal region, and are estimated from simulation.
The $R$ factor accounts for a potential correlation between the photon identification and isolation variables for the $Z$+jets background.
The central value of $R$ is taken to be one, as would be the case for no correlation.
Its uncertainty of $20\%$ is determined by the deviation of the $R$ value from one as determined from simulation studies of the $Z$+jets background.
The yields $N_{i}^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}}$ ($i$=A,B,C,D) are the contributions from other electroweak backgrounds in each region taken from simulation.
Equations~(\ref{eq:ABCD1}) and~(\ref{eq:ABCD2}) yield a quadratic expression in the unknown variable $N^{j\rightarrow\gamma}_{\mathrm{A}}$.
The solution with physical meaning is retained.
The uncertainty in the value of $R$ represents the dominant systematic uncertainty of $24\%$ in the estimate of the $Z$+jets background.
The second largest systematic uncertainty of $10\%$ arises from the inaccuracy in modeling of the coefficients $c_i$, mainly due to the uncertainties in photon identification and isolation efficiencies.
An additional $Z$+jets background uncertainty of $5\%$ arises from uncertainties in the estimates of the $N_{i}^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}}$ in each of the control regions.
\subsubsection{Estimation of the background from jets misidentified as photons in $\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma\gamma$\xspace measurements}
\label{sec:dd_bkg_Zllgg}
A matrix method as described in Ref.~\cite{STDM-2011-05} is used to estimate the background from jets misidentified as photons in $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ events from $Z(\leplep)\gamma$+jets and $Z(\leplep)$+jets events with one or two jets misidentified as photons.
The method uses as inputs the jet-to-photon misidentification rate (fake rate), $f$, which is the probability for a jet satisfying "loose" photon identification criteria~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2012-123} to be identified as a "tight" and isolated photon,
and the real photon identification efficiency, $\epsilon$, which is the probability for "loose" prompt photons to be identified as "tight" and isolated photons.
The fake rate and the real photon identification efficiency are estimated from data and from MC simulation, respectively.
A 4$\times$4 matrix is constructed from the fake rate and the real photon identification efficiency, relating the observed number of events, $N_{\mathrm{TT}}$, $N_{\mathrm{TL}}$, $N_{\mathrm{LT}}$, $N_{\mathrm{LL}}$,
to the unknown number of each type of event, $N_{\gamma\gamma}$, $N_{\gamma\mathrm{jet}}$, $N_{\mathrm{jet} \gamma}$, $N_{\mathrm{jet}\mathrm{jet}}$, by a set of linear equations:
\begin{linenomath}
\begin{equation}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
N_{\mathrm{TT}}\\
N_{\mathrm{TL}}\\
N_{\mathrm{LT}}\\
N_{\mathrm{LL}}\end{array}\right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cccc}
\epsilon_1\epsilon_2 & \epsilon_1 f_2 & f_1 \epsilon_2 & f_1 f_2\\
\epsilon_1(1-\epsilon_2) & \epsilon_1(1-f_2) & f_1(1-\epsilon_2) & f_1(1-f_2)\\
(1-\epsilon_1)\epsilon_2 & (1-\epsilon_1)f_2 & (1-f_1)\epsilon_2 & (1-f_1)f_2\\
(1-\epsilon_1)(1-\epsilon_2) & (1-\epsilon_1)(1-f_2) & (1-f_1)(1-\epsilon_2) & (1-f_1)(1-f_2)\end{array} \right) \left( \begin{array}{c}
N_{\gamma\gamma} \\
N_{\gamma\mathrm{jet}}\\
N_{\mathrm{jet} \gamma}\\
N_{\mathrm{jet}\mathrm{jet}}\end{array}\right).
\label{equ:matrix}
\end{equation}
\end{linenomath}
In the subscripts TT, TL, LT, LL, the first (second) subscript refers to the leading (subleading) reconstructed photon candidate; T means that it is "tight" and isolated while L corresponds to a "loose", not "tight" or not isolated candidate.
Similarly, the subscripts $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$jet, jet$\gamma$, and jetjet correspond to the cases of two photons, leading photon and subleading jet, leading jet and subleading photon, and two jets, respectively.
The subscripts 1 and 2 refer to the leading and subleading photon candidates, respectively.
The number of each type of event, $N_{\gamma\gamma}$, $N_{\gamma\mathrm{jet}}$, $N_{\mathrm{jet} \gamma}$, $N_{\mathrm{jet}\mathrm{jet}}$, is obtained by solving Equation~(\ref{equ:matrix}), from which
the number of background events with jets misidentified as photons in the signal region, $N_{\mathrm{TT}}^{j\rightarrow\gamma}$, is then obtained: $N_{\mathrm{TT}}^{j\rightarrow\gamma} = \epsilon_1f_2\times N_{\gamma\mathrm{jet}} + f_1\epsilon_2\times N_{\mathrm{jet} \gamma} + f_1f_2\times N_{\mathrm{jet}\mathrm{jet}}$.
The fake rate is estimated from data using a sample enriched in $\Zboson(\leplep)+$jets with one jet misidentified as a photon.
To suppress the contribution from $\Zboson\rightarrow \leplep\gamma$, the invariant mass of opposite-charge dilepton pairs in the events is required to be within 8 \GeV~of the $\Zboson$ boson mass.
A two-dimensional sideband method similar to that described in Section~\ref{sec:dd_bkg_Zllg} is used to estimate the number of $\leplep+$jets events in which the "loose" jets satisfy the "tight" identification and isolation requirements.
As the fake rate depends on the photon $\ET$, a fake rate as a function of the photon $\ET$ is used in the matrix method.
The real photon identification efficiency, which is also a function of the photon $\ET$, is estimated from MC simulation.
The systematic uncertainty related to the background from jets misidentified as photons is dominated by the potential bias of the two-dimensional sideband method to estimate the fake rate.
It is evaluated from $Z$+jets MC simulation to be about $23\%$, by comparing the fake rate calculated by the two-dimensional sideband method to the fake rate calculated using the generator-level information in the MC simulation.
Other systematic uncertainties, arising from possible inaccuracy in modeling of the real photon identification efficiency, other electroweak backgrounds, as well as the dependence of $\epsilon$ and $f$ on photon $\eta$, sum to about $10\%$.
\subsubsection{Results of the background estimation for $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$}
\label{sec:bkgresults}
The backgrounds other than those from jets misidentified as photons are estimated using MC simulation.
The systematic uncertainties in these backgrounds consist of the experimental uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:intXsec} and the cross-section uncertainties,
which are $22\%$ ($t\bar{t}\gamma$~\cite{Melnikov:2011ta}),
$10\%$ ($W\Zboson$~\cite{Campbell:2011bn,Campanario:2012fk}) and $15\%$ ($\Zboson\Zboson$~\cite{Campbell:2011bn,Cascioli:2014yka}).
The cross-section uncertainties in the $\tautau\gamma$ and $\tautau\gamma\gamma$ backgrounds are evaluated to be 7\% using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
An additional uncertainty of $30\%$ ($60\%$) is assigned to the $WZ$ ($ZZ$) background to account for the mismodeling of the electron-to-photon fake rate.
This uncertainty is estimated by comparing the fake rate predicted by simulation to that estimated in data, using the method described in Section~\ref{sec:bkg-Znunug-Wenu}.
The number of events observed in data, $N^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$, as well as the estimated background yields in the \ensuremath{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma}\xspace and $\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma\gamma$\xspace measurements, are summarized in Tables~\ref{table:results_Zllg} and~\ref{table:results_Zllgg}, respectively.
The $\ET$ distributions of photons selected in the \ensuremath{e^{+}e^{-}\gamma}\xspace and \ensuremath{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}\gamma}\xspace inclusive measurements are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:photonET_Zllg}.
The highest-$\ET$ photon is measured as $\ET^{\gamma}=585~(570)$ \GeV~in the \ensuremath{e^{+}e^{-}\gamma}\xspace (\ensuremath{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}\gamma}\xspace) final state.
The background from jets misidentified as photons ($Z$+jets) in each $\ET$ bin results from the data-driven estimation for that bin. The distributions of other backgrounds are taken from MC simulation normalized to the integrated luminosity with the cross sections of the background processes.
Similarly, Figures~\ref{fig:mllgg_Zllgg} and~\ref{fig:mgg_Zllgg} present the distributions of the invariant mass of the $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ four-body system and the diphoton invariant mass distributions, respectively, in the \ensuremath{e^{+}e^{-}\gamma\gamma}\xspace and \ensuremath{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}\gamma\gamma}\xspace inclusive measurements.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline
\hline
& \ensuremath{e^{+}e^{-}\gamma}\xspace & \ensuremath{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}\gamma}\xspace & \ensuremath{e^{+}e^{-}\gamma}\xspace & \ensuremath{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}\gamma}\xspace \\
$ $ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ $\geq$ 0} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ = 0}\\
$N^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & 13807 & 17054 & 10268 & 12738\\
\hline
$N^{j\rightarrow \xspace\gamma}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & $1840 \pm 90 \pm 480$ & $ 2120 \pm 90 \pm 560 $ & $1260 \pm 80 \pm 330$ & $ 1510 \pm 80 \pm 400 $ \\
$N^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & $143 \pm 3 \pm 28$ & $ 146 \pm 2 \pm 29 $ & $30.8 \pm 1.6 \pm 6.7$ & $ 26.9 \pm 1.5 \pm 5.8 $ \\
\hline
$N^{\mathrm{sig}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ ($\SHERPA$) & $12040 \pm 40 \pm 820$ & $15070 \pm 40 \pm 960$ & $9160 \pm 30 \pm 750$ & $11570 \pm 40 \pm 910$ \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Total number of events satisfying the $\leplep\gamma$ selection requirements in data $(N^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace})$, predicted number of signal events from $\SHERPA$ ($N^{\mathrm{sig}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$), and the estimated number of background events ($N^{j\rightarrow \xspace\gamma}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ and $N^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$) in the $\ensuremath{e^{+}e^{-}\gamma}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}\gamma}\xspace$ channels with the inclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ $\geq$ 0) and exclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ = 0) selections.
The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is the sum of all contributions to the systematic uncertainty.
The statistical uncertainties arise from the numbers of events in the control regions and the simulation.
The systematic uncertainties in the signal include both the experimental uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:intXsec} and the theoretical uncertainties in the cross sections evaluated using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
}
\label{table:results_Zllg}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline
\hline
& \ensuremath{e^{+}e^{-}\gamma\gamma}\xspace & \ensuremath{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}\gamma\gamma}\xspace & \ensuremath{e^{+}e^{-}\gamma\gamma}\xspace & \ensuremath{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}\gamma\gamma}\xspace \\
$ $ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ $\geq$ 0} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ = 0}\\
$N^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & 43 & 37 & 29 & 22 \\
\hline
$N^{j\rightarrow \xspace\gamma}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & $ 5.8 \pm 1.0 \pm 1.4 $ & $ 10.9 \pm 1.1 \pm 2.8 $ & $ 3.08 \pm 0.73 \pm 0.75 $ & $ 6.4 \pm 0.9 \pm 1.8 $ \\
$N^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & $ 0.42 \pm 0.08 \pm 0.18 $ & $ 0.194 \pm 0.047 \pm 0.097 $ & $ 0.24 \pm 0.05 \pm 0.11 $ & $ 0.105 \pm 0.028 \pm 0.055 $ \\
\hline
$N^{\mathrm{sig}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ ($\SHERPA$) & $ 25.7 \pm 0.5 \pm 1.6 $ & $ 29.5 \pm 0.6 \pm 1.7 $ & $ 18.9 \pm 0.5 \pm 1.5 $ & $ 21.8 \pm 0.5 \pm 1.7 $ \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Total number of events satisfying the $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ selection requirements in data $(N^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace})$, predicted number of signal events from $\SHERPA$ ($N^{\mathrm{sig}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$), and the estimated number of background events ($N^{j\rightarrow \xspace\gamma}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ and $N^{\mathrm{Other~BKG}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$) in the $\ensuremath{e^{+}e^{-}\gamma\gamma}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}\gamma\gamma}\xspace$ channels with the inclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ $\geq$ 0) and exclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ = 0) selections.
The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is the sum of all contributions to the systematic uncertainty.
The statistical uncertainties arise from the numbers of events in the control regions and the simulation.
The systematic uncertainties in the signal include both the experimental uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:intXsec} and the theoretical uncertainties in the cross sections evaluated using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
}
\label{table:results_Zllgg}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_02a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_02b.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The photon transverse energy ($\ET^{\gamma}$) distributions from inclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jet}}\geq 0$) $\leplep\gamma$ events for the electron (left) and muon (right) channels.
The numbers of candidates observed in data (points with error bars) are compared to the sum of the SM signal predicted from $\SHERPA$ and the various backgrounds discussed in Section~\ref{sec:backgrounds_Zllg_Zllgg}.
The uncertainty band on the sum of expected signal and backgrounds includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the MC simulations and the data-driven background estimate added in quadrature.
The signal is normalized using the cross sections predicted by $\SHERPA$.
The theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross sections are evaluated bin-by-bin using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
The ratio of the numbers of candidates observed in data to the sum of expected signal and backgrounds is also shown.}
\label{fig:photonET_Zllg}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_03a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_03b.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The four-body invariant mass ($m_{\leplep\gamma\gamma}$) distributions from inclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jet}}\geq 0$) $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ events for the electron (left) and muon (right) channels.
The numbers of candidates observed in data (points with error bars) are compared to the sum of the SM signal predicted from $\SHERPA$ and the various backgrounds discussed in Section~\ref{sec:backgrounds_Zllg_Zllgg}.
The uncertainty band on the sum of expected signal and backgrounds includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the MC simulations and the data-driven background estimate added in quadrature.
The signal is normalized using the cross sections predicted by $\SHERPA$.
The theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross sections are evaluated using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
}
\label{fig:mllgg_Zllgg}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_04a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_04b.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The diphoton invariant mass ($m_{\gamma\gamma}$) distributions from inclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jet}}\geq 0$) $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ events for the electron (left) and muon (right) channels.
The numbers of candidates observed in data (points with error bars) are compared to the sum of the SM signal predicted from $\SHERPA$ and the various backgrounds discussed in Section~\ref{sec:backgrounds_Zllg_Zllgg}.
The uncertainty band on the sum of expected signal and backgrounds includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the MC simulations and the data-driven background estimate added in quadrature.
The signal is normalized using the cross sections predicted by $\SHERPA$.
The theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross sections are evaluated using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
}
\label{fig:mgg_Zllgg}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Backgrounds to $\nnbar\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$}
\label{sec:bkgnngnngg}
Backgrounds to the $\nnbar\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ signals originate from several sources (listed in decreasing order of significance): events with prompt photons and mismeasured jet momenta causing missing transverse momentum (dominant for the inclusive measurement); nonsignal electroweak processes, such as $W(\ell\nu)\gamma$, with partial event detection; events with real $\met$ from neutrinos (such as $\Zboson(\nnbar)$ or $W(e\nu)$) and misidentified photons from electrons or jets.
The largest contributions are determined using data-driven techniques. The procedures used to
estimate these backgrounds follow closely those in a previous ATLAS measurement~\cite{Aad:2013izg}.
Smaller backgrounds originate from $\tautau\gamma$ for $\nnbar\gamma$ and $\tautau\gamma\gamma$ for $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$.
These are expected to contribute less than $1.5\%$ of the selected event yield and are derived from MC simulation.
The backgrounds from multijet and $\leplep\gamma$ processes are negligible.
Each source of background is discussed in detail together with the method used for its estimation in the following subsections.
\subsubsection{$\gamma+$jets background to $\nnbar\gamma$}
\label{sec:bkg-Znunug-gj}
An imprecise measurement of jet activity in the calorimeter can cause the appearance of fake $\met$ in the event.
Photon+jets events are one of the dominant background contributions to the $\nnbar\gamma$ channel.
Although the high-$\met$ requirement reduces the $\gamma$+jets background, a residual contamination from this background remains for the inclusive measurement and is estimated with the following data-driven method.
In order to measure this background from data, a control sample enriched in $\gamma$+jets events is selected by applying all the signal
region (SR) selection criteria, but inverting the angular separation requirement such that $\Delta\phi(\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}},\gamma)<\pi/2$.
The data yield in this control region (CR), after subtraction of
signal and other backgrounds obtained using the MC simulation, is then extrapolated to the signal region with a
transfer factor determined from a $\gamma$+jets simulation. The transfer factor equals the ratio of the numbers of $\gamma$+jets events in the SR to the CR. The nominal
transfer factor is determined to be 1.1 from $\SHERPA$ and a 30\% uncertainty is
estimated using an alternative prediction from $\PYTHIA$.
\subsubsection{$W(\ell\nu)\gamma$ background to $\nnbar\gamma$ }
\label{sec:bkg-Znunug-Wg}
Misidentified events from $W(\ell\nu)\gamma$ production are one of the dominant background contributions to the $\nnbar\gamma$ signal.
A large fraction (about 60\%) of this contamination originates from $W(\tau\nu)\gamma$ events.
A scale factor is defined to correct the yield of $W\gamma$ events estimated by MC simulation to match the $W\gamma$ event yield measured
in a control data region constructed by requiring exactly one identified electron or muon instead of the charged-lepton veto.
Since the control region contains some amount of signal leakage and other background contaminations, these contributions are estimated using the methods described in Sections~\ref{sec:bkg-Znunug-gj},~\ref{sec:bkg-Znunug-Wenu} as well as with MC simulation and then subtracted.
With equal branching fraction of the $W$ boson leptonic decays, the MC scale factor for the dominant $W(\tau\nu)\gamma$ events in the signal region and its uncertainty are taken from the measurement of $W(\ell\nu)\gamma$ events in the control region.
The main uncertainty of 34\% in this background prediction is due to the extrapolation transfer factor from the control region to the signal region. This is estimated by comparing transfer factors between two MC samples generated with $\SHERPA$ and $\ALPGEN$, respectively. The transfer factor between the control and the signal regions is taken from $\SHERPA$ as the baseline and equals $2.2\pm0.7$ for the inclusive selection and $1.8\pm0.7$ for the exclusive selection.
\subsubsection{$W(e\nu)$ background to $\nnbar\gamma$ }
\label{sec:bkg-Znunug-Wenu}
Misidentification of electrons as photons also contributes to the background yield in the signal region.
The estimation of this background is made in two steps. The first is the determination of the probability for an electron to
be misidentified as a photon using $\Zboson(\ee)$ decays reconstructed as $e+\gamma$, as described in Ref.~\cite{Aad:2015exgm}.
The probability of observing an $e+\gamma$ pair with invariant mass near the $\Zboson$ boson mass is used to determine an electron-to-photon fake factor $f_{e\rightarrow\gamma}$.
This increases from 2\% to 6\% as $|\eta|$ increases from 0 to 2.37.
The second step is the construction of a control region with nominal $\nnbar\gamma$ selection criteria, except that an electron is required instead
of the photon in the final state. This control region contains $W(e\nu)$+jets as the dominant process and some fractions of other processes containing genuine electrons and jets.
The estimated $W(e\nu)$ background is then the product of the electron-to-photon fake factor by the number of events in the chosen control sample.
The total uncertainty in this background varies from 10\% to 30\% as a function of photon $\ET$ and $\eta$ and is dominated by the number of events in the $e+\gamma$ control sample used to measure the electron misidentification probability.
\subsubsection{$\Zboson(\nnbar)$+jets backgrounds to $\nnbar\gamma$}
Misidentification of jets as photons gives a non-negligible background contribution to the $\nnbar\gamma$ signal.
A data-driven method similar to the one described for $\Zboson(\leplep)$+jets in Section~\ref{sec:dd_bkg_Zllg} is
used to determine the background contribution from $\Zboson(\nnbar)$+jets events.
A systematic uncertainty of 25\% in this background is assigned, dominated by the uncertainty in the correlation factor between identification and isolation of jets reconstructed as photons.
\subsubsection{$\gamma$+jets and $\gamma\gamma$+jets backgrounds to $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$}
\label{sec:bkg-Znunugg-QCD}
The estimation of $\gamma$+jets and $\gamma\gamma$+jets backgrounds to the $Z(\nnbar)\gamma\gamma$ signal uses a two-dimensional sideband method.
Four regions are constructed using two orthogonal selections: different $\ET^\mathrm{miss}$ requirements ($\ET^\mathrm{miss}$ $<$ 20 \GeV~or $\ET^\mathrm{miss}$ $>$ 110 \GeV)
and different identification requirements for photons (two "tight" photons or one "tight" photon and one photon meeting the looser criteria but not the "tight" ones).
Since the correlations between these regions are small, the number of background events in the signal region can be estimated by scaling the number of events
in the high-$\ET^\mathrm{miss}$ control region by the ratio of the events from control samples in the low $\ET^\mathrm{miss}$ region.
Corrections are applied for the $Z(\nnbar)\gamma\gamma$ signal and other backgrounds leaking into the control samples.
The largest uncertainty in this procedure is due to the number of events in the control regions. Systematic uncertainties for this background are evaluated with
alternative low $\ET^\mathrm{miss}$ control regions (5 $<\ET^\mathrm{miss}<$ 25 \GeV) and from the uncertainty in the correlation between control regions (15\%).
\subsubsection{$W(\ell\nu)\gamma\gamma$ background to $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$}
The background from $W(\ell\nu)\gamma\gamma$ events is dominated by the
$\tau\nu\gamma\gamma$ contribution and is estimated using
techniques similar to those described above in Section~\ref{sec:bkg-Znunug-Wg}. A control region is
defined by requiring exactly one identified electron or muon
instead of the charged-lepton veto. After accounting for signal leakage and
other background contributions, the control region yield is compared
to the $W\gamma\gamma$ simulation. Good agreement is found, as in the
recent measurement of the $W\gamma\gamma$ cross section~\cite{STDM-2013-05}, although in the high-$\ET^\mathrm{miss}$ region considered here the size of the control sample leads to a
100\% uncertainty in the transfer factor.
\subsubsection{$W(e\nu)\gamma$ background to $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$}
One of the dominant backgrounds in the $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma\gamma$ channel originates from the misidentification of electrons as photons.
This background is estimated by selecting a control sample in which an electron is required instead of one of the photons in the $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma\gamma$ final state.
The electron fake rate is estimated as described in Section~\ref{sec:bkg-Znunug-Wenu}.
The estimated background in the signal region is then obtained by rescaling the yield in the control sample by the electron-to-photon fake rate.
The largest uncertainty in this background is 20\% and is derived from MC events in a closure test of the method.
\subsubsection{$\Zboson(\nnbar)\gamma$+jets background to $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$}
The $\Zboson(\nnbar)\gamma$+jets background falls into the signal region when one jet is misidentified as a photon.
This background contributes less than 5\% of the total event yield and is estimated from the MC simulation.
The systematic uncertainty arises from the mismodeling of the jet-to-photon misidentification rate in the MC simulation.
It is evaluated to be 127\% (106\%) in the inclusive (exclusive) channel, based on $\Zboson(\leplep)\gamma$+jets events with one jet misidentified as a photon, by comparing its estimate from data (as described in Section~\ref{sec:dd_bkg_Zllgg}) with the prediction from MC simulation.
\subsubsection {Results of the background estimation for $\nnbar\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$}
A summary of the number of events observed in data and the background contributions in the $\nnbar\gamma(\gamma)$ channels is given in Tables~\ref{table:Znunug_results} and~\ref{table:Znunugg_results}.
The photon transverse energy and the missing transverse momentum distributions from the selected events in the $\nnbar\gamma$ channel are shown in Figure \ref{fig:ZnunuGPlots}.
The highest-$\ET$ photon is measured as $\ET^{\gamma}$=783 \GeV.
The diphoton invariant mass and the missing transverse momentum distributions from the selected events in the $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ channel are shown in Figure \ref{fig:ZnunuGGPlots}.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline \hline
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ $\geq$ 0} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ = 0}\\
$N^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & $3085$ & $1039$ \\
\hline
$N^{\gamma+\mathrm{jets}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & $950\pm 30\pm 300$ & $9.2\pm 3.5\pm 0.7$ \\
$N^{W(\ell\nu)\gamma}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & $900\pm 50\pm 300$ & $ 272\pm 14\pm 92$ \\
$N^{W(e\nu)}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & $258\pm 38\pm 18$ & $147\pm 21\pm 10$ \\
$N^{Z(\nnbar)+\mathrm{jets}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & $22.9\pm0.5\pm6.1$ & $11.1\pm0.4\pm3.4$ \\
$N^{Z(\tautau)\gamma}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & $46.2\pm 0.9\pm 3.2$ & $10.23\pm 0.43\pm 0.72$ \\
\hline
$N^{\mathrm{bkg}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ & $2180\pm 70\pm 420$ & $450\pm 25\pm 93$ \\
\hline
$N^{\mathrm{sig}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$ ($\SHERPA$) & $1221\pm 2\pm 65$ & $742\pm 2 \pm 44$ \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{
Total number of events satisfying the $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma$ selection requirements in data ($N^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$), predicted number of signal events from $\SHERPA$ ($N^{\mathrm{sig}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$), and the
expected number of background events for each of the sources and together ($N^{\mathrm{bkg}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma}\xspace}$)
with the inclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ $\geq$ 0) and exclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ = 0) selections.
The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is the sum of all contributions to the systematic uncertainty.
The statistical uncertainties arise from the numbers of events in the control regions and the simulation.
The systematic uncertainties in the signal include both the experimental uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:intXsec} and the theoretical uncertainties in the cross sections evaluated using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
}
\label{table:Znunug_results}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline \hline
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ $\geq$ 0} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ = 0}\\
$N^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & $46$ & $19$ \\
\hline
$N^{\mathrm{jets}+\gamma(\gamma)}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & $12.2\pm6.7\pm1.8$ & $2.9\pm4.0\pm0.4$ \\
$N^{W(\ell\nu)\gamma\gamma}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & $3.6\pm0.1\pm3.6$ & $1.0\pm0.1\pm1.0$ \\
$N^{W(e\nu)\gamma}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & $10.4\pm0.5\pm2.1$ & $3.47\pm0.28\pm0.69$\\
$N^{Z(\nnbar)\gamma+\mathrm{jets}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & $0.71\pm0.71\pm0.90$ & $0.71\pm0.71\pm0.75$ \\
$N^{Z(\tautau)\gamma\gamma}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & $0.381\pm0.055\pm0.027$ & $0.141\pm0.036\pm0.010$ \\
\hline
$N^{\mathrm{bkg}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ & $27.2\pm6.8\pm4.6$ & $8.3\pm4.1\pm1.5$ \\
\hline
$N^{\mathrm{sig}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$ ($\SHERPA$) & $7.54\pm0.07\pm0.34$ & $4.80\pm0.06\pm0.29$ \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Total number of events satisfying the $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma\gamma$ selection requirements in data ($N^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$), predicted number of signal events from $\SHERPA$ ($N^{\mathrm{sig}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$), and the
expected number of background events for each of the sources and together ($N^{\mathrm{bkg}}_{\ensuremath{\Zzero\gamma\gamma}\xspace}$)
with the inclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ $\geq$ 0) and exclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ = 0) selections.
The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is the sum of all contributions to the systematic uncertainty.
The statistical uncertainties arise from the numbers of events in the control regions and the simulation.
The systematic uncertainties in the signal include both the experimental uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:intXsec} and the theoretical uncertainties in the cross sections evaluated using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
}
\label{table:Znunugg_results}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_05a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_05b.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The photon transverse energy $\ET$ (left) and missing transverse momentum $\met$ (right) distributions from inclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jet}}\geq 0$) $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma$ events.
The numbers of candidates observed in data (points with error bars) are compared to the sum of the SM signal predicted from $\SHERPA$ and the various backgrounds discussed in Section~\ref{sec:bkgnngnngg}.
The uncertainty band on the sum of expected signal and backgrounds includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the MC simulations and the data-driven background estimate added in quadrature.
The signal is normalized using the cross sections predicted by $\SHERPA$.
The theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross sections are evaluated bin-by-bin using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
The ratio of the numbers of candidates observed in data to the sum of expected signal and backgrounds is also shown.
}
\label{fig:ZnunuGPlots}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_06a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_06b.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The diphoton invariant mass $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ (left) and missing transverse momentum $\met$ (right) distributions from inclusive ($N_{\mathrm{jet}}\geq 0$) $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma\gamma$ events.
The numbers of candidates observed in data (points with error bars) are compared to the sum of the SM signal predicted from $\SHERPA$ and the various backgrounds discussed in Section~\ref{sec:bkgnngnngg}.
The uncertainty band on the sum of expected signal and backgrounds includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the MC simulations and the data-driven background estimate added in quadrature.
The signal is normalized using the cross sections predicted by $\SHERPA$.
The theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross sections are evaluated using MCFM, as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
The ratio of the numbers of candidates observed in data to the sum of expected signal and backgrounds is also shown.
}
\label{fig:ZnunuGGPlots}
\end{figure}
\section {$Z\gamma$ and $Z\gamma\gamma$ cross sections}
\label{sec:crossection}
\subsection{Description of the cross-section measurements}
\label{sec:introXsec}
The number of signal events in each of the four production channels, \ensuremath{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma}\xspace, $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma$, $\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma\gamma$\xspace, and $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma\gamma$,
is determined by subtracting the estimated backgrounds from the number of observed events.
The signal yields are then corrected for detection efficiencies in the fiducial regions used for the measurements.
The cross sections are calculated for slightly extended fiducial regions using SM predictions for the extrapolation.
These cross sections allow a combination of data obtained from the $Z$ boson to electron and muon decay channels and are more easily compared to predictions from theory.
The extended fiducial regions (see Table~\ref{table:ZggExtendedFiducial}) are defined at the particle level, as described below.
The methods used for the determination of the cross sections and their uncertainties are described in Section~\ref{sec:intXsec}.
The integrated and differential cross-section measurement results are presented in Sections~\ref{sec:xsectotal} and~\ref{sec:diffXsec}, respectively.
"Particle level" refers to stable particles with a proper decay length $c\tau > 10$ mm which are produced from the hard scattering,
including those that are the products of hadronization.
The fiducial regions are defined with the same object and event kinematic selection criteria as the reconstruction-level selections described in Section~\ref{sec:selection}.
Compared with the fiducial regions,
the extended fiducial regions use a unified charged lepton pseudorapidity selection criterion $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.47$ for $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ channels.
As for $\nnbar\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ channels, the extended fiducial regions remove the $\Delta \phi(\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}},\gamma) > \pi/2$ and $\Delta \phi(\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{\;miss}},\gamma\gamma) > 5\pi/6$ requirements, respectively.
Final-state radiation is incorporated into the particle level definition of the leptons by including the contributions from the photons
within a cone of $\Delta R = 0.1$ around the lepton direction.
The particle level jets are reconstructed using the anti-$k_t$ algorithm with a radius parameter of $R=0.4$, including all stable particles except for muons and neutrinos.
The photons at particle level are required to satisfy the isolation criterion of $\epsilon^{p}_{h} < 0.5$,
where $\epsilon^{p}_{h}$ is the transverse energy carried by the closest particle-level jet in a cone of $\Delta R = 0.4$ around the photon direction, subtracting the photon $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ and then divided by the photon $E_{\mathrm{T}}$.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline
\hline
Cuts & $\leplep\gamma$ & $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ & $\nnbar\gamma$ & $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ \\
\hline
Lepton & $\pT^{\ell} > 25$ \GeV & $\pT^{\ell} > 25$ \GeV & - & - \\
& $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.47$ & $|\eta^{\ell}| < 2.47$ & - & - \\
\hline
Boson & $m_{\leplep} > 40$ \GeV & $m_{\leplep} > 40$ \GeV & $\pT^{\nnbar} > 100$ \GeV & $\pT^{\nnbar} > 110$ \GeV \\
\hline
Photon & $\ET^{\gamma} > 15$ \GeV & $\ET^{\gamma} > 15$ \GeV & $\ET^{\gamma} > 130$ \GeV & $\ET^{\gamma} > 22$ \GeV\\
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{$|\eta^\gamma| < 2.37$} \\
& $\Delta R(\ell,\gamma) > 0.7$ & $\Delta R(\ell,\gamma) > 0.4$ & - & - \\
& - & $\Delta R(\gamma,\gamma) > 0.4$ & - & $\Delta R(\gamma,\gamma) > 0.4$ \\
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{$\epsilon^p_h <$0.5} \\
\hline
Jet & \multicolumn{4}{c}{ $\pT^{\mathrm{jet}} >$ 30 \GeV, $|\eta^{\mathrm{jet}}| < 4.5$}\\
& $\Delta R(\mathrm{jet},\ell/\gamma) > 0.3$ & $\Delta R(\mathrm{jet},\ell/\gamma) > 0.3$ & $\Delta R(\mathrm{jet},\gamma) > 0.3$ & $\Delta R(\mathrm{jet},\gamma) > 0.3$ \\
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{Inclusive : $N_{\mathrm{jet}} \geq 0$, Exclusive : $N_{\mathrm{jet}} = 0$}\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Definition of the extended fiducial regions where the cross sections are measured. The variable $\pT^{\nnbar}$ is the transverse momentum of the $\Zboson$ boson decaying to a neutrino pair.
The variable $\epsilon^{p}_{h}$ is the transverse energy carried by the closest particle level jet in a cone of $\Delta R = 0.4$ around the photon direction, excluding the photon and divided by the photon transverse energy.}
\label{table:ZggExtendedFiducial}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Determination of extended fiducial cross sections}
\label{sec:intXsec}
The integrated cross sections for $Z\gamma$ and $Z\gamma\gamma$ production in the extended fiducial regions are calculated using :
\begin{linenomath}
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{\textrm{ext-fid}} = \frac{N - B}{A \cdot C \cdot \int{Ldt}},
\end{equation}
\end{linenomath}
where
$N$ is the number of candidate events observed, $B$ is the expected number of background events and
$\int{Ldt}$ is the integrated luminosity corresponding to the dataset analyzed.
The factors $C$ and $A$ correct for detection efficiency and acceptance, respectively:
\begin{itemize}
\item $C$ is defined as the number of reconstructed signal events satisfying all selection criteria
divided by the number of events that, at particle level, meet the acceptance criteria of the fiducial region.
\item $A$ is defined as the number of signal events within the fiducial region
divided by the number of signal events within the extended fiducial region, which are both defined at particle level.
\end{itemize}
The corrections $A$ and $C$ are determined using the $Z\gamma$ and $Z\gamma\gamma$ signal events generated with $\SHERPA$. The numerical values are summarized in Table~\ref{table:ZggAC}.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
\hline
\hline
& $\ee\gamma$ & $\mumu\gamma$ & $\nnbar\gamma $ & $\ee\gamma\gamma$ & $\mumu\gamma\gamma$ & $\nnbar\gamma\gamma $ \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{6}{c} {$N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ } \\
$C$ & $0.412 \pm 0.016$ & $0.512\pm 0.017$ & $0.720\pm0.038$ & $0.329\pm0.016$ & $0.377\pm0.017$ & $0.516\pm0.022$ \\
$A$ & $0.9381 \pm 0.0012$ & $0.9470\pm 0.0010$ & $0.9132\pm0.0055$ & $0.8841\pm0.0037$ & $0.8844\pm0.0041$ & $0.711\pm0.010$ \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{6}{c} {$N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ } \\
$C$ & $0.392\pm0.019$ & $0.492\pm0.020$ & $0.718\pm0.042$ & $0.312\pm0.018$ & $0.365\pm0.019$ & $0.515\pm0.031$ \\
$A$ & $0.9380\pm0.0013$ & $0.9469\pm0.0012$ & $0.9380\pm0.0010$ & $0.8852\pm0.0044$ & $0.8807\pm0.0050$ & $0.873\pm0.010$ \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Summary of correction factors $C$ and acceptances $A$ for the $Z\gamma$ and $Z\gamma\gamma$ cross-section measurements.
The uncertainties include both the statistical and systematic uncertainties.}
\label{table:ZggAC}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Systematic uncertainties in the acceptances $A$ are evaluated by varying the PDFs and the renormalization and factorization scales.
The uncertainty in the acceptances due to the PDF is taken as the envelope of the internal uncertainties from three different PDF sets, namely, the CT10 PDF set, the MSTW2008NLO PDF set~\cite{Martin:2009iq}, and the NNPDF2.3 PDF set~\cite{Ball:2013htb}.
The internal uncertainty from each PDF set is estimated by comparing the acceptance using the PDF central set with the acceptance estimated using the PDF eigenvector sets.
The renormalization and factorization scale uncertainties are assessed by varying these two scales independently by a factor of two from their nominal values, and taking the envelope of the resulting variations.
The impact of PDF uncertainties varies from $0.04\%$ to $0.3\%$,
while the renormalization and factorization scale uncertainties cause variations from $0.08\%$ to $1.5\%$.
The total uncertainties in the acceptance factors are summarized in Table~\ref{table:ZggAC} .
Systematic uncertainties affecting the correction factors $C$ can be grouped into two categories.
The first includes the uncertainties
arising from the efficiencies of
the trigger, reconstruction, identification, and other selection requirements. The second category stems
from the uncertainties of energy and momentum scales and resolutions of the final-state objects and the simulation of pileup events.
Table~\ref{table:Zggsyst} presents all the contributions to the uncertainties in $C$
determined using the methods described below. The total uncertainties in the correction factors are summarized in Table~\ref{table:ZggAC} .
The photon identification efficiencies are measured in data using a combination of three methods as described in Ref.~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2012-123}.
The uncertainties induced by the photon identification efficiency are estimated to be $1.5\%$ and $0.5\%$ for the $\leplep\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma$ channels, respectively.
For the $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ channels, after taking into account the correlations between the two photons,
the resulting uncertainties are $2.1\%$ and $1.9\%$, respectively.
The photon isolation efficiencies are determined from data by studying the electron isolation efficiencies using $Z\rightarrow \ee$ events.
The estimated uncertainty increases from $0.5\%$ for photons with $\ET$ around 20 \GeV~to $8\%$ for photons with $\ET$ greater than 350 \GeV,
dominated by the limited size of the $Z\rightarrow \ee$ sample in data.
The reconstruction and identification efficiencies of electrons and muons are derived using a tag-and-probe method with $Z$ and $J/\psi$ events decaying into $\ee$ or $\mumu$ pairs~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2014-032,PERF-2014-05}.
The uncertainties are evaluated to be $1.6\%$ for the electron channels, and $0.9\%$ for the muon channels.
The uncertainties arising from the selection efficiencies of lepton isolation and impact parameters requirements are also measured with a tag-and-probe method using $Z$ events.
They are found to be $2.2\%$.
The uncertainties due to the modeling of trigger efficiencies are evaluated to be $1.9\%$ for the $\nnbar\gamma$ channel and no more than $0.5\%$ for the other channels~\cite{TRIG-2012-03,ATLAS-CONF-2012-048}.
The uncertainty in the jet vertex fraction efficiency is estimated by varying the selection requirement to account for the difference between data and simulation.
For exclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}}=0$ measurements, they are calculated to be no more than $0.6\%$ for all the channels.
The energy scale and resolution and their uncertainties for electrons and photons are obtained using $Z\rightarrow \ee$ events~\cite{Aad:2012elid}.
The systematic uncertainty due to the energy scale varies from $1.2\%$ to $2.7\%$ and that associated with the energy resolution is no more than $0.5\%$ for all the final states.
The muon momentum scale and resolution are studied using samples of $J/\psi$, $\Upsilon$, and $Z$ decays to muon pairs~\cite{PERF-2014-05}.
The corresponding uncertainties are no more than $0.5\%$ in all the channels.
The exclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}}=0$ measurements are affected by the uncertainties in the jet energy scale and resolution, because these uncertainties change the distributions of the number of jets with $\pT > 30$ \GeV~and $|\eta|<4.5$.
They are studied using MC simulation, as well as $\gamma+$jet, $Z+$jet, dijet, and multijet data events~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2015-037}.
Their systematic effect varies from $0.8\%$ to $2.9\%$ for all channels.
The uncertainties in the energy and momentum scales and resolutions of reconstructed physics objects are propagated to the $\met$ calculation.
The uncertainties arising from the scale and resolution of the energy deposits that are
not associated with any reconstructed physics object, named the $\met$ soft-term~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2013-082}, are no more than $0.5\%$ for the $\nnbar\gamma$ final state,
and vary from $0.4\%$ to $1.7\%$ for the $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ final state.
As mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:signalMC}, the MC events are reweighted so that the pileup conditions in the simulation match the data.
The pileup events are modeled by MC simulation.
The uncertainties associated with the modeling of the pileup events are estimated to be no more than $1.1\%$ for all the final states.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
\hline
\hline
& $\ee\gamma$ & $\mumu\gamma$ & $\nnbar\gamma $ & $\ee\gamma\gamma$ & $\mumu\gamma\gamma$ & $\nnbar\gamma\gamma $ \\
\hline
MC statistical uncertainty & 0.3 (0.3) & 0.2 (0.3) & 0.1 (0.1) & 1.9 (2.3) & 1.8 (2.1) & 0.6 (0.8) \\
\hline
Efficiencies : \\
~~~~Trigger & 0.2 (0.2) & 0.5 (0.5) & 1.9 (1.9) & 0.1 (0.1) & 0.5 (0.5) & 0.2 (0.2) \\
~~~~Photon identification & 1.5 (1.5) & 1.5 (1.5) & 0.5 (0.5) & 2.1 (2.1) & 2.1 (2.1) & 1.9 (1.9) \\
~~~~Photon isolation & 0.5 (0.5) & 0.5 (0.5) & 4.5 (4.3) & 1.2 (1.2) & 1.2 (1.2) & 2.8 (2.8) \\
~~~~Lepton reconstruction and identification & 1.6 (1.6) & 0.9 (0.9) & $-$ ($-$) & 1.6 (1.6) & 0.9 (0.9) & $-$ ($-$) \\
~~~~Lepton isolation and impact parameter & 2.2 (2.2) & 2.2 (2.2) & $-$ ($-$) & 2.2 (2.2) & 2.2 (2.2) & $-$ ($-$) \\
~~~~Jet vertex fraction & $-$ (0.5) & $-$ (0.6) & $-$ (0.1) & $-$ (0.5) & $-$ (0.6) & $-$ (0.2) \\
& & & & & & \\
Energy/momentum scale and resolution : \\
~~~~Electromagnetic energy scale & 2.3 (2.5) & 1.2 (1.3) & 2.1 (2.4) & 2.5 (2.7) & 1.8 (1.9) & 2.0 (2.8) \\
~~~~Electromagnetic energy resolution & $<$0.05 ($<$0.05) & $<$0.05 ($<$0.05) & $<$0.05 (0.1) & 0.2 (0.3) & 0.3 (0.3) & 0.4 (0.5) \\
~~~~Muon momentum scale & $-$ ($-$) & 0.1 (0.2) & $-$ ($-$) & $-$ ($-$) & 0.3 (0.2) & $-$ ($-$) \\
~~~~Muon momentum resolution & $-$ ($-$) & $<$0.05 ($<$0.05) & $-$ ($-$) & $-$ ($-$) & 0.5 (0.5) & $-$ ($-$) \\
~~~~Jet energy scale & $-$ (1.9) & $-$ (1.9) & $<$0.05 (2.2) & $-$ (2.2) & $-$ (1.8) & 0.7 (2.9) \\
~~~~Jet energy resolution & $-$ (1.2) & $-$ (1.4) & $<$0.05 (1.0) & $-$ (1.2) & $-$ (0.8) & 0.1 (1.9) \\
~~~~$\met$ soft-term energy scale & $-$ ($-$) & $-$ ($-$) & 0.3 (0.5) & $-$ ($-$) & $-$ ($-$) & 1.3 (1.7) \\
~~~~$\met$ soft-term energy resolution & $-$ ($-$) & $-$ ($-$) & $<$0.05 ($<$0.05) & $-$ ($-$) & $-$ ($-$) & 0.4 (0.7) \\
& & & & & & \\
Pileup simulation & 0.8 (0.8) & 0.6 (0.7) & 0.2 (0.4) & 0.8 (1.0) & 1.1 (1.1) & 0.6 (0.9) \\
\hline
Total, without MC statistical uncertainty & 4.0 (4.7) & 3.2 (4.1) & 5.3 (5.9) & 4.5 (5.3) & 4.1 (4.6) & 4.3 (6.0) \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Relative systematic uncertainties, in $\%$, in the signal correction factor $C$ for each channel in the inclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ (exclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}}=0$) measurement.}
\label{table:Zggsyst}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Integrated extended fiducial cross sections for $Z\gamma$ and $Z\gamma\gamma$ production}
\label{sec:xsectotal}
The measurements of the cross sections of each final state and the combined charged-lepton final states, along with their uncertainties, are based on the maximization of the profile-likelihood ratio:
\begin{linenomath}
\begin{equation}
\Lambda(\sigma) = \frac{\mathcal{L}(\sigma, \hat{\hat{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}(\sigma))}{\mathcal{L}(\hat{\sigma}, \hat{\boldsymbol{\theta}})},
\end{equation}
\end{linenomath}
where $\mathcal{L}$ represents the likelihood function, $\sigma$ is the cross section
and $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ are the nuisance parameters corresponding to sources of the systematic uncertainties.
The $\hat{\sigma}$ and $\hat{\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ terms denote the unconditional maximum-likelihood estimate of the parameters, i.e., where
the likelihood is maximized for both $\sigma$ and $\boldsymbol{\theta}$.
The $\hat{\hat{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}(\sigma)$ corresponds to the value of $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ that maximizes $\mathcal{L}$ for given parameter values of $\sigma$.
The likelihood function is defined as :
\begin{linenomath}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}(\sigma, \boldsymbol{\theta}) = \prod^{\mathrm{^{final}_{states}}}_{i} {\mathrm{Poisson}}(N_{i}~|~S_i(\sigma, \boldsymbol{\theta}) + B_i(\boldsymbol{\theta})) \
\cdot {\mathrm{Gaussian}}( \boldsymbol{\theta_0}~|~\boldsymbol{\theta}).
\end{equation}
\end{linenomath}
It corresponds to the product of the Poisson probability of observing $N_{i}$ events in each final state, given the expectation for the signal $S_i$ and background $B_i$,
and is multiplied by the Gaussian constraints on the systematic uncertainties $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ with central values $\boldsymbol{\theta_0}$ from auxiliary measurements as described in Section~\ref{sec:intXsec}.
The measured cross sections for the $Z\gamma$ and $Z\gamma\gamma$ processes in the extended fiducial regions defined in Table~\ref{table:ZggExtendedFiducial}
are summarized in Table~\ref{table:ZggCrossSections}.
The theoretical predictions in the table are described in Section~\ref{sec:comparison}.
The significance for the combination of $\ee\gamma\gamma$ and $\mumu\gamma\gamma$ processes is 6.3 (6.0) standard deviations for the inclusive (exclusive) selection.
The $Z\gamma$ inclusive (exclusive) cross sections in the extended fiducial regions are measured with a precision of $6\%$ ($6\%$) in the $\leplep\gamma$ final state and $50\%$ ($24\%$) in the $\nnbar\gamma$ final state.
The smaller uncertainty in the exclusive $\nnbar\gamma$ measurement results from the reduced background fraction as shown in Table~\ref{table:Znunug_results}.
The $Z\gamma\gamma$ inclusive (exclusive) cross sections in the extended fiducial regions are measured with a precision of $16\%$ ($19\%$) in the $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ final state and $70\%$ ($60\%$) in the $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ final state.
The precision of the $Z\gamma$ cross-section measurements is driven by their systematic uncertainties.
For the $Z\gamma\gamma$ cross sections, the precision of the measurements is dominated by the statistical uncertainty in the $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ final state, and is equally affected by statistical and systematic uncertainties in the $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ final state.
The systematic uncertainties in the measured cross sections in Table~\ref{table:ZggCrossSections} arise from the uncertainties in the acceptances $A$ and correction factors $C$, as well as from the uncertainties in the estimates of backgrounds.
In the $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ final states the two sources have effects of comparable size on the measured cross sections,
while in the $\nnbar\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ final states the uncertainties in the estimates of backgrounds dominate.
Compared with the $Z\gamma$ measurements at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ \TeV~\cite{Aad:2013izg}, the systematic uncertainty is reduced in the $\leplep\gamma$ final state while it becomes larger in the $\nnbar\gamma$ final state.
The reduced systematic uncertainty in the $\leplep\gamma$ final state mainly results from the reduced systematic uncertainty from photon identification efficiency, as well as the smaller statistical uncertainty in the data-driven estimate of the $Z$+jets background.
The larger systematic uncertainty in the $\nnbar\gamma$ final state is largely a result of the increased photon $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold requirement due to the increased single-photon trigger $E_{\mathrm{T}}$ threshold, which results in generally increased systematic uncertainties in the estimates of backgrounds.
The measurements of the cross sections in the $\ee\gamma$ and $\mumu\gamma$ final states agree within one standard deviation.
In order to assess the compatibility of the cross-section measurements in the $\ee\gamma\gamma$ and $\mumu\gamma\gamma$ final states, a profile-likelihood ratio is constructed, parameterized as a function of the difference in measured cross sections.
With this approach, the measurements are found to be compatible within 1.7 (1.8) standard deviations in the inclusive (exclusive) case.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c}
\hline\hline
Channel & Measurement [fb] & \textsc{MCFM} Prediction [fb] & NNLO Prediction [fb]\\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{4}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ }\\
\hline
$\ee\gamma$ & 1510 $\pm 15 (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+91} _{-84} (\mathrm{syst.}) ^{+30} _{-28} (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & \multirow{3}{*}{1345$^{+66}_{-82}$} & \multirow{3}{*}{$1483^{+19}_{-37}$} \\
$\mumu\gamma$ & 1507 $\pm 13 (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+78} _{-73} (\mathrm{syst.}) ^{+29} _{-28} (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & & \\
\cline{1-2}
$\leplep\gamma$ & 1507 $\pm 10 (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+78} _{-73} (\mathrm{syst.}) ^{+29} _{-28} (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & & \\
\hline
$\nnbar\gamma$ & 68 $\pm 4 (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+33} _{-32} (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 1 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & 68.2$ \pm 2.2$ & $81.4^{+2.4}_{-2.2}$\\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{4}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ }\\
\hline
$\ee\gamma$ & 1205 $ \pm 14 (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+84} _{-75} (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 23 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & \multirow{3}{*}{1191$^{+71}_{-89}$} & \multirow{3}{*}{$1230^{+10}_{-18}$} \\
$\mumu\gamma$ & 1188 $ \pm 12 (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+68} _{-63} (\mathrm{syst.}) ^{+23} _{-22} (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & & \\
\cline{1-2}
$\leplep\gamma$ & 1189 $ \pm 9 (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+69} _{-63} (\mathrm{syst.}) ^{+23} _{-22} (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & & \\
\hline
$\nnbar\gamma$ & 43 $ \pm 2 (\mathrm{stat.}) \pm 10 (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 1 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & 51.0$^{+2.1}_{-2.3}$ & $49.21^{+0.61}_{-0.52}$\\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{4}{c}{}\\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{4}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ }\\
\hline
$\ee\gamma\gamma$ & 6.2 $^{+1.2} _{-1.1} (\mathrm{stat.}) \pm 0.4 (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 0.1 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & \multirow{3}{*}{3.70$^{+0.21}_{-0.11}$} & \\
$\mumu\gamma\gamma$ & 3.83 $^{+0.95} _{-0.85} (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+0.48} _{-0.47} (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 0.07 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & & \\
\cline{1-2}
$\leplep\gamma\gamma$ & 5.07 $^{+0.73} _{-0.68} (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+0.41} _{-0.38} (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 0.10 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & \\
\hline
$\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ & 2.5 $^{+1.0} _{-0.9} (\mathrm{stat.}) \pm 1.1 (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 0.1 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & 0.737$^{+0.039}_{-0.032}$ \\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{4}{c}{$N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ }\\
\hline
$\ee\gamma\gamma$ & 4.6 $^{+1.0} _{-0.9} (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+0.4} _{-0.3} (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 0.1 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & \multirow{3}{*}{2.91$^{+0.23}_{-0.12}$} & \\
$\mumu\gamma\gamma$ & 2.38 $^{+0.77} _{-0.67} (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+0.33} _{-0.32} (\mathrm{syst.}) ^{+0.05} _{-0.04} (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & & \\
\cline{1-2}
$\leplep\gamma\gamma$ & 3.48 $^{+0.61} _{-0.56} (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+0.29} _{-0.25} (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 0.07 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & & \\
\hline
$\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ & 1.18 $^{+0.52} _{-0.44} (\mathrm{stat.}) ^{+0.48} _{-0.49} (\mathrm{syst.}) \pm 0.02 (\mathrm{lumi.})$ & 0.395$^{+0.049}_{-0.037}$ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Measured cross sections for the $Z\gamma$ and $Z\gamma\gamma$ processes at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ \TeV~in the extended fiducial regions defined in Table~\ref{table:ZggExtendedFiducial}.
The SM predictions from the generator \textsc{MCFM} calculated at NLO, as well as the predictions at NNLO~\cite{Grazzini:2015nwa} (for $Z\gamma$ only), are also shown in the table with combined statistical and systematic uncertainties.
All \textsc{MCFM}
~\cite{MCFM_2011}
and NNLO predictions are corrected to particle level using parton-to-particle scale factors as described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.}
\label{table:ZggCrossSections}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Differential extended fiducial cross section for $Z\gamma$ production}
\label{sec:diffXsec}
The measurements of differential cross sections allow the comparison of data results to theory predictions in terms of not only their overall normalizations, but also their shapes.
The measurements are performed for $Z\gamma$ production in several observables that are sensitive to higher-order perturbative QCD corrections.
These include the photon transverse energy $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$, the invariant mass of the $\ensuremath{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma}\xspace$ three-body system, and the jet multiplicity $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$.
The differential cross sections are defined in the extended fiducial region, and are extracted with an unfolding procedure to remove measurement
inefficiencies and resolution effects from the observed distributions.
The procedure described in Ref.~\cite{Aad:2013izg} is followed, using an iterative Bayesian method~\cite{D'Agostini:1994zf}.
Events from simulated signal MC samples are used to generate a response matrix for each distribution.
Each element of the response matrix is the
conditional probability that an event is found in bin $i$ in the measurement given that it is in bin $j$ at the particle level.
In the first iteration, the prior distribution of the particle level prediction is given by the signal MC sample.
The response matrix and the measured distribution then modify the prior distribution, giving the posterior distribution at the particle level.
For each further iteration, the posterior distribution of the previous iteration is used as the new prior distribution.
Three iterations are found to be optimal, as too many iterations give rise to large statistical fluctuations,
while too few can produce a result that is biased by the dependence on the initial prior distribution.
The statistical uncertainties of the unfolded distribution are estimated using pseudoexperiments,
generated by fluctuating each bin of the observed spectrum according to a Poisson distribution with
the expected value equal to the observed yield.
The shape uncertainties from the number of signal MC events are also obtained by performing pseudoexperiments.
The sources of systematic uncertainty are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:intXsec},
with their impact on the unfolded distribution assessed by varying the response matrix
for each of the systematic uncertainty sources by one standard deviation and adding up the resulting changes in quadrature.
The results from the electron and muon channels are combined with equal weight, taking into account the correlations between the systematic uncertainties in the two channels.
In addition to the systematic uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:intXsec}, the differences between the unfolded results with three iterations and the results with two or four iterations are taken as systematic uncertainties associated with the unfolding method.
The differential cross sections are presented as a function of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ in Figure~\ref{fig:UnfoldedPhotonEtllg} for the inclusive and exclusive measurements of the $\leplep\gamma$ channel
and in Figure~\ref{fig:UnfoldedPhotonEtnunug} for the inclusive and exclusive measurements of the $\nnbar\gamma$ channel.
The differential cross sections are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:UnfoldedMllg} as a function of $m_{\leplep\gamma}$.
Figure~\ref{fig:UnfoldedNJetsllg} shows the cross sections in the $\leplep\gamma$ channel measured in bins of jet multiplicity.
The predictions in the figures are described in Section~\ref{sec:comparison}.
As with the integrated cross sections shown in Table~\ref{table:ZggCrossSections}, the differential cross sections of the exclusive measurements in the $\nnbar\gamma$ channel have smaller uncertainties than the inclusive measurements.
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_07a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_07b.pdf}
\caption{The measured (points with error bars) and predicted differential cross sections as a function of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \leplep\gamma$ process in the inclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ (left)
and exclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ (right) extended fiducial regions.
The error bars on the data points show the statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
The MCFM and NNLO predictions are shown with shaded bands that indicate the theoretical uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
The \SHERPA predictions are shown with shaded bands indicating the statistical uncertainties from the size of the MC samples.
The lower plots show the ratios of the predictions to data (shaded bands).
The error bars on the points show the relative uncertainties of the data measurements themselves.
The bin size varies from 5~\GeV~to 800~\GeV.
}
\label{fig:UnfoldedPhotonEtllg}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_08a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_08b.pdf}
\caption{The measured (points with error bars) and predicted differential cross sections as a function of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \nnbar\gamma$ process in the inclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ (left)
and exclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ (right) extended fiducial regions.
The error bars on the data points show the statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
The MCFM and NNLO predictions are shown with shaded bands that indicate the theoretical uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
The \SHERPA predictions are shown with shaded bands indicating the statistical uncertainties from the size of the MC samples.
The lower plots show the ratios of the predictions to data (shaded bands).
The error bars on the points show the relative uncertainties of the data measurements themselves.
The bin size varies from 20~\GeV~to 650~\GeV.
}
\label{fig:UnfoldedPhotonEtnunug}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_09a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_09b.pdf}
\caption{The measured (points with error bars) and predicted differential cross sections as a function of $m_{\leplep\gamma}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \leplep\gamma$ process in the inclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ (left)
and exclusive $N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ (right) extended fiducial regions.
The error bars on the data points show the statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
The MCFM and NNLO predictions are shown with shaded bands that indicate the theoretical uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
The \SHERPA predictions are shown with shaded bands indicating the statistical uncertainties from the size of the MC samples.
The lower plots show the ratios of the predictions to data (shaded bands).
The error bars on the points show the relative uncertainties of the data measurements themselves.
The bin size varies from 10~\GeV~to 1360~\GeV.
}
\label{fig:UnfoldedMllg}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_10.pdf}
\caption{The measured (points with error bars) and predicted cross sections as a function of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ for the $pp \rightarrow \leplep\gamma$ process in the extended fiducial region.
The error bars on the data points show the statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
The MCFM prediction is shown with shaded bands that indicate the theoretical uncertainties described in Section~\ref{sec:theory_calc}.
The \SHERPA prediction is shown with shaded bands indicating the statistical uncertainties from the size of the MC samples.
The lower plot shows the ratios of the predictions to data (shaded bands).
The error bars on the points show the relative uncertainties of the data measurements themselves.
}
\label{fig:UnfoldedNJetsllg}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section {Comparison of measurements to Standard Model predictions}
\label{sec:comparison}
\subsection{Estimation of Standard Model expectations}
\label{sec:theory_calc}
The measurements of $\Zboson\gamma$ and $\Zboson\gamma\gamma$ production are compared to SM predictions using the parton shower Monte Carlo $\SHERPA$ 1.4 and the NLO parton-level generator {\textsc{MCFM}}.\footnote{The MCFM predictions of $Z\gamma$ production include all the NLO QCD contributions of order $\alpha_{\mathrm{s}}$ and in addition the process $gg\rightarrow Z\gamma$, which is of order ${\alpha_{\mathrm{s}}}^2$. The contribution from gluon fusion is about $1\%$ ($2\%$) of the cross section in the inclusive extended fiducial region for the $\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma$ ($\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma$) final state~\cite{Grazzini:2015nwa}.}
In addition, parton-level NNLO SM predictions for $\Zboson$$\gamma$ are compared to data using the calculations described in Ref.~\cite{Grazzini:2015nwa}.
The theory predictions include off-shell $Z$ bosons and direct photons arising from initial-state radiation (from the quarks) and radiative $Z$-boson decay in the case of charged-lepton final states, and from fragmentation of final-state quarks and gluons into photons,
leading to the production channels $pp$ $\to\leplep\gamma(\gamma)+X$ and $pp$ $\to\nnbar\gamma(\gamma)+X$. In the $\SHERPA$ and {\textsc{MCFM}} generators, contributions from quark/gluon fragmentation into isolated photons are also included. The CT10 PDF set~\cite{Lai:2010vv} is used for the $\SHERPA$ and {\textsc{MCFM}} generation, and the MMHT2014 PDF set~\cite{Harland-Lang:2014zoa} is
used for the NNLO predictions. The renormalization and factorization scales
are set equal to $m_{\Zboson\gamma}$ ($m_{\Zboson\gamma\gamma}$) for the {\textsc{MCFM}} NLO generation of
$\Zboson\gamma$ ($\Zboson\gamma\gamma$) events and to $\sqrt{m_\Zboson^2 + (\ET^{\gamma})^2}$ for the NNLO
$\Zboson\gamma$ predictions. The other electroweak parameters used are the default values~\cite{mcfm_man} from the authors of the generators.
The events
generated with $\SHERPA$ as described in Section~\ref{sec:signalMC} are also compared to
the measurements at particle level.
For the NLO and NNLO parton-level predictions, parton-to-particle correction factors $C^{*}$(parton $\to$ particle) must be applied in order to obtain the particle level cross sections.
These correction factors are computed as the ratios of the $pp\rightarrow Z\gamma(\gamma)$ cross sections predicted by $\SHERPA$ with hadronization and the underlying event disabled to the cross sections with them enabled.
The systematic uncertainties in the correction factors are evaluated by using an alternative parton-showering method~\cite{Carli:2010cg} within $\SHERPA$, and are found to be negligible compared to the statistical uncertainties.
The particle level cross sections are
obtained by dividing the NLO and NNLO parton-level predictions by the $C^{*}(\mathrm{parton}\to \mathrm{particle})$ correction factors
summarized in Table~\ref{tab:SF_p2p}. The corrections are a few percent for the inclusive cross sections and reach
about 10$\%$ for some exclusive channels. The correction factors in Table~\ref{tab:SF_p2p} apply to the predictions made for the $\Zboson\gamma$ and $\Zboson\gamma\gamma$ cross sections in the extended fiducial region described in Table~\ref{table:ZggExtendedFiducial}.
The systematic uncertainties in the SM NLO cross sections are estimated
by varying the QCD scales by factors of 0.5 to 2.0 (independently for the
renormalization and factorization scales) and varying the
CT10 PDFs by their uncertainties at 68\% confidence level. The uncertainties due to the contribution of photons from fragmentation of quarks or gluons are estimated by varying
the fraction of hadronic energy $\epsilon^{p}_{h}$ in the isolation cone from
0.25 to 0.75. For the NLO exclusive zero-jet cross sections
the method suggested in Ref.~\cite{Stewart:2011cf} is used to estimate the
additional uncertainty due to the $N_{\mathrm{jet}} = 0$ requirement. The systematic uncertainties in the SM
NNLO cross sections are determined as described
in Ref.~\cite{Grazzini:2015nwa}. In all cases the
uncertainties in the parton-to-particle correction factors are included.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline
\hline
& $N_{\mathrm{jets}} \geq 0$ & $N_{\mathrm{jets}} = 0$ \\
\hline
$\leplep\gamma$ & $1.01708 \pm 0.00065$ & $0.96809 \pm 0.00078$ \\
$\nnbar\gamma$ & $0.9987 \pm 0.0025 $ & $0.9150 \pm 0.0030 $ \\
\hline
$\leplep\gamma\gamma$ & $1.0273 \pm 0.0039$ & $0.9755 \pm 0.0047$ \\
$\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ & $1.0012 \pm 0.0076 $ & $0.873 \pm 0.010 $ \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Parton-to-particle correction factors $C^{*}(\mathrm{parton}\to \mathrm{particle})$ obtained from the $\SHERPA$ MC samples.
For $\leplep\gamma$ and $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ channels the parton-to-particle level correction factors are the weighted average over both lepton flavors ($e$, $\mu$).
The uncertainties include both the statistical and systematic contributions.}
\label{tab:SF_p2p}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Extended fiducial cross sections compared to SM predictions}
The measured extended fiducial cross sections for $pp$ $\to$ $\leplep$$\gamma$+$X$ and $pp$ $\to$ $\nnbar$$\gamma+X$ production are compared to SM predictions in Table~\ref{table:ZggCrossSections}.
The estimates of the cross section at NLO and NNLO and their systematic uncertainties are obtained as described above.
Predictions are made for both inclusive production (no restriction on the system recoil $X$) and exclusive production of events having no central ($|$$\eta$$|$ $<$ 4.5) jet with $\pT > 30$ \GeV.
There is generally good agreement between the cross-section measurements for these $\Zboson\gamma$ channels and the SM predictions; the NNLO calculation of the inclusive cross section for the $\Zboson$($\leplep$)$\gamma$ channel gives better agreement with the measurement than the NLO calculation.
Requiring two photons with $\ET$ $>$ 15 $\GeV$ results in a $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ cross section a factor of approximately 400 times smaller than $\leplep\gamma$ production.
The measurements for both the $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ and $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ channels are compared to the NLO MCFM predictions in Table~\ref{table:ZggCrossSections}. The measurements in these channels are statistically limited, but the
data are consistent with the predicted SM cross sections.
The measured cross sections and the MCFM predictions are compatible within 1.7 (0.9) standard deviations in the inclusive (exclusive) $\leplep\gamma\gamma$ channel, and within 1.2 standard deviations in the $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ channel.
\subsection{Differential cross sections compared to SM predictions}
The background-subtracted, unfolded differential cross sections for the $\ET^{\gamma}$ spectra from
$pp\to \leplep \gamma+X$ and $pp \to \nnbar\gamma+X$ production are compared to SM
expectations in Figures~\ref{fig:UnfoldedPhotonEtllg} and~\ref{fig:UnfoldedPhotonEtnunug}. For inclusive
$pp \to \leplep \gamma+X$ the NLO calculation underestimates the production
of photons at high $\ET$, whereas the NNLO calculation and the $\SHERPA$ shower MC both agree with
the data. For exclusive $pp \to \leplep \gamma+X$ production all three SM calculations are in
good agreement with the data, as are the SM predictions for the photon $\ET$ spectra from
$pp$ $\to$ $\nnbar$$\gamma+X$ production.
The differential spectra of the $\leplep \gamma$ invariant mass from $pp \to \leplep \gamma+X$
are compared to data in Figure~\ref{fig:UnfoldedMllg}. For the exclusive channel all three SM predictions agree well with the
data. For the inclusive channel the NLO prediction underestimates the cross section at high
$m_{\leplep\gamma}$, while the NNLO calculation is in good agreement with the data.
In Figure~\ref{fig:UnfoldedNJetsllg} the measured jet multiplicity spectrum from $\leplep \gamma$ events is compared to NLO {\textsc{MCFM}} predictions
for zero and one jet, and to $\SHERPA$ for zero to three jets. These SM predictions are in
agreement with the data.
\section {Limits on triple and quartic gauge-boson couplings}
\label{sec:agc}
\subsection{Anomalous triple gauge-boson couplings $\Zboson$$\Zboson$$\gamma$ and $\Zboson$$\gamma$$\gamma$}
Within the Standard Model, vector-boson self-interactions are completely fixed by the model's $S\kern -0.15em U(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ gauge structure~\cite{PhysRevD.47.4889}. Their observation is thus a crucial test of the model. Any deviation from the SM prediction is called an anomalous coupling.
Anomalous triple gauge-boson couplings for $\Zboson\gamma$ production can be parameterized by four CP-violating ($h_1^V$, $h_2^V$) and
four CP-conserving ($h_3^V$, $h_4^V$) complex parameters (where $V=Z$, $\gamma$).
All of these parameters are zero at tree level in the SM. Since the CP-conserving couplings $h_{3,4}^V$ and the CP-violating couplings $h_{1,2}^V$ do not interfere and their
sensitivities to aTGCs are nearly identical~\cite{PhysRevD.47.4889},
the limits from this study are expressed in terms of the CP-conserving parameters $h_{3,4}^V$.
The yields of $\Zboson\gamma$ events with high $\ET^{\gamma}$ with the exclusive zero-jet selection are used to set the limits.
The exclusive selection is used since it significantly reduces the SM contribution at high $\ET^{\gamma}$ and therefore optimizes the sensitivity to anomalous couplings.
The contributions from aTGCs increase with
the $\ET$ of the photon, and the search is optimized to have the highest sensitivity by using the extended fiducial cross sections for $\Zboson
\gamma$ production with $\ET^{\gamma}$ greater than 250 \GeV~for $\leplep\gamma$ and greater than 400 \GeV~for $\nnbar\gamma$. The neutrino channel has the highest sensitivity to aTGCs.
The measured cross sections and the SM predictions in these high-$\ET^\gamma$ phase-space regions (aTGC regions) are shown in Table~\ref{table:aTGC_reg_SM_cs}.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\begin{spacing}{1.25}
\begin{tabular}{l c c}
\hline\hline
Channel & Measurement [fb] & Prediction [fb] \\
\hline
$\leplep\gamma$ ($E_{\mathrm{T}}^\gamma>$ 250 \GeV) & $0.42^{+0.16}_{-0.13}(\mathrm{stat.})^{+0.07}_{-0.04}(\mathrm{syst.})$ & $0.660\pm0.015(\mathrm{stat.})\pm0.018(\mathrm{syst.})$ \\
$\nnbar\gamma$ ($E_{\mathrm{T}}^\gamma>$ 400 \GeV)& $0.06^{+0.15}_{-0.10}(\mathrm{stat.})^{+0.04}_{-0.04}(\mathrm{syst.})$ & $0.466\pm0.021(\mathrm{stat.})\pm0.020(\mathrm{syst.})$ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{spacing}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-8mm}
\caption{Theoretical \textsc{MCFM} SM and observed cross sections in chosen aTGC regions (with the exclusive selection) for the channels studied.
The $\ET^{\gamma}$ threshold is $250$ \GeV~for the electron and muon channels and is $400$ \GeV~for the neutrino channel.
The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic.}
\label{table:aTGC_reg_SM_cs}
\end{table}
Form factors (FF) are introduced to avoid unitarity violation at very high parton center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{\hat{s}}$:
$h_3^V(\hat{s})=h_{3}^V/(1+\hat{s}/\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}^2)^n$ and $h_4^V(\hat{s})=h_{4}^V/(1+\hat{s}/\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}^2)^n$,
with the form factor exponent $n$ set to three for $h_3^V$ and four for $h_4^V$ to preserve unitarity~\cite{EuPhJ.16.105}, where $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ is the approximate energy scale at which contributions from physics beyond the SM would become directly observable.
The dependencies of the unitarity bounds on the aTGC parameters from the scale $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ calculated as in Ref.~\cite{PLB.201.3} are shown in Figures~\ref{fig:h3_Lambda_opt} and ~\ref{fig:h4_Lambda_opt}, where the observed and expected limits are derived as discussed below.
A form factor with $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ = 4 \TeV~is chosen as the lowest scale to
preserve unitarity for all the studied parameters. The limits on aTGCs are
also given without a form factor ($\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}=\infty$) as a benchmark, although
unitarity is not preserved in this case.
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_11a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_11b.pdf}
\caption{Dependencies of the observed limits, expected limits and unitarity bounds on the form factor energy scale $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ for $h_3^\Zboson$ (left) and $h_3^{\gamma}$ (right). $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}\le8$ \TeV~can be chosen to obtain the unitarized limits. The green and yellow bands show areas of variation for the expected limits by 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$, respectively.}
\label{fig:h3_Lambda_opt}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_12a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_12b.pdf}
\caption{Dependencies of the observed limits, expected limits and unitarity bounds on the form factor energy scale $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ for $h_4^\Zboson$ (left) and $h_4^{\gamma}$ (right). $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}\le4$ \TeV~can be chosen to obtain the unitarized limits. The green and yellow bands show areas of variation for the expected limits by 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$, respectively.}
\label{fig:h4_Lambda_opt}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The cross-section predictions with aTGCs ($\sigma_{\Zboson\gamma}^{\mathrm{aTGC}}$) are obtained from the \textsc{MCFM} generator.
The number of expected $\Zboson\gamma$ events in the exclusive aTGC region ($N^{\mathrm{aTGC}}_{\Zboson\gamma}(h_3^V,h_4^V)$, where $V = Z$ or $\gamma$) is obtained using
\begin{equation}
N^{\mathrm{aTGC}}_{\Zboson\gamma}(h_3^V,h_4^V) = \sigma_{\Zboson\gamma}^{\mathrm{aTGC}}(h_3^V,h_4^V) \times C_{\Zboson\gamma} \times A_{\Zboson\gamma} \times \frac{1}{C^{*}(\mathrm{parton}\to \mathrm{particle})} \times \int
\mathcal{L} dt.
\label{eqn:NaTGC}
\end{equation}
The anomalous couplings influence the kinematic properties of the $\Zboson\gamma$ events and thus the corrections for event reconstruction ($C_{\Zboson
\gamma}$). The maximum variations of $C_{\Zboson\gamma}$ due to nonzero aTGC parameters within the measured aTGC limits are quoted as additional systematic uncertainties. Since the influence of the anomalous couplings on the acceptance corrections ($A_{\Zboson\gamma}$) and parton-to-particle ($C^{*}(\mathrm{parton}\to \mathrm{particle})$) corrections is an order of magnitude smaller than on $C_{\Zboson\gamma}$, it is neglected.
The limits on a given aTGC parameter are extracted from a frequentist profile-likelihood test, as explained in Section~\ref{sec:xsectotal}. The profile likelihood combines the observed number of exclusive $\Zboson\gamma$ candidate events for the $\ET^{\gamma}$ threshold mentioned above, the expected signal as a function of aTGC as described in Equation~\ref{eqn:NaTGC}, and the estimated number of background
events separately for each channel. A point in the aTGC space is accepted (rejected) at the 95\% confidence level (C.L.) if fewer (more) than 95\% of the randomly generated
pseudoexperiments exhibit larger profile-likelihood-ratio values than that observed in data. A pseudoexperiment in this context is a set of randomly generated numbers of events, which follow the Poisson distribution with the mean equal to the sum of the number of expected signal events and the estimated number of background events. The systematic uncertainties are included in
the likelihood function as nuisance parameters with correlated Gaussian constraints, and all nuisance parameters are fluctuated in each
pseudoexperiment.
The allowed ranges for the anomalous couplings are shown in Table~\ref{table:observedExpected1DLimitsATGC} for $\Zboson\Zboson\gamma$ ($h_3^Z$ and $h_4^Z$) and $\Zboson\gamma\gamma$ ($h_3^\gamma$ and $h_4^\gamma$) vertices. These results are compared in Figure~\ref{fig:h3_limit_comp} with the previous ATLAS results~\cite{Aad:2013izg} and results from the CMS experiment~\cite{CMS:2013zg,Chatrchyan:2013nda,Khachatryan:2015kea,bib:CMSZnunug15}.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline\hline
Process & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$pp \rightarrow \leplep\gamma$ and $pp \rightarrow \nnbar\gamma$}\\
\hline
$\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\infty$}\\
& Observed 95\% C.L. & Expected 95\% C.L. \\
$h_3^\gamma$ & $[-9.5, 9.9] \times 10^{-4}$ & $[-1.8, 1.8] \times 10^{-3} $\\
$h_3^\Zboson$ & $[-7.8, 8.6] \times 10^{-4}$ & $[-1.5, 1.5] \times 10^{-3} $\\
$h_4^\gamma$ & $[-3.2, 3.2] \times 10^{-6}$ & $[-6.0, 5.9] \times 10^{-6} $\\
$h_4^\Zboson$ & $[-3.0, 2.9] \times 10^{-6}$ & $[-5.5, 5.4] \times 10^{-6} $\\
\hline
$\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{4 \TeV}\\
& Observed 95\% C.L. & Expected 95\% C.L. \\
$h_3^\gamma$ & $[-1.6, 1.7] \times 10^{-3}$ & $[-3.0, 3.1] \times 10^{-3} $\\
$h_3^\Zboson$ & $[-1.3, 1.4] \times 10^{-3}$ & $[-2.5, 2.6] \times 10^{-3} $\\
$h_4^\gamma$ & $[-1.2, 1.1] \times 10^{-5}$ & $[-2.2, 2.1] \times 10^{-5} $\\
$h_4^\Zboson$ & $[-1.0, 1.0] \times 10^{-5}$ & $[-1.9, 1.9] \times 10^{-5} $\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Observed and expected one-dimensional limits on $h_3^V$ and $h_4^V$, assuming that any excess in data over background predictions is due solely to $h_3^V$ or $h_4^V$ and that only one of them is nonzero.}
\label{table:observedExpected1DLimitsATGC}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_13a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_13b.pdf}
\caption{The 95\% C.L. nonunitarized intervals ($\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}=\infty$) for anomalous couplings from current and previous ATLAS results and CMS results for the neutral aTGC $h_3^{\gamma}$, $h_3^\Zboson$ (left) and $h_4^{\gamma}$, $h_4^\Zboson$ (right) as obtained from $\Zboson\gamma$ events.}
\label{fig:h3_limit_comp}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The 95\% C.L. limits on each aTGC parameter are obtained with the other aTGC parameters set to their SM values using a one-dimensional profile-likelihood fit. The dependence of these observed and expected limits versus $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ is shown in Figures~\ref{fig:h4_Lambda_opt} and ~\ref{fig:h3_Lambda_opt}.
The obtained observed limits are almost a factor of two better than the expected limits, which is due to a downward fluctuation in the region of high $\ET^{\gamma}$ for the $\nnbar\gamma$ channel. All anomalous couplings considered are found to be compatible with the SM value zero. The observed limits on $h_3^{\gamma}, h_3^{Z}$ are at the level of $0.8$--$1.7 \times 10^{-3}$ and those on $h_4^{\gamma}, h_4^{Z}$ are at the level of $0.3$--$1.2\times 10^{-5}$ as shown in Table~\ref{table:observedExpected1DLimitsATGC}. These limits are the most stringent to date.
The limits on all possible combinations of each pair of aTGC are also evaluated by the same method. The 95\% C.L. regions in two-parameter aTGC space are shown as contours on the $(h_3^{\gamma}, h_4^{\gamma})$ and $(h_3^{\Zboson}, h_4^{\Zboson})$ planes in Figures~\ref{fig:TwoDimensionalLimits_inf} and~\ref{fig:TwoDimensionalLimits_4TeV}, since only these pairs are expected to interfere~\cite{PhysRevD.47.4889}.
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_14a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_14b.pdf}
\caption{Observed (solid ellipse) and expected (dashed ellipse) 95\% C.L. contours shown in the two-parameter planes for pairs of anomalous couplings $h_3^{\gamma}$ and $h_4^{\gamma}$ (left), $h_3^\Zboson$ and $h_4^\Zboson$ (right), corresponding to an infinite cutoff scale. The horizontal and vertical lines inside each contour correspond to the limits found in the one-parameter fit procedure, and the ellipses indicate the correlations between the one-parameter fits. The cross inside each contour corresponds to the observed best-fit value.}
\label{fig:TwoDimensionalLimits_inf}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_15a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{fig_15b.pdf}
\caption{Observed (solid ellipse) and expected (dashed ellipse) 95\% C.L. contours shown in the two-parameter planes for pairs of anomalous couplings $h_3^{\gamma}$ and $h_4^{\gamma}$ (left), $h_3^\Zboson$ and $h_4^\Zboson$ (right), corresponding to a $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}=4$ \TeV~cutoff scale. The horizontal and vertical lines inside each contour correspond to the limits found in the one-parameter fit procedure, and the ellipses indicate the correlations between the one-parameter fits. The cross inside each contour corresponds to the observed best-fit value.}
\label{fig:TwoDimensionalLimits_4TeV}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Since all sensitivity of the measurement of aTGCs is contained in a single measurement of the $\Zboson\gamma$ cross section in the high-$\ET^\gamma$
regions, the likelihood ratio used to obtain the two-parameter limits has one effective degree of freedom.
Therefore the results obtained for the aTGC frequentist limits found in the one-parameter fit are identical to the corresponding limits obtained from the two-parameter
fits at the points where the other aTGC is zero.
\subsection{Anomalous quartic gauge-boson couplings $Z$$Z$$\gamma\gamma$ and $Z$$\gamma$$\gamma\gamma$}
Triboson $Z\gamma\gamma$ production in the SM has no contributions from the quartic gauge-boson couplings $ZZ\gamma\gamma$ and $Z\gamma\gamma\gamma$.
However, physics beyond the SM could induce these anomalous neutral QGCs, enhancing the cross section for $Z\gamma\gamma$ production and modifying the kinematic distribution of the final-state $Z$ boson and photons.
The effect of such new couplings can be modeled using an effective field theory (EFT)~\cite{bib:eft} that includes higher-dimensional operators~\cite{bib-eboli-dim8}.
The event generator \textsc{Vbfnlo} is used to produce the $Z\gamma\gamma$ events with the aQGCs introduced using EFT dimension-8 operators with coefficients $f_{T0}/\Lambda^{4}$, $f_{T5}/\Lambda^{4}$, $f_{T9}/\Lambda^{4}$, $f_{M2}/\Lambda^{4}$, and $f_{M3}/\Lambda^{4}$ in the linear Higgs-doublet representation~\cite{bib-eboli-dim8}
for the aQGC parameterization~\cite{bib:snowmass_ewk}. In this formalism, the parity conserving effective Lagrangian, which induces pure quartic couplings of the weak gauge bosons,
is introduced by employing the linear representation for the higher order operators and assuming that the recently observed Higgs boson belongs to a $S\kern -0.15em U(2)_{L}$ doublet~\cite{bib-eboli-dim8}.
Dimension-8 operators are the lowest-dimension operators that lead to quartic gauge-boson couplings without exhibiting triple gauge-boson vertices.
The $f_{T,x}$ operators contain only the field strength tensor while the $f_{M,x}$ operators contain both the Higgs double derivatives and the field strength.
A weak boson field is either from the covariant derivative of the Higgs doublet field or from the field strength tensor.
In the SM, all these aQGC operator coefficients are equal to zero.
The parameters $f_{T0}/\Lambda^{4}$ and $f_{T5}/\Lambda^{4}$ are most sensitive to production of aQGC effects, $f_{T9}$ can only be probed via neutral QGCs
such as $Z\gamma\gamma$ while $f_{M2}/\Lambda^{4}$ and $f_{M3}/\Lambda^{4}$ are chosen since they can be related to dimension-6 operators constrained by LEP experiments and CMS~\cite{bib:snowmass_ewk},
which allows further comparisons and future aQGC combinations across different experiments.
The corresponding coefficients $a_0$ and $a_c$ in the LEP formalism can be translated in the context of EFT dimension-8 operators (for $ZZ\gamma\gamma$/$Z\gamma\gamma\gamma$ vertices) according to the formalism transformation equation as follows~\cite{bib:snowmass_ewk}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{f_{M2}}{\Lambda^4} = - \frac{a_0}{\Lambda^2} \frac{s_w^2}{2 v^2 c_w^2},
\\
\frac{f_{M3}}{\Lambda^4} = \frac{a_c}{\Lambda^2} \frac{s_w^2}{2 v^2 c_w^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Form factors are introduced to restore unitarity at a very high parton center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{\hat{s}}$:
$f_i(\hat{s})=f_{i}/(1+\hat{s}/\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}^2)^n$.
The parameter $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ is chosen to preserve unitarity up to $\sqrt{\hat{s}} = 8$ \TeV~with the FF exponent $n$ set to two.
In order to have better sensitivities to aQGCs, the measured $Z\gamma\gamma$ exclusive (zero-jet) fiducial cross section is used with the additional requirement
$m_{\gamma\gamma} >$ 300 (200) \GeV~for $\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ ($\leplep\gamma\gamma$) channel.
The SM backgrounds in these aQGC-optimized regions are estimated using the same methods as described in Section~\ref{sec:backgrounds} for the $Z\gamma\gamma$ cross-section measurements.
Theory predictions for the SM signal and data observations in these aQGC extended fiducial regions are shown in Table~\ref{table:aQGC_reg_SM_cs}.
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\begin{spacing}{1.25}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c}
\hline\hline
Channel & Measurement [fb] & Prediction [fb] \\
\hline
$\leplep\gamma\gamma$ ($m_{\gamma\gamma}>$ 200 \GeV) & $0.12^{+0.11}_{-0.07}(\mathrm{stat.})^{+0.03}_{-0.01}(\mathrm{syst.})$ & $0.0674\pm0.0013(\mathrm{stat.})\pm0.0053(\mathrm{syst.})$ \\
$\nnbar\gamma\gamma$ ($m_{\gamma\gamma}>$ 300 \GeV) & $0.16^{+0.17}_{-0.11}(\mathrm{stat.})^{+0.04}_{-0.01}(\mathrm{syst.})$ & $0.0499\pm0.0008(\mathrm{stat.})\pm0.0062(\mathrm{syst.})$ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{spacing}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-8mm}
\caption{Theoretical \textsc{Vbfnlo} SM and observed cross sections in chosen aQGC regions (with the exclusive selection) for the channels studied.
The $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ threshold is $200$ \GeV~for the electron and muon channels and is $300$ \GeV~for the neutrino channel.
The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic.}
\label{table:aQGC_reg_SM_cs}
\end{table}
The reconstruction efficiency $C_{\Zboson\gamma\gamma}$ is calculated from simulation samples with nonzero aQGCs using the events generated at LO by \textsc{Vbfnlo} and parton-showered by \textsc{Pythia8}. The deviation of
the reconstruction efficiency from that for SM production using $\SHERPA$ is taken as an additional uncertainty of 20\%~(60\%)
for the $\nnbar$ channel
($\leplep$ channels). The differences in $A_{\Zboson\gamma\gamma}$ and $C^*$(parton $\rightarrow$ particle) between aQGC and SM simulation samples are at the percent level and were neglected. The expected and observed 95\% C.L. limits of each dimension-8 operator coefficient are derived from one-dimensional profile-likelihood fits
as described in the aTGC study. The $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$-dependent observed/expected limits are obtained using the signal cross-section parameterization produced at LO by \textsc{Vbfnlo} and shown in Figure~\ref{fig:aQGCvsLambdaFF}.
The unitarity bounds versus $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ are also plotted in the figure with the FF exponent $n$ equal to two.
Table~\ref{tab:observedExpected1DLimitsAQGC} shows the expected and observed 95\% C.L. limits with no unitarization restriction along with those respecting unitarity bounds at the maximum allowed
value of $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ according to the \textsc{Vbfnlo} estimation.
The limits without unitarization are compared to the limits from the most recent CMS
results~\cite{bib:CMSWWaa,bib:CMSWVa,bib:CMSWWss} and ATLAS results~\cite{STDM-2013-05} in Figure~\ref{fig:ununitarizedComp}.
The limits are presented in the formalism as implemented in \textsc{Vbfnlo}~\cite{Degrande:2013rea}, except for the ones in Figure~\ref{fig:ununitarizedComp},
which are presented in the formalism as implemented in {\textsc{MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO}}~\cite{Degrande:2013rea} (left plot) and in the LEP formalism~\cite{bib:snowmass_ewk} (right plot) in order to be compared to other results.
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_16a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_16b.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_16c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_16d.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_16e.pdf}
\caption{Dependencies of the observed limits, expected limits and unitarity bounds on the form factor energy scale $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ for $f_{M2}$ (top left), $f_{M3}$ (top right), $f_{T0}$ (center left), $f_{T5}$ (center right), $f_{T9}$ (bottom). The green and yellow bands show areas of variation for the expected limits by 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$, respectively.}
\label{fig:aQGCvsLambdaFF}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}
\hline\hline
$n$ & $\Lambda_{\mathrm{FF}}$ [\TeV] & Limits 95\% C.L. & Observed [\TeV$^{-4}$] & Expected [\TeV$^{-4}$] \\ \hline
\multirow{5}{*}{$0$}& \multirow{5}{*}{$\infty$}
& $f_{M2}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-1.6, 1.6]\times10^4$ & $[-1.2, 1.2]\times10^4$ \\
&& $f_{M3}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-2.9, 2.7]\times10^4$ & $[-2.2, 2.2]\times10^4$ \\
&& $f_{T0}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-0.86, 1.03]\times10^2$ & $[-0.65, 0.82]\times10^2$ \\
&& $f_{T5}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-0.69, 0.68]\times10^3$ & $[-0.52, 0.52]\times10^3$ \\
&&$f_{T9}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-0.74, 0.74]\times10^4$ & $[-0.58, 0.59]\times10^4$ \\
\hline
\multirow{5}{*}{$2$} & 5.5 & $f_{M2}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-1.8, 1.9]\times10^4$ & $[-1.4, 1.5]\times10^4$ \\
& 5.0 & $f_{M3}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-3.4,
3.3]\times10^4$ & $[-2.6, 2.6]\times10^4$\\
& 0.7 & $f_{T0}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-2.3, 2.1]\times10^3$ & $[-1.9, 1.6]\times10^3$ \\
& 0.6 & $f_{T5}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-2.3, 2.2]\times10^4$ & $[-1.8, 1.8]\times10^4$ \\
& 0.4 & $f_{T9}/\Lambda^4$ & $[-0.89,
0.86]\times10^6$ & $[-0.71, 0.68]\times10^6$ \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Observed and expected one-dimensional limits on aQGC parameters. Form factor exponent $n=0$ corresponds to infinite scale limits without any form factor.}
\label{tab:observedExpected1DLimitsAQGC}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[hbtp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_17a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fig_17b.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the observed limits for $f_{T0}/\Lambda^{4}$, $f_{T5}/\Lambda^{4}$, $f_{T9}/\Lambda^{4}$ (on the left) and LEP parameters~\cite{Belanger:1992ac} $a_0/\Lambda^{2}$ and $a_c/\Lambda^{2}$ (on the right) without FF unitarization.
The limits are presented in the formalism as implemented in {\textsc{MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO}}~\cite{Degrande:2013rea} (left) and in the LEP formalism~\cite{bib:snowmass_ewk} (right).}
\label{fig:ununitarizedComp}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
\section{Summary}
\label{sec:summary}
The production cross section of $Z$ bosons in association with isolated high-energy photons is measured using 20.3 $\ifb$ of $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ \TeV~collected with the ATLAS detector at the LHC.
The analyses use the decays $Z$$\to$$\nnbar$ and $Z$/$\gamma^*$$\to$ $\ee$ or $\mumu$ with
$m_{\leplep} > 40$ \GeV. The $\Zboson$/$\gamma^*$ decays to charged leptons are triggered on using electrons or muons with large transverse momentum.
The production channels studied are $pp\to\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma + X$
and $pp\to\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma\gamma + X$ where the photons are required to have $\ET$ $>$ 15 \GeV. The events with $\Zboson$ decays to neutrinos are selected using high-$\ET$ photon triggers.
The production channels studied are $pp\to\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma + X$ with photon $\ET$ $>$ 130 \GeV~and $pp\to\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma\gamma + X$ where the photons have $\ET$ $>$ 22 \GeV.
In all production channels the photons are required to be isolated and to satisfy tight identification criteria. The dominant backgrounds arise from jets faking photons and these are evaluated using data-driven techniques.
The cross sections and kinematic distributions for channels with $\Zboson$/$\gamma^*$ decays to electrons and muons are combined assuming lepton universality and presented for a single charged-lepton flavor in fiducial regions
defined by the lepton and photon acceptance.
For the channels with $\Zboson$ decays to neutrinos, the cross sections and kinematics are quoted for the sum of the three neutrino flavors. This leads to studies of the following four production channels:
\begin{itemize}
\item $pp\to\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma + X$,
\item $pp\to\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma\gamma + X$,
\item $pp\to\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma + X$,
\item $pp\to\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma\gamma + X$.
\end{itemize}
The cross sections are measured in a fiducial region, for both the inclusive case, with no requirements on the recoil system $X$, and the exclusive case in which there are no jets with $\pT > 30$ \GeV~within $|\eta|< 4.5$.
The data are compared to SM predictions using a parton shower Monte Carlo ($\SHERPA$) and parton-level perturbative calculations carried out at NLO ({\textsc{MCFM}}) and NNLO, corrected by parton-to-particle scale factors.
There is good agreement between the measurements and the SM predictions. $\SHERPA$ reproduces the kinematic spectra, including the jet multiplicity spectrum, in the single-photon production channels $\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma + X$ and $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma + X$. The NLO and NNLO matrix element generators are used to predict the photon $\ET$ and $m_{\leplep\gamma}$ differential spectra in these single-photon channels, and the magnitude of the cross sections. There is good agreement between data and the SM predictions, with the NNLO calculations needed to account for the production of the high-$\ET$ photons where the NLO calculation significantly underestimates the data. In the two-photon production channels
$\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\gamma\gamma + X$ and $\nu\bar{\nu}\gamma\gamma + X$ the cross sections are compared to the NLO predictions.
The measurements in these channels are statistically limited, but the data and SM predictions agree within the uncertainties.
Having found no significant deviations from SM predictions, the data are used to set limits on anomalous couplings of photons and $\Zboson$ bosons. These could result from $\Zboson$/$\gamma^*$ $s$-channel production
coupled to a final-state $\Zboson$ boson and one photon (anomalous triple gauge-boson couplings, or aTGCs), or a final-state $\Zboson$ boson and two photons (anomalous quartic gauge-boson couplings, or aQGCs). The limits on the
aTGCs are determined using a modified SM Lagrangian with operators proportional to parameters conventionally denoted as $h_3^V$ and $h_4^V$ ($V = Z$ or $\gamma$). The contributions from aQGCs
are introduced using an effective field theory concentrating on those operators most sensitive to the $Z\gamma\gamma$ final state.
Limits are derived for these aTGC and aQGC parameters.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the
support staff from our institutions without whom ATLAS could not be
operated efficiently.
We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DSM/IRFU, France; GNSF, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; FOM and NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZ\v{S}, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, FP7, Horizon 2020 and Marie Sk{\l}odowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, R{\'e}gion Auvergne and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom.
The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged
gratefully, in particular from CERN and the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at
TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France),
KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain),
ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK) and BNL (USA) and in the Tier-2 facilities
worldwide.
\printbibliography
\newpage
\input{atlas_authlist}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Mih\u{a}ilescu's theorem says that the only solution to the equation $$x^a-y^b=1$$ in natural numbers $x,y>0$ and $a,b>1$ is $(x,a,y,b)=(3,2,2,3)$. Drawing inspiration by this beautiful result, we want to try to modify the problem. Indeed, we are interested in $x,y$ as consecutive primes and we release the condition that $x^a-y^b$ is equal to $1$, but we require that this is a perfect square. In other terms, we are interested in the consecutive primes $p,q$ such that $$p^x-q^y=n^2,$$ where $x,y,n \in \mathbb{N}$. We begin our analysis tackling the problem from the most elementary cases. We begin with the following.
\begin{prop}
The only pairs of natural numbers $(x,y)$ such that $3^x-2^y$ is a perfect square are $(0,0),(1,1),(2,3),(3,1),(4,5)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{first-eq}
3^x-2^y=n^2.
\end{equation}
Clearly, if $x=0$, then $y=0$. Let $x>0$. We have three cases.
\begin{description}
\item[(i)] If $y \geq 2$, then $3^x \equiv n^2 \pmod{4}$, so $x$ must be even, i.e. $x=2k$ for some $k \in \mathbb{N}^*$. Therefore, equation \eqref{first-eq} becomes $$(3^k-n)(3^k+n)=2^y.$$ It follows that $3^k-n=2^a$ and $3^k+n=2^b$, where $a,b \in \mathbb{N}$ and $a+b=y$. Moreover, $a<b$ and adding these two equations, we get $$2\cdot3^k=2^a+2^b.$$ If $a=0$, the LHS is even and the RHS is odd, contradiction. If $a \geq 2$, we obtain $2\cdot3^k \equiv 0 \pmod{4}$, contradiction. So, $a=1$ and $b=y-1$ and we get $$3^k=1+2^{y-2}.$$ If $y=3$, we obtain $k=1$, i.e. $x=2$. If $y \geq 4$, then $3^k \equiv 1 \pmod{4}$, so $k$ is even and we can write $$(3^{\frac{k}{2}}-1)(3^{\frac{k}{2}}+1)=2^{y-2}.$$ Since $3^{\frac{k}{2}}+1$ and $3^{\frac{k}{2}}-1$ are powers of $2$ and their difference is $2$, we obtain $3^{\frac{k}{2}}+1=4$ and $3^{\frac{k}{2}}-1=2$, i.e. $k=2$, which gives $x=4$ and $y=5$. Therefore, we obtain the solutions $(x,y) \in \{(2,3),(4,5)\}$.
\item[(ii)] If $y=1$, then $3^x-2=n^2$. We have that $x$ must be odd, otherwise $n^2 \equiv -1 \pmod{4}$, contradiction. In the ring of integers $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-2}]$, we have $$3^x=(n-\sqrt{-2})(n+\sqrt{-2}).$$
Let $d=(n-\sqrt{-2},n+\sqrt{-2})$. Clearly, $d \ | \ 2\sqrt{-2}$, so $N(d) \ | \ 8$. Since $3^x$ is odd, then its norm is odd and this implies that $N(d)=1$, i.e. $d=\pm 1$. So, $n-\sqrt{-2}$ and $n+\sqrt{-2}$ are coprime in $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-2}]$. Since these two factors have the same norm and the only non trivial factorization (up to sign permutations) of $3$ with factors with the same norm is $3=(1-\sqrt{-2})(1+\sqrt{-2})$, then this forces
$$\begin{array}{rcl} n-\sqrt{-2}&=&(1-\sqrt{-2})^x \\ n+\sqrt{-2}&=&(1+\sqrt{-2})^x \end{array} \qquad \textrm{or} \qquad \begin{array}{rcl} n-\sqrt{-2}&=&(1+\sqrt{-2})^x \\ n+\sqrt{-2}&=&(1-\sqrt{-2})^x \end{array}$$
Considering the first equation, we get $\textrm{Im}(n-\sqrt{-2})=\textrm{Im}((1-\sqrt{-2})^x)$, i.e. $$-\sqrt{2}=\left[-{x \choose 1}+2{x \choose 3}-4{x \choose 5}+\ldots+(-1)^{\frac{x+1}{2}}2^{\frac{x-1}{2}}{x \choose x}\right]\sqrt{2},$$ i.e. $$-1=-{x \choose 1}+2{x \choose 3}-4{x \choose 5}+\ldots+(-1)^{\frac{x+1}{2}}2^{\frac{x-1}{2}}{x \choose x}.$$ Let $$\displaystyle f(x)=\sum_{k \textrm{ odd}}^x {x \choose k} (-1)^{\frac{k+1}{2}}2^{\frac{k-1}{2}}$$ be defined on the odd natural numbers. An easy check shows that $f(x) \leq f(x+2)$ for any odd $x$. Since $f(5)=11$, then $x \in \{1,3\}$. An easy check shows that $f(1)=f(3)=-1$ and we get $(x,y) \in \{(1,1),(3,1)\}$. If we consider the second system of equations, we get $\textrm{Im}(n-\sqrt{-2})=\textrm{Im}((1+\sqrt{-2})^x)$ and proceeding as before, we obtain no solutions.
\item[(iii)] If $y=0$, then $3^x-1=n^2$, i.e. $3^x=n^2+1$. Since $x>0$ and $n^2 \equiv 0,1 \pmod{3}$, we get no solutions in this case.
\end{description}
In conclusion, $(x,y) \in \{(0,0),(1,1),(2,3),(3,1),(4,5)\}$.
\end{proof}
Using the same ideas, we also obtain the following propositions.
\begin{prop}
The only pairs of natural numbers $(x,y)$ such that $5^x-3^y$ is a perfect square are $(0,0),(1,0)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{second-eq}
5^x-3^y=n^2.
\end{equation}
Clearly, if $x=0$, then $y=0$. Let $x>0$. We have three cases.
\begin{description}
\item[(i)] If $y \geq 2$, then $5^x \equiv n^2 \pmod{9}$, so $x=6k$ or $x=6k+4$, where $k \in \mathbb{N}^*$. In the first case, equation \eqref{second-eq} becomes $$(5^{3k}-n)(5^{3k}+n)=3^y.$$ It follows that $5^{3k}-n=3^a$ and $5^{3k}+n=3^b$, where $a,b \in \mathbb{N}$ and $a+b=y$. Moreover, $a<b$ and adding these two equations, we get $$2\cdot5^{3k}=3^a+3^b.$$ If $a>0$, the RHS is divisible by $3$, but the LHS is not divisible by $3$, so $a=0$ and $b=y$ and we get $$2\cdot5^{3k}=1+3^y.$$ But then $2\cdot5^{3k} \equiv 1 \pmod{9}$, contradiction. If $x=6k+4$, we get $$(5^{3k+2}-n)(5^{3k+2}+n)=3^y.$$ Reasoning as before we obtain a contradiction, so there are no solutions in this case.
\item[(ii)] If $y=1$, then $5^x-3=n^2$. Reducing modulo $4$, we obtain $n^2 \equiv 2 \pmod{4}$, so no solutions in this case.
\item[(iii)] If $y=0$, then $5^x-1=n^2$. We have that $x$ must be odd, otherwise $(5^{\frac{x}{2}}-1)(5^{\frac{x}{2}}+1)=n^2$ and since the two factors on the LHS are coprime, they must be both perfect squares, contradiction. In the ring of integers $\mathbb{Z}[i]$, we have $$5^x=(n-i)(n+i).$$
Let $d=(n-i,n+i)$. Clearly, $d \ | \ 2i$, so $N(d) \ | \ 4$. Since $5^x$ is odd, then its norm is odd and this implies that $N(d)=1$, i.e. $d=\pm 1, \pm i$. So, $n-i$ and $n+i$ are coprime in $\mathbb{Z}[i]$. Since these two factors have the same norm and the only non trivial factorization (up to sign permutations) of $5$ with factors with the same norm is $5=(2-i)(2+i)$, then this forces
$$\begin{array}{rcl} n-i&=&(2-i)^x \\ n+i&=&(2+i)^x \end{array} \qquad \textrm{or} \qquad \begin{array}{rcl} n-i&=&(2+i)^x \\ n+i&=&(2-i)^x \end{array}$$
Considering the first equation, we get $\textrm{Im}(n-i)=\textrm{Im}((2-i)^x)$, i.e. $$-1=-2^{x-1}{x \choose 1}+2^{x-3}{x \choose 3}-2^{x-5}{x \choose 5}+\ldots+(-1)^{\frac{x+1}{2}}{x \choose x}.$$ Let $$\displaystyle f(x)=\sum_{k \textrm{ odd}}^x {x \choose k} (-1)^{\frac{k+1}{2}} 2^{x-k}$$ be defined on the odd natural numbers. An easy check shows that $f(x) \geq f(x+2)$ for any odd $x$. Since $f(3)=-11$, then $x<3$, i.e. $x=1$. An easy check shows that $x=1$ works, so $(x,y)=(1,0)$. If we consider the second system of equations, we get $\textrm{Im}(n-i)=\textrm{Im}((2+i)^x)$ and proceeding as before, we obtain no solutions.
\end{description}
In conclusion, $(x,y) \in \{(0,0),(1,0)\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}
The only pair of natural numbers $(x,y)$ such that $7^x-5^y$ is a perfect square is $(0,0)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{third-eq}
7^x-5^y=n^2.
\end{equation}
Clearly, if $x=0$, then $y=0$. Let $x>0$. Reducing the equation modulo $4$, we obtain that $x$ must be even, i.e. $x=2k$ for some $k \in \mathbb{N}^*$. So, \eqref{third-eq} becomes $$(7^k-n)(7^k+n)=5^y.$$ It follows that $7^k-n=5^a$ and $7^k+n=5^b$, where $a,b \in \mathbb{N}$ and $a+b=y$. Moreover, $a<b$ and adding these two equations, we get $$2\cdot7^k=5^a+5^b.$$ If $a>0$, the RHS is divisible by $5$, but the LHS is not divisible by $5$, so $a=0$ and $b=y$ and we get $$2\cdot7^k=1+5^y.$$ If $y \geq 2$, then $2\cdot7^k \equiv 1 \pmod{25}$, contradiction. If $y=1$, then $2\cdot7^k=6$, contradiction. If $y=0$, then $7^k=1$, which has no solutions if $k \in \mathbb{N}^*$. So, $(x,y)=(0,0)$.
\end{proof}
\section{Generalizations and Conjectures}
From what we have seen, we can give generalizations and conjectures to the problem.
\begin{dfn}
We say that two primes $p$ and $q$ ($p>q$) are \emph{trivially squared} if $p^x-q^y$ is a perfect square implies that $(x,y)=(0,0)$. Otherwise, we say that two primes $p$ and $q$ ($p>q$) are \emph{nontrivially squared}.
\end{dfn}
In the last proposition we used only the congruence modulo $4$. So, if there are infinitely many twin primes $p,p-2$, where $p \equiv 3 \pmod{4}$, we obtain that there are infinitely many twin primes $p,p-2$ ($p>3$) which are trivially squared. We can go further and give the following conjecture.
\begin{conj}
There are infinitely many consecutive primes $p$ and $q$ ($p>q$) which are trivially squared.
\end{conj}
If we know that there are infinitely many primes $p$ of the form $n^2+1$, then if $(x,y)=(1,0)$ we obtain that $p^x-q^y$ is a perfect square for infinitely many consecutive primes $p$ and $q$.
\begin{conj}
There are infinitely many consecutive primes $p$ and $q$ ($p>q$) which are nontrivially squared.
\end{conj}
Observe that if the Landau's conjectures are true, then the two conjectures above would be true. Another observation of what we have done raises some other questions. For example, we can notice that the pairs of consecutive primes $(3,2)$, $(5,3)$ and $(7,5)$ yield a finite number of pairs of natural numbers $(x,y)$ such that $p^x-q^y$ is a perfect square. We state that this happens in general.
\begin{conj}
For any pair of consecutive primes $p$ and $q$ ($p>q$) there are only a finite number of pairs of natural numbers $(x,y)$ such that $p^x-q^y$ is a perfect square.
\end{conj}
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Although more than a century has passed since the discovery of the first Trojan asteroid in Jupiter's orbit (Wolf 1906), the origin and orbital evolution of the Jupiter Trojans is still a matter of debate. As of March 2012, a total of 5179 members have been cataloged, including numbered and multi-oppositional asteroids. Of these, 3394 are located around $L_4$, while only 1785 inhabit the tadpole region around $L_5$.
In recent years a number of Trojans have also been detected around other planets (e.g., Innanen 1991, Tabachnik and Evans 1999, Connors et al. 2011). Although those associated to the terrestrial planets are believed to be dynamically unstable in the long run, and therefore temporary populations, the asteroids associated to the outer planets appear more long lived. In particular, there is evidence that Neptune houses a Trojan population that rivals and may even surpass that around Jupiter (Chiang and Lithwick 2005).
Many different mechanisms have been proposed to explain the origin of these bodies, particularly the Jupiter Trojans. Traditionally, these mechanisms have either disregarded planetary migration or assumed that any variation in the orbital architecture of Jupiter and Saturn was fairly smooth and adiabatic. According to this scenario, rouge asteroids in heliocentric orbits were
trapped into the Lagrange points either through the effects of gas drag with the primordial nebula (Kary and Lissauer 1995) or through the increase in size of the tadpole regions accompanying the mass growth of Jupiter itself (Marzari and Scholl 1998). Collisions among these asteroids could also have caused sufficient changes in their orbital elements to cause permanent trapping around the equilateral Lagrange points (Shoemaker et al. 1989).
Gomes (1998) and Michtchenko et al. (2001) analyzed the stability of the Trojan region assuming that Jupiter and Saturn were locked in mean-motion resonances (MMR). They found that the tadpole region would then become unstable, ejecting any primordial Trojan there in place. Although the aim of these papers was to place limits on planetary migration, Morbidelli et al. (2005) inverted this interpretation and pointed out that the same instability could also allow for the capture of new asteroids into the region. This new scenario, dubbed {\it chaotic capture}, appeared as a natural consequence of the chaotic evolution of the giant planets under the Nice model. Contrary to more traditional theories, it seemed to be able to reproduce the inclination distribution, a dynamical characteristic until then elusive.
As the Nice model evolved, so did its interpretation of the origin of Trojans. Nesvorn\'y et al. (2013) presented new numerical simulations within the Jumping-Jupiter version of the Nice model
(Morbidelli et al. 2009, Nesvorn\'y 2011, Nesvorn\'y and Morbidelli 2012). This new {\it jump-capture} mechanism proposes that part of the remnant planetesimal disk was trapped in the Lagrange points following almost instantaneous changes in the semimajor axis of Jupiter caused by close encounters with ice giants.
Perhaps the most prominent and curious dynamical characteristic of the Jupiter Trojans is the observed asymmetry between the populations in $L_4$ and $L_5$. Not only does the leading swarm have almost $40 \%$ more asteroids than the trailing region (Grav et al. 2011, Nesvorn\'y et al. 2013), but there are also significant differences in the asteroid families. While $L_4$ hosts several numerous family candidates (Eurypides being the most notorious, see Beaug\'e and Roig 2001, Bro\v{z} and Rosehnal 2011), the region around $L_5$ only contains small (albeit compact) agglomerations.
The origin of this asymmetry is still a mystery. Dynamical studies of the Trojan region show the same resonance structure and stability limits in both Lagrange points, even when considering the perturbations of additional planets (e.g. \'Erdi 1996, Marzari et al. 2002, Robutel and Gabern 2006). Most of the proposed formation mechanisms also predict similar populations in both equilateral Lagrange points, including the first versions of the Nice model (e.g. Morbidelli et al. 2005). So, it appears that even under the most complex scenarios, both $L_4$ and $L_5$ are dynamically equivalent. However, recently Hou et al. (2014) showed that a temporary asymmetry my be obtained with the same initial conditions in both tadpole regions. this asymmetry, however, is short-lived and cannot at present account for the observed disparity.
Perhaps even more drastic measures are necessary to create an asymmetry. In the mechanism proposed by Nesvorn\'y et al. (2013), close encounters with an ice giant could have partially depleted one of the Lagrange points while leaving the other virtually unaffected. Once again, as it occurs several times in exoplanetary systems, planetary scattering appears as an excitation mechanism much more effective than slow-acting long-range gravitational perturbations. Since scattering is stochastic and extremely sensitive to initial conditions, the final ratio of Trojans in $L_4$ and $L_5$ (i.e. $N(L_4)/N(L_5)$) is not deterministic. However, some of the runs presented in Nesvorn\'y et al. (2013) do seem to be able to obtain values similar to those observed in the real asteroids.
The aims of this paper are very simple. Since it is known that even today the Trojan population is undergoing slow chaotic diffusion (Tsiganis et al. 2005, \'Erdi et al. 2013), what dynamical characteristics can be considered primordial? In particular, can the current $N(L_4)/N(L_5)$ ratio be considered invariant in time, or was the original asymmetry different?
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we review and analyze the main physical and dynamical characteristics of the Trojan swarm and present the results of a long term integration of observed Trojans. In Section 3, we extend our Gyr-simulations to fictitious massless particles in $L_4$ and $L_5$, and compare those results with the evolution of the real asteroids. Finally, discussions and conclusions close the paper in Section 4.
\section{The Observed Population}
\subsection{Orbital and Dynamical Features}
\label{ini}
As of March 2013, there were 2972 numbered Jupiter Trojans, thus with fairly reliable orbits. Of these, 1975 (over $66 \%$) display tadpole orbits around $L_4$, while 997 are associated to $L_5$. The population of Jupiter Trojans is believed to be complete up to absolute magnitude $H = 12$ (Szab\'o et al. 2007); however for the purposes of the present study we will consider the complete (numbered) population regardless of the absolute magnitude.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centerline{\includegraphics*[width=0.9\textwidth]{plano_rep.eps}}
\caption{Distribution of eccentricity (left) and inclination (right) with the semimajor axis of all numbered Trojans in $L_4$ (top) and $L_5$ (bottom). Orbits stable for 4.5 Gyrs are shown in black, while unstable asteroids are depicted in red.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig1} shows the distribution of both swarms in the $(e,a)$ and $(i,a)$ planes, where $a$ is the semimajor axis (in AU), $e$ the eccentricity and $i$ the inclination with respect to the Laplace plane of the outer Solar System. The upper half of the plots (positive values of $e$ and $i$) corresponds to $L_4$, while the lower half corresponds to $L_5$. The orbital elements are osculating, but each asteroid was integrated until it crossed the representative plane defined by the conditions $M - M_{\rm J} = 0$, $\varpi - \varpi_{\rm J} = \pm 60^\circ$ and $\Omega - \Omega_{\rm J}=0$. Here $M$ is the mean anomaly, $\varpi$ the longitude of pericenter and $\Omega$ the longitude of the ascending node. Variables with subscript ``J'' correspond to Jupiter.
The orbits were evolved using the hybrid integrator EVORB (Fern\'andez et al. 2002) including the gravitational perturbations of all outer planets. The masses of the inner planets were added to the Sun, and we adopted a time-step of 0.2 years.
One of the most interesting dynamical characteristics of the Trojan asteroids is that not all of them lie in orbits that are stable over time-spans comparable with the age of the Solar System. Although the chaotic nature of some of these asteroids has been known for many years (e.g. Milani 1993), at first it was not clear whether this chaoticity was local (i.e. ``stable-chaos'') or whether it could lead to ultimate escapes from the Lagrange points. Levison et al. (1997) were the first to present Gyr-long numerical simulations of known and fictitious Trojans, showing that indeed approximately $12 \%$ of the asteroids were unstable due to the gravitational perturbations of the other giant planets in times of the order of the age of the Solar System. Furthermore, they showed that the orbits of the escaped asteroids resemble those of the Jupiter Family Comets.
Tsiganis et al. (2005) revisited this problem, calculating dynamical maps of Lyapunov characteristic exponents for grids of elements $(D,e)$ for a set of discrete values of the inclination $i$. Here $D$ is the semi-amplitude of libration of the asteroid. Although their total integration time was only equal to $4$ Myr, it was sufficient to correlate their maps with the distribution of real Trojans, and identify which asteroids could lie in unstable orbits. Those candidates were integrated a second time for $4.5$ Gyr, confirming the unstable nature of their motion. The results of Tsiganis et al. (2005) show that $\sim 17 \%$ of the real Trojans escape from the Lagrange regions in this time interval and are effectively unstable. The ``effective'' stability region shrinks with increasing orbital inclination.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centerline{\includegraphics*[width=0.9\textwidth]{hitnum.eps}}
\caption{Distribution of inclination of all (left), small with $d<30$ (middle) and large with $d>30$ km (right) numbered $L_4$ (black) and $L_5$ (red) Trojans.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
It is also possible to observe some special features of the orbital elements of the Trojan population. In Fig. \ref{fig1}, the inclinations of $L_5$ Trojans seems to be more disperse than in $L_4$. There is a well-defined set of low inclination Trojans in $L_4$ that is not observed in such a number in $L_5$. In fact, while the mean values of osculating semimajor axis and eccentricity are almost the same for $L_4$ and $L_5$, i.e. $\langle a_{L_4} \rangle=5.2062$ AU, $\langle a_{L_5} \rangle=5.2068$ AU, $\langle e_{L_4} \rangle=0.072 , \langle e_{L_5} \rangle=0.074 $, the mean value of the inclinations in $L_5$ is greater than in $L_4$: $\langle i_{L_5} \rangle=14^{\circ}.2, \langle i_{L_4} \rangle=10^{\circ}.4 $. Both results are in agreement with Slyusarev (2013).
However, the difference in inclination distribution is size-dependent. There are a number of papers that analyzed the dependence of the cumulative size distribution (CSD) and albedos on the Trojan sizes. Jewitt et al. (2000) found that there must be a break in the CSD at diameters $d \sim 60 - 80$ km.
Yoshida and Nakamura (2008) analized the CSD of $L_4$ and $L_5$ and found that on a range
of $5$ km $< d < 93$ km, the slope of the CSD is nearly constant, breaking at $d \sim 90$ km.
Fraser et al. (2014) obtained a CSD power-law for Trojans that breaks at absolute magnitude
$H = 8.4$, that corresponds to a diameter $d =130$ km (for albedo 0.045).
Fernandez et al. (2003) derived visual albedos for 32 Trojans with diameters $d > 50$ km and found a mean value of 0.056 and 0.041 depending on the beaming parameter. Later, Fernandez et al. (2009) presented thermal observations of 44 small
Trojans with diameters $ 5 < d < 24 $ km and found a median value of 0.12, higher
than that of the large Trojans. They attributed this correlation albedo-size
to the collisional evolution, which makes that the smaller Trojans are more
likely to be collisional fragments of larger bodies and thus they have younger
surfaces implying cleanest ones. Then, considering the albedos
it seems that there is a certain diameter transition in the range $30 < d < 50$ that divide two ``species'' of Trojans, the greater ones would
be primordial and the smaller the product of a collisional evolution and fragments of families. Considering
the break of the CSD obtained in the previous mentioned papers, a transition between small and large Trojans would be in the range $60 < d < 130$.
Taking those works into account, we chose a transition diameter between ``small'' and ``large'' Trojans at $d_t = 30$ km in order to analyze the inclination distribution size dependence. We test however,
greater values of $d_t$ which showed no significant differences.
We have calculated that $\langle i_{L_5} (d<30$ km$) \rangle =13^{\circ}.2$ meanwhile $\langle i_{L_4} (d<30$ km$) \rangle =9^{\circ}.6 $ and $\langle i_{L_5} (d>30$ km$) \rangle =18^{\circ}$ meanwhile $\langle i_{L_4} (d>30$ km$) =15^{\circ} $. In Fig. \ref{fig2} we plot the normalized distribution of $L_4$ and $L_5$ Trojans for all of them and for the smaller ($d<30$ km) and the greater ones ($d>30$ km). We can see that the $L_4$ population has a set of low inclination Trojans proportionally more numerous than the $L_5$ population. This trend is maintained for the smaller Trojans but it is not noticed for the greater ones. This means that there are more $L_4$ small Trojans in the small inclination population (say less than $10^{\circ}$) than $L_5$ small Trojans. However the whole $L_5$ population is ``biased'' to high inclinations with respect to the $L_4$ population and this behavior is present for both the smaller and the greater ones. The question is to discern if this is primordial or a consequence of a different evolution? We will address this topic again in the future sections.
Contrary to the main belt asteroids, where chaotic diffusion is mainly fueled by non-conservative forces like Yarkovsky thermal effects (e.g. Farinella and Vokrouhlick\'y 1999), the inherent instability of the Trojans appears purely gravitational and caused by secondary and secular resonances within the tadpole regions (Robutel et al. 2005, Robutel and Gabern 2006). This seems to indicate that the full orbital characteristics of the Trojans cannot be estimated from short (Myr) timescale integrations, and that very slow diffusive and dynamical effects contribute to sculpt the distribution of these swarms.
The implications of the results of Levison et al. (1997) and Tsiganis et al. (2005) are sufficiently interesting to merit a new analysis. Contrary to these works, we analyzed each
Lagrange point separately, analyzing whether the instability of each swarm showed differences.
\subsection{Long-term Orbital Evolution}
\label{sim}
We performed a numerical integration of all 2972 numbered Jupiter Trojans under the gravitational action of the Sun and the four giant planets over 4.5 Gyr. We used the hybrid integrator EVORB (Fern\'andez et al. 2002). Each integration was stopped if the particle suffered a close encounter with a planet (i.e. mutual distance smaller than the corresponding Hill radius). We took notice of the time of each ``escape'' and the condition under which it occurred.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centerline{\includegraphics*[width=0.9\textwidth]{amp_sigma.eps}}
\caption{Distribution of eccentricity with the libration amplitude $D$ for numbered Trojans in $L_4$ (top) and $L_5$ (bottom). The left frame shows all asteroids, while the middle plot presents only those that remain stable after 4.5 Gyrs. The right-hand graph shows stable numbered Trojans with absolute magnitude $H \le 12$.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
From the present day Trojans, approximately $23 \%$ were found to escape from the $L_4$ swarm, while this number increased to $28.3 \%$ for $L_5$. The percentage of $L_4$ escapees is higher than that estimated by Tsiganis et al. (2005) and about twice the proportion mentioned by Levison et al. (1997). Since our integrations included all the numbered asteroids, we believe our results are more representative of the real diffusion within the Trojan swarms. In Figures \ref{fig1} and \ref{fig3} the unstable asteroids are shown in red, while those that remained tied to tadpole orbits are depicted in black. While there appears to be little correlation between both sub-sets in the $(i,a)$ plane, the $(e,a)$ and $(e,D)$ planes show that the escaped asteroids are preferably those with larger libration amplitude or with larger orbital eccentricity. Since the Trojan population is already several Gyrs old, it is safe to assume that the original population covered a much larger region of the phase space, and that the
escapees detected here are characterized by only very weak chaoticity.
Approximately $99 \%$ for $L_5$ and $96 \%$ for $L_4$ of the ejections occurred after a close encounter with Jupiter and the rest due to encounters with Saturn.
The middle graph of Figure \ref{fig3} shows the distribution of the $L_4$ and $L_5$ swarms considering only stable orbits, while the plot on the right is further restricted to those asteroids with absolute magnitude $H \le 12$. At least from a first-hand analysis, there appears no distinction between the two swarms. In all cases, however, there is a noticeable paucity of asteroids with small amplitudes of libration $D$ as well as small values of $|e-e_J|$. This is indicative of a well known property: most of the Trojans display significant amplitudes of oscillation of both the resonant and secular degrees of freedom.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centerline{\includegraphics*[width=0.9\textwidth]{escapes.eps}}
\caption{{\it Left:} Number of escaped numbered asteroids ($N_{\rm esc}$) as function of time, for both Trojan swarms. {\it Right:} Ratio of surviving members ($N_{\rm surv}$) over original number ($N_0$) as function of time.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
A more detailed differential analysis between the two Lagrange points is shown in Figure \ref{fig4}. The left-hand graph shows the number of escapees ($N_{\rm esc}$) as a function of time, where the black curve corresponds to the $L_4$ swarm and red is reserved for $L_5$. In both cases the escape rate decreases with time until it appears close to constant for $t > 2$ Gyrs. It is very probable that the escape rate $dN_{\rm esc}/dt$ was much larger during the early stages of of the Solar System, and we are currently just detecting the tail of the distribution. However, it is interesting to note that there is no evidence of a leveling off and a tendency for $dN_{\rm esc}/dt \rightarrow 0$ at any given time.
While the escape rate in $L_4$ is about $\sim 60 \%$ larger than that in $L_5$, this number is affected by the larger population in the leading Trojan swarm. The right plot of Figure \ref{fig4} shows the evolution of the total number of surviving bodies in terms of the original population. As the escape rate, for $t >2$ Gyrs, the survival rate (in terms of the original population, $N_0$) $d(N_{surv}/N_0)/dt $ is almost linear. In fact it is possible to fit a linear relation for both Lagrangian points obtaining that the survival rate for $t>2$ Gyrs is given by:
$ d(N_{surv}/N_0)/dt_{L_4} = s_{L_4} = -3.9929 \times 10^{-11} \pm 2.45 \times 10^{-13} $ for $L_4$, and
$d(N_{surv}/N_0)/dt_{L_5} = s_ {L_5} = -5.11663 \times 10^{-11} \pm 4.14 \times 10^{-13} $ for $L_5$. That is, the number of surviving observed Trojans decreases with time at a rate given by $|s_{L_4}|$ and $|s_{L_5}|$ for $L_4$ and $L_5$ respectively. Then, although the trailing Trojans loose a smaller number of asteroids per unit time, the total population actually decreases faster than that associated to the leading swarm (e.g for $t>2$ Gyrs, $ |s_{L_5}| > |s_{L_4}|$). In consequence, the ratio between $N_{L_4}$ and $N_{L_5}$ increases with time (see Figure \ref{fig5}), from a current value of $\sim 1.97$ to a future value of $\sim 2.13$ in $4.5$ Gyrs time. Even though the two numbers are not drastically different, it is interesting to speculate whether the value could in fact have been significantly lower at the time of the capture of the Trojan asteroids.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centerline{\includegraphics*[width=0.6\textwidth]{nl4nl5.eps}}
\caption{Time evolution of the ratio between numbered Trojans in $L_4$ and $L_5$.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{mapasobs.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Normalized time-weighted distribution of the $4.5$ Gyr evolution of all numbered Trojans in the $(a,e)$ plane (left) and $(i,a)$ plane (right) for $L_4$ and $L_5$. The white dots are the numbered Jupiter Trojans.}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
A different way to visualize the long-term evolution is depicted in Figure \ref{fig6}. Each plot shows the normalized time fraction spent by members of the $L_4$ and $L_5$ swarms in different regions of the $(a,e)$ and $(a,i)$ planes. The color code is indicative of the portion of time or permanence time spent in each zone (blue for most visited regions, red for least visited). The red dots are the numbered Jupiter Trojans that are our initial conditions for the numerical simulation.
Those plots form, then dynamical maps of ``permanence''. It is important to note that those plots represent the regions of stability due to the evolution of the observed population and they may not be equal to the ``ideal'' stability regions of the restricted three body problem.
Although there is practically no difference between the Lagrangian points in the $(a,e)$ plane, there are in the $(a,i)$ plane different regions visited by Trojans in $L_4$ and $L_5$. In particular there is a colored region in the the zone of inclinations between $50^{\circ}$ and $60^{\circ}$, present in the $L_4$ $a$ vs $i$ plot that it is not present in the $L_5$ plot. This is due to evolution of the stable $L_4$ Trojan (83983) or 2002 GE39 with an initial high inclination of $55^{\circ}.4$. This asteroid evolves in this high inclination zone for all the simulation time i.e. 4.5 Gyrs having at the end of the integration an inclination $i = 53^{\circ}.71$. Also the colored zones in $L_4$ reach $40^{\circ}$ and then there is a gap up to the zone of (83983). But in $L_5$ there are two asteroids (19844) and (12999) with inclinations between $40^{\circ}$ and $50^{\circ}$ that evolve in that region and escape the swarm due to an encounter with Jupiter at almost the end of the 4.5 Gyr integration.
In line with the analysis done for the initial observed population of Trojans, we plot the normalized time weighted inclination distribution of the 4.5 Gyr evolution of the numbered Trojans, in Figure \ref{fig7}. We can observe that both inclination distributions hold their original shape, with an excess of $L_4$ Trojans with $i \lesssim 10^{\circ}$ and an $L_5$ inclination distribution biased to high values with respect to the $L_4$ one. Then, the dynamical evolution of Trojans doesn't change their original inclination properties. That is, the inclination distribution of Trojans must be primordial or at least a result of an initial collisional evolution (de El\'{\i}a and Brunini (2007) and de El\'{\i}a personal communication).
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centerline{\includegraphics*[width=0.9\textwidth]{hievoln.eps}}
\caption{Normalized time weighted inclination distribution of the 4.5 Gyr evolution
of $L_4$ (black) and $L_5$ (red) numbered Trojans.}
\label{fig7}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Proper Elements and Families}
Possibly one of the first numerical estimations of proper elements among the Trojan asteroids is due to Bien and Schubart (1987), later extended to a larger population by Milani (1993). Although the number of known asteroids at that time was small compared to today's standards (the latter work only considered 147 bodies), Milani (1993) already identified the existence of Trojans in chaotic orbits and postulated the existence of several agglomerations in the proper-element space. Beaug\'e and Roig (2001) extended the calculation to a larger data base employing a semi-analytical model involving averaging methods and adiabatic invariant theory. They found several possible dynamical families in $L_4$, the most prominent related to Menelaus and Eurybates. No significant accumulations were found around $L_5$.
More recently, Bro\v{z} and Rozehnal (2011) again estimated proper elements for the Trojans using a numerical technique similar to Milani (1993). They complemented their work with a detailed analysis of the size distribution of possible agglomerations and taxonomical similarities. They concluded that the only robust family appears to be the inner core of the Menelaus family proposed by Beaug\'e and Roig (2001), whose largest member is Eurybates. Again, no significant agglomeration was found in $L_5$.
All these works, however, included both numbered and multi-oppositional asteroids. Although this
was inevitable when the population of numbered bodies was small, it appears no longer necessary and may lead to significant uncertainties in the corresponding proper elements. For our present study we only consider the 2972 numbered Trojans, and calculated their proper elements using the semi-analytical model of Beaug\'e and Roig (2001). Our first aim is twofold: (i) estimate the accuracy of this perturbation model against N-body calculations, and (ii) analyze the precision of the orbital elements of the multi-oppositional bodies compared with the numbered asteroids.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centerline{\includegraphics*[width=0.9\textwidth]{comparacion_eps.eps}}
\caption{Comparison between the proper elements $a^*$, $e^*$ and $I^*$ from Bro\v{z} and Rozehnal (2011) (ordinates) and the values for the same asteroids estimated with the semi-analytical model of Beaug\'e and Roig (2001) (abscissas). Black circles show those bodies which where already numbered in 2011, while red circles correspond to asteroids that where updated to numbered after this time. }
\label{fig8}
\end{figure}
Results on both issues are presented in Figure \ref{fig8}, where we compare the values from the Bro\v{z} and Rozehnal catalog (ordinates) against the proper elements estimated here (abscissas). Since the definition of both sets are not exactly equal, we do not expect an exact linear trend between them, but any dispersion with respect to a one-dimensional curve is indicative of errors in the determination.
We can see two interesting trends. First, for asteroids that were already numbered in 2011
(black circles) there is a very good agreement between both determinations. This lends credibility to the semi-analytical perturbation theory of Beaug\'e and Roig (2001), and indicates that it may be considered a good model for the long-term (albeit) regular evolution of co-orbital asteroids. Second, and more important, there is a significant dispersion in results for those asteroids which are now numbered but were multi-oppositional at the time of the work of Bro\v{z} and Rozehnal (2011). Not all of these bodies are equally unreliable, but it does show that using un-numbered asteroids for this problem may lead to highly imprecise results.
Curiously, however, the dispersion is not significant in the proper inclination $I^*$, but is clearly noticeable in both $a^*$ and $e^*$. Thus, any proposed collisional family that includes multi-oppositional members (such as the Ennomos and 1996RJ clusters mentioned by Bro\v{z} and Rozehanl (2011)) should be considered with care.
\section{Long-term Evolution of Fictitious Trojans}
Although we detected some differences in the long-term dynamical evolution of the observed numbered Trojans, we have yet to determine whether this is due to disparity in the initial conditions (i.e. primordial) or consequence of different dynamical evolution of the $L_4$ and $L_5$ swarms. In order to address this issue, we performed a series of numerical simulations of fictitious Trojans, using the same initial distribution in both Lagrange points, and followed their evolution for 4.5 Gyrs.
\subsection{Initial Conditions}
\label{sim2}
Around both $L_4$ and $L_5$ we generated 18200 fictitious massless bodies with semimajor axes, eccentricities and inclinations in the intervals
\begin{eqnarray}
5.01 \leq \; \; a& \leq 5.4 \nonumber \\
0 \leq \; \; e& \leq 0.34 \\
0^{\circ} \leq \; \; i& \leq 60^{\circ} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
with separations given by $\Delta a = 0.01$, $\Delta e = 0.01$ and $\Delta i = 5^{\circ}$. The values of the semimajor axes are given in AU. The ranges considered for these elements were chosen to cover all the orbital element space attained by the observed Trojans in our previous simulations.
The initial angular orbital elements were taken as follows. The longitude of perihelion $\varpi$ was set equal to $\varpi = \varpi_J + 60^{\circ}$ for $L_4$ and $\varpi = \varpi_J - 60^{\circ}$ for $L_5$. The longitudes of the nodes were taken equal to that of Jupiter: $\Omega = \Omega_J$, while the mean anomalies chosen as $M = M_J$. Variables with subscript $J$ correspond to Jupiter's orbit. All initial conditions were numerically integrated over $4.5$ Gyr under the gravitational effects of all four outer planets, employing the same numerical code described in the previous section.
\subsection{Results}
\label{res}
Most of the particles were ejected from the tadpole region early in the simulation, and suffered close encounters with Jupiter ($81 \%$ of the cases) or Saturn (the remaining $19 \%$). The left-hand frame of Figure \ref{fig9} shows the cumulative number of escaped objects ($N_{esc}$) as a function of time, while the graph on the right presents the ratio of surviving members ($N_{surv}$) over original number ($N_0 = 18200$). At the end of the simulation, $81.4 \%$ of the initial conditions in $L_4$ were ejected, while the number corresponding to $L_5$ was almost identical.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centerline{\includegraphics*[width=0.9\textwidth]{escysurvg.eps}}
\caption{{\it Left:} Number of escaped fictitious Trojans ($N_{esc}$) as function of time. {\it Right:} Ratio of surviving members ($N_{\rm surv}$) over original number ($N_0 = 18200$) as function of time.}
\label{fig9}
\end{figure}
For both the leading and trailing populations the escape rate is almost identical throughout the integration. Almost half of the initial conditions are lost after only a few thousand years. Although the rate continues high, it slowly decreases as function of time, leading to an almost constant value for $t > 2$ Gyrs. Fitting a straight line to the results for $t > 2$ Gyrs, we obtain that the survival rate may be approximated by:
$ d(N_{surv}/N_0)/dt_{L_4} = sf_{L_4} = -1.10675 \times 10^{-11} \pm 8.819 \times 10^{-14} $ for $L_4$, and
$d(N_{surv}/N_0)/dt_{L_5} = sf_{L_5} = -1.07656 \times 10^{-11} \pm 9.248 \times 10^{-14} $ for $L_5$. The values of both Lagrange points are virtually identical.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{mapasgrilla.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Normalized time-weighted distribution of the $4.5$ Gyr dynamical evolution of fictitious Trojans in the $(a,e)$ plane (left) and $(i,a)$ plane (right) for $L_4$ and $L_5$.}
\label{fig10}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig10} shows the time-weighted distribution of the osculating elements of the fictitious Trojans throughout the simulation. These dynamical maps of permanence are analogous to those shown in Figure \ref{fig6}, but unaffected by the initial conditions of the particles. We find no significant difference between the two tadpole regions, indicating that not only the escape rate, but also their dynamical structure appear to be equivalent, even on Gyr timescales.
\subsection{Comparison with the Observed Population}
Even though the synthetic populations show the same escape rate, our simulations with real Trojans
indicate that the trailing population actually decreases faster than that associated to the leading swarm. At the end of their dynamical evolution, 1517 $L_4$ Trojans (out of 1975) and 715 $L_5$ asteroids (out of 997) survived in the integration. If this proportion is representative of the different escape rate of the original swarms, then we can relate the present-day populations $N_{surv} (L_i)$ with the original numbers $N_0(L_i)$ via a simple linear law:
\begin{equation}
\frac{N_{surv} (L_4)}{N_0(L_4)} \simeq 1.07 \,\, \frac{N_{surv} (L_5)}{N_0(L_5)} .
\label{ns}
\end{equation}
Even though this difference is not large, it is statistically significant when compared with the escape rates of the s
synthetic population.
If, as calculated by Grav et al. (2011), the present unbiased fraction of Trojans between $L_4$ and $L_5$ is $N_{surv}(L_4)/N_{surv}(L_5) = 1.4 \pm 0.2$, then, from Eq. \ref{ns} we can estimate the original population ratio as
\begin{equation}
N_0(L_4)/ N_0(L_5) = 1.3 \pm 0.2 ,
\label{ni}
\end{equation}
With this calculation, the difference in the survival rate between $L_5$ and $L_4$, accounts for
$\sim 10 \%$ of the total asymmetry or, in other words, it has contributed to $\sim 25 \%$ of the present unbiased asymmetry. Consequently, at least part of the observed asymmetry must be primordial and related to the capture/formation process of these asteroids.
Since the dynamics appear equal, then the difference must lie in the distribution of the Trojans
around each Lagrange point. As we mentioned in Sect (\ref{ini}), the inclinations of the observed Trojans in $L_4$ show an excess with respect to the inclination distribution of $L_5$ Trojans in the range $i \lesssim 10^{\circ}$ and this is attributed mainly to small-size bodies. However, even large-size Trojans in $L_5$ appear to have a broader inclination distribution, so the difference cannot be solely due to small asteroids.
One possible scenario has been recently proposed by Nesvorn\'y et al. (2013), where a hypothetical ice giant planet (later ejected from the Solar System) transversed the $L_5$ cloud, partially scattering its population and modifying the inclination distribution. Another possibility could be related to different collisional evolution in each Lagrange point, for example, due to larger asteroids captured in $L_4$ than in $L_5$, producing a larger collisional cascade of fragments at $L_4$. This could also explain the numerous family candidates at $L_4$, while only small agglomerations are detected around $L_5$.
\section{Discussion and Conclusions}
In this paper we have presented a series of numerical integrations of real and fictitious Jupiter Trojans over time-spans comparable with the age of the Solar System. We obtained that fictitious bodies with the same initial distribution in both Lagrange points, show the same dynamical evolution and orbital instability for $L_4$ and $L_5$. However the evolution of the observed population in the trailing Trojan point decays faster than that associated to the leading region. For the present day Trojans, approximately $23 \%$ were found to escape from $L_4$ swarm after $4.5$ Gyrs, while this number increased to $28.3 \%$ for $L_5$. We believe this is mainly due to a difference in the orbital element distribution of the bodies and not to any inherent dynamical process which may be more effective in one of the tadpole regions.
From the present-day ratio of asteroids in $L_4$ with respect to $L_5$, we have estimated the original ratio, assuming that the current escape rates may be extrapolated backwards to primordial times. This assumption is not obvious, and must be considered with care. However, the results show that the original population ratio must have been much closer to unity, indicating that perhaps both Lagrange points contained originally similar number of asteroids.
Finally, we have also calculated the proper elements of numbered asteroids using the semi-analytical method of Beaug\'e and Roig (2001), and compared the results with the numerical estimations by Bro\v{z} and Rosehnal (2011). We found that both methods yield very similar results for numbered asteroids, but not for asteroids that are now numbered but were multi-oppositional in 2011. This seems to indicate that only the numbered asteroids have sufficiently well determined orbits to allow for detailed and long-term dynamical analysis.
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgments:}
The authors wish to express their gratitude to the reviewers for their suggestions and comments, and to the FCAGLP for extensive use of their computing facilities. This work was partially supported by research grants from CONICET and Secyt/UNC.
\vspace*{0.5cm}
\noindent{\bf Bibliography}
|
\section{Introduction}
In recent years, the Economic Theory literature has seen intense interest in the concept of assortative matching on risk attitude, particularly when applied to the marriage market. One obvious reason for this interest is that the nature of this type of matching has profound implications for the relationship between individual decision making and household decision making (see \citealt{browning_chiappori_weiss_2014}). Much of this literature is based on risk-sharing arguments, which amount to the substitutability of risk-bearing between individuals in an incomplete insurance market: a risk-averse female is a demanding buyer of insurance, while a risk-seeking male is a ready seller of it \citep{Schulhofer-Wohl-2006, Legros&Newman2007, Chiappori-Reny-2006}. This approach leads to the unambiguous prediction of negative assortative matching (NAM): the most risk-averse male will match with the least risk-averse female; the second most risk-averse male will match with the second least risk-averse female; and so on.
Against this background, a number of other theorists have demonstrated that the introduction of certain other model features can reverse the prediction to one of positive assortative matching (PAM). For example, \cite{Li-etal2013} propose a model in which agents can control the risks to their incomes (by e.g. re-training, changing career or taking a second job). Under this assumption, agents prefer similar partners because of their aligned objectives in risk management. \cite{Gierlinger&Laczo2017} find that assortative matching behaviour depends on the level of commitment, with PAM resulting in a situation of limited commitment. The assumption of limited commitment must be seen as highly plausible in the context of the marriage market, in which formal risk-sharing contracts are typically not signed. \cite{Li-etal-2016} show that when risks are large compared with individuals' risk-free incomes, PAM may result.
Empirical and experimental evidence that is currently available is broadly favourable to PAM. \cite{Bacon-etal-2014} used repeated data on married couples within the German Socio-Economic Panel to investigate spousal correlation in risk attitude. They applied the bivariate panel ordered probit model to the self-reported risk attitude data from this source. They found that the individual-specific effects (in the risk attitude equation) for the two members of a married couple, are positively correlated, and this was interpreted as evidence of PAM. Evidence of PAM has also been found in factors that are known to determine risk attitude, for example education, wages and wealth \citep{becker1974,lam1988,Charles&Hurst2003}, and also in factors relating to non-financial risk-taking such as smoking \citep{Clark2006}. \cite{DiCagno-etal-2012} carry out experiments in which agents allocate their wealth among risky lotteries and share winnings with their partners according to pre-committed rules. Again, evidence of PAM is found: agents tend to choose partners with similar risk attitude to themselves.
Clearly this body of empirical evidence has important implications for the validity of each of the various assortative matching theories cited above. Given this, it is imperative that the econometric approaches used to establish such evidence are valid, and sufficiently flexible to detect whatever patterns of assortative matching exist within the data. With this in mind, in this paper we delve deeper into the investigation of assortative mating on risk attitude, by applying the copula approach. The main advantage of the copula approach is that it can allow a wide range of flexible tail dependence and asymmetry between the two variables (here male's and female's risk attitude) under investigation. For example, could it be that PAM exists and is stronger in the tails than in the centre of the distribution? That is, could it be that risk seekers and risk avoiders are particularly keen to match with similarly minded individuals, while risk-neutral individuals are less discerning in their choice? Or, could it be that PAM is stronger in one tail than in the other? That is, could it be that, as suggested by \cite{Li-etal-2016}, risk-seeking individuals, with their higher endowments of risky assets, are keen to match with other risk-seeking individuals, but risk-averse individuals have less reason to care about the risk-attitude of their partners? It is these sorts of patterns of dependence that the copula approach is able to capture via the concepts of upper and lower tail dependence \citep{joe93}, i.e. dependence among extreme values. Importantly, the richness of the dependence structure is introduced without the requirement of estimation of additional parameters. Note that existing approaches used to investigate assortative matching, such as, the random effects models used by \cite{Clark2006,Bacon-etal-2014}, are based on the normality assumption, and, although mathematically convenient, are constrained to tail independence.
We are particularly interested in whether and how this dependence structure changes with years of marriage. A very interesting hypothesis is that of socialization \citep{arnett-1995}: a process by which attitudes become more similar with time. This hypothesis can be investigated by estimating the copula model separately for different stages of marriage.
We will use a general copula construction, based on a set of bivariate copulas to jointly model bivariate ordinal time-series responses with covariates. We call this the ``joint copula-based Markov model''. For the proposed model, we construct the joint distribution in terms of three bivariate copulas. For each ordinal time series we consider a copula-based Markov model, where a parametric copula family is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations and then we relate these ordinal time-series responses using another copula to couple their conditional (on the past) distributions at each time point. Much is known about properties of parametric bivariate copula families in terms of dependence and tail behavior. In this paper we draw on this wealth of knowledge. The discretized bivariate normal (BVN) model is a special case of our general construction when all the bivariate linking copulas are BVN. Other choices of copulas are better if (a) $Y_j$'s have more probability in
joint upper
or lower tail than would be expected with a discretized BVN, or (b)
$Y_j$'s can be considered as discretized maxima/minima or mixtures of discretized means
rather than discretized means \citep{nikoloulopoulos&joe12}. Copulas that arise from extreme value theory have more probability in one joint tail (upper
or lower) than expected with a discretized MVN distribution or an MVN copula with discrete margins. It is also possible that there can be more probability in both the joint upper and joint lower tail, compared with discretized MVN models. This happens if the respondents consist of a ``mixture" population (e.g., different ethnicities). From the theory of elliptical distributions and copulas, it is known that some scale mixtures of MVN have more dependence in the tails.
Much is known about copulas. They have been used to great benefit in many areas (e.g., insurance, finance and hydrology), but have only recently taken hold in econometrics research. So far in the Economics literature, the copula approach has been used to model earnings, mobility, house prices, and measures of well-being \citep{Dardanoni&Lamber2001,Bonhomme&Robin2006,
Bonhomme&Robin2009,Zimmer2012,Decancq2014}. To our knowledge, our paper is the first application of the copula approach to an assortative matching problem.
The remainder of the paper proceeds as follows. Section \ref{overview} has a brief overview of relevant copula theory. Section \ref{themodel} introduces
the joint copula-based Markov model for discrete ordinal responses with covariates and discusses its relationship with existing models.
Section \ref{sec-families} discusses suitable parametric families of copulas for the joint copula-based Markov model for discrete ordinal responses with covariates. Estimation techniques and computational details are provided in Section \ref{estimation}.
Section \ref{sec-appl} presents the applications
of our methodology to assortative mating using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel over the period 2004--2012.
It turns out that our model, with linking copulas
selected according to the ordinal responses being plausibly based on
mixtures of means, provides better fit than the discretized BVN model.
We conclude with some discussion in Section \ref{sec-discussion}.
\section{\label{overview}Overview and relevant background for copulas}
A copula is a multivariate cumulative distribution function (cdf) with uniform $U(0,1)$ margins \citep{joe97,nelsen06,joe2014}.
If $F$ is a bivariate cdf with univariate margins $F_1,F_2$,
then Sklar's (1959) \nocite{1959} theorem implies that there is a copula $C$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{copulacdf}
F(y_1,y_2)= C\Bigl(F_1(y_1),F_2(y_2)\Bigr).
\end{equation}
The copula is unique if $F_1,F_2$ are continuous, but not
if some of the $F_j$ have discrete components.
If $F$ is continuous and $(Y_1,Y_2)\sim F$, then the unique copula
is the distribution of $(U_1,U_2)=\left(F_1(Y_1),F_2(Y_2)\right)$ leading to
$$C(u_1,u_2)=F\Bigl(F_1^{-1}(u_1),F_2^{-1}(u_2)\Bigr),
\quad 0\le u_j\le 1, j=1,2,$$
where $F_j^{-1}$ are inverse cdfs. In particular, if $\Phi_{2}(\cdot;\rho)$
is the bivariate normal (BVN) cdf with correlation $\rho$ and
standard normal margins, and $\Phi$ is the univariate standard normal cdf,
then the BVN copula is
$$
C(u_1,u_2)=\Phi_{2}\Bigl(\Phi^{-1}(u_1),\Phi^{-1}(u_2);\rho\Bigr).
$$
The major advantage of copulas for dependence modelling is that the dependence structure may be separated from the univariate margins; see, for example, Section 1.6 of \cite{joe97}.
If $C(\cdot;\theta)$ is a parametric
family of copulas and $F_j(\cdot;\eta_j)$ is a parametric model for the
$j$th univariate margin, then
$$C\Bigl(F_1(y_1;\eta_1),F_2(y_2;\eta_2);\theta\Bigr)$$
is a bivariate parametric model with univariate margins $F_1,F_2$.
For copula models, the variables can be continuous or discrete \citep{Nikoloulopoulos2013a,nikoloulopoulos&joe12}.
\section{\label{themodel}A joint copula-based Markov model}
For ease of exposition, let $T$ be the dimension of a
``panel" and $n$ the number of clusters. The theory can
be extended to varying cluster sizes.
Let $p$ be the number of
covariates, that is, the dimension of a covariate vector $\mathbf{x}$.
Let $Y^\star\sim \mathcal{F}$ be a latent variable, such that $Y=y$ if
$\alpha_{y-1}+\mathbf{x}^T\boldsymbol{\beta}\leq Y^\star\leq \alpha_{y}+\mathbf{x}^T\boldsymbol{\beta},\,y=1,\ldots,K,$
where $K$ is the number of categories of $Y$
(without loss of generality, assume $\alpha_0=-\infty$ and $\alpha_K=\infty$), and $\boldsymbol{\beta}$ is the $p$-dimensional regression vector.
From this definition, the response $Y$ is assumed to have density
$$f(y;\mu,\boldsymbol{\gamma})=\mathcal{F}(\alpha_{y}+\mu)-\mathcal{F}(\alpha_{y-1}+\mu),$$
where $\mu=\mathbf{x}^T\boldsymbol{\beta}$ is a function of $\mathbf{x}$
and the $p$-dimensional regression vector $\boldsymbol{\beta}$, and $\boldsymbol{\gamma}=(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_{K-1})$ is the $q$-dimensional vector of the univariate cutpoints ($q=K-1$). Note that $\mathcal{F}$ normal leads to the ordinal probit model for ordinal response, $\mathcal{F}$ logistic
leads to the ordinal cumulative logit model.
Suppose that data are $(y_{itj}, \mathbf{x}_{itj}),\, i = 1, . . . ,n,\,t=1,\ldots,T,\, j=1,2$
where $i$ is an index for individuals or clusters, $t$ is an index for
the repeated measurements or within cluster measurements, and $j$ is an index for the gender: 1=male, 2=female.
The univariate marginal model for
$Y_{itj} $ is $f_j(y_{itj}; \mu_{itj},\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j)$ where $\mu_{itj}=\mathbf{x}_{itj}^\top\boldsymbol{\beta}_j$ and $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j$ of dimension $q_j$ be the vector of univariate cutpoints. If for each $t$, $Y_{i1j},\ldots,Y_{iTj}$ are serially independent conditional on $\mu_{itj}$, then the
log-likelihood for each gender is
\begin{eqnarray}\label{indlik}\ell_{j}= \sum_{i=1}^n\sum_{t=1}^T\, \log f_j(y_{itj};\mu_{itj},\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j).
\end{eqnarray}
For estimation of $\boldsymbol{\beta}_j,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j$ when $Y_{i1j},\ldots,Y_{iTj}$ are dependent we consider copula-based Markov models \citep[page 244]{joe97} for ordinal time series with covariates, where a parametric copula family is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations and then the corresponding transition probabilities are obtained. Note in passing that \cite{chen-fan-06} studied copula-based Markov models of continuous response data.
The transition cdf of $Y_{tj}$ given $Y_{t-1,j}$ is
\begin{eqnarray*}F_{j|t}(y_{tj}|y_{t-1,j})&=&P(Y_{tj}\leq
y_{tj}|Y_{t-1,j}=y_{t-1,j})\\&=&\Bigl[C_{j|t}\bigl(F(y_{t-1,j}),F(y_{tj})\bigr)-C_{j|t}\bigl(F(y_{t-1,j}-1),F(y_{tj})\bigr)\Bigr]/f(y_{t-1,j}),
\end{eqnarray*}
and the transition probability mass function (pmf) is
$$f_{j|t}(y_{tj}|y_{t-1,j})=P(Y_{tj}=y_{tj}|Y_{t-1,j}=y_{t-1,j})=\frac{f(y_{tj},y_{t-1,j})}{f_j(y_{t-1,j})},$$
where
$f(y_t,y_{t-1})=C_{j|t}\bigl(F(y_t),F(y_{t-1})\bigr)-C_{j|t}\bigl(F(y_t-1),F(y_{t-1})\bigr)-C_{j|t}\bigl(F(y_t),F(y_{t-1}-1)\bigr)+C_{j|t}\bigl(F(y_t-1),F(y_{t-1}-1)\bigr)$.
Then the log-likelihood for each gender is
\begin{equation}\label{serlik}\ell_{j|t}= \sum_{i=1}^n\left(\log f_j(y_{i1j};\mu_{i1j},\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j)+\sum_{t=2}^T\, \log f_{j|t}(y_{itj}|y_{i,t-1,j};\mu_{itj},\mu_{i,t-1,j},\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j)\right).
\end{equation}
The BVN copula is a special case, and this is called ``autoregressive-to-anything" in \cite{biller&nelson2005} as acknowledged by \cite{joe2014}. Other copulas would be useful for the transition probability if there is more clustering of consecutive large or small values than would be expected with BVN.
So far we treat the ordinal response of the males and the ordinal response of the females separately as if they were independent. In the sequel, we novel propose to relate these responses using a copula to couple their conditional (on the past) distributions at each time point.
From \cite{sklar1959}, there is a
bivariate copula $C_{12|t}$
such that $\Pr(Y_{t1}\le y_{t1}, Y_{t2}\le y_{t2})=C_{12|t}\bigl(F_{1|t}(y_{t1}|y_{t-1,1}),F_{2|t}(y_{t2}|y_{t-1,2})\bigr)$. Then it follows that the joint pmf is
\begin{align}\label{jointserpmf}
&f_{12|t}(y_{t1},y_{t2})=\\&C_{12|t}\bigl(F_{1|t}(y_{t1}|y_{t-1,1}),F_{2|t}(y_{t2}|y_{t-1,2})\bigr)-C_{12|t}\bigl(F_{1|t}(y_{t1}-1|y_{t-1,1}),F_{2|t}(y_{t2}|y_{t-1,2})\bigr)-\nonumber\\&C_{12|t}\bigl(F_{1|t}(y_{t1}|y_{t-1,1}),F_{2|t}(y_{t2}-1|y_{t-1,2})\bigr)+C_{12|t}\bigl(F_{1|t}(y_{t1}-1|y_{t-1,1}),F_{2|t}(y_{t2}-1|y_{t-1,2})\bigr)\nonumber
\end{align}
For the joint copula-based Markov model, we let $C_{1|t},C_{2|t}$ and
$C_{12|t}$ be parametric bivariate copulas, say with parameters $\theta_1,\theta_2$
and $\theta$, respectively.
For the set of all parameters, let $\boldsymbol{\theta}=\{\boldsymbol{\beta}_j,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j,\theta_j,\theta: j=1,2\}$.
We model
the joint distribution in terms of three bivariate
copulas.
There is much known about properties of parametric bivariate copula families
in terms of dependence and tail behavior.
Note that the copula $C_{j|t}$ models the time-series for the $j$th response and the copula $C_{12|t}$ links the ordinal
response for males to the ordinal response for females.
Our general statistical model allows for selection of $C_{j|t}$ and $C_{12|t}$ independently among a variety of parametric copula families, i.e.,
there are no constraints in the choices of parametric copulas $\{C_{j|t},C_{12|t}:
j=1,2\}$.
\section{\label{sec-families}Choices of parametric families of copulas}
In our candidate set, families that have
different strengths of tail behaviour (see e.g., \cite{nikoloulopoulos&joe&li11,nikoloulopoulos&joe12}) are included. In the descriptions below, a bivariate copula $C$ is {\it reflection symmetric}
if its density
satisfies $c(u_1,u_2)=c(1-u_1,1-u_2)$ for all $0\leq u_1,u_2\leq 1$.
Otherwise, it is reflection asymmetric often with more probability in the
joint upper tail or joint lower tail. {\it Upper tail dependence} means
that $c(1-u,1-u)=O(u^{-1})$ as $u\to 0$ and {\it lower tail dependence}
means that $c(u,u)=O(u^{-1})$ as $u\to 0$.
If $(U_1,U_2)\sim C$ for a bivariate copula $C$, then $(1-U_1,1-U_2)\sim
C_{180^0}$, where $C_{180^0}(u_1,u_2)=u_1+u_2-1+C(1-u_1,1-u_2)$ is the survival (or rotated by 180 degrees) copula of $C$; this ``reflection"
of each uniform $U(0,1)$ random variable about $1/2$ changes the direction
of tail asymmetry.
\newpage
\begin{itemize}
\item
Reflection symmetric copulas with tail independence satisfying
$C(u,u)=O(u^2)$ and ${\overline C}(1-u,1-u)=O(u^2)$ as $u\to 0$,
such as the Frank copula with cdf
$$C(u_1,u_2;\theta)=-\theta^{-1}\log \left\{1+\frac{(e^{-\theta u_1}-1)(e^{-\theta
u_2}-1)}{e^{-\theta}-1} \right\},\quad \theta \in (-\infty,\infty)\setminus\{0\}.$$
\item Reflection asymmetric copula family with upper tail dependence,
such as the Gumbel extreme value copula with cdf
$$C(u_1,u_2;\theta)=\exp\Bigl[-\Bigl\{(-\log u_1)^{\theta}
+(-\log u_2)^{\theta}\Bigr\}^{1/\theta}\Bigr],\quad \theta\geq 1.$$
The resulting model in this case has more probability in the joint upper tail compared to the BVN copula. That is there is more dependence of large ordinal values that would be expected with BVN.
\item Reflection asymmetric copula family with lower tail dependence, such as the
survival Gumbel (s.Gumbel) copula with cdf
$$C(u_1,u_2;\theta)=u_1+u_2-1 + \exp\Bigl[-\Bigl\{\bigl(-\log (1-u_1)\bigr)^{\theta}
+\bigl(-\log (1-u_2)\bigr)^{\theta}\Bigr\}^{1/\theta}\Bigr],\quad \theta\geq 1.$$
The resulting model in this case has more probability in the joint lower tail compared to the BVN copula. That is there is more dependence of small ordinal values that would be expected with BVN.
\item\label{t} Copulas with reflection symmetric upper and lower tail
dependence, such as the bivariate Student $t_\nu$ copula with cdf
$$C(u_1,u_2;\theta)=T_2\Bigl(T^{-1}(u_1;\nu),T^{-1}(u_2;\nu);\theta,\nu\Bigr),\quad-1\leq\theta\leq 1,$$
where $T(;\nu)$ is the univariate Student t cdf with (non-integer) $\nu$ degrees of freedom, and $T_2$ is the
cdf of a bivariate Student t distribution with $\nu$ degrees of freedom and correlation parameter $\theta$.
A small value of $\nu$, such as $1\le \nu\le 5$, leads to a model with
more probabilities in the joint upper and joint lower tails compared to the BVN copula. That is there is more dependence of large and small ordinal values than would be expected with BVN.
\end{itemize}
To depict the concept of reflection symmetric (asymmetric) tail dependence (independence), we plot contour plots of the corresponding copula densities with standard normal margins and dependence parameters corresponding to Kendall's $\tau$ value of $0.5$ in Figure \ref{contours}.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{bvn.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{t2.eps}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{frank.eps}}
\\
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{gumbel.eps}
&
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{sgumbel.eps}
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{contours}Contour plots of BVN, $t_2$, Frank, Gumbel and s.Gumbel copulas with standard normal margins and dependence parameters corresponding to Kendall's $\tau$ value of $0.5$. }
\end{center}
\end{figure}
For this paper, the above copula families are sufficient for the applications in Section \ref{sec-appl}, since tail dependence is a property to consider when choosing amongst different families of copulas and the concept of upper/lower tail dependence is one way to differentiate families. \cite{Nikoloulopoulos&karlis08CSDA}
have shown that it is hard to choose a copula with similar properties from real data, since
copulas with similar (tail) dependence properties provide similar fit.
Note also that these copulas satisfy the conditions under which a copula function generates a stationary Markov chain that satisfies mixing conditions at a geometric rate \citep{chen-etal-2009,Beare2010}.
\section{\label{estimation}Estimation techniques and computational details}
The log-likelihood of the joint copula-based Markov model is
\begin{equation}\label{jointserlik}\ell_{12|t}(\boldsymbol{\theta})= \sum_{i=1}^n\left(\log f_{12}(y_{i11},y_{i12};\boldsymbol{\theta}) + \sum_{t=2}^T\, \log f_{12|t}(y_{it1},y_{it2};\boldsymbol{\theta})\right).
\end{equation}
where $f_{12|t}(\cdot)$ is given in (\ref{jointserpmf}) and
\begin{align*}
&f_{12}(y_{11},y_{12})=\\&C_{12|t}\bigl(F_{1}(y_{11}),F_{2}(y_{12})\bigr)-C_{12|t}\bigl(F_{1}(y_{11}-1),F_{2}(y_{12})\bigr)-\nonumber\\&C_{12|t}\bigl(F_{1}(y_{11}),F_{2}(y_{12}-1)\bigr)+C_{12|t}\bigl(F_{1}(y_{11}-1),F_{2}(y_{12}-1)\bigr).
\end{align*}
The maximum likelihood (ML) estimates can be derived using the steps below:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For each $j$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item At the first step the $\ell_j(\boldsymbol{\beta}_j,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j)$ in (\ref{indlik}) is maximized over the univariate marginal parameters $\boldsymbol{\beta}_j,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j$ assuming time independence.
\item At the second step the $\ell_{j|t}(\boldsymbol{\beta}_j,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j,\theta_j)$ in (\ref{serlik}) is maximized over
the copula parameter $\theta_j$
with univariate parameters $\boldsymbol{\beta}_j,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j$ fixed as estimated at the first step.
\item At the third step the $\ell_{j|t}(\boldsymbol{\beta}_j,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j,\theta_j)$ in (\ref{serlik}) is maximized over both the univariate parameters $\boldsymbol{\beta}_j,\boldsymbol{\gamma}_j$ and
copula parameter $\theta_j$
with initial parameters the estimates for the preceding steps.
\end{enumerate}
\item At the fourth step the $\ell_{12|t}(\boldsymbol{\theta})$ in (\ref{jointserlik}) is maximized over
the copula parameter $\theta$
with all the other parameters fixed as estimated at the preceding steps.
\item At the final step the $\ell_{12|t}(\boldsymbol{\theta})$ in (\ref{jointserlik}) is maximized over $\boldsymbol{\theta}$
with initial parameters the estimates for the preceding steps.
\end{enumerate}
In the steps above
the Inference function of
Margins method \citep{joe97,joe05} is used to get initial estimates.
Each of the estimated parameters can be obtained by
using a quasi-Newton \citep{nash90} method applied to the log-likelihood.
This numerical method requires only the objective
function, i.e., the joint log-likelihood, while the gradients
are computed numerically and the Hessian matrix of the second
order derivatives is updated in each iteration. The standard errors (SEs) of the ML estimates can be also obtained via the gradients and the Hessian computed numerically during the maximization process. Assuming that the usual regularity conditions \citep{serfling80} for
asymptotic maximum likelihood theory hold for the bivariate model
as well as for its margins we have that ML estimates are
asymptotically normal. Therefore one can build Wald tests to
statistically judge the effect of any covariate.
\section{\label{sec-appl}Application to the German Socio-Economic Panel}
Couples were followed during 2004--2012. Interviews were administered
every 2 years between 2004 and 2008, and every year thereafter, resulting in 7 measurements per couple. We use the 2201 couples observed at all seven time points, although our methodology could be applied to situations in which the cluster size $T$ is non-constant.
The outcome variable in our analysis is the risk attitude question which is asked in each of the seven survey years. The question is reproduced as follows:
\begin{quote}
How do you see yourself? Are you generally a person who is fully prepared to take risks or do you try to avoid taking risks? Please tick a box on the scale,
where 0 means ``risk averse" and 10 means ``fully prepared to take risks"
\end{quote}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccc}
$\Box$&$\Box$&$\Box$&$\Box$&$\Box$&$\Box$&$\Box$&$\Box$&$\Box$&$\Box$&$\Box$\\
0&1&2&3&4&5&6&7&8&9&10\\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\bigskip
\noindent We also use a number of explanatory variables: number of children, log of household income, age, age-squared and education level.
We fit the joint copula-based Markov model with BVN,
Gumbel, s.Gumbel, and $t_\nu$ bivariate linking copulas.
For Student $t_\nu$, choices of $\nu$ were $1,2,\ldots,10$. For the model we allow three different copula
families, one for the male time-series, one for the female time-series and one to join them.
To make it easier
to compare the dependence parameters, we convert the estimated parameters to Kendall's $\tau$'s
in $(0,1)$ via the relations
$\tau=\frac{2}{\pi}\arcsin{\theta}$,
$\tau=1+4\theta^{-1}\left[\frac{1}{\theta}\int_0^{\theta}\frac{t}{e^t-1}dt-1\right],$
and
$\tau=1-\theta^{-1}$
for elliptical, Frank and Gumbel copulas
in \cite{HultLindskog02}, \cite{genest87}, and \cite{genest&mackay86}, respectively.
Note that Kendall's {$\tau$} only accounts for the dependence dominated by the middle of the data, and it is expected to be similar amongst different families of copulas. However, the tail dependence varies, as explained in Section \ref{sec-families}, and is a property to consider when choosing amongst different families of copulas.
For the model with $t_\nu$ we summarize the
choice of integer $\nu$ with the largest maximized log-likelihood.
{Since the number of parameters is the same between the models, we use the log-likelihood at estimates as a measure for goodness of fit between all the models.
We further compute the \nocite{vuong1989}Vuong's (1989) test to check if there is
more probability in the joint tails than the one expected via assuming a BVN copula to couple the conditional (on the past) distributions of male and female ordinal time-series.
The Vuong's test is the sample version of the difference in Kullback-Leibler divergence between two models and can be used to differentiate two parametric models which could be non-nested.
Assume that we have Models 1 and 2 with parametric densities $f^{(1)}_{12|t}$ and $f^{(2)}_{12|t}$ with $C_{12|t}$ being the BVN copula and any other parametric family of copulas with different tail properties, respectively; the best fit of $C_{j|t}$ is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations for males and females.
The sample version of the difference in Kullback-Leibler divergence between two models with MLEs $\hat\boldsymbol{\theta}^{(1)},\hat\boldsymbol{\theta}^{(2)}$ is
$$\bar D=\sum_{i=1}^N D_i/N,$$
where $D_i=\log\left[\frac{f^{(2)}_{12|t}\left(Y_1,Y_2;\hat\boldsymbol{\theta}^{(2)}\right)}{f^{(1)}_{12|t}\left(Y_1,Y_2;\hat\boldsymbol{\theta}^{(1)}\right)}\right]$.
Model 1 is the better fitting model if $\bar D<0$, and Model 2 is the better fitting model if $\bar D>0$.
\cite{vuong1989}
has shown that asymptotically under the null hypothesis $H_0:\Delta=0$, i.e., Models 1 and 2 have the same parametric densities $f^{(1)}$ and $f^{(2)}$,
$$z_0=\sqrt{N}\bar D/s\widesim{H_0}\mathcal{N}(0,1),$$
where $s^2=\frac{1}{N-1}\sum_{i=1}^N(D_i-\bar D)^2$.
For more details we refer the interested reader to
\cite{joe2014,Nikoloulopoulos2015b}.
}
For these risk data, if a respondent reports the maximum (minimum) willingness to take risk in year $t$, then it seems natural to expect them to report the maximum (minimum) in year $t-1$ and year $t+1$ as well.
That is, based on the data descriptions,
we can expect {\it a priori} that a model with $C_{j|t}$ being the $t_\nu$ copulas might
be plausible, as in this case the data have more probability in the joint tails.
Furthermore, since the sample is a mixture (males and females) we can expect {\it a priori} that a $t_\nu$ copula to join the male and female time-series might be plausible, as in this case the ordinal responses can be considered as mixtures of discretized means.
Table \ref{time-series} contains results from the copula-based Markov models for ordinal time series with covariates for both males and females, where a parametric copula family $C_{j|t}$ is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations estimated separately for males and females, using data from all available years. On the evidence of the maximised log-likelihoods, it is clear that the $t_\nu$ copula with a small $\nu$ is the best-fitting model for these data, and, there is a big improvement over the ``autoregressive-to-anything" (BVN copula-based Markov) model. In particular, we find that the $t_4$ copula is the best-fitting model for the male time series, while the $t_5$ is the best-fitting for female time series.
\begin{sidewaystable}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Estimated parameters, and joint log-likelihoods
$\ell_{j|t}$ for the copula-based Markov models for ordinal time series with covariates for both males and females, where a parametric copula family $C_{j|t}$ is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations for 2004--12 time period.}
\bigskip
\begin{tabular}{c|cc|cc|cc|cc|cc}
\hline
$C_{j|t}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{s.Gumbel} & $t_4$ & $t_5$ \\
& Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females \\
\hline
$\alpha_1$ & -0.708 & -1.381 & -0.803 & -1.257 & -1.259 & -1.839 & -0.105 & -1.143 & -0.595 & -1.507 \\
$\alpha_2$ & -0.244 & -0.861 & -0.296 & -0.719 & -0.754 & -1.293 & 0.269 & -0.704 & -0.165 & -1.010 \\
$\alpha_3$ & 0.352 & -0.249 & 0.317 & -0.104 & -0.130 & -0.663 & 0.781 & -0.147 & 0.401 & -0.408 \\
$\alpha_4$ & 0.818 & 0.258 & 0.780 & 0.390 & 0.349 & -0.150 & 1.210 & 0.341 & 0.859 & 0.099 \\
$\alpha_5$ & 1.126 & 0.600 & 1.077 & 0.721 & 0.661 & 0.191 & 1.505 & 0.681 & 1.166 & 0.444 \\
$\alpha_6$ & 1.719 & 1.256 & 1.647 & 1.363 & 1.249 & 0.825 & 2.094 & 1.346 & 1.762 & 1.103 \\
$\alpha_7$ & 2.116 & 1.664 & 2.034 & 1.773 & 1.630 & 1.201 & 2.497 & 1.765 & 2.160 & 1.508 \\
$\alpha_8$ & 2.703 & 2.193 & 2.622 & 2.314 & 2.172 & 1.666 & 3.102 & 2.316 & 2.743 & 2.029 \\
$\alpha_9$ & 3.478 & 2.867 & 3.402 & 3.013 & 2.845 & 2.224 & 3.907 & 3.028 & 3.494 & 2.680 \\
$\alpha_{10}$ & 3.972 & 3.263 & 3.905 & 3.422 & 3.252 & 2.540 & 4.431 & 3.449 & 3.964 & 3.055 \\
\# children & -0.013 & -0.027 & -0.011 & -0.020 & -0.002 & -0.021 & -0.007 & -0.027 & 0.001 & -0.024 \\
$\log$(HH income) & 0.174 & 0.005 & 0.166 & 0.009 & 0.137 & -0.009 & 0.192 & 0.005 & 0.172 & 0.001 \\
Age & -0.109 & 0.090 & -0.104 & 0.124 & -0.112 & 0.004 & -0.074 & 0.106 & -0.086 & 0.044 \\
Age$^2$ & 0.003 & -0.012 & 0.004 & -0.014 & 0.004 & -0.004 & 0.000 & -0.013 & 0.001 & -0.008 \\
Education & 0.008 & 0.028 & 0.008 & 0.027 & 0.000 & 0.025 & 0.017 & 0.033 & 0.007 & 0.030 \\
$\tau_j$ & 0.308 & 0.289 & 0.347 & 0.322 & 0.336 & 0.314 & 0.334 & 0.307 & 0.334 & 0.309 \\\hline
$\ell_{j|t}$ & -30734.0 & -30434.6 & -30605.8 & -30335.6 & -30552.8 & -30332.9 & -30694.0 & -30407.5 & -30445.4 & -30225.1 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
\label{time-series}%
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{flushleft}
Age and Age$^2$ are scaled by factor $10^{-1}$ and $10^{-2}$ respectively.
\end{flushleft}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{sidewaystable}%
\begin{sidewaystable}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Estimated parameters, their standard errors, joint log-likelihoods
$\ell_{12|t}$, and Vuong's statistics for the joint copula-based Markov models for ordinal time series with covariates for both males and females, where a $t_4$ and a $t_5$ copula family is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations for males and females, respectively, and, an additional parametric copula family $C_{12|t}$ is used for the joint distribution of couple observations for the 2004--12 time period.}
\bigskip
\begin{tabular}{c|cc|cc|cc|cc|cc}
\hline
$C_{12|t}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{s.Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$t_5$} \\
& Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females \\
\hline
{$\alpha_1$} & {-0.611} & {-1.508} & {-0.601} & {-1.508} & {-0.595} & {-1.494} & {-0.687} & {-1.625} & -0.612 (0.282) & -1.507 (0.276) \\
{$\alpha_2$} & {-0.171} & {-1.005} & {-0.168} & {-1.008} & {-0.158} & {-0.990} & {-0.245} & {-1.124} & -0.164 (0.282) & -0.999 (0.276) \\
{$\alpha_3$} & {0.405} & {-0.399} & {0.404} & {-0.403} & {0.416} & {-0.383} & {0.327} & {-0.521} & 0.414 (0.282) & -0.390 (0.276) \\
{$\alpha_4$} & {0.868} & {0.107} & {0.867} & {0.103} & {0.879} & {0.125} & {0.786} & {-0.016} & 0.875 (0.283) & 0.118 (0.276) \\
{$\alpha_5$} & {1.176} & {0.451} & {1.175} & {0.445} & {1.188} & {0.468} & {1.093} & {0.328} & 1.183 (0.283) & 0.460 (0.276) \\
{$\alpha_6$} & {1.772} & {1.105} & {1.770} & {1.098} & {1.781} & {1.117} & {1.688} & {0.985} & 1.775 (0.283) & 1.111 (0.276) \\
{$\alpha_7$} & {2.169} & {1.506} & {2.165} & {1.501} & {2.174} & {1.511} & {2.086} & {1.391} & 2.169 (0.284) & 1.509 (0.276) \\
{$\alpha_8$} & {2.747} & {2.023} & {2.745} & {2.019} & {2.742} & {2.014} & {2.669} & {1.913} & 2.742 (0.284) & 2.018 (0.277) \\
{$\alpha_9$} & {3.488} & {2.669} & {3.494} & {2.669} & {3.461} & {2.638} & {3.420} & {2.567} & 3.475 (0.285) & 2.652 (0.278) \\
{$\alpha_{10}$} & {3.952} & {3.041} & {3.965} & {3.045} & {3.902} & {2.997} & {3.892} & {2.945} & 3.930 (0.287) & 3.019 (0.280) \\
{\# children} & {0.002} & {-0.022} & {0.005} & {-0.021} & {0.001} & {-0.028} & {0.002} & {-0.023} & 0.003 (0.015) & -0.028 (0.015) \\
{$\log$(HH income)} & {0.179} & {0.005} & {0.174} & {0.003} & {0.175} & {0.010} & {0.172} & {0.003} & 0.174 (0.022) & 0.012 (0.021) \\
{Age} & {-0.109} & {0.033} & {-0.099} & {0.037} & {-0.088} & {0.024} & {-0.114} & {-0.003} & -0.086 (0.074) & 0.020 (0.074) \\
{Age$^2$} & {0.003} & {-0.007} & {0.002} & {-0.007} & {0.001} & {-0.007} & {0.004} & {-0.003} & 0.002 (0.006) & -0.006 (0.007) \\
{Education} & {0.006} & {0.029} & {0.007} & {0.029} & {0.007} & {0.030} & {0.005} & {0.027} & 0.005 (0.004) & 0.027 (0.004) \\
{$\tau_j$} & {0.330} & {0.311} & {0.327} & {0.309} & {0.334} & {0.313} & {0.329} & {0.310} & 0.333 (0.006) & 0.312 (0.006) \\
{$\tau$} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.171} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.176} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.160} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.173} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0.172 (0.006)} \\\hline
{$\ell_{12|t}$} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-60145.5} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-60197.1} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-60173.9} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-59987.1} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-59942.2} \\\hline
Vuong's & $z_0$&$p$-value& $z_0$&$p$-value& $z_0$&$p$-value& $z_0$&$p$-value&$z_0$&$p$-value \\
test &\multicolumn{2}{c|}{-}& -3.792 &$<0.001$ & -1.817 & 0.069& 8.536&$<0.001$ &7.831 &$<0.001$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
\label{joint-copula}%
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{flushleft}
Standard errors are shown in parentheses for the best fit; Age and Age$^2$ are scaled by factor $10^{-1}$ and $10^{-2}$ respectively.
\end{flushleft}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{sidewaystable}%
On this basis, these two copulas are chosen for the joint copula-based Markov model that couples the two univariate ordinal time series. For the joint copula-based Markov model for ordinal time series with covariates for both males and females, where a $t_4$ and a $t_5$ copula family is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations for males and females, once again, a number of different copulas are tried to form the joint distribution of couple observations, and the results from these joint models are presented in Table \ref{joint-copula}. This time, we find that the $t_5$ copula provides the best fit. {In fact, from the Vuong's statistic there is enough improvement {compared to the BVN copula} to get a highly statistical significant difference ($p$-value$<0.001$).
This result suggests some skewness to both upper and lower tail for the pair of male and female risks.}
In the final (double) column of Table \ref{joint-copula}, we provide estimates together with SEs for this joint model. The coefficients associated with the explanatory variables lead us to the following conclusions: for males, income has a strong positive effect on willingness to take risk; for females, number of children has a negative effect, while education has a positive effect.
The estimate of Kendall's $\tau$ appearing in the final column of Table \ref{joint-copula} is 0.172 and this is strongly significant. In fact, a joint copula-based Markov model leads to better inferences than a copula-based Markov model with independence of males and females since the likelihood has been improved by $728.3=-59942.2-(-30445.4-30225.1)$. This indicates that there is strong evidence of positive dependence between males and females in the middle of the distribution (i.e. at normal levels of risk attitude). The fact that the best-fitting copula for the joint model is $t_5$ (instead of say, BVN) indicates that there is also positive tail dependence: risk-lovers are particularly keen to match with other risk-lovers, and risk-avoiders with risk-avoiders. This is confirmed by the Vuong's statistic of 7.831 (p-value$<0.001$) reported in the final row of Table \ref{joint-copula}, which establishes clear superiority of the $t_5$ over the BVN.
Next, we have carried out estimation separately for two different time ranges: 2004--8 and 2009--12. Table \ref{time-series-2004-8} shows results from the univariate models using data from 2004--8 only, from which we conclude that the $t_4$ copula provides the best-fitting model for both univariate ordinal time-series. Table \ref{time-series-2009-12} does the same using data from 2009-12, and finds that the best-fitting models are $t_4$ and $t_5$ for males and females respectively.
Tables \ref{joint-copula-2004-8} and \ref{joint-copula-2009-12} show results from the joint models estimated with data from 2004--8 and 2009--12 respectively, and assuming the univariate models found to be best-fitting in Tables \ref{time-series-2004-8} and \ref{time-series-2009-12}. Comparing Tables \ref{joint-copula-2004-8} and \ref{joint-copula-2009-12}, we note two key differences. Firstly, the estimate of Kendall's $\tau$ rises from 0.146 in 2004--8 to 0.191 in 2009--12, and moreover, it may be verified from the associated SEs that the two 95\% confidence intervals do not overlap. Hence we have evidence that Kendall's $\tau$ rises with years of marriage. The second key difference is that the best-fitting joint model for the 2004--8 data is $t_6$, while the best-fitting joint model for 2009--12 is $t_5$. There is a reduction of one in the degrees of freedom of the best-fitting $t_\nu$ copula. Both of these differences between the results in Tables \ref{joint-copula-2004-8} and \ref{joint-copula-2009-12} provide evidence that dependence increases with years of marriage; both in the middle of the distribution, and in the joint tails.
\begin{sidewaystable}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Estimated parameters, and joint log-likelihoods
$\ell_{j|t}$ for the copula-based Markov models for ordinal time series with covariates for both males and females, where a parametric copula family $C_{j|t}$ is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations for 2004--8 time period.}
\begin{tabular}{c|cc|cc|cc|cc|cc}
\hline
$C_{j|t}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{s.Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$t_4$} \\
& Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females \\
\hline
{$\alpha_1$} & -0.482 & -1.268 & -0.399 & -1.209 & -0.933 & -1.549 & -0.073 & -0.944 & -0.474 & -1.312 \\
{$\alpha_2$} & 0.195 & -0.465 & 0.338 & -0.375 & -0.209 & -0.719 & 0.517 & -0.228 & 0.177 & -0.550 \\
{$\alpha_3$} & 0.856 & 0.217 & 1.027 & 0.317 & 0.481 & -0.021 & 1.106 & 0.409 & 0.814 & 0.119 \\
{$\alpha_4$} & 1.307 & 0.743 & 1.482 & 0.840 & 0.946 & 0.514 & 1.527 & 0.917 & 1.257 & 0.642 \\
{$\alpha_5$} & 1.632 & 1.109 & 1.804 & 1.199 & 1.277 & 0.882 & 1.840 & 1.278 & 1.581 & 1.008 \\
{$\alpha_6$} & 2.215 & 1.758 & 2.375 & 1.841 & 1.864 & 1.527 & 2.416 & 1.927 & 2.165 & 1.655 \\
{$\alpha_7$} & 2.596 & 2.157 & 2.750 & 2.239 & 2.241 & 1.913 & 2.799 & 2.331 & 2.547 & 2.049 \\
{$\alpha_8$} & 3.155 & 2.687 & 3.305 & 2.773 & 2.779 & 2.408 & 3.365 & 2.872 & 3.102 & 2.565 \\
{$\alpha_9$} & 3.932 & 3.362 & 4.076 & 3.459 & 3.498 & 3.014 & 4.157 & 3.569 & 3.862 & 3.208 \\
{$\alpha_{10}$} & 4.448 & 3.843 & 4.579 & 3.954 & 3.960 & 3.426 & 4.683 & 4.070 & 4.362 & 3.647 \\
{\# children} & 0.003 & -0.039 & 0.004 & -0.029 & 0.004 & -0.037 & 0.004 & -0.037 & 0.006 & -0.039 \\
{$\log$(HH income)} & 0.199 & 0.047 & 0.208 & 0.044 & 0.183 & 0.041 & 0.212 & 0.058 & 0.207 & 0.051 \\
{Age} & -0.035 & 0.122 & -0.015 & 0.168 & -0.075 & 0.069 & -0.030 & 0.126 & -0.071 & 0.059 \\
{Age$^2$} & -0.002 & -0.015 & -0.003 & -0.019 & 0.002 & -0.010 & -0.003 & -0.016 & 0.000 & -0.009 \\
{Education} & 0.011 & 0.033 & 0.011 & 0.033 & 0.003 & 0.030 & 0.016 & 0.036 & 0.008 & 0.034 \\
{$\tau_j$} & 0.289 & 0.241 & 0.315 & 0.271 & 0.298 & 0.249 & 0.312 & 0.267 & 0.308 & 0.266 \\\hline
$\ell_{j|t}$& -13334.0 & -13140.4 & -13309.2 & -13103.8 & -13269.6 & -13110.0 & -13334.8 & -13119.0 & -13244.7 & -13062.8 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
\label{time-series-2004-8}%
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{flushleft}
Age and Age$^2$ are scaled by factor $10^{-1}$ and $10^{-2}$ respectively.
\end{flushleft}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{sidewaystable}
\begin{sidewaystable}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Estimated parameters, and joint log-likelihoods
$\ell_{j|t}$ for the copula-based Markov models for ordinal time series with covariates for both males and females, where a parametric copula family $C_{j|t}$ is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations for 2009--12 time period.}
\begin{tabular}{c|cc|cc|cc|cc|cc}
\hline
$C_{j|t}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{s.Gumbel} & $t_4$ & $t_5$ \\
& Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females \\
\hline
$\alpha_1$ & -0.271 & -0.618 & -0.406 & -0.499 & -0.633 & -1.082 & 0.250 & -0.608 & -0.046 & -0.771 \\
$\alpha_2$ & 0.141 & -0.175 & 0.043 & -0.032 & -0.186 & -0.611 & 0.596 & -0.228 & 0.350 & -0.338 \\
$\alpha_3$ & 0.705 & 0.402 & 0.626 & 0.550 & 0.407 & -0.011 & 1.093 & 0.296 & 0.900 & 0.233 \\
$\alpha_4$ & 1.181 & 0.895 & 1.099 & 1.031 & 0.899 & 0.493 & 1.534 & 0.769 & 1.373 & 0.728 \\
$\alpha_5$ & 1.474 & 1.220 & 1.382 & 1.343 & 1.198 & 0.818 & 1.817 & 1.090 & 1.666 & 1.055 \\
$\alpha_6$ & 2.069 & 1.881 & 1.952 & 1.988 & 1.789 & 1.458 & 2.406 & 1.759 & 2.262 & 1.718 \\
$\alpha_7$ & 2.476 & 2.300 & 2.349 & 2.407 & 2.181 & 1.842 & 2.818 & 2.188 & 2.669 & 2.133 \\
$\alpha_8$ & 3.092 & 2.839 & 2.966 & 2.954 & 2.748 & 2.311 & 3.452 & 2.748 & 3.277 & 2.658 \\
$\alpha_9$ & 3.879 & 3.535 & 3.752 & 3.667 & 3.422 & 2.871 & 4.267 & 3.478 & 4.027 & 3.313 \\
$\alpha_{10}$ & 4.365 & 3.846 & 4.253 & 3.985 & 3.814 & 3.115 & 4.787 & 3.808 & 4.478 & 3.604 \\
\# children & -0.008 & 0.006 & -0.003 & 0.002 & 0.012 & 0.009 & -0.011 & 0.005 & 0.006 & 0.010 \\
$\log$(HH income) & 0.192 & 0.006 & 0.190 & 0.018 & 0.148 & -0.007 & 0.207 & -0.008 & 0.180 & -0.004 \\
Age & -0.087 & 0.248 & -0.115 & 0.257 & -0.023 & 0.157 & -0.051 & 0.249 & 0.008 & 0.219 \\
Age$^2$ & 0.004 & -0.021 & 0.006 & -0.021 & -0.001 & -0.013 & 0.000 & -0.021 & -0.004 & -0.018 \\
Education & 0.002 & 0.022 & 0.001 & 0.020 & -0.002 & 0.020 & 0.010 & 0.025 & 0.004 & 0.023 \\
$\tau_j$ & 0.339 & 0.336 & 0.376 & 0.369 & 0.357 & 0.350 & 0.371 & 0.363 & 0.365 & 0.355 \\\hline
$\ell_{j|t}$ & -17520.4 & -17316.6 & -17453.8 & -17264.8 & -17426.2 & -17245.8 & -17485.2 & -17312.8 & -17356.6 & -17198.8 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
\label{time-series-2009-12}%
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{flushleft}
Age and Age$^2$ are scaled by factor $10^{-1}$ and $10^{-2}$ respectively.
\end{flushleft}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{sidewaystable}
\begin{sidewaystable}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Estimated parameters, their standard errors,
joint log-likelihoods
$\ell_{12|t}$, and Vuong's statistics for the joint copula-based Markov models for ordinal time series with covariates for both males and females, where a $t_4$ and a $t_5$ copula family is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations for males and females, respectively, and, an additional parametric copula family $C_{12|t}$ is used for the joint distribution of couple observations for the 2004--8 time period.}
\begin{tabular}{c|cc|cc|cc|cc|cc}
\hline
$C_{12|t}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{s.Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$t_6$} \\
& Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females \\
\hline
$\alpha_1$ & -0.478 & -1.362 & -0.477 & -1.309 & -0.534 & -1.228 & -0.601 & -1.450 & -0.684 (0.369) & -1.381 (0.363) \\
$\alpha_2$ & 0.178 & -0.598 & 0.178 & -0.545 & 0.124 & -0.461 & 0.041 & -0.703 & -0.024 (0.367) & -0.616 (0.361) \\
$\alpha_3$ & 0.819 & 0.072 & 0.818 & 0.125 & 0.765 & 0.210 & 0.672 & -0.041 & 0.615 (0.367) & 0.053 (0.362) \\
$\alpha_4$ & 1.264 & 0.594 & 1.263 & 0.646 & 1.210 & 0.733 & 1.113 & 0.478 & 1.059 (0.367) & 0.575 (0.362) \\
$\alpha_5$ & 1.588 & 0.958 & 1.587 & 1.009 & 1.534 & 1.098 & 1.435 & 0.841 & 1.382 (0.368) & 0.938 (0.362) \\
$\alpha_6$ & 2.171 & 1.602 & 2.169 & 1.651 & 2.117 & 1.739 & 2.017 & 1.486 & 1.963 (0.368) & 1.580 (0.362) \\
$\alpha_7$ & 2.552 & 1.994 & 2.548 & 2.043 & 2.496 & 2.126 & 2.398 & 1.880 & 2.342 (0.369) & 1.969 (0.363) \\
$\alpha_8$ & 3.103 & 2.508 & 3.100 & 2.558 & 3.042 & 2.631 & 2.953 & 2.396 & 2.892 (0.370) & 2.479 (0.364) \\
$\alpha_9$ & 3.854 & 3.149 & 3.858 & 3.201 & 3.775 & 3.253 & 3.712 & 3.041 & 3.640 (0.372) & 3.113 (0.366) \\
$\alpha_{10}$ & 4.347 & 3.583 & 4.359 & 3.641 & 4.246 & 3.670 & 4.212 & 3.479 & 4.129 (0.374) & 3.536 (0.370) \\
\# children & 0.005 & -0.039 & 0.006 & -0.039 & 0.001 & -0.041 & 0.009 & -0.035 & 0.005 (0.019) & -0.039 (0.019) \\
$\log$(HH income) & 0.215 & 0.052 & 0.211 & 0.054 & 0.211 & 0.066 & 0.202 & 0.048 & 0.203 (0.031) & 0.061 (0.031) \\
Age & -0.091 & 0.042 & -0.082 & 0.055 & -0.094 & 0.042 & -0.098 & 0.021 & -0.118 (0.100) & 0.014 (0.097) \\
Age$^2$ & 0.002 & -0.008 & 0.001 & -0.009 & 0.002 & -0.008 & 0.003 & -0.006 & 0.005 (0.009) & -0.005 (0.009) \\
Education & 0.006 & 0.032 & 0.007 & 0.033 & 0.006 & 0.032 & 0.005 & 0.031 & 0.004 (0.006) & 0.030 (0.006) \\
$\tau_j$ & 0.311 & 0.272 & 0.307 & 0.271 & 0.315 & 0.276 & 0.310 & 0.275 & 0.314 (0.010) & 0.279 (0.010) \\
$\tau$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.142} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.149} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.135} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.143} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0.146 (0.009)} \\\hline
$\ell_{12|t}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-26150.7} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-26160.1} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-26143.5} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-26115.4 } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-26078.4}\\
\hline
Vuong's & $z_0$&$p$-value& $z_0$&$p$-value& $z_0$&$p$-value& $z_0$&$p$-value&$z_0$&$p$-value \\
test & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-}&-1.294 &0.196&0.777 &0.437&3.464 &0.001&5.102 &$<0.001$\\\hline
\end{tabular}%
\label{joint-copula-2004-8}%
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{flushleft}
Standard errors are shown in parentheses for the best fit; Age and Age$^2$ are scaled by factor $10^{-1}$ and $10^{-2}$ respectively.
\end{flushleft}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{sidewaystable}
\begin{sidewaystable}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Estimated parameters, their standard errors, joint log-likelihoods
$\ell_{12|t}$, and Vuong's statistics for the joint copula-based Markov models for ordinal time series with covariates for both males and females, where a $t_4$ and a $t_5$ copula family is used for the joint distribution of subsequent observations for males and females, respectively, and, an additional parametric copula family $C_{12|t}$ is used for the joint distribution of couple observations for the 2009--12 time period.}
\begin{tabular}{c|cc|cc|cc|cc|cc}
\hline
$C_{12|t}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{BVN} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Frank} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{s.Gumbel} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$t_5$} \\
& Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females & Males & Females \\
\hline
$\alpha_1$ & -0.069 & -0.775 & -0.060 & -0.776 & -0.051 & -0.761 & -0.219 & -0.970 & -0.062 (0.423) & -0.930 (0.411) \\
$\alpha_2$ & 0.337 & -0.336 & 0.341 & -0.338 & 0.355 & -0.320 & 0.186 & -0.535 & 0.352 (0.423) & -0.483 (0.411) \\
$\alpha_3$ & 0.900 & 0.240 & 0.900 & 0.240 & 0.916 & 0.259 & 0.744 & 0.040 & 0.919 (0.424) & 0.101 (0.411) \\
$\alpha_4$ & 1.379 & 0.737 & 1.379 & 0.736 & 1.396 & 0.757 & 1.220 & 0.536 & 1.400 (0.424) & 0.601 (0.411) \\
$\alpha_5$ & 1.676 & 1.064 & 1.675 & 1.062 & 1.693 & 1.083 & 1.515 & 0.864 & 1.696 (0.424) & 0.928 (0.412) \\
$\alpha_6$ & 2.275 & 1.722 & 2.271 & 1.719 & 2.288 & 1.734 & 2.113 & 1.528 & 2.292 (0.425) & 1.583 (0.412) \\
$\alpha_7$ & 2.680 & 2.133 & 2.674 & 2.132 & 2.687 & 2.135 & 2.521 & 1.945 & 2.693 (0.426) & 1.989 (0.412) \\
$\alpha_8$ & 3.281 & 2.653 & 3.276 & 2.654 & 3.274 & 2.638 & 3.129 & 2.472 & 3.287 (0.426) & 2.500 (0.413) \\
$\alpha_9$ & 4.022 & 3.300 & 4.024 & 3.305 & 3.987 & 3.263 & 3.882 & 3.130 & 4.016 (0.428) & 3.136 (0.415) \\
$\alpha_{10}$ & 4.469 & 3.592 & 4.475 & 3.593 & 4.412 & 3.547 & 4.337 & 3.425 & 4.456 (0.431) & 3.425 (0.418) \\
\# children & 0.006 & 0.010 & 0.011 & 0.012 & 0.010 & 0.003 & 0.005 & 0.005 & 0.011 (0.022) & -0.002 (0.022) \\
$\log$(HH income) & 0.185 & 0.002 & 0.180 & -0.004 & 0.178 & 0.004 & 0.176 & 0.002 & 0.177 (0.029) & 0.004 (0.028) \\
Age & -0.013 & 0.206 & -0.003 & 0.219 & 0.017 & 0.208 & -0.037 & 0.137 & 0.020 (0.113) & 0.159 (0.114) \\
Age$^2$ & -0.002 & -0.017 & -0.003 & -0.018 & -0.005 & -0.018 & 0.000 & -0.011 & -0.005 (0.009) & -0.014 (0.010) \\
Education & 0.004 & 0.022 & 0.005 & 0.022 & 0.007 & 0.023 & 0.004 & 0.021 & 0.005 (0.005) & 0.022 (0.006) \\
$\tau_j$ & 0.357 & 0.353 & 0.356 & 0.350 & 0.364 & 0.358 & 0.354 & 0.348 & 0.360 (0.008) & 0.352 (0.008) \\
$\tau$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.186} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.197} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.167}& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{0.199}& \multicolumn{2}{|c}{0.191 (0.008)}\\\hline
$\ell_{12|t}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-34202.2} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-34217.7} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-34238.9} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-34087.1} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{-34074.5} \\
\hline
Vuong's & $z_0$&$p$-value& $z_0$&$p$-value& $z_0$&$p$-value& $z_0$&$p$-value&$z_0$&$p$-value \\
test & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{-} &-1.451 & 0.147 &-2.748 & 0.006 & 8.275 &$<0.001$&6.659 &$<0.001$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
\label{joint-copula-2009-12}%
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{flushleft}
Standard errors are shown in parentheses for the best fit; Age and Age$^2$ are scaled by factor $10^{-1}$ and $10^{-2}$ respectively.
\end{flushleft}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{sidewaystable}
At this point it is useful to recall that the sample used in this study is restricted to couples observed in every year. Hence attrition (poorly-matched couples dropping out of the sample) is not an issue. This means that the increase in dependence seen in the comparison of Tables 4 and 6 may be interpreted as clear evidence of ``socialization'' \citep{arnett-1995}: the two members of the couple become more similar in terms of risk-attitude as their marriage progresses.
Of course, this effect could simply be a time effect. For example, the global financial crisis occurred between our two sample ranges. Clearly this sort of event has the potential to influence risk attitudes. However, it is less clear that this sort of event, and more generally the passage of time, has the potential to change {\it the dependence patterns} in risk attitude between spouses. We are therefore led to believe that our socialization explanation is the most plausible.
\baselineskip=17pt
\section{\label{sec-discussion}Discussion}
Assortative matching is a concept of great interest to economists, as evidenced by the extensive theoretical and empirical literatures devoted to it, dating back to \cite{becker1974}. The econometric modelling of assortative matching is clearly a setting in which the precise nature of the dependence between two variables representing the relevant outcomes for the two members of the couple, becomes the central focus of the analysis. The copula approach provides the ideal framework for this sort of modelling, since it brings richness to the dependence structure. For example, it allows the modelling of both joint tails and moreover allows a variety of types of asymmetry in the dependence structure.
In applying the copula approach to the problem of assortative matching on risk attitude, we have found evidence of positive assortative matching, in agreement with previous empirical work. However, the copula approach has enabled us to find evidence of both centre dependence and tail dependence. That is, over the entire range of of risk attitudes, there is a tendency for individuals to match with other individuals with similar risk attitude, and this positive dependence is particularly marked in the tails.
The evidence of PAM amounts to a rejection of standard assortative matching theories based on risk-sharing assumptions, and the favouring models based on alternative assumptions such as the ability of agents to control income risk, and limited commitment in the marriage contract. Since we have not found major differences between the extent of PAM in the two tails, we are unable to claim strong support for the model of \cite{Li-etal-2016} which may be interpreted as predicting PAM to be strongest for risk seekers.
These conclusions have been arrived at using a novel model which we have labelled the ``joint copula-based Markov model". The model consists of two stages. In the first stage, males and females are considered separately, and a copula is used to model the joint distribution of neighbouring (in time) outcomes for a given individual. The best fitting copulas thus found are then combined using a third copula that couples the two conditional distributions at each time point. In all three cases, the best-fitting copula is found to be a $t_\nu$ with a small $\nu$, which leads to a model with more probability in the joint upper and joint lower tails compared to the BVN copula. In this economics application, it is highlighted that a joint model with a $t_\nu$ copula is plausible for a population that is a mixture of subpopulations, while a BVN model might be adequate for smaller homogeneous subgroups. This fact leads to the conclusion of positive dependence in the tails, and we have found strong statistical evidence to confirm this, in the form of the Vuong's statistic.
Having arrived at this conclusion, we then extended the analysis by applying the same two-stage procedure separately for the 2004-8 and 2009-12 data. The key results here were that both middle and tail dependence were stronger in the second time range. We interpreted this in terms of the phenomenon of ``socialization": the two members of the couple become more similar in risk attitude with the accumulation of years of marriage.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
We acknowledge access to the German Socio-Economic Panel for use in this research under licence number: 2596. Thanks to Phil Bacon for outstanding data management.
|
\section{Introduction}
Systematic error control and rejection are central considerations of cosmic microwave background (CMB) instrument design and data analysis. The reionization feature of inflationary gravitational waves \citep{1997PhRvD..55.7368K, 1997PhRvL..78.2054S, 1997NewA....2..323H} and improved constraints on the optical depth $\tau$ \citep{2015PhRvD..92l3535A} are of great interest, and require analysis of CMB polarization on the widest angular scales of the sky. These measurements are susceptible to contamination because they relate instrument response and foregrounds across the largest angular and temporal separations.
A well-established approach to detect or reject systematics splits the data into epochs, frequencies, surveys or other subsets across which a contaminant varies or is uncorrelated. This general approach can take the form of a cross-spectral estimator \citep{2005MNRAS.358..833T} or power spectrum null tests across a variety of difference maps. The maps can be split and subtracted to check for particular instrumental effects such as time constants (e.g. \citep{2015ApJ...811..126B}) or to get uncorrelated realizations of detector noise or atmospheric fluctuations (e.g., \citep{2013ApJ...779...86S, 2014JCAP...04..014D}). Contamination that is uncorrelated between the maps does not produce bias in the cross power, but it does boost errors. Here, we consider robustness and bias in the pixel-space likelihood and develop an approach analogous to the cross power or difference map null test.
Anisotropy spectral analysis compresses map information by exploiting the Gaussianity and statistical isotropy of the CMB signal. A survey is limited to fractions of the sky by its scan strategy and galactic contamination. Truncation has two consequences for the power spectrum. The estimate $\hat C_\ell$ is the sum of quadratic products of normally distributed map variations, making $P(C_\ell | \bmath{x})$ (given map data vector $\bmath{x}$) non-Gaussian unless there are sufficient modes available to be in the central limit. On a partial sky, the spherical harmonics for intensity and polarization are an incomplete basis, which results in correlations between $\ell$ \citep{2014PhRvD..89f3008G, 2002ApJ...567....2H}, and $E$- and $B$-mode\ polarization mixing \citep{2003PhRvD..67b3501B}. Polarization power spectra through pseudo-$C_\ell$ \citep{1973ApJ...185..413P, 2002ApJ...567....2H} and related quadratic methods have well-established procedures for deriving the $P(C_\ell | \bmath{x})$ \citep{2006MNRAS.370..343E, 2009PhRvD..79h3012H, 2009PhRvD..79l3515G}. \citet{2015MNRAS.453.3174M} recently developed an implementation of a complete probability distribution function for the cross power spectrum on large scales, including the effects above.
An alternative approach resolves the challenges of spectral estimation by determining the cosmological parameters directly from the map \citep{2007ApJS..170..335P, 2011ApJ...737...78K, 2013ApJ...771...12F, 2015ApJ...814..103W, 2015arXiv150702704P}. The pixel-space likelihood approach has several advantages. Cuts and variation in coverage on a partial sky are included in the pixel covariance model and do not require simulations or analytic treatment of multipole correlation or polarization mixing. The likelihood represents the complete information contained in maps with Gaussian signal and noise, so it can achieve the lowest-variance estimates of the parameters. It accommodates some classes of foreground subtraction and self-consistently propagates parameter errors \citep{2011ApJ...737...78K, 2015ApJ...814..103W, 2015arXiv150702704P}. The likelihood avoids the need to represent a complete joint (non-Gaussian, correlated) probability distribution of the $C_\ell$'s for $\ell$ on angular scales comparable to the survey size. Finally, the likelihood does not require reference to fiducial model parameters. There are well-established procedures for combining information from pixel-space likelihoods of large scales and spectral analysis of small scales \citep{2007ApJS..170..335P, 2015arXiv150702704P}.
Drawing an analogy to the power spectrum null test, we can estimate cosmological parameters from the likelihood of a difference between two maps from subsets of the data. The sky signal drops out in the difference, and only noise or variable contamination remains. If there is no contamination, the posterior distribution of cosmological parameters will be consistent with data containing only detector noise. A null test based on the likelihood of the difference may fail to be informative when contamination does not match covariance in the data model. In this case, excess variance produces parameter-dependent bias through the effective weighting of the contaminants in map space. In the difference map, there is no signal, and the contaminant is weighted differently than in the sum.
We develop the joint likelihood analogy to the cross power and null test and propose a reweighting method for difference maps. Reweighting gives a consistent interpretation of bias from contamination in the sum and difference. However, excess variance (misspecification) also produces bias in the width of the posterior parameter distribution. Contamination must be treated either in a reanalysis of the data or as a new term in the likelihood model.
The methods developed here apply to experiments and missions specifically seeking the largest scales on the sky (Advanced ACTPol \citep{2016JLTP..184..772H}, CLASS \citep{2014SPIE.9153E..1IE}, GroundBIRD \citep{2012SPIE.8452E..1MT}, LSPE \citep{2012SPIE.8446E..7AA}, PIPER \citep{2014SPIE.9153E..1LL}, and QUIJOTE \citep{2014arXiv1401.4690L}) and missions (CORE+\,\footnote{\tt http://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/169642}, Inflation Probe \citep{2014arXiv1401.3741K}, LiteBIRD \citep{2014JLTP..176..733M}, and PIXIE \citep{2011JCAP...07..025K}), but also to the largest angular scales of surveys on smaller regions.
Section~\ref{sec:likeadv} reviews the likelihood approach and its relation to spectral methods.
Section~\ref{sec:detnoise} extends the likelihood to include the detector noise amplitude as a nuisance parameter. This setting demonstrates properties of an incomplete covariance model.
Section~\ref{sec:jointlikelihood} reviews the cross-spectral estimator and defines an analogous joint likelihood between data splits.
Section~\ref{ssec:rewighted} describes the joint estimator with unknown contamination covariance and develops a re-weighted difference map null test.
Section~\ref{sec:summary} summarizes the approach.
\section{The likelihood of CMB maps}
\label{sec:likeadv}
The Gaussian log-likelihood $\mathcal L\equiv-\ln P(\bmath{x} | \bmath{\Theta})$ for map data $\bmath{x}$ given parameters $\bmath{\Theta}$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:likeform}
2 \mathcal L &=& \Tr[\ln \mathbfss{C}(\bmath{\Theta}) + \mathbfss{C}(\bmath{\Theta})^{-1} \mathbfss{D}(\bmath{x}, \bmath{\Theta})] \\
\mathbfss{D}(\bmath{x}, \bmath{\Theta}) &\equiv& [\bmath{x} - \bmath{\mu}(\bmath{\Theta})] [\bmath{x} - \bmath{\mu}(\bmath{\Theta})]^T\nonumber,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbfss{C}$ and $\bmath{\mu}$ are the covariance and mean of the map vector $\bmath{x}$. In subsequent equations, we assume implicit parameter dependence in the mean and covariance model or emphasize dependence on individual model parameters.
The data vector for CMB polarization is $\bmath{x}^T \equiv (\bmath{x}_Q^T, \bmath{x}_U^T)$, a stack of Stokes $Q$ and $U$ maps. Stokes $I$ intensity can also be added for complete $TT$, $TE$, $EE$, and $BB$ two-point information, but models and simulations here use only Stokes $Q$ and $U$ for simplicity. The maps used in the likelihoods are smoothed at $\theta_{\rm FWHM} = 15^\circ$ and binned onto $N_\mathrm{side}=8$ \citep{2005ApJ...622..759G}, encompassing multipoles $2 \leq \ell \leq 23$. The mask region is defined by {\it WMAP} P06 \citep{2007ApJS..170..335P} and a declination limit of $-73^\circ < \delta < 27^\circ$ available to wide-area surveys in the Atacama, such as Advanced ACTPol \citep{2016JLTP..184..772H} and CLASS \citep{2015ApJ...814..103W} in the near term. Combined, $f_{\rm sky} \approx 0.5$, shown in Fig.\,\ref{fig:skymask}.
The total covariance $\mathbfss{C}(\bmath{\Theta})$ is the sum of cosmological signal and noise, $\mathbfss{C}(\bmath{\Theta}) = \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) + \mathbfss{N}(\bmath{\Theta})$. The signal covariance matrix is defined from the power spectrum $C_\ell(\bmath{\Theta})$ through \citep{2015arXiv150702704P}
\begin{equation}
\mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) = \sum_\ell \sum_{XY} C_\ell^{XY}(\bmath{\Theta}) \mathbfss{P}_\ell^{XY},
\label{eqn:sigcovmodel}
\end{equation}
where our $XY$ sum extends over only $EE$ and $BB$ to predict the Stokes $Q$ and $U$ covariance. $\mathbfss{P}_\ell^{XY}$ is described in \citet{2001PhRvD..64f3001T} and includes effects of the $\theta_{\rm FWHM} = 15^\circ$ smoothing and incomplete sky coverage. For simplicity, we fix $\Lambda$CDM cosmological parameters \citep{2013ApJS..208...19H} throughout, but these could be jointly estimated in the likelihood. Conclusions are not dependent on the base cosmology at the currently available precision. The input data $\bmath{x}$ are generated using \texttt{synfast} \citep{2005ApJ...622..759G} plus a Gaussian random detector noise and are consistent with the covariance in Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:sigcovmodel}). In subsequent sections, we add contamination to the maps to study departures from the model.
For the purpose of demonstrating the $B$-mode\ constraint, we use a reference survey with noise RMS amplitude $10\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$. This noise level is typical of per-band sensitivities of next-generation experiments in their prime CMB science band (see e.g. \citet{2016JCAP...03..052E} and \citet{2016MNRAS.458.2032R} for summaries). Throughout, ``detector noise" refers to the variance in the map attributable to the detectors, which we assume is uncorrelated between map pixels.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{mask_region-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Mask used in the simulations here ($N_\mathrm{side}=8$, giving $f_{\rm sky} \approx 0.5$), representative of the region accessible from the Atacama, as well as masking the galaxy through WMAP's P06 map.
\label{fig:skymask}}
\end{figure}
To simulate the distribution of experimental outcomes, we find maximum likelihood (ML) parameters across Monte Carlo realizations of data sets using the limited-memory Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno algorithm \citep{byrd1995limited,zhu1997algorithm}.
\subsection{Relation to quadratic methods}
\label{ssec:likequad}
The Newton-Raphson approach provides an analytic expression to iterate to find the maximum likelihood as \citep{1998PhRvD..57.2117B, 2004MNRAS.349..603E}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:nriter}
\delta \theta_i &=& \sum_j F_{ij}^{-1} \frac{1}{2} \Tr \left [ (\bmath{x} \bmath{x}^T -\mathbfss{C}) \left ( \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,j} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \right ) \right ] \\
F_{ij} &\equiv& \frac{1}{2} \Tr(\mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,i} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,j}),
\end{eqnarray}
where commas denote partial derivatives as $\mathbfss{C}_{,i} \equiv \partial \mathbfss{C} / \partial \theta_i$. This expression gives the update to the parameter $\theta_i$ among the parameters in $\bmath{\Theta} = \{ \theta_1, ...\}$. Equation\,(\ref{eq:nriter}) evaluates all covariances and derivatives at the current iteration, and the resulting $\delta \theta_i$ gives the vector of changes $\delta \bmath{\Theta}$ to iterate to the maximum likelihood. Each iteration is driven by $\bmath{x} \bmath{x}^T -\mathbfss{C}(\bmath{\Theta})$, the difference between the covariance model at that iteration and the outer product of the data.
The covariance model $\mathbfss{C} = \alpha \mathbfss{C}_{,\alpha} + \mathbfss{N}$ provides a simple example of quadratic estimation of the covariance amplitude $\alpha$. Let the first guess be $\alpha=0$. Then the first step toward the maximum likelihood value of $\alpha$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:quadest}
\hat \alpha &=& \frac{\bmath{x}^T \mathbfss{Q}_{\alpha} \bmath{x} - b}{\Tr(\mathbfss{Q}_{\alpha} \mathbfss{C}_{,\alpha})}~~~~b=\Tr(\mathbfss{Q}_{\alpha} \mathbfss{N}) \\
\mathbfss{Q}_{\alpha} &=& \mathbfss{N}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,\alpha} \mathbfss{N}^{-1}.
\end{eqnarray}
The quadratic term $\bmath{x}^T \mathbfss{N}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,\alpha} \mathbfss{N}^{-1} \bmath{x}$ inverse-noise weights the map data ($\mathbfss{N}^{-1} \bmath{x}$) and dots across the covariance structure $\mathbfss{C}_{,\alpha}$. The ``noise bias" $b$ removes the contribution of noise $\mathbfss{N}$. The denominator is a normalization that ensures that the expectation value is
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \hat \alpha \rangle &=& \frac{\Tr(\alpha \mathbfss{Q}_{\alpha} \mathbfss{C}_{,\alpha} + \mathbfss{Q}_{\alpha}\mathbfss{N}) - \Tr(\mathbfss{Q}_{\alpha} \mathbfss{N})}{\Tr(\mathbfss{Q}_{\alpha} \mathbfss{C}_{,\alpha})} = \alpha.
\end{eqnarray}
The quadratic estimator with full $\mathbfss{C}^{-1}$ weights is the minimum-variance estimate of Gaussian covariance amplitude parameters \citep{1997PhRvD..55.5895T, 2001PhRvD..64f3001T}. Quadratic methods are commonly used to estimate the anisotropy spectrum \citep{2002ApJ...567....2H, 2004MNRAS.348..885E, 2004MNRAS.349..603E, 2006MNRAS.370..343E, 2009MNRAS.400..463G, 2011MNRAS.414..823R, 2015ApJS..221....5G}. In this case, the parameters of the covariance model are the $C_\ell$'s themselves or band powers.
The quadratic approach to the maximum likelihood provides some analytic intuition about the behavior of the maximum likelihood (Sec.\,\ref{ssec:bbias}) and relation of the joint pixel-space likelihood to the cross power (Sec.\,\ref{sec:jointl} and Appendix~\ref{app:jointcross}).
\subsection{Applicability of the likelihood approach}
\label{ssec:applike}
The pixel-space likelihood is analytically simple at the expense of being computationally intensive and structurally rigid. Evaluation of the likelihood requires the specification and inverse of the $N_{\rm pix} \times N_{\rm pix}$ covariance matrix of the maps, which is numerically expensive. The pixel-space likelihood has therefore seen greatest use in extracting information from the largest scales in the survey, which span $O(1000)$ pixels. Note that the pixel-space analysis is generally useful for modeling signal covariance on angular scales approaching the size of the survey, not just at low-$\ell$.
Given map data and a model, the likelihood is a self-sufficient ``black box" to determine the cosmological parameters. As long as the data model is accurate, the likelihood gives the probability distribution of the parameters. Spectral methods provide greater freedom, such as choosing spatial weightings, removing foregrounds in advance, and throwing out spatial modes. Freedom also carries the responsibility of propagating treatments to the final parameter distribution. Choices in data weighting and filtering other than $\mathbfss{C}^{-1}$ move away from optimality. In contrast, the likelihood has only the fixed model and does not differentiate between the signal structure covariance and data weighting or filtering.
Covariance in the observed data that is neither modeled nor isolated could produce a spurious detection of $B$-modes\ or bias the true value. Some contaminant covariance structure may be known accurately in advance. For example, the variation of detector noise across the map can be modeled from the survey coverage and data cuts. However, the amplitude of that noise may not be known from only laboratory measurements or characterization of the time domain data. It is straightforward to include detector noise amplitude in the likelihood's covariance model and to fit it jointly with the cosmological parameters. Fitting for the amplitude removes that source of bias from the cosmological parameters and gives confidence regions that reflect the full covariance.
\section{Bias from excess detector noise}
\label{sec:detnoise}
A simple covariance model for CMB polarization data is the sum of tensor and scalar cosmological contributions and a known noise, or \citep{2011ApJ...737...78K, 2015ApJ...814..103W}
\begin{equation}
\mathbfss{C}(\{r, s\}) = r \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} + s \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{S} + \mathbfss{N},
\label{eqn:simplecov}
\end{equation}
where the tensor-to-scalar ratio $r$ multiplies the tensor covariance structure $\mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T}$, the scalar amplitude $s\equiv A_s/A_{s,0}$ multiplies scalar covariance $\mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{S}$, and $\mathbfss{N}$ is fixed detector noise. $\mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T}$ and $\mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{S}$ are derived from the sum on EE and BB in Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:sigcovmodel}) for fixed $\Lambda$CDM cosmological parameters \citep{2013ApJS..208...19H}.
Figure\,\ref{fig:detnoise_fit} shows the Monte Carlo maximum likelihood distribution of $r$ for an input $r=0.05$ when both the modeled noise and the true map noise are $10\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$, and also the case when the detector noise is $30\%$ higher (in map space) than modeled in the fixed $\mathbfss{N}$ term.
A simple extension to the covariance model can also fit for the detector noise amplitude in the maps with the covariance model, as \citep{2009ApJ...702L..87G}
\begin{equation}
\mathbfss{C}(\{r, s, \sigma \}) = r \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} + s \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{S} + (\sigma / \sigma_0)^2 \mathbfss{N}.
\label{eqn:simplecovnoise}
\end{equation}
Figure\,\ref{fig:detnoise_fit} shows that the distribution of $r$ is correctly centered around the input $r=0.05$ when the noise amplitude of $13\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$ is jointly modeled with the cosmological signal as in Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:simplecovnoise}). It is slightly broader due to the higher level of detector noise and expense of fitting $\sigma$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{thermal_fit-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{The Monte Carlo distribution of the maximum likelihood tensor-to-scalar ratio $r$ for several scenarios of detector noise. {\it Solid curve:} the distribution of $r$ when both the map and the covariance model have $10\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$ noise, and a true input $r=0.05$. {\it Dotted curve:} the biased distribution of $r$ when the map noise is $13\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$ while the likelihood's covariance model assumes $10\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$. {\it Dashed curve:} the distribution of $r$ with a map noise level of $13\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$, and the likelihood models the detector noise amplitude jointly with the signal. Jointly fitting for the noise recovers the input $r$ value and represents the larger uncertainty in $r$ from $13\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$ noise vs. the $10\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$ reference case.
\label{fig:detnoise_fit}}
\end{figure}
It is possible to fit for cosmological amplitudes $r$ and $s$ in parallel with noise $\sigma$ because these have different covariance structures. In multipole space, $s$ modulates the $E$-modes, $r$ impacts the $E$- and $B$-modes\ and detector noise contributes to both but with a different $\ell$ dependence. When a contaminant has more overlap with the $B$-mode\ covariance structure, it becomes harder to separate. In the worst case, the excess covariance structure is identical to the signal and so is indistinguishable.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{rbias-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{The bias in $\hat r_{\rm ML}$ from detector noise that is $30\%$ higher than modeled in the likelihood, as a function of the true $B$-mode\ $r$ signal in the map. Light and dark gray regions are percentile regions equivalent to $2\sigma$ and $1\sigma$ respectively, about the median (solid line). The distribution is estimated as the Monte Carlo of the maximum likelihood value of $r$ over map realizations of both signal and detector noise. The dashed line shows bias in $r$ inferred from the quadratic estimate of $r$, as the first step of the Newton-Raphson approach to the maximum likelihood (Sec.\,\ref{ssec:likequad}). The presence of true $B$-mode\ signal modulates the weighting of variance that contributes to the bias.
\label{fig:rbias}}
\end{figure}
Figure\,\ref{fig:rbias} shows the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ equivalent regions for the distribution of bias in $\hat r_{\rm ML}$ that is produced by detector noise $30\%$ higher than modeled. The bias has clear dependence on the amplitude of true $B$-modes\ present in the map. The parameter dependence of the bias goes against intuition from the power spectrum, where uncorrelated contributions in the map are additive in $C_\ell$. The behavior in Fig.\,\ref{fig:rbias} does not occur for all types of covariance. For example, adding $r=0.1$ $B$-modes\ to a map with $r=0$ $B$-mode\ amplitude will produce an estimate of $\langle \hat r \rangle = 0.1$. Adding a systematic with equivalent $r=0.1$ $B$-modes\ to a map with true signal $r=0.1$ $B$-mode\ amplitude produces an estimate of $\langle \hat r \rangle = 0.2$. More generally, for a systematic level of $r_{\rm sys}$, the measured $\langle \hat r \rangle = r_{\rm true} + r_{\rm sys}$, independently of the level of $r_{\rm true}$.
\subsection{Parameter dependence of the bias}
\label{ssec:bbias}
There is no intuitive closed-form expression for the maximum likelihood, but the quadratic approach to the maximum likelihood can give approximate expressions that explain the basic behavior. The quadratic estimate for $\hat r$ in Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:simplecov}) is analogous to the covariance amplitude determination in Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:quadest}), and gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat r &=& (\bmath{x}^T \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \bmath{x} - b) / \Tr(\mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T}) \\
b &=& \Tr(\mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{N}),
\end{eqnarray}
where matrices are as defined in Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:simplecov}).
Taking the expectation value gives $\Tr(\mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \langle \bmath{x} \bmath{x}^T \rangle)$ in the numerator. Identify the total covariance
\begin{equation}
\mathbfss{C}_{\rm tot} \equiv \langle \bmath{x} \bmath{x}^T \rangle = r \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} + s \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{S} + \mathbfss{N} + \mathbfss{\Sigma},
\end{equation}
where $\mathbfss{\Sigma}$ is some contamination covariance present in the data but not the model. Thermal noise is represented by $\mathbfss{N}$ in the model, and is removed through subtraction of $b$. The remaining incurred bias in $\langle \hat r \rangle$ due to the un-modeled term $\mathbfss{\Sigma}$ is
\begin{equation}
\langle \hat r_{\rm bias} \rangle = \Tr(\mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{\Sigma}) / \Tr(\mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T}).
\label{eqn:rbiasquad}
\end{equation}
In the numerator, $\mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{\Sigma}$ weighs the contamination $\mathbfss{\Sigma}$, and $\mathbfss{C}$ depends on the cosmological parameters $r$ and $s$ through covariance terms $r \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} + s \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{S}$. Hence the weighting of the contamination is parameter dependent. Other parameters such as $\langle \hat s_{\rm bias} \rangle$ have a similar expression of some weighted overlap of the signal covariance structure with the contamination. The contamination biases all parameters that have structural overlap, and in a way that depends on the value of the parameters. Figure\,\ref{fig:rbias} shows the quadratic approximation to the bias as a dashed line. It is lower than the median of maximum likelihood realizations but captures much of the effect. Recall that the quadratic expression is only the first step of the Newton-Raphson approach to the maximum likelihood.
To get additional analytic intuition, Appendix~\ref{app:quadweight} derives $\langle \hat r_{\rm bias} \rangle$ in terms of the signal and contaminant covariance eigenvalues in the case where the contaminant is a multiplier times the identity matrix, $\mathbfss{\Sigma} = \sigma_b^2 \mathbfss{1}$. Then the bias becomes a simple ratio
\begin{equation}
\langle \hat r_{\rm bias} \rangle = \sigma_b^2 \frac{\bmath{w}(r)^T \bmath{1} }{\bmath{w}(r)^T \bmath{\lambda}},
\label{eqn:quadbiasweight}
\end{equation}
where $\bmath{w}(r)$ is the weight per signal eigenmode (given in Appendix~\ref{app:quadweight}), and $\bmath{\lambda}$ is the vector of signal eigenvalues. Figure\,\ref{fig:bias_basis} shows the terms of $\bmath{w}(r)^T \bmath{\lambda}$ for each mode, as a function of $r$, and is $S/(S+N)$ per mode. For low $r$, there are fewer signal-dominated modes. The $r$-dependence of the weight gives $r$-dependence to the bias. If the contaminant has the same form as the $B$-mode, then the numerator becomes $\bmath{w}(r)^T \bmath{\lambda}$, and the bias is independent of any true $r$ in the map.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{bias_basis-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{$S/(S+N)$ weight per eigenmode for three values of tensor amplitude: $r=0.01$ (solid curve), $r=0.1$ (dashed curve), and $r=1$ (dotted curve). The parameter dependence of the weight produces parameter dependence in the bias from contamination.
\label{fig:bias_basis}}
\end{figure}
The quadratic estimator in Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:quadest}) has additional flexibility that is not available in the likelihood because it separates the covariance structure of the signal from the covariance structure of the weights. That is, in the quadratic form
\begin{equation}
\hat \theta \propto \bmath{x}^T \mathbfss{\tilde C}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,\theta} \mathbfss{\tilde C}^{-1} \bmath{x},
\end{equation}
$\mathbfss{\tilde C}^{-1}$ and $\mathbfss{C}_{,\theta}$ do not need to originate from the same parent $\mathbfss{C}$. In the likelihood, this choice is fixed for both. Different choices of weights affect the optimality of the estimator and the structure of parameter correlations. In the pseudo-$C_\ell$ approach to spectral estimation, the quadratic combination of data can be weighted by some $\mathbfss{N}^{-1}$ (hit map) or other apodization $\mathbfss{W}$. In either case, the weighting does not depend on the parameters.
\section{Likelihoods across data splits}
\label{sec:jointlikelihood}
Many sources of contamination vary or become uncorrelated across subsets of data from different epochs, frequencies, surveys, or data treatments. The cross power estimator \citep{2005MNRAS.358..833T} extends the quadratic estimator in Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:quadest}) by forming the quadratic product across subsets $A$ and $B$ of the data as
\begin{equation}
\hat C_\ell \propto \bmath{x}_A^T \mathbfss{N}_A^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_{,\ell} \mathbfss{N}_B^{-1} \bmath{x}_B.
\label{eqn:quadcross}
\end{equation}
The expectation value $\langle \hat C_\ell \rangle \propto \Tr(\mathbfss{N}_A^{-1} \mathbfss{S}_{,\ell} \mathbfss{N}_B^{-1} \langle \bmath{x}_B \bmath{x}_A^T \rangle)$ contains $\bmath{x}_B \bmath{x}_A^T$, which averages to zero for any variance terms that are not common to both $A$ and $B$. (Variance not common between $A$ and $B$ increases the variance of the estimator.) This approach has recently been extended to analysis of variance when few modes are available in a survey volume \citep{2015MNRAS.453.3174M}.
The difference of maps across a data split, $\bmath{x}_A - \bmath{x}_B$, will remove any astronomical signal common to both maps. The power spectrum of the difference map tests for any excess variance. For example, the analysis of time-domain data must account or compensate for the detector response time constants. Otherwise, time constants can produce a residual variance in the difference between maps of left- and right-going scans. Large suites of such null tests support the ultimate parameter determination by ruling out sources of contamination. This approach has been applied extensively to spectral analysis and, to a much more limited degree, pixel-space likelihoods \citep{2015arXiv150702704P}.
\subsection{The joint likelihood}
\label{sec:jointl}
The pixel-space likelihood analogy to the cross power is the joint likelihood of the maps $A$ and $B$ in the data split. Model the joint likelihood across the data split between $A$ and $B$, with $\bmath{x}^T = (\bmath{x}_A^T~~\bmath{x}_B^T)$ as
\begin{equation}
\mathbfss{C} = \left ( \begin{array}{cc} \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) + \mathbfss{N}_A & \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) \\ \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) & \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) + \mathbfss{N}_B \end{array} \right),
\label{eq:jointcovsimple}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta})$ is in common to both $A$ and $B$. Recall that $\bmath{x}_A$ is still a stack of the Stokes $Q$ and $U$ maps, so the combined data vector $(\bmath{x}_A^T~~\bmath{x}_B^T)$ is the stack of four maps and the covariance is also naturally $4\times 4$ blocks for correlations of Stokes $Q$ and $U$ across $A$ and $B$. The noise covariance can also be extended to accept parameters such as the $\sigma$ amplitude in Sec.\,\ref{sec:detnoise}.
A likelihood model for that data that uses Eq.\,(\ref{eq:jointcovsimple}) extracts parameter information from $A \times B$ (cross) but also $A \times A$ and $B \times B$ (auto). This can be seen in the form of the quadratic estimator $\bmath{x}^T \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,\theta} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \bmath{x}$, where both $\mathbfss{C}^{-1}$ and $\mathbfss{C}_{,\theta}$ have off- and on-diagonal block terms, so the inner product with $\bmath{x}^T = (\bmath{x}_A^T~~\bmath{x}_B^T)$ mixes both $A\times B$ and $A \times A$ or $B \times B$ information. A likelihood that uses the covariance model of Eq.\,(\ref{eq:jointcovsimple}) will have sensitivity to information in $A \times A$, and so does not have the same immunity to uncorrelated noise as the cross power in Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:quadcross}).
To reach a closer analog to the cross power, take a covariance model which has a duplicate set of nuisance parameters on the diagonal as
\begin{equation}
\mathbfss{C} = \left ( \begin{array}{cc} \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) + \mathbfss{S} (\bmath{\Theta}_{b}) + \mathbfss{N}_A & \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) \\ \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) & \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) + \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}_{b}) + \mathbfss{N}_B \end{array} \right).
\label{eq:jointcov}
\end{equation}
Adding $\mathbfss{S} (\bmath{\Theta}_{b})$ to the diagonal and marginalizing over $\bmath{\Theta}_{b}$ effectively sweeps the rug out from under parameter constraints on $\bmath{\Theta}$ coming from $A \times A$ and $B\times B$.
Appendix~\ref{app:jointcross} relates Eq.\,(\ref{eq:jointcov}) to the cross quadratic product $\bmath{x}_A^T \mathbfss{N}_A^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,\theta} \mathbfss{N}_B^{-1} \bmath{x}_B$ (with no noise bias to remove) as the first step of a Newton-Raphson iteration starting from a noise-only covariance.
The approach in Eq.\,(\ref{eq:jointcov}) resembles mode avoidance or cleaning strategies. These are commonly implemented by fitting and subtracting mode functions. Several authors \citep{1992ApJ...398..169R, 1998ApJ...499..555T, 1998ApJ...503..492S, 2010MNRAS.408..865T} consider this class of avoidance and argue that the following three are equivalent: (1) least-squared fitting and subtracting modes in the mean model, (2) marginalizing over the amplitude of nuisance modes in the mean model, and (3) taking a multiplier of the covariance structure of the contaminated modes to infinity. In the present case, rather than marginalizing over the bias nuisance variables $\bmath{\Theta}_{b}$, another approach that suggests itself would be to set the amplitude of these on-diagonal variance terms to infinity through $\bmath{\Theta}_{b}$. This limit throws away dependence on the nuisance parameters, and so halves the number of free parameters to estimate through the likelihood. Taking on-diagonal signal variance to infinity results in a quadratic estimator that uses only information across the data split, as intended. However, it also results in a $\mathbfss{C}^{-1}$ weight applied to each map with infinite variance in the signal modes; e.g., it also eliminates the signal. Rather than marginalize over nuisance parameters in the mean, the likelihood using the covariance model in Eq.\,(\ref{eq:jointcov}) marginalizes over nuisance parameters in the covariance. \citet{2010MNRAS.408..865T} give analytic expressions for marginalization over covariance parameters. These can be used to simplify computation in a high-dimensionality parameter space, but are not needed for the simple, few-parameter models considered here.
\subsection{The sum-difference likelihood}
\label{ssec:sumdifflike}
Rotating to a basis of sum and difference maps, $(\bmath{x}_s, \bmath{x}_d) = (\bmath{x}_A^T + \bmath{x}_B^T, \bmath{x}_A^T - \bmath{x}_B^T)$ simplifies the joint covariance in Eq.\,(\ref{eq:jointcov}). Take the detector noise amplitude to be identical between splits $A$ and $B$ for simplicity (this can be arranged by splitting complementary sets of the data with common integration depth). The resulting likelihood separates as the product of sum and difference likelihoods
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:sumdiff}
P(\bmath{x} | \bmath{\Theta}, \bmath{\Theta}_b) &=& P_s(\bmath{x}_s | \bmath{\Theta}, \bmath{\Theta}_b) P_d(\bmath{x}_d | \bmath{\Theta}_b) \\
P_s(\bmath{x}_s | \bmath{\Theta}, \bmath{\Theta}_b) &\sim& N(\bmath{0}, 4 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) + 2 \mathbfss{S} (\bmath{\Theta}_{b}) + 2 \mathbfss{N}) \nonumber \\
P_d(\bmath{x}_d | \bmath{\Theta}_b) &\sim& N(\bmath{0}, 2 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}_{b}) + 2 \mathbfss{N}). \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The factors of $2$ and $4$ are a by-product of taking the $\bmath{x}_A^T + \bmath{x}_B^T$ combination rather than $1/2 \cdot (\bmath{x}_A^T + \bmath{x}_B^T)$. The signal in common to both maps appears as $4 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta})$ because it adds coherently between the two maps, as $(2 \sigma)^2$, and the bias of uncorrelated contamination appears in both the sum and the difference as $2 \mathbfss{S} (\bmath{\Theta}_{b})$ because it is the addition of two uncorrelated variances $\mathbfss{S} (\bmath{\Theta}_{b}) + \mathbfss{S} (\bmath{\Theta}_{b})$ in each map.
An interpretation of the joint sum-diff likelihood of Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:sumdiff}) is that $P_s$ constrains the parameters plus bias, while the difference $P_d$ constrains only bias from modulated contamination.
\subsection{Sum-difference likelihood: $B$-mode\ contamination}
\label{ssec:sdknown}
Following Sec.\,\ref{sec:detnoise}, take a simple model where $\mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}) = r_{\rm true} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} + s_{\rm true} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{S}$. Again $\mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T}$ and $\mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{S}$ are the covariance structure of the tensor and scalar modes in the Stokes $Q$ and $U$ maps. The new parameters in the bias space are $\mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}_b) = r_{\rm bias} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{T} + s_{\rm bias} \mathbfss{S}_\mathrm{S}$. Figure\,\ref{fig:sd_joint} shows the sum and difference likelihoods for $r$ for a simulation with $r_{\rm true} = 0.05$, detector noise of $10\,\mu{\rm K}\,{\rm arcmin}$ in each map, and contamination at the level of $r_{\rm bias} = 0.1$ in uncorrelated realizations added to both maps. The sum map can only constrain $2 r_{\rm true} + r_{\rm bias}$ so it is a degenerate band from upper left to lower right. The difference map can only constrain $r_{\rm bias}$ with no dependence on $r_{\rm true}$, so it appears as a horizontal band. The product of the two likelihoods recovers both the input $r_{\rm true} = 0.05$ and the contamination level. The factor of two in $2 r_{\rm true} + r_{\rm bias}$ is effectively a normalization for the bias amplitude under the assumption that the source of bias is uncorrelated between the split maps.
Marginalizing over $r_{\rm bias}$ in the joint likelihood gives an estimate of $r_{\rm true}$ with errors self-consistently inflated to reflect the fact that some of the constraining power of the map is used to estimate bias. An analogous power-spectral null test uses the difference of maps to rule out bias parameters. If the power spectrum of the difference map is consistent with zero, a particular source of contamination can be ruled out. In a typical use of the null test, once a source of variance is ruled out, it is taken to be identically zero. In contrast, in the joint likelihood, Eqs.\,(\ref{eqn:sumdiff}) and\,(\ref{eq:jointcov}), uncertainty in the bias parameter is folded into the final estimate $\hat r_{\rm true}$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{rbias_sumdiff.pdf}
\caption{The likelihood of $r_{\rm bias}$ and $r_{\rm true}$ from the sum and difference of maps across a split in the data. Here $r_{\rm true}=0.05$ is in common between the maps, and each map has an independent realization of contaminating $B$-modes\ at the level $r_{\rm bias} = 0.1$. This represents a scenario where there is time-varying contamination with structure indistinguishable from the $B$-modes. {\it Solid lines:} The regions of $68\%$ and $95\%$ probability enclosed ($1\sigma$, $2\sigma$ equivalent) in the likelihood of the sum map. It traces a degeneracy between interpretation of the data as all true $B$-mode\ signal or all bias. {\it Dashed lines:} The analogous regions for the likelihood of the difference map. This likelihood isolates residual variance at the level $r_{\rm bias} = 0.1$. The joint likelihood of sum and difference maps determines both the bias and the target $r$ amplitude with self-consistent errors. Both posterior distributions are from a single realization of data, so the maximum likelihood is not centered on the input parameters.
\label{fig:sd_joint}}
\end{figure}
When the likelihood model includes all covariance terms, the tensor to scalar ratio can be recovered without bias and with correct confidence intervals. When the contaminant covariance differs in structure from terms in the covariance model, the cross likelihood fails and can give biased results due to the weighting effect in Sec.\,\ref{ssec:bbias}.
\subsection{Reweighting for difference map null tests}
\label{ssec:rewighted}
Section~\ref{sec:detnoise} provides a scenario where the data have some covariance that is not explained by the structure in the likelihood model. In the case of a single map, Sec.\,\ref{ssec:bbias} showed how a parameter $\theta$ is biased when its structure $\mathbfss{C}_{,\theta}$ overlaps with contamination $\mathbfss{\Sigma}$ through $\Tr(\mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,\theta} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{\Sigma})$. Further, the bias depends on parameters through the $\mathbfss{C}(\bmath{\Theta})^{-1}$ weight. In the sum-difference formalism, the difference map has no signal by construction, so the contamination is weighted differently than in the sum map likelihood.
Mis-specification of the covariance model results in significantly different parameter biases in the likelihoods of the sum and difference maps. In the difference map, there is no cosmological $B$-mode\ signal by construction, so the pixel-space covariance is equivalent to the case of $r=0$. Figure\,\ref{fig:rbias} shows the bias produced by a $30\%$ excess of thermal noise as a function of $r$ assumed in the covariance. At $r=0$, the likelihood of the difference map reports negligible bias produced by the excess thermal noise. In contrast, if the data have a true $r=0.1$, the $30\%$ excess thermal noise will produce a bias of $\Delta r = 0.06$ on average, with fluctuations at the level of $\sigma_r = 0.05$. The parameters inferred from the likelihood of the difference map no longer provide useful information about the bias of parameters in the sum map, and may lead to false confidence in the analysis.
For the likelihood of the difference to constitute a null test, it must weigh the contamination consistently with the sum. An approach to consistent weighting is to add a signal realization $\bmath{x}_{\rm sig}$ to the difference map $\bmath{x}_d$ and find the Monte Carlo average of the parameters over signal realizations (each realization will have some signal variance). Any deviation from the input parameters could be attributed to contamination in the difference map. In this case, the data matrix $\langle \mathbfss{D} \rangle = \langle (\bmath{x}_{\rm sig} + \bmath{x}_d) (\bmath{x}_{\rm sig} + \bmath{x}_d)^T \rangle = \bmath{x}_d \bmath{x}_d^T + 4 \mathbfss{S} (\bmath{\Theta})$, where $\langle \rangle$ is the expectation over signal realizations. (In the sum map, two coherent copies of the signal are added, giving a factor of $4$ in variance.) Rather than Monte Carlo, we take the expectation value of the likelihood over added signal, giving the model
\begin{eqnarray}
2 \mathcal L_d &=& \Tr[\ln \mathbfss{\tilde C}_d + \mathbfss{\tilde C}_d^{-1} (\bmath{x}_d \bmath{x}_d^T + 4 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta})) ] \label{eqn:diffreweightlike} \\
\mathbfss{\tilde C}_d &=& 2 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}_{b}) + 2 \mathbfss{N} + 4 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}). \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The factor of 2 in the bias covariance $2 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}_{b})$ represents the assumption that the excess variance producing the systematic is not correlated across the difference of maps.
The role of $4 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta})$ in the covariance model is clear as a reweighting, but the $4 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta})$ term in the data matrix also plays an important role in the likelihood. In the Newton-Raphson approach to maximum likelihood, each iteration is based on the difference between the data matrix (outer product of the data) and the covariance model,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbfss{\Delta} &=& \mathbfss{D} - \mathbfss{C} (\bmath{\Theta}) \\
&=& [\bmath{x}_d \bmath{x}_d^T + 4 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta})] - [2 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}_{b}) + 2 \mathbfss{N} + 4 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta})] \\
&=& \bmath{x}_d \bmath{x}_d^T - 2 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta}_{b}) - 2 \mathbfss{N}.
\end{eqnarray}
The maximum likelihood therefore fits the residual variance in the difference map to the signal bias model, accounting for thermal noise. Recall that each Newton-Raphson step in Eq.\,(\ref{eq:nriter}) is weighted by a $\mathbfss{C}^{-1}$, which also contains $4 \mathbfss{S}(\bmath{\Theta})$ and weights $\mathbfss{\Delta}$ consistently with the sum map.
The reweighted likelihood of the difference map should be interpreted as $P_d(\bmath{\Theta}_b | \bmath{\Theta})$, the distribution of bias parameters evaluated in a map where signal variance is fixed at $\bmath{\Theta}$. It should not be interpreted as the joint likelihood $P_d(\bmath{\Theta}_b, \bmath{\Theta})$.
The sum and difference likelihoods can be sampled and combined through the following process:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Use the map sum $\bmath{x}_A + \bmath{x}_B$ to constrain $2 r_{\rm true} + r_{\rm bias}$, marginalized over all other parameters. This gives a diagonal band of degeneracy in the $r_{\rm true}$-$r_{\rm bias}$ plane.
\item Use the difference map $\bmath{x}_A - \bmath{x}_B$ in the re-weighted likelihood Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:diffreweightlike}) ($r_{\rm true}$ fixed) to estimate the distribution of $r_{\rm bias}$, marginalized over all other parameters. This gives a slice of the probability of $r_{\rm bias}$ for a given true level of signal $r_{\rm true}$, $P(r_{\rm bias} | r_{\rm true})$.
\item Repeat the difference analysis for any other null test combinations, giving contours in the $r_{\rm true}$-$r_{\rm bias}$ plane.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=0.70]{rbias_sumdiff_reweighted.pdf}
\caption{Same layout as Fig.\,\ref{fig:sd_joint}, except that instead of adding variance in the form of $B$-modes\ (which are in the likelihood covariance model), this simulation has detector noise $30\%$ higher than modeled and is not explained by any free term of the covariance. Mis-specification produces a parameter-dependent bias. Here we force the likelihood of the difference map to weight consistently with the covariance in the sum map likelihood. Without reweighting, the likelihood of the difference map gives $r_{\rm bias} < 0.004$ at $95\%$ confidence.
\label{fig:sd_reweight}}
\end{figure}
Figure\,\ref{fig:sd_reweight} applies this process to maps with $r_{\rm true}=0.05$ and detector noise that is $30\%$ higher than is modeled in the likelihood. Without reweighting, the likelihood of the difference map reports $r_{\rm bias} < 0.004$ at $95\%$, independently of $r_{\rm true}$. Reweighting the likelihood results in $P(r_{\rm bias} | r_{\rm true})$ that depends on $r_{\rm true}$, analogously to Fig.\,\ref{fig:rbias}.
WMAP \citep{2009ApJS..180..225H} and Planck \citep{2015arXiv150702704P} find the posterior distribution of $\tau$ from difference maps, but do not describe added signal covariance in the model. This covariance is required to consistently weight contamination in the null analysis.
To constitute a useful null test, the likelihood of the difference map must also give an informative confidence interval. Appendix~\ref{app:likewidth} describes the curvature of the posterior parameter distribution. When there is no excess variance, the curvature is the usual Fisher matrix $\Tr [\mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,\theta_i} \mathbfss{C}^{-1} \mathbfss{C}_{,\theta_j}]$. The width coincides with the distribution of the cosmological signal and noise at fixed contamination. The width is analogous to a standard null test, where the errors in the difference map power spectrum do not account for any contamination.
The width of the likelihood is erroneous when the difference map has an excess variance that is not described by free parameters in the likelihood model. Contamination must be treated either in a reprocessing of the data or be modeled self-consistently in the likelihood. Examples here could include a fit for noise amplitude in the map or deprojection \citep{2015ApJ...811..126B}, where instrumental systematics of known structure produce correlations between temperature and polarization maps. Extensions to the likelihood must balance adequacy (of describing noncosmological variance) and simplicity. The likelihood ratio and related tests can be used to assess the candidate extensions.
\section{Summary}
\label{sec:summary}
Instrumental systematics, residual foregrounds, and other excess variance produce bias in cosmological parameters. Experiments to detect inflationary gravitational waves must use a battery of tests to rule out biases that could lead to a false detection. Determination of cosmological parameters directly from pixel-space likelihood has shown promise as a method to self-consistently handle foregrounds and survey depth variations or masks, especially on the largest scales in the survey. This approach bypasses calculation of the band powers, which have had a vigorous history of tests for systematics. We have developed some pixel-space likelihood analogies to the cross power, noise modeling, and the difference map null test.
If excess variance modulates with time or instrumental setup, a difference map can be interpreted using a likelihood for a particular source of parameter bias. The two dimensional posterior distribution of a parameter and its bias is a convenient diagnostic. We show examples of this parameter bias plane for the tensor to scalar ratio $r$ when the excess variance is parameterized in the likelihood, and where it is not (mis-specification).
The parametric nature of the likelihood requires additional care. Bias in the pixel-space likelihood is signal-dependent because the map weights contain signal covariance. Signal dependence of the weight produces parameter distributions that are not consistent between the sum and difference maps. We propose a procedure for consistently weighting contamination. The method accomplishes the role of a null test: under the same assumptions as the sum map analysis, is there evidence for parameter bias caused by modulated contamination in the difference?
We recommend an iterative approach. In a first pass, the likelihood models all cosmological parameters and imperfectly known instrumental terms (e.g. detector noise). If a weighted difference null test fails, that information should be used either to construct a model of excess variance or to reprocess the data in a way that eliminates the systematic effect. If a left-right scan difference fails, compensation of time constants should be reassessed until that test passes. Temperature-to-polarization leakage results in a covariance matrix between the temperature and the polarization. In parallel with cosmological parameters, the pixel-space likelihood should include any contamination which has a well-defined model.
The likelihood of the difference map provides a parametric test for mis-specification of the covariance model by isolating components that vary across data subsets. A more general problem is assessing whether there is variance in the data, time-varying or not, that is not explained well by the model and could produce spurious $B$-modes. A parametric model can be tested against less parametric models that are sensitive to a wider range of variance structure. In the case of CMB polarization, the power spectrum is already an excellent example of this approach and has been used by WMAP \citep{2009ApJS..180..225H} and Planck \citep{2015arXiv150702704P} to corroborate likelihood results on large scales. The power spectrum exposes statistically isotropic variance with $\ell$-dependence different from the signal. At the next level, tests for isotropy \citep{2014A&A...571A..23P, 2014PhRvL.113s1303K} are sensitive to residual galactic foregrounds.
\acknowledgements
We acknowledge useful comments from Jo Dunkley and an anonymous reviewer.
|
\section{Introduction}
Two-dimensional electron systems (2DESs) in oxide semiconductors have attracted growing interests since the discovery of the high mobility electron gas at the LaAlO$_3$/SrTiO$_3$ heterojunction \cite{Ohtomo2004}. A series of angle-resolved photoelectron spectroscopy (ARPES) studies have proved that such 2DESs with metallic properties are also realized on various metal oxide surfaces such as ZnO \cite{Piper2010,Ozawa2010,Ozawa2010a,Ozawa2011}, In$_{2}$O$_{3}$ \cite{Zhang2013}, CdO \cite{Piper2008,King2010}, SrTiO$_3$ \cite{Meevasana2011,Santander-Syro2011,DAngelo2012,Yukawa2013,Wang2016,Rodel2016}, KTaO$_3$ \cite{King2012}, BaTiO$_3$ \cite{Rodel2016}, and anatase TiO$_2$ \cite{Rodel2015,Rodel2016} by chemical or physical doping of electrons to these surfaces. Based on the orbital characters of the metallic bands, the 2DESs are classified into two types; one is the $s$-orbital type like ZnO, In$_2$O$_3$, and CdO and the other is the $d$-orbital type like SrTiO$_3$, KTaO$_3$, BaTiO$_3$, and anatase TiO$_2$.
A characteristic difference among the 2DESs with different orbital character is the many-body effects of the electronic system such as electron-phonon ($e$-ph) and electron-plasmon interactions. Recent ARPES studies have reported that the many-body interactions in the 2DESs on SrTiO$_3$(001) are inevitable and the 2DESs should be described in terms of the electron liquid \cite{Meevasana2011,Wang2016}.
In these 2DESs, the tails that accompany the two-dimensional (2D) metallic band have been attributed to energy loss structures by the $e$-ph coupling interaction. A similar enhanced spectral weight has also been observed for the 2DESs on anatase TiO$_2$ surfaces \cite{Rodel2015}. On the other hand, no such anomalous spectral weight has been reported for the $s$-orbital derived 2D metallic bands on ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) \cite{Ozawa2011,Ozawa2010,Ozawa2010a}, ZnO(000$\bar{1}$) \cite{Piper2010,Ozawa2011}, In$_{2}$O$_{3}$(111) \cite{Zhang2013}, and CdO(001) surfaces \cite{Piper2008,King2010}. This systematic difference implies that the $e$-ph coupling strength might be weaker for the $s$ electrons than the $d$ electrons. However, this difference is against the theoretical predictions \cite{Frohlich1950} that the orbital character should have little effect on the $e$-ph coupling. Therefore, the solution of this discrepancy is one of the challenging subjects for the 2DESs on oxide surfaces.
In the present study, the electronic structure of the 2DES developed on the H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface was examined by ARPES. The detailed measurements have allowed us to successfully extract 2D quasiparticle (2DQP) bands and the $e$-ph satellites from the measured broad band, which has been regarded as a single metallic band in the previous studies \cite{Piper2010,Ozawa2011,Ozawa2010,Ozawa2010a,Deinert2015}. The spectral analysis reveals the $e$-ph coupling strength of $\alpha= 0.30-0.34$, indicating a sufficient $e$-ph coupling in the 2DES on the ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface.
Single-crystal ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) was cleaned $in$ $situ$ by well-established procedures \cite{Ozawa2007,sup}. H$_2$ molecules were cracked by hot tungsten filaments and dosed on the surface at room temperature. By these procedures, surface-localized O 2$p$ dangling-bond state is suppressed and a 2DES is induced at the surface \cite{Ozawa2010a}.
The ARPES measurements were performed at BL-1 of a compact electron-storage ring (HiSOR) at Hiroshima University \cite{SHIMADA2002,Hayashi2013,sup}.
Figure 1(a) shows an ARPES intensity map of the 2D metallic band on the H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface. The metallic band is only observable around the $\bar{\Gamma}$ point [Fig. 1(b)]. The band crosses the Fermi level ($E_{\text{F}}$) and forms a circular Fermi surface with a radius of a Fermi wave vector $k_{\text{F}} = 0.77$ nm$^{-1}$, which is determined from the peak position of the momentum distribution curve (MDC) at $E_{\text{F}}$ [Fig. 1(c)]. From the size of the Fermi surface, the density of the doped electrons at the surface is evaluated to be $9.4 \times 10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$. This carrier concentration is well within a metallic regime at this surface as judged by the Mott-Ioffe-Regel criterion \cite{sup}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{Fig1.eps}
\caption{(color online). Results of the ARPES measurements for the H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface with $h\nu = 65$ eV at 13 K. (a) An intensity map near the $\bar{\Gamma}_{00}$ point along the $\bar{\Gamma}-\bar{\text{X'}}$ axis. Arrows indicate the intensity dips at $E_{\text{F}}-70$ meV. (b) The curvature intensity plot \cite{Zhang2011} of the Fermi surface. The surface Brillouin zone is also shown. (c) An MDC of the 2D metallic state at $E_{\text{F}}$. The experimental lineshape was fitted by three Voigt functions: two represent the 2DQP states and one represents the background contribution. The positions of the 2DQP states at $E_{\text{F}}$ are indicated by triangles. (d) The EDCs at $k_x = 0$ nm$^{-1}$ and $k_{\text{F}}$. The peak and hump structures of the EDC at $k_{\text{F}}$ are indicated by triangles.
}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
As previously reported \cite{Piper2010,Ozawa2011,Ozawa2010,Ozawa2010a,Deinert2015}, the 2D metallic band has a very broad spectral feature with a long tail extending to 600 meV below $E_{\text{F}}$ at $k_x =0$ nm$^{-1}$ [Fig. 1(a)], where $k_x$ is a wave vector along the $\bar{\Gamma}-\bar{\text{X'}}$ axis [Fig. 1(b)]. A close examination of the metallic band, however, reveals that there are faint intensity dips at $E_{\text{F}} - 70$ meV. The multiple-component structure is more obvious when we examine an energy distribution curve (EDC) at each $k_x$ point [Fig. 1(d)]. The lineshape of each EDC shows a fine structure at $<E_{\text{F}} - 100$ meV, indicating the contribution of at least two components. The EDC at $k_{\text{F}}$ has a peak-dip-hump structure, which is similar to those observed for strongly correlated systems \cite{Norman1998,Cuk2005}. The energy difference between the peak and the hump in these systems roughly reflects energies of many-body interactions such as $e$-ph and electron-plasmon interactions \cite{Moser2013}. In the case of the present ZnO system, the energy difference between the peak and the hump is around 70 meV, which is close to the energy of the longitudinal optical (LO) phonon of the ZnO crystal ($\hbar\omega_{\text{ph}}=72$ meV \cite{Butkhuzi1998}). Thus, we speculate that the $e$-ph coupling should be responsible for the multiple-component structures; namely, the peak and the hump originate from the 2DQP states and a phonon satellite (a 2D $e$-ph satellite), respectively. A possible contribution of the electron-plasmon coupling to the hump peak is excluded since the plasmon excitation energy at the density of $9.4 \times 10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$ exceeds 100 meV \cite{Goldstein1980}.
In order to extract the intrinsic 2DQP band, the peak positions in the MDC curves were determined between $E_{\text{F}}+10$ meV and $E_{\text{F}}-20$ meV, where the two-peak structure as shown in Fig. 1(c) is obvious. The peak positions, plotted by circles in Fig. 2(a), were fitted by a parabola to reproduce the overall band structure. The fitting result gives a band bottom of $E_{\text{F}}-86$ meV at the $\bar{\Gamma}$ point and an effective mass of 0.26$m_e$, where $m_e$ is the mass of a free electron. Since this band naturally corresponds to the first subband of the 2D electrons at the ZnO surface, a depth profile of the potential well and the electron density as well as the energy position of a second subband can be deduced by self-consistently solving the Poisson-Schr{\"{o}}dinger equation \cite{Eger1979,Yukawa2015}. The results are shown in Fig. 2(b). The accumulated electrons are confined in a deep potential well formed between the vacuum and the edge of the Zn 4$s$-derived conduction band, i.e., the conduction band minimum (CBM). The CBM at the surface is located at $E_{\text{F}}-478$ meV. The energy minima of the first subband ($E_1$) and the second subband ($E_2$) are, respectively, $E_1 = E_{\text{F}} - 86$ meV (the experimental value) and $E_2 = E_{\text{F}} - 3$ meV at the $\bar{\Gamma}$ point. Because of a much lower density of electrons near the surface in the second subband in comparison with the first one [see inset of Fig. 2(b)], a contribution to ARPES intensities from the second subband is negligible but may be visible near $k_x =0$ nm$^{-1}$ as a background [Figs. 1(a,c)].
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{Fig2.eps}
\caption{ (color online). (a) Expanded images of Fig. 1(a). The positions of the 2DQP states are indicated by circles. The fitted result of the parabolic curve is drawn by solid lines. (b) Depth profiles of the CBM position. The corresponding eigenfunctions of the first and second subbands are displayed. The depth profile of the carrier electron density is shown in the inset.
}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
An important conclusion drawn from the calculated potential structure is that the long tail of the 2DQP band shown in Fig. 1(a) should not be ascribed to any electronic band because the tail extends into the band-gap region below the CBM. This supports our claim that the broad feature of the band should arise from the $e$-ph interaction.
A recent ARPES study on the metallized SrTiO$_3$(001) surface by UV irradiation has revealed that a long tail accompanying the 2DQP band can be described by the phonon satellite peaks \cite{Wang2016}.
Here we show that the phonon satellite peaks also emerge at the higher-binding-energy side of the 2DQP band on the H-dosed SrTiO$_3$(001) surface, where adsorbed H donates its 1$s$ electron to the surface and induces Ti 3$d$-derived metallic bands \cite{DAngelo2012,Yukawa2013,sup}. Figure 3(a) shows an ARPES intensity map of the metallic band, whose tail extends to $E_{\text{F}}-500$ meV. An in-gap state is seen at $> E_{\text{F}}-500$ meV with a non-dispersive feature, in good agreement with the previous ARPES studies \cite{DAngelo2012,Yukawa2013}. The EDCs at $k_x = 0$ nm$^{-1}$ and $k_{\text{F}}$ exhibit a peak-dip-hump structure [Fig. 3(b)], which resembles the EDC at $k_{\text{F}}$ on the H-dosed ZnO surface [Fig. 1(d)]. The overall lineshape of each EDC is reproduced by two peaks labeled $A^{(0)}$ and $A'^{(0)}$, which are associated with the first and second Ti 3$d_{xy}$-derived subbands, respectively, and three energy-loss satellite peaks labeled $A^{(1)}$, $A^{(2)}$, and $A^{(3)}$, which are formed via the excitations of the LO phonon mode of SrTiO$_3$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{Fig3.eps}
\caption{ (color online). (a) The ARPES intensity map near the $\bar{\Gamma}$ point in the second surface Brillouin zone ($\bar{\Gamma}_{10}$) of the H-dosed SrTiO$_3$(001) surface ($h\nu = 81$ eV, 20 K). (b) The EDCs (circles) and calculated spectral functions (solid curves) at $k_x = 0$ nm$^{-1}$ and $k_{\text{F}}$. (c) The ARPES intensity map (a lower panel), which is symmetrized with respect to the center line ($k_x = 0$ nm$^{-1}$) and smoothed, is compared with the calculated spectral functions of $A^{(0)} + A^{(1)}$ (upper). (d) Schematic image of the 2D $e$-ph coupling. The brownish curve indicates the band bending structure near the surface. A blue curve indicates the 2DQP band, while green to pale-green curves represent the 2D $e$-ph satellites. The scattering process of an electron is illustrated by yellow circles.
}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
The $A^{(0)}$ and $A^{(1)}$ peaks correspond to the solutions of the spectral functions calculated by the 2D $e$-ph coupling model, which is formulated on the basis of the three-dimensional $e$-ph coupling model by Moser $et$ $al$. \cite{Moser2013}. $A^{(0)}$ is given by $A^{(0)}(E,\bm{k}) \propto f_{\text{FD}}(\epsilon_{\bm{k}}) \cdot |\text{Im} \Sigma |/(|E- \epsilon_{\bm{k}} -\text{Re} \Sigma |^2 + |\text{Im} \Sigma |^2 ) $, where $\text{Re} \Sigma$ and $\text{Im} \Sigma$ are the real and imaginary parts of the self-energy $\Sigma$ and $f_{\text{FD}}(\epsilon_{\bm{k}} )$ is the Fermi-Dirac (FD) distribution function. $\text{Im} \Sigma$ of the SrTiO$_3$ surface was obtained from the ARPES intensity plot by using $2|\text{Im} \Sigma |=(\partial \epsilon_{\bm{k}} / \partial k )\cdot \Delta k $ . On the other hand, the spectral function of the $e$-ph satellite state $A^{(1)}(E,\bm{k}) $ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
A^{(1)}(E,\bm{k}) & \propto & \sum_{k'}|\gamma_{\text{2D}}(\bm{q}) |^2 f_{\text{FD}}(\epsilon_{\bm{k}'} ) \delta(E -\epsilon_{\bm{k}'} + \hbar\omega_{\text{ph}} ) \nonumber\\
&& \cdot \delta(\bm{k} -\bm{k}' + \bm{q} ) \Theta(E-E_1 +\hbar\omega_{\text{ph}}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\delta(x)$ and $\Theta(x)$ are the delta function and the Heaviside step function, respectively.
In the 2D $e$-ph coupling model, an electron in the first subband with the momentum $\bm{k}'$ and the energy $ \epsilon_{\bm{k}'}=\hbar^2 |\bm{k}'|^2/(2m^*) + E_1$ loses its energy and momentum by an excitation of an LO phonon having a momentum $\bm{q}$ and an energy $\hbar\omega_{\text{ph}}$. Here, we neglected the momentum dependence of the LO phonon energies for simplicity and used the value of $\hbar\omega_{\text{ph}}=99$ meV for the SrTiO$_3$ surface \cite{Klimin2012}.
The coupling strength of the 2D electrons and the LO phonons is in a relation of $|\gamma_{\text{2D}}(\bm{q}) |^2\propto 1/|\bm{q}| $ \cite{Peeters1987,sup}. The $A^{(l>1)}$ components [Fig. 3(b)] are the multiple phonon-loss structures described by a Franck-Condon model and are separated by $\hbar\omega_{\text{ph}}$.
As shown in Fig. 3(c), the spectral weight of $A^{(0)}+ A^{(1)}$ well reproduces the ARPES intensity distribution, supporting the validity of the 2D $e$-ph coupling model. Fig. 3(d) illustrates a schematic drawing of the energy loss process of a 2D electron by LO phonon excitations.
The same lineshape analysis was carried out for the EDCs of the 2DQP band on the H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface, and the results with $\hbar\omega_{\text{ph}}=72$ meV for the ZnO surface \cite{Butkhuzi1998} are shown in Figs. 4(a) and 4(b). The peak-dip-hump structure in the EDC at $k_x = k_{\text{F}}$ is composed of the $A^{(0)}$ and $A^{(1)}$ peaks, and the long tail at $> E_{\text{F}} - 100$ meV arises from the $A^{(l> 1)}$ phonon satellite peaks. Absence of the peak-dip-hump structure at $k_x = 0$ nm$^{-1}$ is due to a decrease in an energy separation between the $A^{(0)}$ and $A^{(1)}$ peaks as well as a relative increase in the contribution of the phonon satellite peaks.
Figures 4(c-f) show the calculated spectral weight distributions of $A^{(0)}$, $A^{(1)}$, and $A^{(0)}+ A^{(1)}$ as well as the measured ARPES intensity distribution. The spectral weighs of $A^{(0)}$ and $A^{(1)}$ merge at $k_x < 0.5$ nm$^{-1}$, and this distribution captures the features of the experimental data quite reasonably.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{Fig4.eps}
\caption{ (color online). (a,b) The EDCs (circles) and calculated spectral functions at $k_x = 0$ nm$^{-1}$ (a) and $k_{\text{F}}$ (b) at the H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface taken at $h\nu = 65$ eV at 13 K. (c-e) The calculated spectral functions of $A^{(0)}$ (c), $A^{(1)}$ (d), and $A^{(0)}+ A^{(1)}$ (e). (f) The ARPES intensity map (bottom right), which is symmetrized with respect to the center line ($k_x = 0$ nm$^{-1}$) and smoothed. }
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
The present ARPES study reveals that the broad feature of the 2DES on the H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface should be derived from the contribution of the LO phonon satellite structures. A similar broad feature has also been observed on the metallized ZnO(000$\bar{1}$) surface \cite{Piper2010,Ozawa2011}. Thus, the $s$-orbital 2D electrons on the ZnO surfaces couple to the LO phonon irrespective of the surface orientation.
The $e$-ph interaction and the resultant formation of the spectral tail are regarded as one of the characteristic features of the correlated electron systems \cite{Meevasana2007,Iwasawa2012}, such as the 2DESs on SrTiO$_3$(001) (Fig. 3). These correlated electrons are often referred as an electron liquid \cite{Meevasana2011,Sawatzky1989}. The anomalously large contribution of the phonon satellites in the 2DESs on the ZnO surfaces, therefore, implies that the 2D electrons accumulated on the ZnO surfaces behave like an electron liquid rather than an electron gas.
Finally, we discuss the possible reason why the $e$-ph coupling is prominent for the 2DES on the ZnO surface but not for the surfaces of In$_2$O$_3$ and CdO, although the $s$ electrons contribute to all these 2DESs. The 2D $e$-ph coupling strength is characterized by a dimensionless Fr$\ddot{\text{o}}$hlich electron-phonon coupling constant \cite{Peeters1987}, $\alpha $, which can be derived either from the ratio of the mass of the phonon-dressed electron to that of the bare band mass or from the intensity ratio of the 2D $e$-ph coupling to the quasiparticle states \cite{sup}. In the case of the 2DES on the H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface, the former relation gives $\alpha=0.34 $, while the latter gives $\alpha=0.30 $. On the other hand, negligibly small coupling constants for the 2DESs on In$_2$O$_3$(111) and CdO(100) are predicted by the mass enhancement analysis \cite{sup}. Since the $e$-ph coupling strength tends to be suppressed when the electron density is high because of an efficient electronic screening \cite{Eger1979}, the absence of the phonon satellite structures in these surfaces can be attributed to the higher densities of the 2D electrons. Actually, the densities of the accumulated electrons on In$_2$O$_3$(111) and CdO(100) are $4.2 \times 10^{13}$ cm$^{-2}$ \cite{Zhang2013} and $8 \times 10^{13}$ cm$^{-2}$ \cite{Piper2008}, respectively, and are larger than that on H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) ($0.94 \times 10^{13}$ cm$^{-2}$). In the case of the 2DES on SrTiO$_3$(001), the mass enhancement is absent when the density exceeds $9 \times 10^{13}$ cm$^{-2}$ \cite{Wang2016}. Thus, the electronic screening effect is expected to be more efficient for the $s$ electrons than the $d$ electrons.
From the Fr$\ddot{\text{o}}$hlich $e$-ph coupling constant of a bulk ZnO crystal ($ 0.95$ \cite{Sezen2015}), the 2D limit of the $e$-ph coupling constant is evaluated to be $\alpha \sim$ 0.40 \cite{sup}. Compared to this $\alpha$, the coupling constant obtained at the H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface, $\alpha=0.30-0.34$, is slightly suppressed. This suppression is most probably due to the electronic screening. The suppression of the $e$-ph coupling is critically important to enhance the carrier mobilities and the sharpness of the near-UV photoluminescence spectrum \cite{Hauschild2006}.
Therefore, our findings of the reduction of the $e$-ph coupling open up the possibilities that the creation of 2DES enhance the functionalities of, e.g., the transparent electronic devices \cite{Minami2005} and optoelectronic devices \cite{Hauschild2006}.
In conclusion, the precise peak and hump structures of the 2DES on the H-dosed ZnO(10$\bar{1}$0) surface have been successfully obtained by ARPES and analyzed with the spectral functions of the 2D $e$-ph coupling model. We found that the $s$-electron derived 2DES is quantitatively described by the model and the 2D electrons at the ZnO surface form the electron liquid. The 2D $e$-ph coupling constant was found to be larger than those expected on the In$_2$O$_3$ and CdO surfaces but smaller than the 2D limit for the bulk ZnO crystal. Our determination of the $e$-ph coupling reveals nature of the 2D electronic states on the ZnO surface and provides technical information for designing novel electronic devices. \\
The authors would like to thank T. Sakurai for the help with the Hall measurements. We gratefully acknowledge A. Fujimori for their valuable discussions. E.F.S. acknowledges financial support from the JSPS postdoctoral fellowship for overseas researchers and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (Grant No. P13783). This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (Grant No. 21560695) from MEXT in Japan. This work was carried out by the joint research in the Synchrotron Radiation Research Organization and the Institute for Solid State Physics, the University of Tokyo (Proposal Nos. 2012B7401, 2013A7401, 2013B7401). The synchrotron radiation experiments were performed with the approval of HSRC (Proposal No. 12-B-2). The work at KEK-PF was performed under the approval of the Program Advisory Committee (Proposals No. 2013S2-002) at the Institute of Materials Structure Science, KEK.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Cascading phenomena permeate the dynamics of social and economic networks. Notable examples are the adoption of new technologies and social norms, the spread of fads and behaviors, participation to riots \cite{mG:1978,moJ:2008,EK:2010}.
Such phenomena have been largely recognized to spread through networks of individual interactions \cite{tcS:1978,mG:1978,Blume:1993,Kandori.ea:1993,Ellison:1993,Rogers:1995,PeytonYoung:1998}. However, in contrast to standard network epidemic models based on pairwise contact mechanisms \cite{Liggettbook2,rD:2007,mN:2003} ---whereby diffusion of a new state occurs independently on the links among the agents--- complex neighborhood effects ---whereby the propensity of an agent to adopt a new state grows nonlinearly with the fraction of adopters among her neighbors--- play a central role in the mechanisms underlying such cascading phenomena \cite{fVR:2007,MS:2010}.
One of the most studied models of cascading mechanisms capturing such complex neighborhood effects is Granovetter's Linear Threshold Model (LTM) \cite{mG:1978}.
Granovetter's original work \cite{mG:1978} is concerned with a fully mixed population of $n$ interacting agents, each holding a binary state $Z_i(t)=0,1$, for $i=1,\ldots,n$, and updating it at every discrete time instant $t=0,1,\ldots$ according to the following threshold rule: $Z_i(t+1)=1$ if the current fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the population is not less than a certain value $\Theta_i$, i.e., if $\frac1n\sum_{j=1}^nZ_j(t)\ge\Theta_i$ and $Z_i(t+1)=0$ otherwise, i.e., if $\frac1n\sum_{j=1}^nZ_j(t)<\Theta_i$.
Here $\Theta_i\in[0,1]$ is a normalized threshold value that measures the reluctance of agent $i$ in choosing state $1$, equivalently, her propensity to choose state $0$.
In more realistic scenarios, the population is not fully mixed and agents interact on an interconnection network that can be represented as a, generally directed, graph $\mathcal G=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E)$ whose node set $\mathcal V=\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$ is identified with the set of agents themselves and where the presence of a link $(i,j)\in\mathcal E$ represents the fact that agent $i$ observes agent $j$ and gets directly influenced by her state. In this setting, the LTM dynamics reads as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{LTMdef}Z_i(t+1)=\left\{\begin{array}{lcl}1&\text{ if }&\sum_{j:(i,j)\in\mathcal E}Z_j(t)\ge\Theta_ik_i\\[10pt]
0&\text{ if }&\sum_{j:(i,j)\in\mathcal E}Z_j(t)<\Theta_ik_i\,,\end{array}\right.\end{equation}
where $k_i$ stands for node $i$'s out-degree, see, e.g., \cite{sM:2000,ADO:2012}.
This can be interpreted as the best response dynamics in a network game whereby agents choose strategically between two actions, $0$ and $1$, and their payoff is an increasing function of the number of their neighbors choosing the same action.
A variant of the LTM, that is referred to as Progressive Linear Threshold Model (PLTM) allows for state transitions from $0$ to $1$ only, but not from $1$ to $0$, so that when an agent adopts state $1$, she keeps it ever after \cite{KKT:2003,Centola.ea:2007,ADL:2009,hA:2010,ACM:2013}.
As illustrated in \cite{mG:1978}, there is a simple way to analyze the LTM in fully mixed populations. If one denotes by $z(t):=\frac1n\sum_{i}Z_i(t)$ the fraction of state-$1$ adopters at time $t$, and if
$F(\theta):=\frac1n|\{i:\,\Theta_i\le\theta\}|$, for $0\le\theta\le 1$,
stands for the cumulative distribution function of the normalized thresholds,
then \begin{equation}\label{LTM-recursion-fullymixed}z(t+1)=F(z(t))\,, \qquad t\ge0\,.\end{equation}
Hence, the evolution of the fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the population can be determined by the above one-dimesional non-linear recursion.
This is a dramatic reduction of complexity with respect to the original LTM dynamics whose discrete state space has cardinality $2^n$ growing exponentially fast in the population size.
In fact, an analogous result can be verified to hold true for the PLTM, provided that agents with initial state $Z_i(0)=1$ are considered as if having threshold $0$, which is consistent with the fact they will always keep their state equal to $1$. More precisely, if one introduces the distribution function
$\tilde F(\theta)=\frac1n|\{i:\,\Theta_i(1-Z_i(0))\le\theta\}|$
then the fraction $z(t)$ of state-$1$ adopters in the PLTM satisfies the recursion\footnote{Formally, the result follows from Lemma \ref{lemma:LTM=PLTM} in Section \ref{sec:model}.}
$z(t+1)=\tilde F(z(t))$.
In the more complex case where the population is not fully mixed but rather interacts along a given graph $\mathcal G=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E)$, the simple recursion \eqref{LTM-recursion-fullymixed} does not hold true any longer for the fraction of state-$1$ adopters $z(t)$ in the LTM \eqref{LTMdef}. In fact, for undirected (possibly infinite) graphs $\mathcal G$ and homogeneous normalized thresholds $\Theta_i=\theta$, Morris \cite{sM:2000} characterizes the fixed points of the LTM dynamics as those configurations in $\{0,1\}^{n}$ whose support $\mathcal U\subseteq\mathcal V$ is a $\theta$-cohesive subset of $\mathcal V$ with $(1-\theta)$-cohesive complement $\mathcal V\setminus\mathcal U$, meaning that all nodes in $\mathcal U$ have at least a fraction $\theta$ of neighbors in $\mathcal U$ and all nodes in $\mathcal V\setminus\mathcal U$ have less than a fraction $\theta$ of neighbors in $\mathcal U$. While such a characterization provides fundamental insight into the structure of the equilibria of the LTM, finding $\theta$-cohesive subsets of nodes with $(1-\theta)$-cohesive complement in an arbitrary graph $\mathcal G$ is a computationally hard problem.
Computational complexity issues also arise in the PLTM dynamics, for which, e.g., Kempe, Kleinberg, and Tardos \cite{KKT:2003} prove NP-hardness of the selection problem of the $k$ `most influential' nodes, i.e., the choice of the cardinality-$k$ subset of nodes that, if initiated as state-$1$ adopters, lead to the largest set of final state-$1$ adopters. Building on submodularity properties of the number of final state-$1$ adopters as a function of the set of initial state-$1$ adopters, provable approximation guarantees are then provided in \cite{KKT:2003} for the $k$ `most influential' nodes selection problem. Such `most influential' nodes selection problem has attracted a large amount of attention recently, see, e.g., \cite{CYZ:2010,GLS:2011}. Asymptotic analysis of the LTM dynamics and associated complexity issues have also been addressed in \cite{ADO:2012}.
As the aforementioned results point out, analysis and optimization of the LTM and of the PLTM on general networks is typically a hard problem. On the other hand, in practical large-scale applications, complete information on the network structure and on the specific threshold configuration might not be available, while only aggregate statistics such as degree and threshold distributions might be known. With this motivation in mind, the present paper deals with the analysis of the LTM and of the PLTM dynamics on the {\it ensemble} of all graphs with a given joint degree/threshold distribution (formally we will consider the so-called \emph{configuration model} \cite{BollobasRG,rD:2007} of interconnections), rather than on a specific graph $\mathcal G$. Our main result shows that for all but a vanishingly small (as the network size $n$ grows large) fraction of networks from the configuration model ensemble of given joint degree-threshold distribution, the fraction $z(t)$ of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM dynamics can be approximated, to an arbitrary small tolerance level, by the solution of the recursion
\begin{equation}\label{rec}x(t+1)=\phi(x(t))\,,\qquad y(t+1)=\psi(x(t))\,,\end{equation} where $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ are suitably defined polynomial functions that map the interval $[0,1]$ in itself, whose form depends only on the joint degree-threshold distribution (see \eqref{psi-def} and \eqref{phi-def}). An analogous result for the PLTM is proved as well, provided that agents with initial state $Z_i(0)=1$ are treated as if having threshold $0$, equivalently, that the functions $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ are defined based on the joint distribution of node degrees and the product $(1-\Theta_i)Z_i(0)$.
Our results should be compared to the literature on the analysis of the LTM or the PLTM on large-scale random networks with given degree distribution. The papers \cite{mL:2009,hA:2010,mL:2012} all study the asymptotic behavior of the PLTM in random undirected networks. In particular, \cite{mL:2009} focuses on the asymptotic effect of two vaccination strategies equivalent to the {\it a priori} removal of nodes, whereas
\cite{hA:2010} and \cite{mL:2012} both rigorously provide conditions, in the large-scale limit, for the PLTM contagion to eventually reach a sizeable fraction of nodes when started from a single node or a fraction of nodes that is sublinear in $n$.
The paper \cite{ACM:2013} presents analogous results for a version of the PLTM on random weighted directed networks, proposed as a model for cascading failures in financial networks. In contrast with those results, ours are concerned with approximation of the dynamics rather than with the asymptotics of the fraction of state-$1$ adopters. The other major difference is that they are not limited to the PLTM but cover also the original LTM on the directed configuration model ensemble of networks. On the other hand, it should be stressed that our results do not extend to the analysis of the general LTM on the undirected configuration model ensemble. In fact, as pointed out in \cite{KM:2011}, the analysis of the LTM on undirected trees presents itself additional challenges beyond the scope of the approach proposed here.
In summary, the main contributions of this paper consist in (a) providing a rigorous approximation result in terms of the output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{rec} for the fraction $z(t)$ of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM and the PLTM dynamics on the ensemble of directed networks (Theorem \ref{theo:concentration}) and of the PLTM on the ensemble of undirected networks (Theorem \ref{theo:concentration2}); and (b) analyzing the asymptotic behavior of the recursion \eqref{rec} in both homogeneous (Section \ref{subsect:homogeneous}) and heterogeneous (Sections \ref{subsect:hetero1} and \ref{subsect:hetero2}) networks. Such theoretical results are then supported by numerical simulations on an actual large-scale network topology (see Section \ref{sec:simulations}). In the course of building up the tools for such analysis, we also prove that the PLTM can be regarded as a special case of the LTM (Lemma \ref{lemma:LTM=PLTM}), a result of potential independent interest.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The final part of this section gathers some notational conventions used throughout the paper; Section \ref{sec:model} formally introduces the LTM and the PLTM dynamics, proves some fundamental monotonicity properties (Lemma \ref{lemma:monotonicity}), and builds on them to prove that PLTM can be regarded as a special case of the LTM when all agents with initial state $1$ have threshold $0$ (Lemma \ref{lemma:LTM=PLTM}); in Section \ref{sec:LTM-BR} we introduce the recursion \eqref{rec} by a heuristic argument and then analyze its asymptotic behavior first in homogeneous and then in heterogenous networks; in Section \ref{sec:density-evolution} we formally prove that the output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{rec} provides a good approximation of the fraction of state-$1$ adopters in both the LTM and PLTM dynamics on the ensemble of directed networks (Theorem \ref{theo:concentration}) and in the PLTM dynamics on the ensemble of undirected networks (Theorem \ref{theo:concentration2}); in Section \ref{sec:simulations} we present numerical simulations on an actual large-scale network testbed.
\textbf{Notational conventions} We denote the transpose of a matrix $M$ by $M'$ and the all-one vector by $\mathbf{1}$.
We model interconnection topologies as directed multi-graphs $\mathcal G=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E)$ where $\mathcal V=\{1,\ldots,n\}$ is a finite set of nodes representing the interacting agents and $\mathcal E\subseteq\mathcal V\times\mathcal V$ is a multi-set of directed links. Here, the use of the prefix \emph{multi} reflects the fact that links $(i,j)$ directed from the same tail node $i$ to the same head node $j$ may occur with multiplicity larger than $1$, i.e., we allow for the possible presence of parallel links. The adjacency matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ of $\mathcal G$ has then nonnegative-integer entries $A_{ij}$ whose value represents the multiplicity with which link $(i,j)$ appears in $\mathcal E$.\footnote{In fact, one could easily relax the integer constraint on the entries of the adjacency matrix $A$ and consider weighted graphs, whereby each positive entry $A_{ij}$ stands for the weight of the link from node $i$ to node $j$. For the sake of simplicity in the exposition we will not consider this generalization explicitly in this paper.} Observe that we also allow for the possibility of selfloops, i.e., links of the form $(i,i)$ that correspond to nonzero diagonal entries $A_{ii}>0$ of the adjacency matrix. Of course, directed graphs with no self-loops can be recovered as a special case when $A$ has binary entries $A_{ij}\in\{0,1\}$ and zero diagonal, whereas undirected graphs can be recovered as a special case when the adjacency matrix $A'=A$ is symmetric. In particular, simple graphs (undirected and with no self-loops) correspond to the case when the adjacency matrix is symmetric and has zero diagonal and binary entries. The in-degree and out-degree vectors of a graph are then denoted by $\delta=A'\mathbf{1}$ and $\kappa=A\mathbf{1}$, respectively, so that $\delta_i=\sum_jA_{ji}$ and $\kappa_i=\sum_jA_{ij}$ are the in- and out-degree, respectively, of node $i$.
Whenever the interconnection topology contains a link $(i,j)\in\mathcal E$ we refer to node $j$ as an out-neighbor of $i$ and to node $i$ as an in-neighbor of $j$. An $l$-tuple of nodes $i_0,i_1,\ldots i_l$ is referred to as a length-$l$ \textit{walk} from $i_0$ to $i_l$ if $(i_{h-1},i_h) \in \mathcal E$ for all $1\le h\le l$.
Finally, the \textit{depth-$t$ neighborhood} $\mathcal N_t^i$ of a node $i$ is the subgraph of $\mathcal G$ containing all the nodes $j$ such that there exists a walk from $i$ to $j$ of length $l\le t$.
\section{The Linear Threshold Model and its progressive version}
\label{sec:model}
In this section, we introduce the LTM dynamics on arbitrary interconnection networks. We then prove some basic monotonicity properties of the LTM and use them to show how the PLTM can be recovered as a special case of the LTM with the proper choice of thresholds.
Let $\mathcal G=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E)$ be an interconnection topology. We follow the convention that the link direction is the opposite of the one of the influence, so that the presence of a link $(i,j)\in\mathcal E$ indicates that agent $i$ observes, and is influenced by, agent $j$. The behavior of each agent $i=1,\ldots,n$ in the LTM dynamics is characterized by a threshold value $\rho_i\in\{0,1,\ldots,\kappa_i\}$ that represents the minimum number of state-$1$ adopters that she needs to observe among her neighbors in order to adopt state $1$ at the next time instant. Such threshold is related to the normalized threshold $\Theta_i\in[0,1]$ mentioned in Section \ref{sec:intro} by the identity $\rho_i=\lceil\Theta_i\kappa_i\rceil$. The vector of all agents' thresholds is then denoted by $\rho\in\mathbb{R}^n$. In order to introduce the LTM dynamics, we are left to specify an initial state $\sigma_i\in\{0,1\}$ for every agent $i$. Let the vector of all agents' initial states be denoted by $\sigma\in\{0,1\}^n$. We will refer to a network as the $4$-tuple $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ of a set of agents $\mathcal V$, a multiset of links $\mathcal E$, a threshold vector $\rho$, and a vector of initial states $\sigma$.
The LTM on a network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ is then defined as the discrete-time dynamical system with state space $\{0,1\}^n$ and update rule
\begin{equation}\label{LTM-def}
Z_i(0)=\sigma_i\,,\qquad Z_i(t+1)=\left\{\begin{array}{lcl}1&\text{ if }&\sum_{j}A_{ij}Z_j(t)\ge\rho_i\\[10pt]
0&\text{ if }&\sum_{j}A_{ij}Z_j(t)<\rho_i\end{array}\r.\qquad i=1,\ldots,n\,,\qquad t\ge0\,.
\end{equation}
In fact, the LTM can be interpreted as the best response dynamics in a network game \cite{sM:2000, moJ:2008, EK:2010, mL:2012} whereby the agents $i\in\mathcal V$ choose their action $Z_i\in\{0,1\}$ so as to maximize their payoff $u_i(Z)=(\kappa_i-\rho_i+\varepsilon)Z_i\sum_jA_{ij}Z_j+\rho_i(1-Z_i)\sum_jA_{ij}(1-Z_j)$
where $0<\varepsilon<1$ is introduced in order to break possible ties in favor of the $Z_i=1$ action. Observe that Granovetter's recursion \eqref{LTMdef} for a fully mixed population can be recovered when the interaction topology is the complete graph with self-loops, i.e., the link set is $\mathcal E=\mathcal V\times\mathcal V$ so that the adjacency matrix is the all-one matrix $A=\mathbf{1}\1'$, and the thresholds are chosen as $\rho_i=\lceil n\Theta_i\rceil$ for all $i\in\mathcal V$.
The following lemma captures some basic monotonicity properties of the LTM dynamics that prove particularly useful in its analysis. In stating and proving it we will adopt the notational convention that an inequality between vectors is meant to hold true entry-wise.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:monotonicity}
Let $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ and $\mathcal N^+=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma^+)$ be two networks differing only (possibly) for the initial state vector. Let $Z(t)$ and $Z^+(t)$ be the state vectors of the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} on $\mathcal N$ and $\mathcal N^+$, respectively. Then,
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] if $\sigma^+\ge \sigma$, then $Z^+(t)\ge Z(t)$ for all $t\ge0$;
\item[(ii)] if $\rho_i\le(1-\sigma_i)\kappa_i$ for all $i$, then $Z(t)$ is non-decreasing in $t$, hence, in particular, it is eventually constant.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\proof
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] Let $A$ be the adjacency matrix of $\mathcal N$ and $\mathcal N^+$. Observe that, since $A$ is a nonnegative matrix, if $Z^+(t)\ge Z(t)$ for some $t\ge0$, then $AZ^+(t)\ge AZ(t)$, hence $Z^+(t+1)\ge Z(t+1)$ (because $Z^+_i(t+1)=0$ implies that $\sum_{j}A_{ij}Z_j(t)\le\sum_{j}A_{ij}Z^+_j(t)<\rho_i$ so that $Z_i(t=1)=0$). The claim now follows by induction on $t$.
\item[(ii)] Let $Z(0)=\sigma$ and $Z^+(0)=\sigma^+=Z(1)$. Observe that, if $\rho_i\le(1-\sigma_i)\kappa_i$ for every $i$, then for all those $i$ such that $Z_i(0)=\sigma_i=1$ one has $\rho_i=0\le\sum_jA_{ij}Z_j(0)$ so that $\sigma^+_i=Z_i(1)=1$. Hence, necessarily $\sigma^+=Z(1)\ge \sigma$. It then follows from point (i) that $Z^+(t)=Z(t+1)\ge Z(t)$ for all $t\ge0$, i.e., $Z(t)$ is non-decreasing, hence eventually constant.
\qed
\end{enumerate}\medskip
We now introduce a variation of the LTM known as \emph{Progressive} LTM (PLTM), whereby only state transitions from $0$ to $1$ are allowed, but not from $1$ to $0$. Formally, the PLTM on a network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ is defined by the following recursive relations
\begin{equation}\label{PLTM-def}
\begin{array}{l}Z_i(0)=\sigma_i\,,\qquad Z_i(t+1)=\left\{\begin{array}{lcl}1&\text{ if }&\sum_{j}A_{ij}Z_j(t)\ge(1-Z_i(t))\rho_i\\[10pt]
0&\text{ if }&\sum_{j}A_{ij}Z_j(t)<(1-Z_i(t))\rho_i\end{array}\r.\qquad i=1,\ldots,n\,,\ t\ge0\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Observe that in the PLTM dynamics the state update rule of every agent $i$ depends on her own current state, regardless of the presence of self-loops in the network. This is in contrast with the LTM update rule, whereby the new state of every agent $i$ such that $A_{ii}=0$ depends on the current state of its out-neighbors only and not on itself. In spite of these differences, the following result shows that the PLTM dynamics coincides with the LTM provided that agents with initial state $1$ are treated as if having effective threshold $0$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:LTM=PLTM}
The PLTM dynamics \eqref{PLTM-def} on a network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ coincide with the dynamics defined by
\begin{equation}\label{PLTM-def1}
\begin{array}{l}
Z_i(0)=\sigma_i\,,\qquad Z_i(t+1)=\left\{\begin{array}{lcl}1&\text{ if }&\sum_{j}A_{ij}Z_j(t)\ge(1-\sigma_i)\rho_i\\[10pt]
0&\text{ if }&\sum_{j}A_{ij}Z_j(t)<(1-\sigma_i)\rho_i\end{array}\r.\qquad i=1,\ldots,n\,,\ t\ge0\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
In particular, if $\rho_i\le(1-\sigma_i)\kappa_i$ for every $i\in\mathcal V$, then the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} and the PLTM dynamics \eqref{PLTM-def} coincide.
\end{lemma}
\proof
Let us denote by $Z(t)$ and $\tilde Z(t)$ the state vectors generated by the recursions \eqref{PLTM-def} and \eqref{PLTM-def1}, respectively.
It follows from applying part (ii) of Lemma \ref{lemma:monotonicity} to the network $\tilde{\mathcal N}=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\tilde\rho,\sigma)$ where $\tilde\rho_i=\rho_i(1-\sigma_i)$ that $\tilde Z(t)$ is non-decreasing in $t$. On the other hand, $Z(t)$ is non-decreasing by construction, since only transitions from $0$ to $1$ are allowed by \eqref{PLTM-def} but not the other way around. Now, we shall proceed by an induction argument, assuming that $Z(s)=\tilde Z(s)$ for $s=0,1,\dots , t$ and showing that then $Z(t+1)=\tilde Z(t+1)$. For all those $i$ such that $Z_i(t)=\tilde Z_i(t)=0$ monotonicity of $\tilde Z(t)$ implies that $\sigma_i=\tilde Z_i(0)\le\tilde Z_i(t)=0$ and therefore the updates in \eqref{PLTM-def} and in \eqref{PLTM-def1} coincide, yielding $Z_i(t+1)=\tilde Z_i(t+1)$. On the other hand, for all those $i$ such that $Z_i(t)=\tilde Z_i(t)=1$, monotonicity implies that $Z_i(t+1)\ge Z_i(t)=1$ and $\tilde Z_i(t+1)\ge\tilde Z_i(t)=1$ so that $\tilde Z_i(t+1)=Z_i(t+1)$. This proves the first claim.
The second part of the Lemma simply follows from the fact that $\rho_i\le(1-\sigma_i)\kappa_i$ and $\sigma_i\in\{0,1\}$ imply $(1-\sigma_i)\rho_i=\rho_i$.
\qed\medskip
Lemma \ref{lemma:LTM=PLTM} is particularly significant in that it implies that the study of the PLTM dynamics \eqref{PLTM-def} can be reduced to that of a special case of the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def}, where all agents with initial state $\sigma_i=1$ have threshold $\rho_i=0$.
\section{Recursive equations for networks with given statistics}
\label{sec:LTM-BR}
As mentioned in Section \ref{sec:intro}, the LTM on a complete network lends itself to a simple analysis enabled by the fact that the fraction of state-$1$ adopters
evolves according to the one-dimensional recursion $y(t+1)=F(y(t))$, where $F$ is the cumulative distribution of the normalized thresholds across the population \cite{mG:1978}. While such a one-dimensional recursion does not hold true for the LTM dynamics on general networks, the main contribution of this paper consists in showing that the fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM and the PLTM dynamics on most directed networks can be approximated\footnote{Cf.~Figures \ref{fig:ex-homo-rand-dyn} and \ref{fig:ex-hetero-glob-rand-dyn}. } ---in a quantitatively precise sense that will be formalized in Section \ref{sec:density-evolution}--- by the output $y(t)$ of another one-dimensional recursion of the form
\begin{equation}\label{CM-recursion}x(t+1)=\phi(x(t))\,,\qquad y(t+1)=\psi(x(t))\,,\end{equation}
where (cf.~\eqref{psi-def} and \eqref{phi-def}) $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ are polynomials with nonnegative coefficients that depend on the network's statistics $\boldsymbol p$ defined below.
In this section, we introduce the specific form of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} and analyze its dynamical behavior, while postponing to Section \ref{sec:density-evolution} the formal proof that the output $y(t)$ of \eqref{CM-recursion} provides an effective approximation of the fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM dynamics.
Throughout, we will use the following notation. For a network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ of size $n$,
\begin{equation}\label{def:joint-distribution}p_{d,k,r,s}=\frac1n\left|\{i\in\mathcal V:\,\delta_i=d,\,\kappa_i=k,\,\rho_i=r,\,\sigma_i=s\}\right|\,,\qquad d\ge0\,,\ 0\le r\le k\,,\ s=0,1\,,\end{equation}
stands for the fraction of agents having in-degree $d$, out-degree $k$, threshold $r$, and initial state $s$ and
\begin{equation}\label{def:average-degree}
l:=\sum_{i\in\mathcal V}\delta_i=\sum_{i\in\mathcal V}\kappa_i\,,\qquad
\overline d=\frac ln\end{equation}
stand for the network's total degree and average degree, respectively.
We refer to $\boldsymbol p=\{ p_{d,k,r,s} \}$ as the \emph{network's statistics} and denote by
\begin{equation}\label{def:degree-distribution}p_{k,r}:=\sum_{d\ge0}\sum_{s=0,1}p_{d,k,r,s}\,,\qquad
q_{k,r}:=\frac{1}{\overline d}\sum_{d\ge0}\sum_{s=0,1}dq_{d,k,r,s}\,,\qquad k,r\ge0\,,\end{equation}
the fractions of agents and, respectively, of links pointing to agents, of out-degree $k$ and threshold $r$, and by
\begin{equation}\label{upsxi}
\upsilon:=\sum_{d\ge0}\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0}p_{d,k,r,1}\,,\qquad
\xi:=\frac1{\overline d}\sum_{d\ge0}\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0}dp_{d,k,r,1}\end{equation}
the fractions of agents and, respectively, of links pointing towards agents, with initial state $\sigma_i=1$.
\subsection{The recursion}\label{subsect:recursion}
In order to get a quick, unrigorous yet intuitive derivation of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}, consider the following random network dynamics with state vector $Y(t)\in\{0,1\}^n$ whose initial state is $Y(0)=\sigma$ and whereby, at each time $t\ge0$, agents $i\in\mathcal V$ select $\kappa_i$ agents $J^{i}_{1},\ldots,J^i_{\kappa_i}$ independently at random from the population with probability $\mathbb{P}(J^i_h=j)=\delta_j/l$ and update its state as $Y_i(t+1)=1$ if $\sum_{0\le h\le\kappa_i}Y_{J^i_h}\ge\rho_i$ and as $Y_i(t+1)=0$ if $\sum_{0\le h\le\kappa_i}Y_{J^i_h}<\rho_i$.
Let
$y(t)=\frac1n\sum_{i}Y_i(t)$ and $x(t)=\frac1l\sum_{i}\delta_iY_i(t)$
be the fractions of state-$1$ adopters and links pointing towards state-$1$ adopters, respectively.
It is immediate to verify that
\begin{equation}\label{initialx}
x(0)=\xi\,,\qquad y(0)=\upsilon\,.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, if $I$ is a random agent selected from $\mathcal V$ with uniform probability $\mathbb{P}(I=i)=1/n$, then
$$\begin{array}{rclcc
\mathbb{E}[y(t+1)|Y(t)]\displaystyle&=&\displaystyle\mathbb{P}(Y_I(t+1)=1|Y(t))\\[5pt]
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0}p_{k,r}\mathbb{P}\l(\sum_{h=1}^kY_{J^I_h}(t)\ge r\big|Y(t)\r)\\[15pt]
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0}p_{k,r}\sum_{u=r}^k\mathbb{P}\l(\sum_{h=1}^kY_{J^I_h}(t)=u\big|Y(t)\r)\\[15pt]
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0}p_{k,r}\varphi_{k,r}(x(t))\\[15pt]
&=&\displaystyle\psi(x(t))\,,
\end{array}
$$
where the forth identity above follows with
\begin{equation}\label{varphi-def}\varphi_{k,r}(x):=\sum_{u=r}^k\binom ku x^u(1-x)^{k-u}\,,\qquad 0\le r\le k\,,\end{equation}
from the fact that, conditioned on $Y(t)$, the $Y_{J^i_h}(t)$ are independent Bernoulli random variables with $\mathbb{P}(Y_{J^i_h}(t)=1|Y(t))=x(t)$, while the last identity holds true upon defining
\begin{equation}\label{psi-def}\qquad \psi(x):=\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0} p_{k,r}\varphi_{k,r}(x)\,.\end{equation}
An analogous computation shows that, if $J$ is a random agent selected with probability and $\mathbb{P}(J=j)=\delta_j/l$, then
$
\mathbb{E}[x(t+1)|Y(t)]=\mathbb{P}(Y_J(t+1)=1|Y(t))
=\phi(x(t))\,,
$$
where
\begin{equation}\label{phi-def}\phi(x):=\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0} q_{k,r}\varphi_{k,r}(x)\,.\end{equation}
While the above computations are merely concerned with the conditional expected fractions of state-$1$ adopters, and links pointing towards state-$1$ adopters, in the random network dynamics $Y(t)$, in Section \ref{sec:density-evolution} we will prove that the output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} with initial condition \eqref{initialx} does in fact provide a good approximation of the evolution of the fraction of state-$1$ adopters for the actual LTM dynamics \eqref{LTMdef} on most of the networks with given statistics $\boldsymbol p$. It will then follow from Lemma \ref{lemma:LTM=PLTM} that such approximation result remains valid for the fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the PLTM dynamics as long as
\begin{equation}\label{PLTMpcond} p_{d,k,r,1}=0\,,\qquad d\ge0\,,\quad 1\le r\le k\,,\end{equation}
i.e., when $\rho_i\le\kappa_i(1-\sigma_i)$ for all agents $i\in\mathcal V$.
In the remainder of this section we study, both analytically and numerically, the behavior of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}.
Observe that every function $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ defined as in \eqref{varphi-def} maps the unitary interval $[0,1]$ in itself in a continuous and monotonically non-decreasing way, and so do $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ which are convex combinations of the $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$. The dynamics of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} can then be understood by a graphical procedure, consisting in iteratively projecting points from the graph of the function $\phi(x)$ to the diagonal of the $[0,1]\times[0,1]$ square and {\it vice versa} (compare the left-most plot in Figure~\ref{fig:Phi-x}). Continuity and monotonicity of $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ imply that both the state $x(t)$ and output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} always converge, as $t$ grows large, to limit values
that depend on the initial seed $\xi$ only, as formally stated in the following result.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:simple}
Let $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ be defined as in \eqref{psi-def} and \eqref{phi-def}, respectively, for given network statistics $\boldsymbol p$.
Then, as time $t$ grows large, the state $x(t)$ and output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} with initial condition \eqref{initialx} are convergent to limit values
$$x^*(\xi):=\lim_{t\to\infty}x(t)\,,\qquad y^*(\xi):=\lim_{t\to\infty}y(t)$$
such that
\begin{equation}
x^*(\xi)=\left\{\begin{array}{lcl}
\text{largest fixed point of }\phi(x)\text{ in }[0,\xi) &\text{ if }&\phi(\xi)<\xi\\
\xi&\text{ if }&\phi(\xi)=\xi\\
\text{smallest fixed point of }\phi(x)\text{ in }(\xi,1] &\text{ if }&\phi(\xi)>\xi\end{array}\right.\qquad\ y^*(\xi)=\psi(x^*(\xi))\,.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\proof
We consider the case $\phi(\xi)<\xi$ first. In this case, $x(1)=\phi(x(0))=\phi(\xi)<\xi=x(0)$ and monotonicity of $\phi(x)$ allows one to prove that $x(t+1)=\phi(x(t))\le\phi(x(t-1))=x(t)$ by a simple induction argument. Then, $x(t)$ is monotonically non-increasing in $t$, hence converging to a limit $x^*(\xi)$. By continuity of $\phi(x)$, such a limit must be a fixed point $x^*(\xi)=\phi(x^*(\xi))$, and continuity of $\psi(x)$ implies that $y^*(\xi)=\lim_{t\to\infty}y(t)=\lim_{t\to\infty}\phi(x(t-1))=\phi(x^*(\xi))$. Observe that, since $x(t)$ is non-increasing in $t$, then $x^*(\xi)=\lim_tx(t)<x(0)=\xi$. Moreover, there cannot exist another fixed point $x^*=\phi(x^*)$ such that $x^*(\xi)<x^*<\xi$, since, if such $x^*$ existed, then monotonicity of $\phi(x)$ would imply that $x(t)=\phi(\phi(\ldots\phi(\xi)))>\phi(\phi(\ldots\phi(x^*)))=x^*$ leading to the contradiction $x^*(\xi)=\lim_{t\to\infty}x(t)\le x^*$. Hence, $x^*(\xi)=\phi(x^*(\xi))$ is necessarily the largest fixed point of $\phi(x)$ in the interval $[0,\xi)$. The other two cases can be proved analogously.
\qed
\subsection{Out-regular networks with homogeneous thresholds}\label{subsect:homogeneous}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{phi1.pdf}\hspace{1cm}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{phi1lim.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:Phi-x} The recursion \eqref{recursion-hom} for a typical out-regular network with out-degree $k\ge3$ and homogeneous thresholds $2\le r<k$. The function $\phi(x)=\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ displayed in the leftmost plot has three fixed points: $0$, $1$ and $x^*$.
The state $x(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{recursion-hom} converges to $0$ for every initial condition $x(0)\in[0,x^*)$, to $1$ for every initial condition $x(0)\in(x^*,1]$, and stays put if $x(0)=x^*$.
The figure on the right shows the limit of $x(t)$ as $t$ grows large as a function of the initial condition $x(0)$.
}
\end{figure}
We now focus on the simplest case where all the agents have the same out-degree $\kappa_i=k$ and threshold $\rho_i=r$. In this case, one has that $p_{k,r}=q_{k,r}=1$, $\phi(x)=\psi(x)=\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ and $\upsilon = \xi$, so that the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{recursion-hom}
x(t+1)=y(t+1)= \varphi_{k,r}(x(t))\,
\end{equation}
with initial condition $x(0) = y(0) = \xi$.
In the following result, we gather some elementary properties of the functions $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ whose proof relies merely on basic calculus and that will prove useful later on.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:phi-properties}
\begin{enumerate}
For $0\le r\le k$, let $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ be the polynomial function defined in \eqref{varphi-def}. Then, for $x\in[0,1]$,
\item[(i)] $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ is a non-decreasing function, strictly increasing if $0<r\le k$;
\item[(ii)] $\varphi'_{k,r}(x)=\binom kr rx^{r-1}(1-x)^{k-r}$;
\item[(iii)] $\varphi''_{k,r}(x)=\binom kr rx^{r-2}(1-x)^{k-r-1}(r-1-x(k-1))$;
\item[(iv)] $\varphi_{k,r}(1)=1$ for $0\le r\le k$; $\varphi_{k,r}(0)=0$ for $0<r\le k$; $\varphi_{k,0}(0)=1$;
\item[(v)] $\varphi_{k,0}(x)=1$, $\varphi_{k,1}(x)=1-(1-x)^k$, $\varphi_{k,k}(x)=x^k$
\item[(vi)] For $1\le r\le k$, with $k > 1$ the function $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ has one inflection point in $\tilde x=(r-1)/(k-1)$. It is strictly convex for $0\leq x\leq \tilde x$ and strictly concave for $\tilde x\leq x\leq 1$;
\item[(vii)] For $2\le r<k$, the equation $\varphi_{k,r}(x)=x$ has exactly three solutions $\{0, x^*, 1\}$ with $0<x^*<1$ and $\varphi_{k,r}'(x^*)>1$.
\end{enumerate}\end{lemma}
Lemma \ref{lemma:phi-properties} implies that, for $2\le r <k$, the function $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ has a \emph{lazy-S}-shaped graph, i.e., it is increasing, with a unique inflection point $\tilde x=(r-1)/(k-1)$, it is convex on the left-hand side of $\tilde x$ and concave on the right-hand side of $\tilde x$ (compare Figure~\ref{fig:Phi-x}, left). Besides the trivial cases $r=0,1, k$, whose asymptotics are reported below
$
y^*(\xi)=x^*(\xi)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}1\quad &\text{ if }\, r=0\text{ or }r=1<k\\ \xi\quad &\text{ if }r=k=1\\ 0\quad &\text{ if } r=k>1\,,\end{array}\right.$$
point (vii) of Lemma \ref{lemma:phi-properties} implies that the recursion \eqref{recursion-hom} exhibits a threshold behavior with respect to the initial fraction of state-$1$ adopters. In fact, for
$2\le r<k$, it holds true that
\begin{equation}\label{xinfty}
y^*(\xi)=x^*(\xi)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}0\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi<x^*\\
x^*\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi=x^*\\
1\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi>x^*\,,\end{array}\right.\end{equation}
where $x^*=\varphi_{k,r}(x^*)$ is the unique fixed point of $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ in the open interval $(0,1)$.
Equation \eqref{xinfty} implies that, if the fraction $\upsilon=\xi$ of agents with initial state $\sigma_i=1$ is smaller than the threshold value $x^*$, then the fraction of state-$1$ adopters vanishes as time grows large whereas, if $\upsilon=\xi>x^*$ then the fraction of state-$1$ adopters approaches $1$ asymptotically (cf.~Figure~\ref{fig:Phi-x}, right).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{phikr_new_2.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:varphi-conv}
Plots of the function $\varphi_{k,k\theta}(x)$ for $\theta = 0.3$ and $k = 10$, $100$, $1000$ (blue solid lines). The small full circles represent the internal fixed point $x^*$ of $\varphi_{k,k\theta}(x)$ for the three values of $k$. In the limit of large $k$, the step function $\varphi_{\theta}(x)=0$ for $x<\theta$ and $\varphi_{\theta}(x)=1$ for $x\ge\theta$ (red dashed plot) is achieved.}
\end{figure}
A simple estimation of the threshold value $x^*=\varphi_{k,r}(x^*)$ follows from the observation that $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ can be interpreted as the probability that a random variable with binomial distribution of parameters $k$ and $x$ exceeds $r$. The fact that mean and median coincide for such binomial random variables when the mean $kx$ is an integer value implies that
\begin{equation}\label{median}\varphi_{k,r}(r/k)\geq 1/2\,,\qquad\varphi_{k,r}((r-1)/k)\leq 1/2\,,\end{equation} so that, in particular,
$$\begin{array}{rclll}x^*&\leq& r/k & \text{ if }& r/k\leq 1/2\\
x^*&\geq& (r-1)/k &\text{ if }& (r-1)/k\geq 1/2\,.\end{array}$$
In fact, if we fix a value $\theta\in [0,1]$ and let $r=\lfloor\theta k\rfloor$, then the law of large numbers implies that
$$\lim_{k\to\infty}\varphi_{k,\lfloor k\theta\rfloor}(x)=\left\{\begin{array}{lcl}0&\text{ if }&0\le x<\theta\\mathbf{1}&\text{ if }&\theta\le x\le1\,,\end{array}\right.$$
i.e., $\varphi_{k,r}(x)$ approaches a step function in the limit as $k$ grows large (cf.~Figure~\ref{fig:varphi-conv}).
This shows that the ratio $\theta=r/k$ is a good approximation of the threshold value $x^*=\varphi_{k,r}(x^*)$ when $r$ and $k$ are large enough.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{dyn_LTM_homo_es3.pdf}%
\hspace{1cm}%
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{dyn_LTM_homo_es4.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:ex-homo-rand-dyn} The dynamics of the fraction $z(t)$ of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM \eqref{LTM-def} (blue solid lines) compared with the recursion \eqref{recursion-hom} (dashed red lines). The random networks used in the simulations have $n = 2000$ nodes, $k = 7$, $r = 3$. The initial condition are $\upsilon = 0.246$ and $\upsilon = 0.266$ (left plot) and $\upsilon = 0.256$ (right plot). Note that $\varphi_{7,3}(x)$ has $x^* \approx 0.256$.
The simulations with $\upsilon = 0.246$ converge to zero, those for $ \upsilon = 0.266$ converge to one; in both case the recursion captures the behavior and the timing of the simulated dynamic.
For $\upsilon = 0.256$, which happens slightly larger than $x^*$, after a slow start the recursion converges to one while the simulations are evenly spread, half converge to one and half to zero, with different timing too.
The simulations $z(t)$ become closer to the recursion $y(t)$ if the network sizes $n$ is increased, or (as in the left plot) if $\upsilon$ is chosen a bit away from $x^*$.
The limit $y^*(\xi)$ for various seed $\xi$ can also be compared with simulations on the same random network used above. If the seed $\xi$ is not very close to $x^*$, the simulation always match the predicted limit, like the right plot of Figure~\ref{fig:Phi-x}. }
\end{figure}
\subsection{Heterogeneous networks: local analysis}\label{subsect:hetero1}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{phi2.pdf}\hspace{1cm}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{phi2lim.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:phi-multi-conv}
On the left, the function $\phi(x)$ for a heterogeneous network with $q_{10,0}=0.02$ $q_{8,6}=0.64$ and $q_{10,1}=0.34$. The function has two inflection points and three fixed points: $x^*_1$, $x^*_2$, and $x_3^*=1$. Note that $\phi(0)=0.02>0$ and $\phi'(0)=3.4>1$, while $\phi'(1)=0$. On the right, the limit value $x^*(\xi)$ as a function of the initial seed $\xi$. }
\end{figure}
In heterogeneous networks, containing a mixture of agents with different out-degrees and thresholds, the functions $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ remain non-decreasing ---as they are polynomials with nonnegative coefficients--- while the shape of their graph can be more complex than the simple lazy-$S$ of the homogeneous case. In particular, their convexity may change several times in the interval $[0,1]$ (see, e.g., Figures~\ref{fig:phi-multi-conv} and \ref{fig:phi-xi}).
Observe that $\phi(x)=\psi(x)$ as in the homogeneous case whenever \begin{equation}\label{indep}\sum_{s=0,1}p_{d,k,r,s}=p_{k,r}\sum_{k'\ge0}\sum_{r'\ge0}\sum_{s=0,1}p_{d,k',r',s}\,,\qquad 0\le r\le k\,,\end{equation} i.e., when the statistics of the in-degrees across the population are independent from the statistics of the out-degrees and thresholds (since in this case $q_{k,r}=p_{k,r}$).
Instead, one has that $\phi(x)\ne\psi(x)$ for general networks that do not enjoy property \eqref{indep}.
In this latter case, the fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM dynamics, estimated by the output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}, does not necessarily coincide with the fraction of links pointing towards state-$1$ adopters in the LTM dynamics, approximated by the state $x(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}.
In this subsection, we analyze the dynamical behavior of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} for values of the initial seed that are either close to $0$ or to $1$.
To start with, notice that
point (iv) of Lemma~\ref{lemma:phi-properties} implies that
\begin{equation}\label{phi1}
\phi(1)=\psi(1)=1\,.
\end{equation}
On the other hand,
\begin{equation}\label{phi0}
\phi(0)=\sum_{k\ge0}q_{k,0}\,,\qquad \psi(0)=\sum_{k\ge0}p_{k,0}
\end{equation}
coincide with the fractions of links pointing towards agents, and, respectively, of agents, with threshold $0$. Analogously, it follows from point (ii) of Lemma \ref{lemma:phi-properties} that
\begin{equation}\label{phi'}\phi'(0)=\sum_{k\ge1}kq_{k,1}\,,\qquad \phi'(1)=\sum_{k\ge0}kq_{k,k}\,.\end{equation}
The rightmost identity in \eqref{phi'} and \eqref{phi1} imply that the asymptotic behavior of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} for the standard LTM when the initial seed $\xi$ is close to $1$ is determined by the sign of $\vartheta-1$ where $$\vartheta:=\sum_{k\ge0}kq_{k,k}\,.$$
Since $\phi(1) = 1$, if $\vartheta<1$ then $\phi(x)>x$ in a left neighborhood of $1$, whereas if $\vartheta>1$ then $\phi(x)<x$ in a left neighborhood of $1$.
In the first case, for a seed $\xi$ close enough to $1$, the fraction of state-$1$ adopters approaches $y^*(\xi)=1$ as $t$ grows large, whereas in the second case it converges to some $y^*(\xi)<1$ even for values of the seed $\xi$ arbitrarily close to $1$ (while, clearly, the recursion stays put in $x(t)=y(t)=1$ if $\xi=\upsilon=1$).
On the other hand, the leftmost identity in \eqref{phi'} implies that the asymptotic behavior of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} when the initial seed $\xi$ is close to $0$ is determined by $\phi(0)$ and by the sign of $\gamma-1$, where
\begin{equation}\label{gamma}\gamma:=\sum_{k\ge0}kq_{k,1}\,.\end{equation}
This can be appreciated in two different settings.
First, we focus on the standard LTM on networks containing no stubborn agents, i.e., where $\sum_{k\ge0}p_{k,0}=\sum_{k\ge0}q_{k,0}=0$. Then, $\phi(0)=\psi(0)=0$ by \eqref{phi0} and the leftmost identity in \eqref{phi'} implies that, if $\gamma<1$, then $\phi(x)<x$ in a right neighborhood of $0$,
whereas, if $\gamma>1$, then $\phi(x)>x$ in a right neighborhood of $0$.
In the first case, for small enough seed $\xi>0$, the fraction of state-$1$ adopters approaches $y^*(\xi)=0$ as $t$ grows large, whereas in the second case it converges to some $y^*(\xi)>0$ even for arbitrarily small positive values of the seed $\xi$ (the recursion stays put in $x(t)=y(t)=0$ if $\xi=\upsilon=0$).
Alternatively, one can focus on the analysis of the PLTM on networks where the statistics of the initial states are independent from the ones of the degrees and thresholds. Specifically, consider networks with joint degree, threshold, and initial state distributions of the form
$$p_{d,k,0,1}=\xi \sum_{0\le r\le k}\overline p_{d,k,r}\,,\qquad p_{d,k,r,0}=(1-\xi)\overline p_{d,k,r}\,,\qquad d,k\ge0,\ 1\le r\le k\,,$$
where $\xi\in[0,1]$ stands for the fraction of initial state-$1$ adopters, and $p_{d,k,0,0}=p_{d,k,r,1}=0$ for all $k,d\ge0$ and $1\le r\le k$.
Here, $\overline p_{d,k,r}$ stands for the fraction of agents with initial state $0$ that have in-degree $d$, out-degree $k$, and threshold $r$.
Observe that, in this setting, condition \eqref{PLTMpcond} is satisfied,
while the functions in \eqref{psi-def} and \eqref{phi-def} satisfy
$$\label{phipsieps}\phi_{\xi}(x)=\xi+(1-\xi)\phi_0(x)\,,\qquad \psi_{\xi}(x)=\xi+(1-\xi)\psi_0(x)\,,$$
i.e., they are obtained by rescaling the ones with seed $\xi=0$, i.e., where all agents have initial state $0$. (See, e.g., Figure~\ref{fig:phi-xi}.)
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={5mm} {\figtrimb} {\figtrimr} {\figtrimt},clip, width={\figwidth},
keepaspectratio=true]{phi_xi.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:phi-xi} The function drawn with solid line is $\phi_{\xi}(x) = \xi + (1-\xi) \phi_0(x)$ with $\xi = 0.15$, obtained from $\phi_0(x) = 0.2\,\varphi_{25,4}(x) + 0.4\,\varphi_{25,13}(x) + 0.4\,\varphi_{25,21}(x) $ (dashed line). }
\end{figure}
In fact, we have that
\begin{equation}\label{phi0eps}\phi_{\xi}(0)=\psi_{\xi}(0)=\xi\,,\qquad \phi'_{\xi}(0)=(1-\xi)\gamma\,,\end{equation}
where $\gamma$
is as in \eqref{gamma}.
It then follows from \eqref{phi0eps} that
\begin{equation}\label{epsto0} \left.\begin{array}{rclcrcl}\displaystyle\lim_{\xi\to0}y^*(\xi)=0&\text{ if }&\gamma<1&\qquad&\displaystyle\lim_{\xi\to0}y^*(\xi)>0&\text{ if }&\gamma>1\,.\end{array}\right.\end{equation}
It is worth pointing out that equation \eqref{epsto0} is consistent with the result stated as Theorem 11 in \cite{mL:2012}. In fact, while reference \cite{mL:2012} deals with the PLTM on random undirected graphs with given degree distribution, our results can be extended to the configuration model ensemble of undirected graphs, as opposed to directed ones, as illustrated in Section \ref{sect:undirectedCM}. The main difference between our approach and the one in \cite{mL:2012} is then that we deal with approximations of the (P)LTM dynamics for large-scale networks and equation \eqref{epsto0} concerns the asymptotic behavior of this approximation as the time $t$ grows large, whereas the results in \cite{mL:2012} deal with the large-scale limit of the asymptotic behavior (as $t$ grows large) of the PLTM dynamics, thus considering the double limit ---in time $t$ and network size $n$--- in the opposite order as we do in this paper.
\subsection{Heterogeneous networks: global analysis} \label{subsect:hetero2}
As mentioned in the previous subsection, the function $\phi(x)$ may have a complex shape for heterogeneous networks and in general it is hard to predict analytically, in terms of the network statistics $\boldsymbol p$, the number and value of the fixed points $x^*=\phi(x^*)$ that ---as stated in Lemma \ref{lemma:simple}--- determine the asymptotic behavior of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} as a function of the initial seed $\xi$.
We present below two special cases when such analytical conditions on the network statistics $\boldsymbol p$ can be found explicitely.
\begin{example}
Let $h>0$ be an integer value, and assume that $q_{k,r}=p_{k,r}=0$ for all pairs $(k,r)$ except for a subset of those such that $k=jh+1$ and $r=j+1$ for some $j>0$. Since, by Lemma \ref{lemma:phi-properties}(vi), the functions $\varphi_{jh+1,j+1}(x)$, for $j>0$, all take value $0$ for $x=0$ and $1$ for $x=1$, have a unique inflection point in $\tilde x=1/h$, are convex in $[0,\tilde x]$ and concave in $[\tilde x,1]$, the same does the function
$$\phi(x)=\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0}q_{k,r}\varphi_{k,r}(x)=\sum_{j>0}q_{jh+1,j+1}\varphi_{jh+1,j+1}(x)\,.$$
Hence, in this very special heterogenous case, the qualitative asymptotic behavior of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} is provably the same as in the homogeneous case, as discussed in Section \ref{subsect:homogeneous}: there exists a unique fixed point $x^*=\phi(x^*)$ in $(0,1)$ such that
$$
x^*(\xi)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}0\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi<x^*\\
x^*\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi=x^*\\
1\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi>x^*\,,\end{array}\right.\qquad y^*(\xi)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}0\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi<x^*\\
\psi(x^*)\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi=x^*\\
1\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi>x^*\,.\end{array}\right.$$
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{example:multi-threshold}
For given $0<\epsilon <1/4$ and $\tau$ such that $2\epsilon<\tau<1-2\epsilon$, consider a network comprising two types of agents, $h=1,2$, each with out-degree $k_h$ and threshold $r_h$, respectively.
Assume that $1< r_1<\varepsilon k_1$, that $(1-\varepsilon)(k_2-1) + 1 < r_2 < k_2$ and that the fraction of links pointing towards agents of type $1$ is $q_{r_1,k_1}=\tau=1-q_{r_2,k_2}$.
Notice that, because of (\ref{median}), $\phi(x)=\tau \varphi_{k_1,r_1}(x)+(1-\tau)\varphi_{k_2,r_2}(x)$ satisfies
$$\phi(r_1/k_1)\geq \frac{1}{2}\tau>\epsilon>\frac{r_1}{k_1}$$
while
$$\phi((r_2-1)/k_2)\leq \tau +\frac{1}{2}(1-\tau)=\frac{1}{2}(1+\tau)<1-\epsilon<\frac{r_2-1}{k_2}\,.$$
Since $\phi(0)=0$, $\phi(1)=1$, and $\phi'(0)=\phi'(1)=0$, this implies that there must be at least five fixed points $x_j^*=\phi(x_j^*)$, $j=0,\ldots,4$, such that
$$0=x^*_0<x^*_1<\frac{r_1}{k_1}<x^*_2<\frac{r_2-1}{k_2}<x^*_3<x^*_4=1$$
and
$$
x^*(\xi)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
0\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi<x^*_1\\
x^*_1\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi=x^*_1\\
x^*_2\quad &{\rm if}\, \overline x^*_1<\xi<\underline x^*_3\\
x^*_3\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi=x^*_3\\
1\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi>x^*_3
\end{array}\right.\qquad
y^*(\xi)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
0\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi<x^*_1\\
\psi(x^*_1)\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi=x^*_1\\
\psi(x^*_2)\quad &{\rm if}\, \overline x^*_1<\xi<\underline x^*_3\\
\psi(x^*_3)\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi=x^*_3\\
1\quad &{\rm if}\, \xi>x^*_3\,,
\end{array}\right.$$
where $\overline x_1^*=\phi(\overline x_1^*)\in[x_1^*,x_2^*)$ and $\underline x_3^*=\phi(\underline x_3^*)\in(x_2^*,x_3^*]$ are possibly additional fixed points (the largest below and, respectively, the lowest above $x_2^*$).
This instantiates a multiple threshold phenomenon that is a specific feature of heterogeneous networks, as it cannot occur in homogeneous ones.
The following simulation illustrates the multiple threshold phenomenon just described.
We consider a random network with $n = 2000$ agents, 45\% of whom has out-degree $k_1 = 14$ and threshold $r_1 = 3$, the remaining 55\% has $k_2 = 11$ and $r_2 = 9$. The initial state of a fraction $\upsilon$ of the agents is one. The agents have in-degree chosen in $\{11, 14\}$ independently from the out-degree, threshold and initial condition.
Therefore, the random network satisfies the assumptions of Example~\ref{example:multi-threshold} with $\varepsilon = 0.225$ and $\tau = 0.45$; moreover $\psi(x) = \phi(x)$ and $\xi = \upsilon$.
The left plot of Figure~\ref{fig:ex-hetero-glob-rand-dyn} represents the function
$\psi(x) = 0.450 \, \varphi_{14,3}(x) + 0.550\, \varphi_{11,9}(x)$,
which has exactly five fixed points: $x^*_0 = 0$, $x^*_1 \approx 0.140$, $x^*_2 \approx 0.451$, $x^*_3 \approx 0.813 $ and $x^*_4 = 1$.
The right plot of Figure~\ref{fig:ex-hetero-glob-rand-dyn} contains (in solid red) the predicted limit of the recursion, $y^*(\xi)$, that is a ``staircase'' function with two discontinuities.
The blue crosses represent thew simulations, namely the fraction $z(T)$ of state-$1$ adopters in the random networks at $T = 200$, for various initial conditions.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{asy_LTM_hetero_2_psi.pdf}%
\hspace{1cm}%
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{asy_LTM_hetero_2_new_legend.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:ex-hetero-glob-rand-dyn}
Left plot: the function $\psi(x) = 0.450 \, \varphi_{14,3}(x) + 0.550\, \varphi_{11,9}(x)$ with its fixed points.
Right plot: the ``staircase'' function (solid red) is the limit $y^*(\varepsilon)$ of the recursion.
The blue crosses represent the values $z(T)$ at time $T = 200$ of the simulations on the random network with $n=2000$ agents and different seed values $\xi$. }
\end{figure}
\end{example}
While the investigation of the exact number and positions of the various fixed points of $\phi(x)$ for general heterogeneous network is analytically unfeasible, fundamental insight can be obtained by taking a large-degree limit as follows. Let $F(\theta)$ be a normalized threshold cumulative distribution function, i.e., $F(\theta)$ is non-decresing, right-continuous, with $F(\theta)=0$ for $\theta<0$ and $F(\theta)=1$ for $\theta\ge1$. Assume that the network statistics $\boldsymbol p$ satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{Frk}p_{k,r}=p_k(F(r/k)-F((r-1)/k))\,,\qquad q_{k,r}=q_k(F(r/k)-F((r-1)/k))\,,\qquad 0\le r\le k\,.\end{equation}
where $p_k$ and $q_k$ stand for the fractions of agents and, respectively, links pointing towards agents of degree $k$, and the minimum out-degree $k_{\min}\ge2$ is such that $p_k=q_k=0$ for all $0\le k\le k_{\min}$.
In this case, the function $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ take the form
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
\displaystyle\phi(x)&=&\displaystyle\sum_{k\ge 0}\sum_{0\le r\le k}q_{k,r}\varphi_{k,r}(x)\\[10pt]
&=&
\displaystyle\sum_{k\ge k_{\min}}q_k\sum_{0\le r\le k}\big(F(r/k)-F((r-1)/k) \big)\sum_{r\le j\le k}\binom kjx^j(1-x)^{k-j}\\[10pt]
&=&
\displaystyle\sum_{k\ge k_{\min}}q_k\sum_{0\le j\le k}\sum_{0\le r\le j}\big(F(r/k)-F((r-1)/k)\big)\binom kjx^j(1-x)^{k-j}\\[10pt]
&=&
\displaystyle\sum_{k\ge k_{\min}}q_k\sum_{0\le j\le k}F(j/k)\binom kjx^j(1-x)^{k-j}\,,
\end{array}
$$
$$\psi(x)=\sum_{k\ge 0}\sum_{0\le r\le k}p_{k,r}\varphi_{k,r}(x)=\sum_{k\ge k_{\min}}p_k\sum_{0\le j\le k}F(j/k)\binom kjx^j(1-x)^{k-j}.$$
Then, if a sequence of network statistics with increasing minimum out-degree $k_{\min}$ is considered satisfying \eqref{Frk} with the same normalized threshold cumulative distribution function $F(\theta)$, then
\begin{equation}\label{phi->F}
\lim_{k_{\min}\to+\infty}\phi(x)=F(x)\,,\qquad\lim_{k_{\min}\to+\infty}\psi(x)=F(x)\,.
\end{equation}
The result above establishes that, as the minimum degree grows large, the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} reduces to the Granovetter one \eqref{LTM-recursion-fullymixed}. In fact, by applying Lemma \ref{lemma:simple} with $\phi(x)=\psi(x)=F(x)$ one gets that the (approximate) fraction of state-$1$ adopters $y(t)$ converges to the largest (respectively, lowest) fixed point $x^*(\xi)=F(x^*(\xi))$
that is not higher (not lower) than the initial seed $\xi$.
That together with \eqref{phi->F} highlights a selected activation phenomenon for networks satisfying \eqref{Frk}: for large enough $k_{\min}$ the eventual state-$1$ adopters tend to be those agents $i$ whose normalized threshold $\theta_i=\rho_i/\kappa_i$ is below the fixed point $x^*(\xi)=F(x^*(\xi))$.
\section{Approximation results for the configuration model ensemble}
\label{sec:density-evolution}
In this section, we show that the output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} introduced in Section \ref{sec:LTM-BR} does in fact provide an accurate approximation of the fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} on most of the directed networks $\mathcal N$ with the same statistics $\boldsymbol p$.
Specifically, we introduce the so-called \emph{configuration model} ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ of all directed networks of given size $n$ and statistics $\boldsymbol p$ and prove that the fraction of state-$1$ adopters
$$z(t)=\frac1n\sum_{i\in\mathcal V}Z_i(t)$$
after a finite number of iterations of the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} is arbitrarily close to the output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} on all but a fraction of networks in $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ that vanishes as $n$ grows large.
Our result is proved in three main steps.
First, we introduce a different random graph model with rooted tree structure, the \emph{two-stage branching process} $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$, and show that the output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} gives the \emph{exact} expression of the \emph{expected value} of the root node's state in the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} on $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$.
Second, we consider the configuration model $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ and prove that, after $t$ iterations of the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} on the configuration model ensemble, the \emph{average} fraction $\overline z(t)$ of state-$1$ adopters is arbitrarily close to $y(t)$, i.e., the expected value of the root node's state on $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$.
Finally, a concentration result is obtained, showing that on most of the networks in $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$, the fraction $z(t)$ of state-$1$ adopters after $t$ iterations of the LTM dynamics is arbitrarily close to its average $\overline z(t)$, hence to the output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}.
\subsection{The LTM on the two-stage branching process}
\label{subsect:LTM-BP}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{BP.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:BP} A directed two-stage branching process $\mathcal T$ with root node $v_0$. The triples $(K_h,R_h,S_h)$, for $h\ge0$, of the agents' outdegrees, thresholds, and initial states are mutually independent and have distribution $\mathbb{P}(K_0=k,R_0=r,S_0=s)=p_{k,r,s}$ and $\mathbb{P}(K_h=k,R_h=r,S_h=s)=q_{k,r,s}$ for $h\ge1$, $0\le r\le k$, and $s=0,1$. The state $X_{v_0}(t)$ of the root node at time $t\ge0$ is a deterministic function of the initial states $S_j$ of the agents $j$ in generation $t$.}
\end{figure}
In this subsection we first introduce a random graph model with rooted directed tree structure, to be referred to as the two-stage branching process $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$.
Then, we provide a complete theoretical analysis of the LTM dynamics on $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$ that will be the basis for then considering, in the next subsection, the configuration model ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ which exhibits a local tree-like structure.
Let $\boldsymbol p$ be the network statistics with average degree $\overline d=\sum_{d,k,r,s}dp_{d,k,r,s}=\sum_{d,k,r,s}kp_{d,k,r,s}$ and
$$p_{k,r,s}=\sum_{d\ge0}p_{d,k,r,s}\,,\qquad q_{k,r,s}=\frac1{\overline d}\sum_{d\ge0}dp_{d,k,r,s}\,,\qquad 0\le r\le k,\ s=0,1\,,$$
be the fractions of agents and, respectively, of links pointing to agents, of out-degree $k$, threshold $r$, and initial state $s$.
In order to define the associated two-stage branching process $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$, we start from a root node $v_0$ and randomly generate a directed tree graph according to the following rule (compare Figure~\ref{fig:BP}). First, we assign to the root node $v_0$ a random out-degree $\kappa_{v_0}=K_0$, threshold $\rho_{v_0}=R_0$ and initial state $\sigma_{v_0}=S_0$ such that the triple $(K_0,R_0,S_0)$ has joint probability distribution $\mathbb{P}(K_0=k,R_0=r,S_0=s)=p_{k,r,s}$ for $0\le r\le k$ and $s=0,1$. Then, we connect the root node $v_0$ with $K_0$ directed links pointing to new nodes $v_1,\ldots,v_{K_0}$, and assign to each such generation-$1$ node $v_h$, $1\le h\le K_0$, out-degree $\kappa_{v_h}=K_h$, threshold $\rho_{v_h}=R_{h}$, and initial state $\sigma_{v_h}=S_{h}$ such that the triples $(K_h,R_h,S_h)$ are mutually independent, independent from $(K_0,R_0,S_0)$, and identically distributed with $\mathbb{P}(K_h=k,R_h=r,S_h=s)=q_{k,r,s}$ for $0\le r\le k$ and $s=0,1$.
We then connect each of the generation-$1$ nodes $v_h$ with $K_h$ directed links pointing to distinct new nodes, and assign to such generation-$2$ nodes $v_{J_1+1},\ldots,v_{J_2}$, where $J_1=K_0$ and $J_2=\sum_{0\le j\le J_1}K_j$, out-degree $\kappa_{v_h}=K_h$, threshold $\rho_{v_h}=R_{h}$, and initial state $\sigma_{v_h}=S_{h}$ such that the triples $(K_h,R_h,S_h)$, for $J_1+1\le h\le J_2$, are mutually independent, independent from $(K_0,R_0,S_0),\ldots,(K_{J_1},R_{J_1},S_{J_1})$, and identically distributed with $\mathbb{P}(K_h=k,R_h=r,S_h=s)=q_{k,r,s}$ for $k\ge0$, $0\le r\le k$, and $s=0,1$. We then keep on repeating the same procedure over and over, thus generating, in a breadth-first manner, a possibly infinite random tree network $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$ with node set $\mathcal V=\{v_0,v_1,\ldots\}$, thresholds $\rho_{v_0},\rho_{v_1},\ldots$, and initial states $\sigma_{v_0},\sigma_{v_1},\ldots$. For $t\ge0$, we let $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}$ be the finite random tree network obtained by truncating $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$ at the $t$-th generation. Observe that the specific realization of the two-stage branching process is uniquely determined by the sequence of mutually independent triples $(K_0,R_0,S_0),(K_1,R_1,S_1),(K_2,R_2,S_2)\ldots\,,$ which are distributed according to $\mathbb{P}(K_0=k,R_0=r,S_0=s)=p_{k,r,s}$ and $\mathbb{P}(K_h=k,R_h=r,S_h=s)=q_{k,r,s}$ for $h\ge1$.
The following result shows that the state $x(t)$ and output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} coincide with the exact expected states of the LTM dynamics on $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$. Observe that the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} is a deterministic process, hence the only randomness concernes the generation of $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$.
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition recursive}
Let $\boldsymbol p$ be the network statistics and $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ be the associated two-stage branching process with node set $\mathcal V=\{v_0,v_1,\ldots\}$, where $v_0$ is the root node. Let $Z(t)$, for $t\ge0$, be the state vector of the LTM dynamics on $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$, and let $x(t)$ and $y(t)$ be respectively the state and output of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}. Then, for every fixed time $t\geq 0$, the following holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] For every $i\in\mathcal V$, the states $\{Z_{j}(t)\}_{j:\,(i,j)\in\mathcal E}$ of the offsprings $v_j$ of $v_i$ in $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$ are independent and identically distributed Bernoulli random variables with expected value $x(t)$;
\item[(ii)] The state $Z_{v_0}(t)$ of the root node $v_0$ is a Bernoulli random variable with expected value $y(t)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
(i) First notice that the state $Z_{i}(t)$ of any node $i\in\mathcal V$ is a deterministic function of the threshold and of the initial states of the descendants of node $i$ in $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$ up to generation $t$.
It follows that, given any two non-root nodes $j,l\in\mathcal V\setminus\{v_0\}$, $Z_{j}(t)$ and $Z_{l}(t)$ are Bernoulli random variables with identical distribution, since the two subnetworks of their descendants are branching processes with the same statistics.
Moreover, for every node $i\in\mathcal V$, let $\mathcal N_i$ be the set of its out-neighbors in $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p}$ and observe that the variables $Z_j(t)$, for $j\in\mathcal N_i$, are mutually independent since each pair of the subnetworks of their descendants have empty intersection.
Let $\zeta(t)=\mathbb{E}[Z_{j}(t)]$, $j\in\mathcal V\setminus\{v_0\}$, be the expected value of all these r.v.'s.
Fix now any $i\in\mathcal V$ and $j\in\mathcal N_{i}$. From (\ref{LTM-def}), we obtain
$$\zeta(t+1)=\mathbb{P}\left(\sum\nolimits_{h\in\mathcal V}A_{jh}Z_h(t)\ge\rho_j\!\right)=
\sum\limits_{k\ge0}\sum_{0\le r\le k}\!\mathbb{P}\left(\sum\nolimits_{h\in\mathcal N_j}Z_h(t)\ge r\,\Big|\, k_j=k,\, \rho_j=r\right)q_{k,r}\,.$$
Now, observe that the conditional probability in the rightmost summation above is simply the probability that a sum of $k$ independent and identically distributed Bernoulli random variables having mean $\zeta(t)$ is not below the threshold $r$. Therefore, such conditional probability is equal to $\varphi_{k,r}(\zeta(t))$. Substituting we get
$$\zeta(t+1)=\sum\limits_{k\ge0}\sum_{0\le r\le k}\varphi_{k,r}(\zeta(t))q_{k,r}=\phi(\zeta(t))\,.$$
Since $\zeta(0)=\mathbb{P}(Z_j(0)=1)=\mathbb{P}(\sigma_j=1)=x(0)$, it follows that $\zeta(t)=x(t)$ for every $t\ge0$.
(ii) Put $\nu(t)=\mathbb{E}[Z_{v_0}(t)]$. From (\ref{LTM-def}) and point (i), it follows that
\begin{align*}
\nu(t+1)&=\displaystyle\mathbb{P}\left(\sum\nolimits_{h\in\mathcal V}A_{v_0h}Z_h(t)\ge\rho_{v_0}\right)\\
&=\displaystyle\sum\limits_{k\ge0}\sum_{0\le r\le k}\mathbb{P}\left(\sum\nolimits_{h\in\mathcal N_{v_0}}Z_h(t)\ge\rho_{v_0}\,\Big|\, k_{v_0}=k,\, \rho_{v_0}=r\right)p_{k,r} \\
&=\displaystyle\sum\limits_{k\ge0}\sum_{0\le r\le k}\varphi_{k,r}(\zeta(t))p_{k,r}=\psi(\zeta(t))\,,
\end{align*}
thus completing the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The LTM on the configuration model ensemble}\label{subsect:conc}
We introduce now the configuration model ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ of all networks with given size $n$ and statistics $\boldsymbol p$. We refer to $\boldsymbol p$ and $n$ as compatible if $np_{d,k,r,s}$ is an integer for all non-negative values of $d$, $k$, $0\le r\le k$, and $s\in\{0,1\}$, and $\overline d=\sum_{d,k,r,s}dp_{d,k,r,s}=\sum_{d,k,r,s}kp_{d,k,r,s}$ and
construct a random network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ of compatible size $n$ and statistics $\boldsymbol p$ as follows.
Let $\mathcal V=\{1,\ldots,n\}$ be a node set and let $\delta$, $\kappa$, $\rho$, and $\sigma$ be a designed vectors of in-degrees, out-degrees, thresholds, and initial states, such that \eqref{def:joint-distribution} holds true, i.e., there is exactly a fraction $p_{d,k,r,s}$ of agents $i\in\mathcal V$ with $(\delta_i,\kappa_i,\rho_i,\sigma_i)=(d,k,r,s)$. Let $l=\overline d n$ be the number of directed links, put $\mathcal L=\{1,2,\ldots,l\}$, and let $\nu,\lambda:\mathcal L\to\mathcal V$ be two maps such that $|\nu^{-1}(i)|=\delta_i$ and $|\lambda^{-1}(i)=\kappa_i|$. Then, let $\pi$ be a uniform random permutation of $\mathcal L$ and let the network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ have node set $\mathcal V$, link multiset $\mathcal E=\{(\lambda(h),\nu(\pi(h))):\,1\le h\le l\}$, threshold vector $\rho$, and initial state vector $\sigma$. Figure~\ref{fig:CM} illustrates the above construction. We refer to such network $\mathcal N$ as being sampled from the configuration model ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{main node} = [shape = circle, draw, thick, inner sep = 0cm, minimum size = 0.6cm]
\def\Dy{1cm};
\def\DyE{0.3cm};
\def1.5cm{1.5cm}
\def4mm{4mm}
\def2mm{2mm}
\def\Dx{6cm} ;
\def\arcR{1cm};
\def\arcA{25};
\node[main node ] (L1) at (0,0) {};
\node[main node ] (R1) at (\Dx,0) {};
\draw[->, thick ] (L1) -- ++ (1.5cm,4mm) node [right] {$1$};
\draw[->, thick ] (L1) -- ++ (1.5cm,0) node [right] {};
\draw[->, thick ] (L1) -- ++ (1.5cm,-4mm) node [right] {};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R1) -- ++ (-1.5cm,2mm) node [left] {$1$};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R1) -- ++ (-1.5cm,-2mm) node [ inner sep = 0] (ee3) [left] {};
\node[main node ] (L2) at (0,-\Dy) {$i$};
\node[main node ] (R2) at (\Dx,-\Dy) {$i$};
\draw[->, thick ] (L2) -- ++ (1.5cm,2mm) node [ inner sep = 0] (e3) [right] {};
\draw[->, thick ] (L2) -- ++ (1.5cm,-2mm) node [ inner sep = 0] (e2) [right] {};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R2) -- ++ (-1.5cm,0) node [left] {};
\draw [color = red] (L2) ++ (+\arcA:\arcR) arc (+\arcA:-\arcA:\arcR) node [left ] {$\kappa_i$};
\draw [color = red] (R2) ++ (180-\arcA:\arcR) arc (180-\arcA:180+\arcA:\arcR) node [right] {$\delta_i$};
\node[main node ] (L3) at (0,-2*\Dy) {$\lambda(h)$};
\node[main node ] (R3) at (\Dx,-2*\Dy) {};
\draw[->,thick ] (L3) -- ++ (1.5cm,2mm) node (h) [right] {$h$};
\draw[->, thick ] (L3) -- ++ (1.5cm,-2mm) node [right] {};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R3) -- ++ (-1.5cm,4mm) node [ inner sep = 0] (ee2) [left] {};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R3) -- ++ (-1.5cm,0) node [left] {};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R3) -- ++ (-1.5cm,-4mm) node [ inner sep = 0] (ee1) [left] {};
\node[main node ] (L4) at (0,-3*\Dy) {};
\node[main node ] (R4) at (\Dx,-3*\Dy) {$\nu(j)$};
\draw[->,thick ] (L4) -- ++ (1.5cm,2mm) node [right] {};
\draw[->, thick ] (L4) -- ++ (1.5cm,-2mm) node [ inner sep = 0] (e1) [right] {};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R4) -- ++ (-1.5cm,2mm) node [left] {};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R4) -- ++ (-1.5cm,-2mm) node (j) [left] {$j$};
\node (dot) at (\Dx/2, -3.8*\Dy - .0*\DyE) {\Large $\ldots$};
\node[main node ] (L5) at (0,-4*\Dy - \DyE) {};
\node[main node ] (R5) at (\Dx,-4*\Dy - \DyE) {};
\draw[->, thick ] (L5) -- ++ (1.5cm,0) node [right] {$l$};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R5) -- ++ (-1.5cm,2mm) node [left] {};
\draw[<-, thick ] (R5) -- ++ (-1.5cm,-2mm) node [left] {$l$};
\draw[->, thick, color = red] (h) edge [out=5, in = 195] node [red, pos=0.4, sloped, above] {$\pi(h) = j$} (j);
\draw[dashed, ->, color = red] (e1) to [out=0, in = 200] (ee1) ;
\draw[dashed, ->, color = red] (e2) to [out=-10, in = 160] (ee2) ;
\draw[dashed, ->, color = red] (e3) to [out=10, in = 190] (ee3) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{\label{fig:CM} The Configuration Model, with each node represented twice, on the left and on the right side of the picture. The picture contains the edge $(\lambda(h), \nu(\pi(h)) )$ and a few other dashed edges. }
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:TV}
Let $\mathcal N$ be a network sampled from the configuration model ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ of compatible size $n$ and statistics $\boldsymbol p$.
For $t\ge0$, let $\mathcal N_t$ be the depth-$t$ neighborhood of a node in $\mathcal N$ chosen uniformly at random from the node set $\mathcal V$, and let $\mu_{\mathcal N_t}$ its probability distribution. Let $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}$ be a two-stage branching process truncated at depth $t$, and let $\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}$ be its distribution. Then, the total variation distance $||\mu_{\mathcal N_t}-\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}||_{TV}$ between $\mu_{\mathcal N_t}$ and $\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}$ satisfies
$$||\mu_{\mathcal N_t}-\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}||_{TV}\le\frac{\gamma_t}{2n}\,,\qquad \gamma_t=\frac{d_{\max}k_{\max}^{2t+3}}{\overline d}\,,$$
where $d_{\max}=\max\{d\ge0:\,\sum_{k,r,s}p_{d,k,r,s}>0\}$ is the maximum in-degree and $k_{\max}=\max\{k\ge0:\,\sum_{d,r,s}p_{d,k,r,s}>0\}$ is the maximum out-degree
\end{lemma}
\proof
We will construct a coupling of the configuration model $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ and the two-stage branching process $\mathcal T$ such that the depth-$t$ neighborhood $\mathcal N_t$ of a uniform random node in $\mathcal N$ and the depth-$t$ truncated branching process $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}$ satisfy $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal N_t\ne\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t})\le\gamma_t/n$. The claim will then follow from the well-known bound $||\mu_{\mathcal N_t}-\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}||_{TV}\le\mathbb{P}(\mathcal N_t\ne\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t})$ valid for every coupling of $\mathcal N_t$ and $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}$ (cf., e.g., \cite[Proposition 4.7]{LPW:2009}).
In order to sample a network $\mathcal N$ from $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ and define the coupling altogether, let us assign in-degree $\delta_i$, out-degree $\kappa_i$, threshold $\rho_i$, and initial state $\sigma_i$ to each of the $n$ nodes $i\in\mathcal V$ in such a way that there are exactly $np_{d,k,r,s}$ nodes of in-degree $d$, out-degree $k$, threshold $r$, and initial state $s$. Let $l=n\overline d=\mathbf{1}'\delta$, $\mathcal L=\{1,2,\ldots,l\}$, and let $\nu:\mathcal L\to\mathcal V$ be a map such that $|\nu^{-1}(i)|=\delta_i$.
Let $w_0$ be a random node chosen uniformly from $\mathcal V$, and let $K_0=\kappa_{w_0}$, $R_0=\rho_{w_0}$, and $S_0=\sigma_{w_0}$ be its out-degree, threshold, and initial state, respectively.
Let $(L_h)_{h=1,2,\ldots}$ be a sequence of mutually independent random variables with identical uniform distribution on the set $\mathcal L$ and independent from $w_0$. Let $(M_h)_{h=1,2,\ldots,l}$ be a finite sequence of $\mathcal L$-valued random variables such that, conditioned on $w_0$, $L_1,\ldots,L_h$ and $M_1,\ldots,M_{h-1}$, one has $M_h=L_h$ if $L_h\notin\{M_1,\ldots,M_{h-1}\}$, while, if $L_h\in\{M_1,\ldots,M_{h-1}\}$, $M_h$ is conditionally uniformly distributed on the set $\mathcal L\setminus\{M_1,\ldots,M_{h-1}\}$.
Notice that the marginal probability distributions of the two sequences $(L_h)_{h=1,2,\ldots}$ and $(M_h)_{h=1,2,\ldots,l}$ correspond to sampling with replacement and, respectively, sampling without replacement, from the same set $\mathcal L$ (note that $(M_h)_{h=1,2,\ldots,l}$ represents a permutation on $\mathcal L$).
Moreover, observe that
\begin{equation}\label{P0}\mathbb{P}\left(L_{h+1}\ne M_{h+1} |(L_1,\ldots,L_{h})=(M_1,\ldots,M_{h})\right)\le\frac hl\,,\qquad 1\le h< l\,.\end{equation}
Let $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}$ be the random directed tree whose root $v_0$ has out-degree $K_0$, threshold $R_0$ and initial state $S_0$, and that is then generated starting from $v_0$ in a breadth-first fashion, by assigning to each node $v_h$, $h\ge1$ at generation $1\le u\le t$ out-degree $K_h=\kappa_{\nu(L_h)}$, threshold $R_h=\rho_{\nu(L_h)}$ and initial state $S_h=\sigma_{\nu(L_h)}$. Observe that the triples $(K_h,R_h,S_h)$ for $h\ge0$ are mutually independent and have distribution
$\mathbb{P}(K_0=k,R_0=r,S_0=s)=p_{k,r,s}$ and
$\mathbb{P}(K_h=k,R_h=r,S_h=s)=\frac1{\overline d}\sum_ddp_{d,k,r,s}=q_{k,r,s}$ for $h\ge1$. Hence, $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}$ generated in this way has indeed the desired distribution $\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}$.
On the other hand, let the network $\mathcal N$, and hence $\mathcal N_t$, be generated starting from $w_0$ and exploring its neighborhood in a breadth-first fashion. First let the $J_0=K_0$ outgoing links of $v_0$ point to the nodes $v_1=\nu(M_1),\ldots,v_{J_0}=\nu(M_{J_0})$; then let the $J_1$ links outgoing from the set $\{v_1,\ldots,v_{J_0}\}\setminus\{v_0\}$ of new out-neighbors of $v_0$ point to the nodes $\nu(M_{J_0+1}),\ldots,\nu(M_{J_0+J_1})$; then let the $J_2$ links outgoing from the set $\{v_{{J_0+1}},\ldots,v_{J_0+J_1}\}\setminus\{v_0,v_1,\ldots v_{J_0}\}$ point to the nodes $\nu(M_{J_0+J_1+1}),\ldots,\nu(M_{J_0+J_1+J_2})$, and so on, possibly restarting from one of the unreached nodes in $\mathcal V$ if the process has arrived to a point where $J_u=0$ and $\sum_{h\le u}J_h<l$ (so that not all nodes have been reached from $v_0$).
Now, let $H_t=\sum_{0\le u\le t-1}J_u$ and $N_t=|\{v_0,v_1,\ldots,v_{H_t}\}|$ be the total number of links and, respectively, nodes in $\mathcal N_t$. Observe that $\mathcal N_t$ is a directed tree if and only if $N_t=H_t+1$, which is in turn equivalent to $ \nu(M_h)\ne\nu(M_{h'})\ne w_0$ for all $1\le h < h' \le N_t$.
Notice that
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}\left(\nu(M_{h+1})\in\{w_0,\nu(M_1),\ldots,\nu(M_h)\}\big|(L_1,\ldots,L_{h+1})=(M_1,\ldots,M_{h+1})\right)\le \frac{(h\!+\!1)(d_{\max}\!-\!1)+1}l\,,
\end{align*}
for $0\le h< l $, which, together with \eqref{P0} gives
\begin{align*}
\varsigma_h &:= \mathbb{P}\left(L_{h+1}\ne M_{h+1} \text{ or } \nu(M_{h+1})\in\{w_0,\nu(M_1),\ldots,\nu(M_h)\}\big|(L_1,\ldots,L_{h})=(M_1,\ldots,M_{h})\right)\\
&\phantom{:} = \mathbb{P}\left(L_{h+1}\ne M_{h+1}\big|(L_1,\ldots,L_{h})=(M_1,\ldots,M_{h})\right)\\
&\phantom{:} + \mathbb{P}\left(L_{h+1}= M_{h+1} \text{ and } \nu(M_{h+1})\in\{w_0,\nu(M_1),\ldots,\nu(M_h)\}\big|(L_1,\ldots,L_{h})=(M_1,\ldots,M_{h})\right) \\
&\phantom{:}\le \mathbb{P}\left(L_{h+1}\ne M_{h+1}\big|(L_1,\ldots,L_{h})=(M_1,\ldots,M_{h})\right)\\
&\phantom{:} + \mathbb{P}\left(\nu(M_{h+1})\in\{w_0,\nu(M_1),\ldots,\nu(M_h)\}\big|(L_1,\ldots,L_{h+1})=(M_1,\ldots,M_{h+1})\right)\\
&\phantom{:}\le \displaystyle\frac{h}l+\frac{(h+1)(d_{\max}-1)+1}l
\le \displaystyle\frac{(h+1)d_{\max}}l \,.
\end{align*}
The key observation is that, upon identifying node $v_h\in\mathcal N$ with node $w_h\in\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}$ for all $0\le h< N_t$, in order for $\mathcal N_t\ne\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}$ it is necessary that either $N_t\ne H_t+1$ (in which case $\mathcal N_t$ is not a tree) or $(L_1,\ldots,L_{H_{t}})\ne(M_1,\ldots,M_{H_{t}})$ (in which case the nodes $v_h$ and $w_h$ might have different outdegree, threshold, or initial state). In order to estimate the probability that any of this occurs, first observe that a standard induction argument shows that $J_u\le k_{\max}^{u+1}$ for all $u\ge0$, so that $H_t\le\sum_{1\le u\le t}k_{\max}^u\le k_{\max}^{t+1}$.
Then,
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\mathbb{P}(\mathcal N_t\ne\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t})&\le&
\mathbb{P}\l((L_1,\ldots,L_{H_{t}})\ne(M_1,\ldots,M_{H_{t}})\text{ or }\bigcup_{1\le h< h'\le H_t}\{\nu(h)=\nu(h')\} \r. \\[10pt]
& & \hspace{7cm} \l. \text{ or }\bigcup_{1\le h\le H_t}\{\nu(h)= w_0\}\r)\\[10pt]
&\le&
\displaystyle\sum_{0\le h\le H_t-1}\varsigma_h\le
\displaystyle\sum_{0\le h\le k_{\max}^{t+1}-1}\frac{d_{\max}(h+1)}{l}=
\frac{d_{\max}k_{\max}^{t+1}(k_{\max}^{t+1}+1)}{2 n\overline d}\\[10pt]
&\le&\displaystyle\frac{d_{\max}}{2 n\overline d}k_{\max}^{2t+3}\,.
\end{array}$$
Hence, the claim follows from the above and the aforementioned bound on the total variation distance between $\mu_{\mathcal N_t}$ and $\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}$.
\qed\medskip
As a consequence of Lemma \ref{lemma:TV}, we get the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:mean}
Let $\mathcal N$ be a network sampled from the configuration model ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ of compatible size $n$ and statistics $\boldsymbol p$. Let $Z(t)$, for $t\ge0$, be the state vector of the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} on $\mathcal N$, $z(t)=\frac1n\sum_{i}Z_i(t)$ be the fraction of state-$1$ adopters at time $t$, and $\overline z(t)=\mathbb{E}[z(t)]$ be its expectation.
Then,
$$|\overline z(t)-y(t)|\le \frac{\gamma_t}{2n}\,,$$
where $y(t)$ is the output of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} and $\gamma_t={d_{\max}k_{\max}^{2t+3}}/{\overline d}$ as in Lemma \ref{lemma:TV}.
\end{proposition}
\proof
Observe that, in the LTM dynamics, the state $Z_i(t)$ of an agent $i$ in a network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ is a deterministic function of the initial states $Z_j(0)=\sigma_j$ of the agents $j$ reachable from $i$ with $t$ hops in $\mathcal N$
and of the thresholds $\rho_k$ of the agents $k$ reachable from $i$ with less than $t$ hops
in $\mathcal N$. In particular, if $\mathcal N_t^i$ is the depth-$t$ neighborhood of node $i$ in $\mathcal N$, then $Z_i(t)=\chi(\mathcal N_t^i)$, where $\chi$ is a certain deterministic $\{0,1\}$-valued function. It follows that, if $\mathcal N$ is a network sampled from the configuration model ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$, $\mathcal N_t$ is the depth-$t$ neighborhood of uniform random node in $\mathcal N$, and $\mu_{\mathcal N_t}$ is its distribution, then
$$\overline z(t)=\mathbb{E}\left[\frac1n\sum_{i\in\mathcal V}Z_i(t)\right]=\int\chi(\omega)\mathrm{d} \mu_{\mathcal N_t}(\omega)\,.$$
On the other hand, it follows from Proposition \ref{proposition recursive} that, if $\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}$ is a two-stage directed branching process with offspring distribution $p_{k,r,s}=\sum_dp_{d,k,r,s}$ for the first generation and $q_{k,r,s}=\frac1{\overline d}\sum_{d\ge0}dp_{d,k,r,s}$ for the following generations, truncated at depth $t$, and $\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}$ is its distribution, then the output $y(t)$ of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} satisfies
$$y(t)=\int\chi(\omega)\mathrm{d} \mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}(\omega)\,.$$
It then follows from the fact that $\chi$ is a $\{0,1\}$-valued random variable and Lemma \ref{lemma:TV} that
$$|\overline z(t)-y(t)| = \left|\int \l(\chi(\omega)-\frac12 \r)\mathrm{d} \mu_{\mathcal N_t}(\omega)-\int \l(\chi(\omega)-\frac12\r)\mathrm{d}\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}(\omega)\right|
\le ||\mu_{\mathcal N_t}-\mu_{\mathcal T_{\boldsymbol p,t}}||_{TV}\le \frac{\gamma_t}{2 n}\,,$$
thus completing the proof.
\qed\medskip
The following result establishes concentration of the fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM dynamics on a random network drawn from the configuration model ensemble and its expectation.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:concentration}
Let $n$ and $\boldsymbol p$ be compatible network size and statistics. Then, for all $\varepsilon>0$, for at least a fraction
$$1-2e^{-\varepsilon^2\beta n}\qquad \text{with} \qquad \beta=(32 \overline dd_{\max}^{2t})^{-1}$$
of networks $\mathcal N$ from the configuration model ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$, the fraction of $z(t)=\frac1n\sum_{i\in\mathcal V}Z_i(t)$ of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} on $\mathcal N$ satisfies
$$|z(t)-\overline z(t)|\le\varepsilon /2\,, $$
where $\overline z(t)$ is the average of $z(t)$ over the choice of $\mathcal N$ from $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$.
\end{proposition}
\proof
Let $a(t)=nz(t)=\sum_{i\in\mathcal V}Z_i(t)$ be the total number of agents in state $1$ at time $t$ in the network $\mathcal N$ drawn uniformly from the configuration model ensemble, and let $\overline a(t)=n\overline z(t)$ be its average over the ensemble. In order to prove the result we will construct a martingale $A_0,A_1,\ldots,A_l$, where $l=n\overline d$ is the total number of links, such that
$A_0=\overline a(t)$, $A_l=a(t)$, and
\begin{equation}\label{|A-A|} |A_h-A_{h-1}|\le\alpha\,,\qquad \alpha:=\frac{2d_{\max}^t}{d_{\max}-1}\,,\qquad h=1,2,\ldots,l\,.
\end{equation}
The result will then follow from the Hoeffding-Azuma inequality \cite[Theorem 7.2.1]{AS:2008} which implies that the fraction of networks from the configuration model ensemble for which $|A_0-A_l|\ge \eta= n \varepsilon /2$ is upper bounded by
$$ 2\exp \l(-\frac{\eta^2}{2l\alpha^2} \r)= 2\exp \l(-\frac{n \varepsilon^2}{8 \overline d \alpha^2} \r)
= 2\exp \l(-\frac{n \varepsilon^2 (d_{\max}-1)^2 }{32 \overline d d_{\max}^2} \r)\leq 2\exp(-\varepsilon^2\beta n)\,,
$$
where $\beta=(32\overline d d_{\max}^{2t})^{-1}$.
In order to define the aforementioned martingale, let $\mathcal L=\{1,2,\ldots,l\}$ and recall that the configuration model ensemble is defined starting from in-degree, out-degree, threshold, and initial state vectors $\delta,\kappa,\rho,\sigma\in\mathbb{R}^n$ with empirical frequency coinciding with the prescribed distribution $\{ p_{d,k,r,s} \} $ and two maps $\nu,\lambda:\mathcal L\to\mathcal V$ such that $|\nu^{-1}(i)|=\delta_i$ and $|\lambda^{-1}(i)|=\kappa_i$ for all $i\in\mathcal V$. The ensemble is then defined by taking a uniform permutation $\pi$ of the set $\mathcal L$ and wiring the $h$-th link
from node $\lambda(h)$ to node $\nu(\pi(h))$ for $h=1,\ldots,l$.
Let $\pi_{[h]}=(\pi(1),\pi(2),\ldots,\pi(h))$ be the vector obtained by unveiling the first $h$ values of $\pi$.
Then, define $A_h=\mathbb{E}[a(t)|\pi_{[h]}]$, for $h=0,1,\ldots,l$ and observe that $A_0,A_1,\ldots,A_l$ is indeed a (Doob) martingale, generally referred to as the link-exposure martingale. It is easily verified that $A_0=\mathbb{E}[a(t)]=\overline a(t)$ and $A_l=\mathbb{E}[a(t)|\pi]=a(t)$.
What remains to be proven is the bound \eqref{|A-A|}. For a given $h=1,\ldots,l$, let $\tilde\pi$ be a random permutation of $\mathcal L$ which is obtained from $\pi$ by choosing some $j$ uniformly at random from the set $\mathcal L\setminus\{\pi(1),\ldots,\pi(h-1)\}$ and putting $\tilde\pi(h)=j$ and $\tilde\pi(\pi^{-1}(j))=\pi(h)$, and $\tilde\pi(k)=\pi(k)$ for all $k\in\mathcal L\setminus\{h,\pi^{-1}(j)\}$. Notice that $\tilde\pi$ and $\pi$ differ in at most two positions, $h$ and $\pi^{-1}(j)\ge h$, the latter inequality following from the fact that $j\in\mathcal L\setminus\{\pi(1),\ldots,\pi(h-1)\}$. Hence, in particular, $\tilde\pi_{[h-1]}=\pi_{[h-1]}$. Moreover, $\tilde\pi$ and $\pi$ have the same conditional distribution given $\pi_{[h-1]}$ (since they both correspond to choosing a bijection of $\{h,h+1,\ldots,l\}$ to $\mathcal L\setminus\{\pi(1),\ldots,\pi(h-1)\}$ uniformly) and $\tilde\pi$ is conditionally independent from $\pi_{[h]}$ given $\pi_{[h-1]}$. Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{AhAh-1}A_h-A_{h-1}=\mathbb{E}[A(t)|\pi_{[h]}]-\mathbb{E}\left[A(t)|\pi_{[h-1]}\right]=\mathbb{E}[A(t)|\pi_{[h]}]-\mathbb{E}[\tilde A(t)|\pi_{[h-1]}]=\mathbb{E}[A(t)-\tilde A(t)|\pi_{[h]}]\,,\end{equation}
for all $h=1,\ldots,l$.
Now, observe that the value of $\pi(h)$ affects the depth-$t$ neighborhoods of the node $\lambda(h)$,
of its in-neighbors, the in-neighbors of its in-neighbors and so on, until those nodes from which $\lambda(h)$ can be reached in less than $t$ hops, for a total of at most
$$\sum_{s=0}^{t-1}d_{\max}^s=\frac{d_{\max}^t-1}{d_{\max}-1}<\frac{d_{\max}^t}{d_{\max}-1}= c$$
nodes in $\mathcal N$.
Analogously, the value of $j$ affects the depth-$t$ neighborhoods of the node $\lambda(\pi^{-1}(j))$
as well as its in-neighbors, the in-neighbors of its in-neighbors and so on, for a total of less than $c$
nodes in $\mathcal N$. It follows that, if $\tilde A(t)=\sum_i\tilde Z_i(t)$ where $\tilde Z(t)$ is the state vector of the LTM dynamics on the network $\tilde N$ associated to the permutation $\tilde\pi$ in the configuration model, then
$$|A(t)-\tilde A(t)|\le 2c \,. $$
It then follows from \eqref{AhAh-1} and the above that
$$|A_h-A_{h-1}| \le\l|\mathbb{E}\left[A(t)-\tilde A(t)|\pi_{[h]}\r]\r|
\le\mathbb{E}\l[|A(t)-\tilde A(t)||\pi_{[h]}\r]\le 2c\,.$$
which proves \eqref{|A-A|}.
The claim then follows from the Hoeffding-Azuma inequality as outlined earlier.
\qed\medskip
By combining Propositions \ref{prop:mean} and \ref{prop:concentration} we get the following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{theo:concentration}
Let $\mathcal N$ be a network sampled from configuration model ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$ of size $n$ and statistics $\boldsymbol p$. Let $Z(t)$, for $t\ge0$ be the state vector of the LTM dynamics \eqref{LTM-def} on $\mathcal N$, let $z(t)=\frac1n\sum_{i}Z_i(t)$, and let $y(t)$ be the output of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}.
Then, for $\varepsilon >0$ and $n \ge \gamma_t /\varepsilon$ where $\gamma_t={d_{\max}k_{\max}^{2t+3}}/{\overline d}$, it holds true
$$|z(t)-y(t)|\le\varepsilon $$
for all but at most a fraction $2e^{-\varepsilon^2\beta n}$ of networks $\mathcal N$ from $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$, where $\beta=(32\overline dk_{\max}^{2t})^{-1}$.
\end{theorem}
\proof
Proposition \ref{prop:concentration} implies that $|z(t)-\overline z(t)|\le\varepsilon/2$ for all but at most a fraction $2e^{-\varepsilon^2\beta n}$ of networks from $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$. On the other hand, Proposition \ref{prop:mean} implies that $|\overline z(t)-y(t)|\le\varepsilon/2$ for $\gamma_t/n \le \varepsilon$.
\qed\medskip
\subsection{Extentions}
We conclude this section by discussing how Theorem \ref{theo:concentration} can be extended to including two variants of the model: undirected configuration model and time-varying thresholds.
\subsubsection{PLTM on the undirected configuration model ensemble} \label{sect:undirectedCM}
While Theorem \ref{theo:concentration} concerns the approximation of the average fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM dynamics for most networks in the directed configuration model ensemble $\mathcal C_{n,\boldsymbol p}$, for the PLTM only the result can be extended to the undirected configuration model ensemble as defined below.
Let $u_{k,r,s}=p_{k,k,r,s}$ for $k\ge0$, $0\le r\le k$, and $s\in\{0,1\}$, denote the fraction of agents of degree $k$, threshold $r$ and initial state $s$ in an undirected network. We shall refer to $\boldsymbol u=\{u_{k,r,s}\}$ as undirected network statistics.
A network size $n$ and undirected network statistics $\boldsymbol u$ are said to be compatible if $nu_{k,r,s}$ is an integer for all $0\le r\le k$ and $s=0,1$, and $l=\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{0\le r\le k}\sum_{s=0,1}nku_{k,r,s}$ is even.
For compatible undirected network statistics $\boldsymbol u$ and size $n$, let $\mathcal V=\{1,\ldots,n\}$ be a node set and let $\kappa$, $\rho$, and $\sigma$ be designed vectors of degrees, thresholds, and initial states, such that there is exactly a fraction $u_{k,r,s}$ of agents $i\in\mathcal V$ with $(\kappa_i,\rho_i,\sigma_i)=(k,r,s)$. Put $\mathcal L=\{1,2,\ldots,l\}$, and let $\lambda:\mathcal L\to\mathcal V$ be a map such that $|\lambda^{-1}(i)|=\kappa_i$ for all agents $i\in\mathcal V$. Let $\pi$ be a uniform random permutation of $\mathcal L$ and let the network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ have node set $\mathcal V$, link multiset $\mathcal E=\{(\lambda(\pi(2h-1)),\lambda(\pi(2h))),(\lambda(\pi(2h)),\lambda(\pi(2h-1)))\,:\,1\le h\le l/2\}$, threshold vector $\rho$, and initial state vector $\sigma$. Observe that, for every realization of the permutation $\pi$, the resulting network $\mathcal N$ is undirected, has size $n$ and statistics $\boldsymbol u$. We refer to such network $\mathcal N$ as being sampled from the undirected configuration model ensemble $\mathcal M_{n,\boldsymbol u}$.
The key step for extending Theorem \ref{theo:concentration} to the PLTM dynamics on undirected configuration model ensemble $\mathcal M_{n,\boldsymbol u}$ is the following result showing that the PLTM dynamics on a rooted undirected tree coincides with PLTM dynamics on the directed version of the tree.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:undirected-tree}
For every network $\mathcal T=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ with undirected tree topology and
every node $i\in\mathcal V$, the state vector $Z(t)$ of the PLTM dynamics \eqref{PLTM-def} on $\mathcal T$ satisfies
$$\label{Tt} Z_i(t)= Z^{(i)}_i(t)\,,\qquad t\ge0\,,$$
where
$Z^{(i)}(t)$ is the state vector of the PLTM dynamics on the network
$\overrightarrow}\newcommand{\ola}{\overleftarrow{\mathcal T_{(i)}}=(\mathcal V,\overrightarrow}\newcommand{\ola}{\overleftarrow{\mathcal E_{(i)}},\rho,\sigma)$ with directed tree topology rooted in $i$, obtained from $\mathcal T$ by making all its links directed from nodes at lower distance from $i$ to nodes at higher distance from it.
\end{lemma}
\proof
We proceed by induction on $t$. The case $t=0$ is trivial as the initial condition is the same $Z_i(0)=\sigma_i=Z_i^{(i)}(0)$ for all $i\in\mathcal V$.
Now, assuming that, for some given $t\ge0$, the PLTM dynamics on every network with undirected tree topology satisfies
$$Z_i(t)=Z^{(i)}_i(t)\,,\qquad \forall i\in\mathcal V$$
we will prove that
$$Z_i(t+1)=Z^{(i)}_i(t+1)\,,\qquad \forall i\in\mathcal V$$
for all networks with undirected tree topology $\mathcal T=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$.
We separately deal with the two cases: (a) $Z_i(t)=Z^{(i)}_i(t)=1$; and (b) $Z_i(t)=Z^{(i)}_i(t)=0$.
Since we are considering the PLTM dynamics, case (a) is easily dealt with, as $Z_i(t)=1=Z^{(i)}_i(t)$ implies
$Z_i(t+1)=1=Z^{(i)}_i(t+1)$. On the other hand, in order to address case (b), let $\mathcal J$ be the set of
neighbors of $i$ in $\mathcal T$, which coincides with the set of offsprings of node $i$ in $\overrightarrow}\newcommand{\ola}{\overleftarrow{\mathcal T_{(i)}}$.
For every $j\in\mathcal J$, let $\overrightarrow}\newcommand{\ola}{\overleftarrow{\mathcal T_{(i,j)}}=(\mathcal V_{(i,j)},\overrightarrow}\newcommand{\ola}{\overleftarrow{\mathcal E_{(i,j)}},\sigma,\rho)$ be the network obtained by restricting $\overrightarrow}\newcommand{\ola}{\overleftarrow{\mathcal T_{(i)}}$ to node $j$ and all its offsprings, let ${\mathcal T}_{(i,j)}=(\mathcal V_{(i,j)},\mathcal E_{(i,j)},\sigma,\rho)$ be the undirected version of $\overrightarrow}\newcommand{\ola}{\overleftarrow{\mathcal T_{(i,j)}}$, and let $W(t)$ and $W^{(j)}(t)$ be the vector states of the PLTM dynamics on ${\mathcal T}_{(i,j)}$ and $\overrightarrow}\newcommand{\ola}{\overleftarrow{\mathcal T_{(i,j)}}$, respectively. Now, note that $Z^{(i)}_j(t)=W^{(j)}_j(t)$, since $j$ has the same $t$-depth neighborhood in the two networks.
On the other hand, note that, if the state of the PLTM dynamics on $\mathcal T$ is such that $Z_i(t)=0$, then $Z_i(s)=0$ for all $0\le s\le t$, so that the state of node $j$ in the PLTM dynamics on $\mathcal T$ depends only on the thresholds $\rho_h$ and the initial states $\sigma_h$ of agents $h\in\mathcal V_{(i,j)}$, and is the same as the state of node $j$ in PLTM dynamics on the original network $\mathcal T_{(i,j)}$, i.e., $Z_j(t)=W_j(t)$. Finally, observe that the inductive assumption applied to the restricted network $\mathcal T_{(i,j)}$ implies that $W_j(t)=W^{(j)}_j(t)$.
It then follows that, if $Z_i(t)=Z^{(i)}_i(t)=0$, then
$$Z_j(t)=W_j(t)=W^{(j)}_j(t)=Z^{(i)}_j(t)\,,\qquad \forall j\in\mathcal J\,.$$
This implies, by the structure of the recursive equation \eqref{PLTM-def} that $Z_i(t+1)=Z_i^{(i)}(t+1)$. This completes the proof.
\qed
Using Lemma \ref{lemma:undirected-tree} it is straightforward to extend Proposition \ref{proposition recursive} to the undirected two-stage branching process. Then, the results in Section \ref{subsect:conc} carry over to the undirected configuration model ensemble without signficant changes, leading the following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{theo:concentration2}
Let $\mathcal N$ be a network sampled from the undirected configuration model ensemble $\mathcal M_{n,\boldsymbol u}$ of size $n$ and statistics $\boldsymbol u$. Let $Z(t)$, for $t\ge0$ be the state vector of the PLTM dynamics \eqref{PLTM-def} on $\mathcal N$, let $z(t)=\frac1n\sum_{i}Z_i(t)$, and let $y(t)$ be the output of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}.
Then, for $\varepsilon >0$ and $n \ge \gamma_t /\varepsilon$ where $\gamma_t={k_{\max}^{2t+4}}/{\overline k}$, it holds true
$$|z(t)-y(t)|\le\varepsilon $$
for all but at most a fraction $2e^{-\varepsilon^2\beta n}$ of networks $\mathcal N$ from the $\mathcal M_{n,\boldsymbol u}$, where $\beta=(32\overline kk_{\max}^{2t})^{-1}$.
\end{theorem}
We stress the fact that the proposed extension of the approximation results for the undirected configuration model ensemble is strictly limited to the PLTM and does not apply to the general LTM. The key step where the structure of the PLTM model is used is in the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:undirected-tree} which allows one to reduce the study of the PLTM on undirected trees to the one of PLTM on directed trees. An analogous results does not hold true for the LTM without permanent activation and indeed the analysis on undirected trees is known to face relevant additional challenges as illustrated in \cite{KM:2011} for the majority dynamics (that can be considered a special case of the LTM).
\subsubsection{Time-varying thresholds}
We first observe that, while we have not made it explicit yet, all the results discussed in this section carry over, along with their proofs, also for networks with time-varying thresholds $\rho_i(t)$. In this case, the network statistics
$$p_{d,k,r,s}(t)=\frac1n\left|\{i\in\mathcal V:\,\delta_i=d,\,\kappa_i=k,\,\rho_i(t)=r,\,\sigma_i=s\}\right|\,,\qquad d\ge0\,,\ 0\le r\le k\,,\ s=0,1\,,$$
become time-varying, and so do their marginals
\begin{equation}\label{def:degree-distribution-t}p_{k,r}(t):=\sum_{d\ge0}\sum_{s=0,1}p_{d,k,r,s}(t)\,,\qquad q_{k,r}(t):=\frac{1}{\overline d}\sum_{d\ge0}\sum_{s=0,1}dq_{d,k,r,s}(t)\,,\qquad k,r\ge0\,.\end{equation}
In contrast, the marginal $p_{d,k,s}=\sum_{0\le r\le k}p_{d,k,r,s}(t)$ remain constant in time since so do the degrees $\delta_i$ and $\kappa_i$ and the initial states $\sigma_i$ of all agents $i$.
For networks with such time-varying thresholds, Theorem \ref{theo:concentration} continues to hold true provided that $y(t)$ is interpreted as the output of the modified recursion
\begin{equation}\label{TV-recursion}x(t+1)=\phi(x(t),t)\,,\qquad y(t+1)=\psi(x(t),t)\,,\qquad t\ge0\,,\end{equation}
where
$$\phi(x,t):=\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0} q_{k,r}(t)\varphi_{k,r}(x)\,,\qquad \psi(x,t):=\sum_{k\ge0}\sum_{r\ge0} p_{k,r}(t)\varphi_{k,r}(x)\,.$$
A note of caution concerns extensions of Lemma \ref{lemma:LTM=PLTM} to networks with time-varying thresholds. This result, allowing one to identify the LTM dynamics with the \textit{progressive} LTM (PLTM) dynamics whenever the condition $\rho_i\le \delta_i(1-\sigma_i)$ is met for all agents $i$, continues to hold true for time-varying networks only with the additional assumption that the thresholds are monotonically non-increasing in time, i.e., $\rho_i(t+1)\le\rho_i(t)$ for every node $i$ and time instant $t\ge0$. It is also worth stressing that the analysis of Section \ref{sec:LTM-BR} for the asymptotic behavior of the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion} does not carry over as such to the time-varying case \eqref{TV-recursion}.
\section{Numerical simulations on a real large-scale social network}
\label{sec:simulations}
We test the prediction capability of our theoretical results for the Linear Threshold Model (LTM) on a real large-scale online social network. We consider the directed interconnection topology of the online social network \url{Epinions.com}, we endow each node with a threshold and assign an initial states, then run the LTM \eqref{LTM-def} and compare the results with the predictions obtained using the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}.
The online social network \url{Epinions.com} was a general consumer review website with a community of users, operating from 1999 until 2014.
The members of the community were encouraged to submit product reviews for any of over one hundred thousand products, to rate other reviews and to list the reviewers they trusted.
The directed graph of trust relationships between users, called the ``Web of Trust'', was used in combination with the review's ratings to determine which reviews were shown to the user.
Being highly connected and containing cycles, the graph remains an interesting source for experiments on social networks and viral marketing \cite{ RAD:2003:snap-source, RD:2002:miningKS}.
The entire ``Web of Trust'' directed graph $\mathcal G = (\mathcal V,\mathcal E)$ of the \url{Epinions.com} social network was obtained by crawling the website \cite{RD:2002:miningKS} and is available from the online collection \cite{SNAP:2014}.
The dataset\footnote{Retrieved from \url{http://snap.stanford.edu/data/soc-Epinions1.html}. The page contains further informations and statistics about the dataset and mentions \cite{RAD:2003:snap-source} as original source. Further statistics can be retrieved from \url{http://konect.uni-koblenz.de/networks/soc-Epinions1}.} is a list of directed edges expressed as pairs $(i,j)$, representing the \textit{who-trust-whom} relations between users: the list contains \numprint{508 837} directed edges corresponding to $n = \numprint{75 879}$ different users. There are no other information for the LTM (e.g. thresholds or initial states).
From the dataset topology, we computed the empirical joint degree statistic
$$p_{d,k} = n^{-1} \l| \{i : \delta_i = d, \kappa_i = k \} \r| \,,$$
i.e., the fractions of nodes with in-degree $d$ and out-degree $k$.
Figure~\ref{fig:epinions-empirical-stat} represents the in-degree statistics $p_d = \sum_k p_{d,k}$ and the out-degree statistic $p_k =\sum_d p_{d,k}$; both follow an approximate power law distribution with exponent $\approx 1.6$.
A few nodes have no in-neighbors or out-neighbors, while the maximum in-degree is \numprint{3035} and the maximum out-degree is \numprint{1801}. The average in/out-degree is {6.705}.
We also computed the fraction of links pointing to nodes with given in-degree $d$ and out-degree $k$, i.e. in-degree weighted, joint degree statistic $q_{d,k} = d p_{d,k} / \overline d$. The values of the joint degree statistics $p_{d,k}$ and $q_{d,k}$, in the interval $d, k \in \{0,1,\ldots,150\}$, are represented by a logarithmic grayscale in Figure~\ref{fig:epinions-joint-pdk-qdk}, showing a mild correlation between in-degree and out-degree.
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtriml} {60mm} {\figtrimr} {\figtrimt},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_in_deg_dist.pdf}%
\hspace{1cm}%
\includegraphics[trim={\figtriml} {60mm} {\figtrimr} {\figtrimt},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_out_deg_dist.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:epinions-empirical-stat}
The degree statistics of the \url{Epinions.com} social network.
The left plot represents the in-degree statistic $p_d = \sum_k p_{d,k}$ with red circles; the black solid line is proportional to $d^{-1.6}$. Not represented in the logarithmic plot, a fraction $p_0 = 0.315 $ of nodes has no in-neighbors.
The right plot represents the out-degree statistic $p_k = \sum_d p_{d,k}$ with blue circles; the black solid line is proportional to $d^{-1.6}$. A fraction $p_0 = 0.205$ of nodes (not represented) has no out-neighbors. }
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtriml} {60mm} {\figtrimr} {\figtrimt},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_joint_PDK.pdf}%
\hspace{1cm}%
\includegraphics[trim={\figtriml} {60mm} {\figtrimr} {\figtrimt},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_joint_QDK.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:epinions-joint-pdk-qdk}
A pictorial representation, with a logarithmic grayscale, of the joint degree statistics' values $p_{d,k}$ (left plot) and of the in-degree weighted, joint degree statistics' values $q_{d,k} = d p_{d,k} / \overline d$ (right plot) in the interval $0 \leq d, k \leq 150$, for the \url{Epinions.com} social network.
Note that, the values of $p_{d,k}$ in the interval $0 \leq d, k \leq 150$ (i.e. those represented in the left plot) add to 99.0\% of the full statistics; for $q_{d,k}$ they add to 64.7\% only (right plot).}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The simulations and comparison with the recursion}
The dataset contains the interconnection topology $\mathcal G=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E)$ of the \url{Epinions.com} social network, but no information about thresholds and initial condition for an hypothetical LTM process. Hence, to simulate the LTM we have to combine the topology with a vector of thresholds and initial states.
In this subsection, we describe how we choose the missing information and present three simulations.
First, we consider a vector $\Theta \in [0,1]^n$, with $n = |\mathcal V|$, of normalized thresholds with given cumulative distribution function $F(\theta):=\frac1n|\{i:\,\Theta_i\le\theta\}|$, such that $F(\theta)$ is non-decresing, right-continuous, with $F(\theta)=0$ for $\theta<0$ and $F(\theta)=1$ for $\theta\ge1$.
Given the fraction $\upsilon\in [0,1]$, we also consider the binary vector $\Sigma \in \{0,1\}^{n}$ such that $\upsilon = \frac1n \sum_i \Sigma_i$, i.e. a fraction $\upsilon$ of entries is equal to one.
Then we define the network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$ as follows. The set of agents $\mathcal V$ and the set of links $\mathcal E$ are those of the \url{Epinions.com} dataset.
Let $\pi'$ and $\pi''$ be two independent and uniformly chosen permutation on the set $\mathcal V=\{1,2,\ldots,n \}$.
The threshold vector $\rho$ has entries $\rho_i = \lceil \Theta_{\pi'(i)}\kappa_i \rceil$ where $\kappa_i$ is the out-degree of node $i$, i.e. the threshold vector corresponds to a permutation of the normalized threshold vector.
The vector of initial states $\sigma$ has components $\sigma_i = \Sigma_{\pi''(i)}$, i.e. is a permutation of $\Sigma$.
Given the network $\mathcal N=(\mathcal V,\mathcal E,\rho,\sigma)$, the LTM \eqref{LTM-def} is a deterministic process: we compute the evolution of the configuration $Z(t) \in \{0,1\}^n$ (which may not converge) until a fixed time horizon $T$.
From the configuration $Z(t)$ we compute the fraction of state-$1$ adopters at time $t$, i.e. $z(t):=\frac1n\sum_{i}Z_i(t)$.
To discuss the simulations, we also compute the fraction of links pointing to state-$1$ adopters at time $t$, i.e. $$a(t):=\frac{1}{|\mathcal E|}\sum_{i}\delta_i Z_i(t)\,,$$
where $\delta_i$ is the in-degree of node $i$.
For a given cumulative distribution function $F(\theta)$ of the normalized threshold and fraction $\upsilon$ of initially active nodes, we repeat a few times the extraction of the permutations $\pi'$ and $\pi''$ (that establish the specific thresholds and initial states assignment) and the computation of the LTM evolution.
We will compare the simulations with the prediction obtained by the recursion \eqref{CM-recursion}. The recursion requires the \emph{network's statistics} $\boldsymbol p=\{ p_{d,k,r,s} \}$, as defined in \eqref{def:joint-distribution}, and the initial condition $\xi$ defined in \eqref{upsxi}.
We stress that in the simulations we assign the normalized thresholds and the initial condition using two permutations $\pi'$ and $\pi''$ chosen independently and uniformly at random among those over the set $\{1,2,\ldots, n\}$.
Hence, \textit{a priori}, the elements of network's statistics $\boldsymbol p$ take the form
\begin{align} \label{eq:sim-joint-distrib}
\l\{\begin{array}{ll}
p_{d,k,r,s} = p_{d,k}
\l( F( \textstyle{\frac{r}{k}} )-F( \textstyle{\frac{r-1}{k}} )\r)
\l( \upsilon\mathbbm{1}_{s=1} + (1-\upsilon)\mathbbm{1}_{s=0}\r)
& d\ge0,\, k>0, \, 0\le r\le k,\, s=0,1\,\\
p_{d,0,0,s} = p_{d,0}
\l( \upsilon\mathbbm{1}_{s=1} + (1-\upsilon)\mathbbm{1}_{s=0}\r)
& d\ge0,\, s=0,1
\end{array} \r. \end{align}
where $p_{d,k}$ is the joint degree statistic corresponding the \url{Epinions.com} graph $\mathcal G = (\mathcal V, \mathcal E)$.
Consequently, \textit{a priori}, we obtain the values of the fractions $p_{k,r}$ and $q_{k,r}$, that enter in the definition of the recursion's functions $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$, by plugging in their definitions \eqref{def:degree-distribution}
the above \textit{a priori} network's statistics $\boldsymbol p$ \eqref{eq:sim-joint-distrib}.
Finally, the seed $\xi$, initial condition of the recursion, \textit{a priori} coincides with $\upsilon$, i.e. $\xi = \upsilon$, because the permutation $\pi''$ is independent from the in-degree of the nodes.
In the following we describe three group of simulations. We will denote with $h(x)$ the right-continuous unit step function
$$ h(x) :=\l\{ \begin{array}{ll} 0, & x<0 \\ 1, & x\geq 0\,. \end{array} \r. $$
\begin{example}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_sim_1b_xt.pdf}%
\hspace{1cm}%
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_sim_1b_yt.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:epinions-sigle-dyn} Simulations of the LTM dynamics on the \url{Epinions.com} topology, with agents endowed by the thresholds $\rho_i = \lceil \frac12 \kappa_i \rceil$. The initial states are randomly selected, conditioned on a fraction $\upsilon = 0.475$ of nodes having $\sigma_i = 1$. The left plot compares the simulations of the fraction of links pointing to state-$1$ adopters $a(t)$ (thin black lines) with the recursion's state dynamic $x(t)$ (thick blue line), initialized with seed $\xi = \upsilon$. Simulations and recursion agree fairly well.
The right plot reports the simulated fraction of state-$1$ adopters $z(t)$ (thin black lines) to be compared with the recursion's output dynamic $y(t)$ (dashed red line).
The recursion captures the qualitative behavior of the simulation, with a mismatch of about 15\% in the settling value. A close look reveals that several simulations show a little ripple with period two. }
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_phi_psi_1b.pdf}%
\hspace{1cm}%
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_sim_1b_asy_new_legend.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:epinions-sigle-phi-asy} The left plot reports the functions $\phi(x)$ (solid blue) and $\psi(x)$ (dashed red), corresponding to the \url{Epinions.com} network where each agent $i$ is endowed by the thresholds $\rho_i = \lceil \frac12 \kappa_i \rceil$.
The right plot compares the values reached by the simulations at the time horizon $T=100$, for various value of the fraction $\upsilon$ of initially active nodes, with the asymptotic activation predicted by the recursion initialized with $\xi = \upsilon$. The black crosses represent $z(T)$, i.e. the fraction of state-$1$ adopters, to be compared with the recursion limits $y^*(\xi)$ in dashed red. The black circles represent $a(T)$, i.e. the fraction of links pointing to state-$1$ adopters, to be compared with the recursion limits $x^*(\xi)$ in dashed red. Near the discontinuity, predicted in $\xi^* \approx 0.487$ and well matched by the simulation, the starting values of $\upsilon$ are more dense.}
\end{figure}
In the first group of simulation we assume every agent $i$ in the network shares the same common normalized threshold $\Theta_i = 0.500$ and hence node $i$'s threshold is $\rho_i = \lceil \frac12 \kappa_i \rceil$.
This assumption corresponds to the distribution function $F(\theta) = h(\theta - \frac12)$. Having set a common normalized threshold and given $\upsilon \in [0,1]$, each simulation consists in choosing a random initial state assignment, such that exactly a fraction $\upsilon$ of the nodes has $\sigma_i = 1$, and in computing the LTM dynamic until a prearranged time horizon $T$.
Given $\upsilon$ we typically repeat the simulation a few times and compare them with the dynamic predicted with the recursion, initialized with $\xi = \upsilon$.
Figure~\ref{fig:epinions-sigle-dyn} reports an example of the simulations with $\upsilon = 0.475$: the left plot contains the simulated dynamics $a(t)$ to be compared with the recursion's state dynamic $x(t)$; the right plot contains the corresponding simulated fraction of active nodes, $z(t)$, to be compared with the recursion's output dynamic $y(t)$. The recursion captures the qualitative behavior of the simulations.
The left plot of Figure~\ref{fig:epinions-sigle-phi-asy} represents the recursion's functions $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ corresponding to this group of simulations. The right plot of the same figure compares the asymptotic activation predicted by the recursion with a few actual simulations, obtained for various $\upsilon$ and computed up to a time horizon $T = 100$.
The fractions of state-$1$ adopters $z(T)$ shall be compared with the recursion's output asymptotic value $y^*(\xi)$, while the corresponding fraction of links pointing at state-$1$ adopters, $a(T)$, shall be compared with the recursion's state asymptotic value $x^*(\xi)$. The discontinuity, predicted in $\xi^* \approx 0.487$ by the recursion, is well matched by the simulation. Before the discontinuity, the simulated values of $z(T)$ are higher that the limit $y^*(\xi)$, showing an increasing trend. The same trend is present in the corresponding values of $a(T)$, that are however closer to the limit $x^*(\xi)$. After the discontinuity, simulations and limits agree to value one.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
In the second group of simulation we allow the normalized thresholds to take two different values: to 40\% of the nodes we assign $\frac14$ as normalized threshold; the remaining 60\% of nodes gets $\frac34$. The choice corresponds to the cumulative distribution of the normalized threshold
$F(\theta) = \frac{4}{10}h(\theta - \frac14) + \frac{6}{10}h(\theta - \frac34)$. Figure~\ref{fig:epinions-2-phi-asy} contains the results of these simulations.
The left plot represents the functions $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$ corresponding to the thresholds chosen: the recursion predicts the presence of two discontinuities in the asymptotic activation for the LTM, for the seed values $\xi^*_1 \approx 0.241$ and $\xi^*_2 \approx 0.7482$, corresponding to the unstable equilibria of $\phi(x)$.
The right plot compares the predicted asymptotic activation with the simulations, obtained for various $\upsilon$ and computed up to time $T = 100$.
The fractions of state-$1$ adopters $z(T)$ shall be compared with the recursion's output asymptotic value $y^*(\xi)$, while the corresponding fraction of links pointing at state-$1$ adopters, $a(T)$, is nearly superimposed to recursion's state asymptotic value $x^*(\xi)$.
The plot shows a good agreement between $a(T)$ and $x^*(\xi)$, while $z(T)$ seems a bit underestimated by $y^*(\xi)$.
The values $z(T)$ and $a(T)$ of one simulation with $\upsilon = 0.310$ settled to a smaller limit, compatible with those obtained for $\upsilon < 0.270$. Apart from this simulation, the discontinuities are matched well.
Also in this group of simulations, the values of $z(T)$ (and less markedly also those of $a(T)$) show an increasing trend with respect to the fraction of initially active nodes $\upsilon$, a feature not expected by the comparison with the recursion limits.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_phi_psi_2.pdf}%
\hspace{1cm}%
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_sim_2b_asy_new_legend.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:epinions-2-phi-asy}
The left plot contains the functions $\phi(x)$ (solid blue) and $\psi(x)$ (dashed red), corresponding to the \url{Epinions.com} network where 40\% of the nodes is endowed by the normalized threshold $\frac14$ and the remaining 60\% by $\frac34$.
The right plot compares the values reached by the simulations at the time horizon $T=100$, for various value of the fraction $\upsilon$ of initially active nodes, with the asymptotic activation predicted by the recursion initialized with $\xi = \upsilon$.
The black crosses represent the fraction of state-$1$ adopters $z(T)$, to be compared with the recursion limits $y^*(\xi)$ in dashed red.
The black circles represent the fraction of links pointing to state-$1$ adopters $a(T)$, to be compared with the recursion limits $x^*(\xi)$ in dashed red.
The predicted limits $y^*(\xi)$ and $x^*(\xi)$ are discontinuous for $\xi^*_1 \approx 0.241$ and $\xi^*_2 \approx 0.7482$, which are the two unstable equilibria of $\phi(x)$ (cf. left plot). The discontinuities are well matched by the simulation, except for one point obtained with $\upsilon = 0.310$.
Apart from the matching the discontinuities, the simulated values show a slowly increasing trend, unexpected from the recursion limits. }
\end{figure}
\end{example}
\begin{example}
Finally, we present a group of simulations where we allow the normalized thresholds to take three different values: 30\% of the nodes are endowed by the normalized threshold $\frac15$, 30\% by $\frac12$ and the remaining 40\% by $\frac45$.
The corresponding cumulative distribution is
$F(\theta) = \frac{3}{10}h(\theta - \frac15) + \frac{3}{10}h(\theta - \frac12) + \frac{4}{10}h(\theta - \frac45)$.
The left plot of Figure~\ref{fig:epinions-3-phi-dyn} represents the functions $\phi(x)$ and $\psi(x)$: the function $\phi(x)$ has seven fixed points, while the convexities of $\psi(x)$ are minimal.
The right plot of the same figure contains the dynamic of the fraction of state-1 node $z(t)$, starting from a fraction $\upsilon = 0.700$ of initial adopters.
The simulations are compared with the output $y(t)$ of the recursion: the majority of the simulations tend to a limit just above the recursion, while showing a ripple with period two; three simulations tend to a smaller value.
With this choice of normalized thresholds, the recursion predicts the presence of three discontinuities in the asymptotic activation for the LTM, in $\xi^*_1 \approx 0.201$, $\xi^*_2 \approx 0.509$ and $\xi^*_3 \approx 0.789$. The comparison between recursion and simulation is available in Figure~\ref{fig:epinions-3-asy}. The left plot represent the simulated values of $z(T)$ at time $T=100$, for various $\upsilon$, compared with the limit $y^*(\xi)$ obtained assuming $\xi = \upsilon$ as initial condition for the recursion.
The right plot represents the corresponding simulated values of $a(T)$, at $T=100$, to be compared with the recursion's limit $x^*(\xi)$.
Some of the simulations in Figure~\ref{fig:epinions-3-asy} settle to values smaller than the those of the points having similar $\upsilon$, values that might be expected from a smaller initial condition.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_phi_psi_3.pdf}%
\hspace{1cm}%
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_sim_3a_yt.pdf}%
\caption{\label{fig:epinions-3-phi-dyn}
The left plot contains the functions $\phi(x)$ (solid blue) and $\psi(x)$ (dashed red), corresponding to the \url{Epinions.com} network where 30\% of the nodes is endowed by the normalized threshold $\frac15$, 30\% by $\frac12$ and the remaining 40\% by $\frac45$.
The right plot contains a few simulations (thin black lines) of the dynamic of the fraction of state-$1$ adopters, $z(t)$, starting from a fraction $\upsilon = 0.700$ of nodes with state one. The majority of the simulations tend to a limit just above the recursion, while showing a ripple with period two; three simulations tend to a smaller value.
The simulations are compared with the output $y(t)$ of the recursion (dashed red line). Note that the vertical axis has been zoomed to the interval $[0.5, 0.8]$.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_sim_3by_asy_new_legend.pdf}%
\hspace{1cm}%
\includegraphics[trim={\figtrimla} {\figtrimba} {\figtrimra} {\figtrimta},clip, width={\figwidthduo},
keepaspectratio=true]{epinions_sim_3bx_asy.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:epinions-3-asy}
Comparison between the predicted asymptotic activation and the actual simulations, on the \url{Epinions.com} graph where the nodes where 30\% of the nodes is endowed by the normalized threshold $\frac15$, 30\% by $\frac12$ and the remaining 40\% by $\frac45$.
The left plot contains the simulated values of the fraction of state-$1$ adopters $z(T)$ at time $T=100$ (black crosses), for various $\upsilon$, compared with the limit $y^*(\xi)$ (red dashed line) of the recursion output, obtained assuming $\xi = \upsilon$.
The right plot represents the values of the fraction of links pointing to state-$1$ adopters, $a(t)$, for the corresponding simulations, to be compared with the asymptotic value of the recursion's state $x^*(\xi)$.
We observe that some simulation settle to values that are smaller than those of the points having similar $\upsilon$.
%
With this choice of normalized thresholds, the limits $y^*(\xi)$ and $x^*(\xi)$ have three discontinuities, in $\xi^*_1 \approx 0.201$, $\xi^*_2 \approx 0.509$ and $\xi^*_3 \approx 0.789$. }
\end{figure}
\end{example}
\subsection{Comments on the results}
The simulations of the LTM using the topology of the social network \url{Epinions.com} give some interesting insights. Overall, the prediction obtained with the recursion are in good agreement with the simulations.
A few differences between the simulations and the predictions remain.
In several simulations we observed that the dynamics of $z(t)$ and $a(t)$ presents a periodic variation, with period two, superimposed to the settling value.
In particular during the last example, the supposed settling value of a few simulations, evaluated with $z(T)$ and $a(T)$ at time $T=100$, seemed to smaller that what expected from similar simulations.
Finally, for increasing initial condition $\upsilon$, the values $z(T)$ and $a(T)$ seem to have an increasing trend besides the expected jumps, and the value $z(T)$ seem to be a little but consistently underestimated by the recursion.
There are few possible explanations for these behaviors .
The social community used in this simulations is based on an online network. Even though it does not have a ``geographical'' origin, it is not a completely random network. The recursion does not take into account any possible community structure of the network, which may play a role in the periodic behavior observed as well as in the increasing trend of the settling values. Furthermore, the presence of a few nodes with extremely high in and out-degree, is able to influence the single simulations, depending on the initial state and threshold assigned to that node. This may contribute to the explanation of the presence of points with smaller-than-expected settling value.
These hypothesis require further work on the \url{Epinions.com} topology to be verified.
The simulations however show a good predicting ability by the recursion: the discontinuities in the settling values of the simulations match well with the jumps in the recursion's limits
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we have studied the Linear Threshold Model (LTM) of cascades in large-scale networks. We have shown that, for all but an asymptotically vanishing fraction of networks with given degree and threshold statistics, the fraction of state-$1$ adopters in the LTM can be approximated by the output of a one-dimensional nonlinear recursion. We have also analyzed the asymptotic behavior of this recursion both for homogeneous and heterogeneous networks. Our results apply both to the original LTM and to the Progressive LTM on the configuration model ensemble of directed networks and for the Progressive LTM (but not to the original LTM) on the configuration model ensemble of undirected networks. Numerical simulations run on the actual topology of the social network \url{Epinions.com} confirm the validity of our theoretical result in predicting the behavior of the LTM in actual large-scale networks. Ongoing work is concerned with the use of the obtained one-dimensional recursion for the design of feedback control policies for the LTM -- see \cite[ch. 4]{wsR:2015:phd-thesis} and \cite{RCF:2016:mtns} for preliminary results.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors wish to acknowledge Prof. Julien Hendrickx of Universit\'e catholique de Louvain for many valuable comments on the second author's PhD thesis \cite{wsR:2015:phd-thesis}.
\providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace}
\providecommand{\MR}{\relax\ifhmode\unskip\space\fi MR }
\providecommand{\MRhref}[2]{%
\href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{#2}
}
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.